These guys are up in arms over this tinker toy generator?

I'm sure the people in Huntington Beach or Long Beach would be happy to lend Ladera Ranch a real power plant.

I couldn't hear the noise test over your shoes.

So the AQMD has said this is safe and the noise test confirms that you won't be able to hear the plant at street level, let alone in Ladera, so what is their argument? Oh yeah, they don't have a legitimate one.

Maybe in Ladera NIMBY is a legitimate excuse,

Their group is holding a meeting tonight at 7pm at Ladera Elementary, I can't wait to hear what they try to come up with. I am willing to place money that at least one of the following is used tonight as an argument against the plant; "Chernobyl", "3 Mile Island" and "We don't care that the science says it is safe, we don't want it in Ladera."

Better than that, let's get a large group together and everytime, we hear "Why Ladera?" we take a drink. Do they allow cabs in Ladera?

"peakers" are clean -- they generally burn natural gas, the cleanest fossil source possible.

"peakers" are safe -- they marry technology Edison would recognize to one of the most reliable technologies on the planet: a jet engine.

"peakers" are noisy. That (aside from dodgy economics) are the principle downside of "peakers."

I have no dog in this fight, but if the noise problem is under control, then these folks should redirect their energies some places more useful.

p.s. Matt, given your day job and past clients, you might want to disclose your interest in this project. I assume it's just personal -- you've raised plenty of similar issues in the past -- but it's good to clear the air.

Tylerh:

As I explained in the post, I was invited to the test. Obviously, the hope was I would blog about it.

When I blog on an issue involving a client, I disclose it. If there's no disclosure, then it doesn't involve a client.

Jubal, do you have a professional interest in this project?

Im curious, because it seems that many calling the concerned Ladera residents "NIMBY"s have something to gain from the project.

For example, Senator Ackerman wrote a glowing piece in support of the plant, and shortly there after, his son-in-law received a contract to represent the plant. What a coincidence!

For those who have not heard both sides, let me tell you that this has less to do with being a NIMBY, and more to do with big business lying and manipulating to get their way.

Those that observed the "sound simulation" can tell you it was a joke. The "pink noise" (which doesnt begin to accurately reflect the actual noise that will be projected) was played out of a speaker the size of a shoe box....does anyone really think that was a fair replication of what we will hear from the plant?

The area where the plant will be built, is 18 acres. An SDG&E spokesperson who provided information to Ladera residents, admitted that they are only using 2 of the acres, and that the facility will increase in size in the future. He couldnt say when, but said eventually it will. Talk about the camels nose under the tent!

They get this peaker plant in, and say it will only run "during peak hours", but they got permits to run it full time, and they have the land to increase it several-fold.

It wouldnt be such an issue, except this land is not zoned for energy production.

There are a lot of legal issues that fall on the side of the Ladera community...I encourage you all to come and hear them tonight.

As a Republican, what I find especially troubling, is the lying, the conflict of interest, the manipulation going on by some who claim to be "Conservative".

It is one thing to support big business, but it's another altogether to support and condone the actions of big business that are unethical and dishonest.

One of the things that true Conservatives are busy trying to fight, as we enter into the height of election season, is the perception that Republicans will lie, cheat and steal to line the pockets of big business. I know this is not what our party stands for....we should be the standard bearers for ethical business practices, not those rife with conflict of interest and deception.

As for the NIMBY claim....I dont think power generating plants belong in anyones backyard. In this case, the area is not zoned for such a facility, and kudos to the County Supervisors for putting a hold on the permits, and recognizing that this plant does not belong in a residential neighborhood.

Jubal, do you have a professional interest in this project?

Kim, I would direct you to the comment immediately preceding yours.

Those that observed the "sound simulation" can tell you it was a joke. The "pink noise" (which doesnt begin to accurately reflect the actual noise that will be projected) was played out of a speaker the size of a shoe box....does anyone really think that was a fair replication of what we will hear from the plant?

Would you be convinced if they made the noise come out of a really, really, really big speaker?

The size of the speaker is irrelevant. It's the size of the noise coming out of it that matters.

They get this peaker plant in, and say it will only run "during peak hours", but they got permits to run it full time, and they have the land to increase it several-fold.

Of course they did. But that doesn't mean it will be run full-time.

The speedometer on your car likely goes to 120 mph. Does that mean you drive 120 mph?

Jubal,

Were you wearing tap dancing shoes with walnuts taped to the bottom?

