sfbg.com

 

Extra

Andrea Nemerson's
alt.sex.column

Norman Solomon's
MediaBeat

nessie's
The nessie files

Tom Tomorrow's
This Modern World


News

PG&E and the California energy crisis

Arts and Entertainment

Venue Guide

Electric Habitat
By Amanda Nowinski

Tiger on beat
By Patrick Macias

Frequencies
By Josh Kun


Calendar

Submit your listing

Culture

Techsploitation
By Annalee Newitz

Without Reservations
By Paul Reidinger

Cheap Eats
By Dan Leone

 

Our Masthead

Editorial Staff

Business Staff

Jobs & Internships


PERSONALS | MOVIE CLOCK | REP CLOCK | SEARCH

No new Potrero plant

EVER SINCE SAN Francisco negotiated a deal in 1998 to close down Pacific Gas and Electric Co.'s pollution-belching Hunters Point power plant, residents of Potrero Hill and Bayview-Hunters Point have waited for the plant to actually close. They're still waiting: the plant remains active, operating under a state order to keep the electricity grid stable.

The Mirant Corp., the big Georgia-based energy company that wants to build a whopping 540-megawatt power plant in Potrero Hill, is trying to use that community concern to its advantage. The company says that if it gets permission to build its new high-tech plant, the old power plant – which may be tied to the neighborhood's high rates of cancers, heart disease, and asthma – can be closed.

But as Rachel Brahinsky reports on page 18, new evidence has emerged that shows the design of Mirant's proposed plant is fatally flawed. If it's built as currently planned, the city may have to keep the old Hunters Point plant, and another dirty plant currently on the Potrero Hill site, going anyway just to provide a secure backup.

And the fact is, there's no need to build the Mirant plant in the first place. The new energy plan that came out in draft form last week shows that the city could close both existing plants in the city and avoid building this new monstrosity – with cleaner, alternative energy sources and expanded transmission lines.

Under state law the California Energy Commission can approve the plant despite local opposition. But the Board of Supervisors can put considerable pressure on the CEC by formally and strongly opposing the Mirant project, approving the clean energy plan, and moving forward with a comprehensive public power initiative for the November ballot.

P.S.
To comment on the city's energy plan, go to www.sfenvironment.org.