Something for Allanon to REALLY get upset about

[KellY]

And everyone else, as well. Can/should the Burner community fight this? And how?

Gerlach to fight plant plan

Susan Voyles
RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL
2/17/2004 05:06 am
Gerlach area residents say they will oppose a giant power plant proposed near the town, claiming it will pollute their air, drain the ground water and destroy a pristine habitat for wildlife.

Called the Granite Fox Power Project, the 1,450-megawatt power plant would be the biggest in Nevada, producing enough electricity to serve at least 1.45 million households.

Proposed by Sempra Energy, the plant would have two pulverized coal-fired boilers, which burn cleaner than other coal plants, officials said.

It would be six miles northwest of Gerlach, where Squaw Creek drains into the Smoke Creek Desert.

“It’s a shame. I’m still in shock,” said John Bogard, who would see the power plant from the front window of his home. He has lived near Gerlach since 1972 and owns Planet X Pottery.

Sempra, a Fortune 500 company based in San Diego, chose the site because it is near a major transmission line, a railroad line, and the company believes water is available, said spokesman Art Lawson. Wind and solar energy also are being explored, he said.

Sempra already has talked with Sierra Pacific Power Co. officials about selling power that would be used within Nevada, Sierra Pacific officials said. The plant would be about 100 miles north of Reno.

While Lawson stressed the project is in its early stages, the company has written a letter to U.S. Bureau of Land Management officials in Winnemucca explaining the details.

The plant would be built on 2,000 acres of private land. The company anticipates a yearly demand for up to 16,000 acre-feet of water a year would be available year after year. An acre-foot is the amount needed to cover an acre to a depth of one foot, the amount used by a family of four in a year.

The project would include a coal waste disposal site and a construction crew work camp. The company said a planned railroad spur, a power line and a water pipe might cross Bureau of Land Management land.

About 800 construction workers would build the project and 100 workers would be needed for operations, the letter said. The company anticipates construction would begin in mid-2006 for an opening in 2009 or 2010.

Lawson said the project could be a new benefactor for Washoe County, producing millions of dollars of nongaming revenue for the economy and a windfall in property taxes.

Sempra is aware of the environmental concerns wherever it has a power plant, Lawson said, adding, “We have a good relationship with communities.”

In the letter, ENSR International, a Colorado company doing the environmental work, asks BLM officials about wildlife in the area.

Bogard said he and about a dozen ranchers share the Smoke Creek Desert with antelope, bighorn sheep, deer, wild horses and a number of birds.

“The real question that’s going to kill them is the water,” Bogard said.

He wonders whether water used at the plant would dry up small reservoirs and ponds used by wildlife as watering holes.

And just north of the power plant, the Washoe County Commission in January endorsed buying an 18,600-acre preserve that officials called a paradise for sheep, antelope, sage grouse, the endangered pygmy rabbit and an endangered sucker fish found nowhere else. The property includes Granite Mountain, Buffalo Hills and Wall Canyon, about 100 miles north of Reno.

U.S. Interior Secretary Gale Norton would have to approve money from the sale of federal land in Clark County to buy the preserve.

With the loss of a pristine area, Bogard said he expects the number of visitors and hunters would drop dramatically.

“It’s heartbreaking,” he said. “We would just have to move.

“They should put it where the coal is or where the power is used. This is probably one of the last spots on the map where you can breathe the air,” he said.

In a letter to Washoe County officials, David Rumsey, who owns the Parker Ranch near Smoke Creek, agreed.

“If this power project goes ahead and is built, the developers will make money, Los Angeles will get the power, and all Gerlach will get is the pollution and environmental degradation.”

The Gerlach-Empire Citizens Advisory Board last week unanimously voted to oppose an air monitoring station that would be needed to study air quality and wind patterns before the plant could be built.

The Washoe County Planning Commission is scheduled to consider the permit March 2.

Patricia Hanneman, Gerlach board secretary-treasurer, said she doesn’t expect Gerlach’s 125 residents would benefit much from the power plant. She said most of the workers probably would live in Fernley.

“There’s no way Gerlach can boom. It’s only eight or nine streets, and it’s surrounded by BLM,” Bogard said. “You couldn’t find six places to rent.”

Terry Reed, BLM office manager in Winnemucca, said he expects the project will require an environmental impact statement, usually a two- to three-year process.

The state’s biggest plant currently is the 687-megawatt Clark Station, which burns natural gas. Near Winnemucca, two coal-fired plants at North Valmy, shared by Sierra Pacific Power Co. and Idaho Power, produce 572 megawatts.

In 2000, the North Valmy plants produced 4 million tons of carbon dioxide, which contributes to the greenhouse effect that produces global warming.