As mentioned, the pink-noise-from-the-tiny-speaker rendition was not an accurate replication....

listen to this, here is a similar peaker:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFbu8tcCaWA

Kim should go to a Bose store so she can see how a very big sound can come out of a very small speaker.

You're too kind to these spoiled NIMBYs, Jubal. They're hysterics.

How do I get in touch with that Corona Mayor Jeff Miller? I hear he knows how to build power plants and we need him to carry our water for us.

Were you wearing tap dancing shoes with walnuts taped to the bottom?

I was wearing sneakers.

As mentioned, the pink-noise-from-the-tiny-speaker rendition was not an accurate replication....

Do you have any evidence of that?

listen to this, here is a similar peaker:

And the noise machine made a nearly identical noise, as is clear from my video. And when I was the same distance from the noise machine as the videographer was from the intakes at that Chula Vista plant, the noise level seemed about the same.

Which isn't the point, because no one lives 100 or 200 feet from where the peaker would be.

As you can tell from the video, once one turns to corner to go down the drive way, one can't hear the noise.

On Antonio, the only noise is the traffic. Not even the people living just across Antonio could have heard the noise demonstration.

Which highlights why the comparison with that Chula Vista plant isn't valid. At Ladera, there is an intervening berm between residents and the plant, not to mention a major thoroughfare that itself produces a good deal of noise.

"jubal" didnt you work for the "conservative" Huffington for Senate campaign?

Yeah, your just oozing with good judgement and ethics, Im totally believing your spin on this.

Ahh, when the facts fail, resort to the old ad hominem (That's Latin for "against the man"). I guess the advantage is any idiot can make an ad hominem attack.

And yes, I did work on the Mike Huffington for U.S. Senate campaign in 1994. Why -- did you vote for Dianne Feinstein, instead?

I have also served as press secretary for former state Sen. John Lewis; deputy press secretary for former Assembly Speaker Curt Pringle; California press secretary for Steve Forbes for President in 2000; I was a media consultant for Supervisor Jim Silva's 1998 re-election, to District Attorney Tony Rackauckas' 2002 re-election, and to the Yes on measure B campaign in Newport Beach last year.

Now why don't you tell the audience something about yourself, Kim?

The facts dont fail "jabal" Anyone interested in the facts should come to the informational meeting tonight, May 13th, 7pm at the Ladera Ranch Middle School.

The facts regarding this power plant, is that there has been a lot of deception and manipulation on the part of the energy companies (you remember those characteristics from your former boss, Huffington, right?)

Why is SDG&E able to override zoning? We have rules in place for a reason, I dont believe such companies should be allowed to go around the public process.

Did you happen to hear Congressman Rohrbacher's speech at the CRA Convention in Costa Mesa? It might do you well to get a transcript.

As for my conservative credentials, I turned down an offer to work for the Huffington's.

I live in Ladera and agree wholeheartedly with Jubal's assessment:

First, according to the MOU between SDGE & Ladera Hope, SDGE agrees never to expand the plant, so that argument doesn't work.

Second, regardless of the speaker size, the point of the noise study was that the peaker plant will not be any noisier than the traffic on Antonio -- and not audible from the nearest homes which back up to antonio.

Peaker plants are located in a lot of densly populated areas and they are not health risks any more than the SUV's that roam our streets with impunity spewing all kinds of carcinogens.

We need the extra power because of the growth created by new communities like ladera.

I laugh when I hear the "duplicitous big company/they all lie/it's all about money" argument. I worry more about duplicitous grass roots groups that lie with more impunity than a company (which has monumential liability at risk) would ever get away with. As for the money issue -- no one got their home in Ladera with food stamps.

Finally, Ladera Hope does not represent the community -- they represent a faction. Moreover, I have been appalled at the rudeness some of their leaders exhibit to SDGE and Wellhead execs at the public meetings. there are many people who like me have no issue iwth the power plant. The chamber and the HOA also had a presentation early on and had no objection. For whatever reason, Ladera Hope has become the self-appointed spokespersons for the community on this issue. the vast majority of Ladera residents can be called "Ladera Thinks" -- because they either don't care/don't mind the peaker plant as they actually have a life.

Kim:

All I've asked you to do is substantiate your claim that the noise test was not an accurate replication of the noise produced by the operating peaker plant.

You've responded by attacking me because of a campaign I worked on 14 years ago, questioning my ethics and implying that somehow I am not a conservative.

