|
SDG&E claims the Sunrise Powerlink will connect to a planned solar plant in Imperial Valley. Experts have testified otherwise. In reality, Sunrise will link to "dirty" power plants across the border, worsening pollution in an area that already has poor air quality and the highest asthma rates in California. |
|
SDG&E over-estimated the Powerlink's savings to consumers, and these numbers relied on electricity from coal-fired power plants. So much for clean, affordable electricity! The Utility Consumers Action Network estimates the line will actually cost consumers $93 million more per year. California needs more cost-effective energy solutions. |
|
Reports by independent experts show that San Diego can meet its energy needs through the year 2014 without the Sunrise Powerlink. Meanwhile, solar power and other "distributed generation" are poised to provide the majority of our power 20 years from now. Why rush to build large, expensive transmission infrastructure that will soon be obsolete? |
 |
"San Diego Gas & Electric Co. said yesterday its proposed Sunrise Powerlink might carry 'dirty' electricity ... [SDG&E Vice-President] Jim Avery added that there may be times when it would be in SDG&E customers' interest for the line to transport electricity generated from fossil fuels." |
—Union-Tribune, July 11, 2007 |
| |
|
|
"A concession by San Diego Gas & Electric that it made 'significant' errors in estimating the economic benefits of its proposed Sunrise Powerlink project led an administrative law judge yesterday to postpone further hearings into the proposal. ... 'This eviscerates their case,' Division of Ratepayer Advocates lawyer Joe Como said." |
—Union-Tribune, July 19, 2007 |
|
|
|
"Sunrise is clearly not needed to meet any of its stated objectives, including the critical goal of providing reliable service in San Diego. DRA is not convinced that Sunrise is the best alternative for meeting such goals - or even that Sunrise's benefits will exceed its costs." |
—Division of Ratepayer Advocates
2007 report |
|
|
