|
|
|
San Mateo County Times October 29, 2000  For more information, contact:
|
Power plant plan sparks outcry Residents fear pollution from 2 County facilities By
Christine Louie A San Jose independent power company has proposed four temporary power plants in the Bay Area, two of which are in San Mateo County, igniting protest from nearby residents who worry the fumes emitted will be hazardous to their health. Opponents say the natural gas-fired plants, each with the ability to provide power to about 90,000 households, could cause a pollution threat to residents living within the immediate areas of the proposed sites in San Mateo, Brisbane, Newark and Santa Clara. The proposed plants are part of an effort from energy officials to increase power supply during critical summer months when electricity use typically reaches year-round highs. Officials also hope the temporary power plants, which would operate for only 500 hours during peak summer months for three years beginning next summer, will help prevent any rolling blackouts, which many in the Bay Area faced this year. The plants would be temporary generators added onto existing Pacific Gas and Electric Co. substations already at the four sites. Calpine Corporation on Tuesday will find out their fate from the California Energy Commission, who will decide whether the company has provided sufficient enough data to begin the licensing process for the four plants. If approved, Calpine would have four months to obtain a license. The time period would also allow the Energy Commission to conduct any environmental reviews on the proposed sites and hold public hearings and workshops to invite public comment and suggestion. "We are not going to push projects through that are not environmentally sound to California," said Claudia Chandler, spokesperson for the Energy Commission. She said the Energy Commission did approve the licensing process for a fifth Bay Area plant. This temporary plant would be introduced at San Francisco International Airport by El Paso Merchant Energy. Residents who live near the PG&E substation in Brisbane, more commonly known as the Martin substation, have been in an uproar since learning of the proposal. Many live in the Daly City Midway Village housing complex, adjacent to the substation, and are angry that PG&E has offered to lease the land to Calpine. They cited the long battles they've waged against PG&E because of toxins they believe are present in the surrounding soil and have made many of them ill. The soil contains chemicals from coal manufacturing PG&E conducted on the site 100 years ago. "We're getting downright angry and putting our kids at risk," said Lula Bishop, a 23-year resident of the housing complex. She worries the temporary plant will add to the medical illnesses that many in her complex have encountered. But Doug Buchanan, vice president of project development at Calpine, said the health risks involved are extraordinarily low. "These technologies emit a fraction of the emissions of older stationary power generation sources," he said, adding that the Energy Commission will ensure there are no significant environmental or health risks involved before the proposal is fully approved. Calpine is also proposing to add a temporary 91.2 megawatt plant next to the San Mateo PG&E substation, adjacent to the bayside Coyote Point Park. John Poultney, a resident who lives near the substation, said that he recognizes the need for more energy but that he would rather see plants put in unpopulated areas rather than an urban setting. He said adding more transmission lines would also help alleviate possible energy shortages. Poultney said he is worried over where the temporary generators would distribute the energy. Buchanan said generators would distribute the energy locally and would bolster electricity reliability throughout the entire Peninsula.
|