That's all very well, but it doesn't answer the question. As I said, any idiot can make ad hominem attacks.

The statement that an offer was made to Ladera Hope to "never" expand the facility is an outright lie. The offer that SDG&E made says no such thing. It says that they will not expand it unless a request is made for SDG&E to make more power later. Which is an easy "out" for them. All they have to do is somehow prove that more power is needed on the grid (which includes a huge area, not only Ladera), and BOOM, they immediately get their expansion! As a matter of fact, their offer stated that they can start building their expansion without even "waiting" for the approval process of asking for more energy to take place. Essentially it says that if they "think" they need more energy, they can immediately start increasing the size while they apply for the permit to expand it based on "needing" additional power. They in no way, shape, or form have made an offer to "never" expand!!!!!

Posters: get you own facts straight before commenting on something you obviously know little about.

Those homes in Ladera Ranch are the ones running their air conditioning on summer afternoons.

Down at the coast, you don't have the a/c users that you do in an inland community like Ladera.

San Clemente's already got a nuclear power plant. Dana Point will have a desalination plant for drinking water.

Time for Ladera to share the burden.

Last night's Ladera Hope meeting was fantastic!

The group outlined the deception that SDG&E has put forth, including their plans to increase the size of the plant!

Thankfully, our County Board of Supervisors also recognizes that SDG&E has not been forthright. Yesterday, we received word that the County Board of Supervisors agree that the CEQA process was not followed, and SDG&E must start from the beginning.

Thank you supervisors, Thank you Pat Bates, for standing up for what is right, and not letting a billion dollar corporation run over the public process.

Question for Kim: let's assume your claim that SDG&E didn't follow CEQA is correct.

If they did follow CEQA, would you still oppose the peaker plant?

Maybe I should have voted for Cassie. Did I really just say that?

I think the thing that gets me is that I was actually disappointed in Pat for not having a backbone on this and caving so easily. I really thought she would be a solid Supervisor. I was wrong.

So Cassie or next candidate for 5th District Supervisor, consider me your first vote, volunteer and contributor. And to Supervisor Bates, you should hope that Ladera has enough votes to get you re-elected as every other 5th District community pulls their weight and sees Ladera for the NIMBYs that they really are.

Junkie,

You really think that a business should be able to lie to the public and deceive county government officials?

This isnt about a power plant, this is about a billion dollar corporation bypassing the public processes that society has put into place.

If you think that SDG&E should be given the liberty to do whatever they want, CEQA be damned, then, yeah vote for Cassie or Lassie or whomever.

In fact, with that total disregard for the democratic institutions that govern people, why vote at all?

Kim -- I'll repeat my question:

Let's assume your claim that SDG&E didn't follow CEQA is correct.

If they did follow CEQA and the public process, would you still oppose the peaker plant?

Kim, you appear to be well-informed.

Two questions:

1) how has the Board determined that the CEQA process was deficient?

2) what are they proposing as remedy?

Please be specific.

Kim, Let me answer Adult's question. IF SDG&E follows CEQA then the Peaker Plant will be denied. CEQA guidelines cannot be overstepped no matter who the lead agency is.

This power plant is needed primarily for San Diego as told to the community by SDG&E and described on their website. Of the 42 circuits listed on their website scheduled for rolling blackouts, 4 are in OC, 38 are in San Diego. SDG&E has claimed the need to keep the lights on in Ladera and to keep the air conditioners in Ladera running. NEWSFLASH, they do not build power plants for single communities. CAISO listed in April, the reserve amount of electricity for Southern California is exceeded by 20%-29% and this plant accounts for less than 0.2% of the needed RESERVE power. And this does not take into account the 40MW approved by the CEC for the expansion of the Palomar plant....which would then take the percent of power from the Ladera Plant to less than 0.1% of the RESERVE power.

This goes to show that an overall study of needed power throughout the county and the state needs to be given as much attention as the planning of the communities we live in.

IN addition, Developers, DMB and RMV, were given a 'Will Serve' letter by SDG&E prior to the start of construction of Ladera Ranch confirming the power and reserve power is already available, or a plan in place to provide the power. As is the case in every development and for every developer. This Power Plant was NOT in the 'Will Serve' letter.

Kim,

How did they bypass CEQA? Even some of the Ladera Hope folks have admitted to being at the public hearings. Just because you didn't care at the time, doesn't mean that it didn't happen.

From what I understand regarding the notification, they did what the law said they had to do. No more. no less. I know that is a sticking point to many people, but if we are all honest about it, that is what we all would do in a similar situation. How many of you added an extra 0 to your income tax payment just because? No one, we all pay what we have to according to the law.

I have not seen proof of any lies. I was at the meeting Tuesday and some of the stuff that was presented was very interesting. If they truly are planning on doubling the size immediately, then that is not cool. When I see proof, then maybe my mind will change. But as presented, the plant is fine.

I think the changing arguments that the group has against say Aqueous Ammonia is pretty funny. One day you say that it is the ammonia that you are against, and now you say it is the transportation of the ammonia. Moving your goal posts is a sign of a weak argument.

You need to lay out your arguments logically and leave emotion behind. If you can do that and then stick to your arguments and show that you have actual concern, then maybe you can lose the NIMBY status that you currently have in the community.

In reference to the noise, it is almost laughable that the 18" diameter speaker putting out pink noise at 70 db is even close to being an example of the Power Plant noise. First, I was confused by Wellhead because they said in their notice they were going to simulate the 'sound attenuation equipment' for the plant. Nevertheless, lets assume, is was to be the noise of the plant. And for those who don't understand, pink noise is generally rated 'better' than white noise when used in offices spaces and is believed to allow babies to sleep better at night. But I digress. When Wellhead tested the sound at their Miramar plant the start up was measured at 84db at a distance of 675 feet away. In Ladera they want 225 start ups a year anytime day or night. Wellhead has said they are going to put a new invention on the 'Shot gun' "POP" that will reduce the sound down by 35 or 40 db. Assuming this 'invention' works and even if they manage to cut the noise in half the impact is roughly 12-15db higher than existing noise levels....which by CEC standards is a 'significant impact'. Furthermore, I am interested in how the pink noise source in the speaker accounted for low frequency noise and sound energy from different 1/3 octave bands generated by a power plant. Anyone, who has been adjacent to a car playing loud music will tell you it is the base you hear most and it is a function of how much air is pushed through the speakers...that is why speakers at concerts are so large...smaller than the noisy air intake of a power plant but still large. Lastly it is a far stretch to assume the test on site resembles the AAC proprietary noise model presented in the CEQA neg dec.

For the record, I am a die-hard Republican and Pro Big Business. I'm even Pro SDG&E and Sempra. However, they need to realize, this particular plant location is just completely out of line. They need to take a step back, admit to perhaps being overzealous and recognize how drastically the political climate has changed in the last few years with regard to fossil fuels. To introduce a fossil fuel burning plant at the same time they have let the State of California know they are not going to meet the Renewable Power Requirements for 2010 is simply wrong. We shareholders would be more interested in seeing Sempra/SDG&E work towards a future with a majority of Renewable Power Sources rather than reintroducing old technology. NOW that is a company planning for the future and one I would enjoy owning stock in. It takes companies like Sempra to step out and lead the way. I know they can, and here is a perfect opportunity to do so. The result would be wonderful to watch them work with the County and State and the rest of the country.
It simply requires a desire to do so.

Kim, Let me answer Adult's question. IF SDG&E follows CEQA then the Peaker Plant will be denied. CEQA guidelines cannot be overstepped no matter who the lead agency is.

Thanks, Seeing Red, but you didn't answer my question, either.

In reference to the noise, it is almost laughable that the 18" diameter speaker putting out pink noise at 70 db is even close to being an example of the Power Plant noise.

Why? Are you a sound engineer or something? I have little Bose computer speakers that put out bigger, better sound than the big stereo speakers I had in the 1990s.

And will the peaker plant have a woofer?

You're more articulate than Kim, but you're still talking around my question.

The answer is NO, I won't support it, because the environmental impacts identified through CEQA will be out of conformance, therefore the plant will not get approved. It is simple to look at the requirements of CEQA and look at the findings of the application, these are all public records. Thats what I did and it seem very obviouse to me. If on the other hand, a miracle occurs and they find the siting proper, then there is no reason to oppose it, other than the lunacy in putting it an improper zone (and yes I'm a planner). Yes I have experience with sound, many years working with sound technicians and experts. IF your bose speakers are better then the ones you had int he 90's then you had sh__y speakers. Sound is produced by volume. Bose is very good at marketing, and yes they are great for their size, but you wont see them displaying sound at a concert. I'm not sure if the plant will have a woofer, but if you believe Wellhead "simulated the sound attenuation" with an 18" diameter speaker, then maybe that is what they are proposing. You might ask them.

Now a question for you....If it is proven the plant does not meet CEQA requirements, will you still support it?

Did I miss something, or did you already perform an EIR yourself, and thence your judgment that the peaker plant is out of compliance.

Let me re-formulate Adult's question: If the peaker plant were in conformance with CEQA, would you still oppose it? Yes? No?

Jubal,
I must have written too many words.

My answer is NO.

Thank you.

Essentially, all the talk about the public process, CEQA, etc, is just talk, and beside the point. Ladera Hope is against a peaker plant. Period.

That clarifies things.

I seriously wonder about the motivations of people who will go to any length to support a plant, that was presented in a deceptive manner.

I understand that some people are opposed to this plant (for a variety of reasons.)

I understand that some people are not opposed, and could care less.

I dont understand why someone would spend time going to town meetings dressed in their suit, with a camera....or blog about it endlessly....in an attempt to discredit the arguments against it. A person who didnt mind the plant would not have the motivation to put energy into supporting it.

So, I wonder, what's in it for the few people (who use a variety of fake blogging identities) who insist that the peaker plant is "good" (or "awesome") for Ladera?

It further adds to my curiousity, when we have already seen conflict of interest, kick backs (relative getting a contract), good friends working for the energy company, prior clients of the companies involved, past history of working for unethical organizations just to make a buck (at the cost of integrity) etc. The waters have already been muddied, and I can only question the motivations of those that keep posting in support of this plant.

I mean, really, is your reputation already so sullied that you dont mind joining in with one more unethical situation?

Who is this kook?

Wellhead has asked that their permits be rescinded.

As they state in their legal filings, the plant is now moot.

Kim, Don't waste your time with the NUT Matt Cunningham/Judal. This guy is full of B.S. This guy is after the money (money talk, b.s. walk). http://www.pacific-strategies.com/whoweare.html

Jon:

Ding-ding-ding! A big no-prize to super-sleuth for figuring out what is common knowledge: I'm a public affairs consultant. Rest assured, if I were working on this project, it would be disclosed.

But please: what exactly have I said that is, as you so intelligently put it, B.S.?

I've observed a couple of things about Ladera Hopers:

1) Any deviating from the Ladera Hope line is met with ad hominem attacks.

2) All the talk about CEQA, EIRs, public process, etc., is collective smoke blowing. The peaker plant could pass the EIR with flying colors, and Ladera Hope would still oppose is. Classic NIMBYism. It's essentially the same as no-growthers using the ESA to "save" a critter they could care less about in order to stop a project. I'm surprised no one has no one has reported seeing an Arroyo Toad near the plant site.

Seeing Red - did you ever think that a small peaker actually supports renewables? This past weekend, at only 98 degrees, I noticed that there was absolutely no wind to drive those lovely windmills and when the sun went down (solar power requires sun) and my new 14 SEER air conditioner and my perfectly clear electricity sucking plasma were still on I thought – God I hope there is a peaker out there to carry me through. Get serious, do you really think they design sanitation systems based on average loads?

Ms Kimmy – why are you so mean? Are you that far over the ledge that an add on facility that you will not hear or see, that is less harmful than your O’Connell leaf blower and YOUR truck as you drop of the little Kimmy and Jonny is stopping you from keeping and open mind. My my where did you go wrong?

Latest rumors in Ladera Ranch is that the citizens will be or have sued the company and people shoving this stupid idea down their throats.
At this juncture, you would think that real GOP'r's would think twice before royally pissing off 20,000 voters in the OC's southern most flank.
Still, given the lousy state of the economy in Ladera Ranch, the falling land valuations, and the failing businesses, the citizens are not in a cooperative mood. In fact, they will back the litigation to stop this stupid idea.

"the citizens will be or have sued the company and people shoving this stupid idea down their throats."

And who, exactly, would that be?

When the A/C goes out in Ladera this summer who they gonna call? SDGE!

Jubal says: "Any Idiot can make an ad hominem attack."

So if someone does X, and then you say to them "Any idiot can do X," you are basically saying they are an idiot.

And when you call someone an idiot, loser, moron, etc., you are attacking their character. That is also known as an ad hominem attack.

So in that statement above, you, Jubal, are calling yourself an idiot. LMAO.

In the future, you may want to say "Anyone" can make an ad hominem attack. That will not only show that you don't need to resort to name calling too, but also, you have enough intelligence not to call yourself an idiot!

have a nice day