The plants also produced 53,175 tons of sulfur dioxide, which causes acid rain, according to an American Lung Association report.

Sempra has a 305-megawatt pulverized coal plant in Bremond, which Lawson described as the cleanest coal plant in Texas.

It also owns a 1,250-megawatt plant near Phoenix, owns half of a gas-fired plant near Bakersfield, Calif., and owns a 600-megawatt plant in Baja California. With the Reliant company, it’s in the permitting stage for a 480-megawatt natural gas plant near Boulder City, Nevada.

[Bob]

“It’s a shame. I’m still in shock,” said John Bogard, who would see the power plant from the front window of his home.

LMAO.

Fall asleep in Gerlach, and you'll find yerself in bed with Burners, eventually.

[III]

>>“It’s a shame. I’m still in shock,” said John Bogard

should probably at least let him sweat a little bit.

either that, or negotiate with sempra to run a line out to power the grid.

[trocar]

Man I am so Psyched. I was just thinking on the drive out there last year that there is way too much nothing out there. What this place really needs is a super fucking huge power plant, or maybe a giant strip mall. The best part will be that no one will have to worry about that lame leave no trace shit anymore. Plus I finally have a place to dump all that used motor oil that I can't figure out what to do with.

Something from Nothing.

[BlueBirdPoof]

And everyone else, as well. Can/should the Burner community fight this? And how?

Some ideas.
Research the other power plants Sempra has--find out just how good their community relations actually are. What kind of fights were put up. What was and wasn't effective. Did they ever fail to get one built?
Follow the EIS process closely. Bookmark the BLM Winnemucca Office home page. At every step of the process--releases of the Notice of Intent to file an EIS, the Draft EIS, the Final EIS, whenever they have a meeting, they will post that information there. Comment. Early and often. Bring up your concerns. If they follow the protacol properly (and apparently the Forest Service--another branch of the Department of the Interior--is being slippery about it) they will have to address any properly submitted comment in writing, on the public record. Attend meetings.
Make coalitions. With locals. With environmental groups. With anyone who will stand by you in the fight.
Watch the money. How does Sempra get things done. How does the BLM get "snookered" or if they are coplacent where does that complacency exist.
Bookmark a local paper too, I guess. I distrust the Gazette-Journal--it's a Gannett thing, and from what little I've seen has anti-environmental blind spots, but still they will report on somethings that you need to know.
Keep talking to people, educating them, letting them know where to get involved and who to donate money to.
As to if Burners should get involved? I have no answer. I can't say that they shouldn't. And if you want to be involved--why spectate?

I'm sure there's more, but those are places to start.

[Rob the Wop]

Quick question.

Where would you put a new power plant? Let's make the assumption that a state like, say California, needs more power. Let's start there due to the rolling blackouts of recent.

Everyone hates the idea of a coal burning power plant, but that's about all you'll get in that region (Gerlach). Wind isn't persistant enough, no massive rivers and I doubt you'd want to divert the hot springs for geothermal. Solar is always there, but usually that doesn't work too hot. There was one nearby where I grew up and I knew a couple folks that worked there. Return on investment was pretty bad, plus the fluid in the pipes that was used was toxic-beyond-toxic. Otherwise you would see them all over the desert lands.

Pick a place and tell me why that area is better than any other.

Before ya start bitchin', this is a serious question. With our population continually expanding, we have a greater need for electricity. No one wants a plant next to their house, so where do you put it? Needs to be close enough to a city to staff the plant, plus have road access and natural resources (water, etc.). If coal, then there must be a way (railroad, nearby mine, etc) to get it there. Plus don't discount coal either, you have a number of investors to convince. An uber expensive, yet relatively inefficient plant is out of the question to most investors.

My answer is quit breeding, but that won't go over with the Moral Majority. So assume a plant MUST be built.

[unjonharley]

Rolling black out Bushs ass. Those black out started when the nation said no to him. He wanted to open the north slope. With "no" in his face the black out started. The trick part of if is, The plan has always been to put a pipe line through to te east. Then came 9 11 and no more black outs. Thats when the enron big boy bailed out with his mils. Some more Bush soup anyone?

[Spokes]

Yep. It's the old not in my back yard issue. Some people chose to have their consumables made in somebody else's less regulated areas and leave the wastes there.

Oklahoma has 18 new power plants for 3-million people. In comparison, California, which did not build a single new plant in the 1990s, has 34 million residents. Oklahoma currently has the eighth lowest electric power prices in the country.

http://www.sb-d.com/issues/fall2001/utilities/index.asp

[BlueBirdPoof]

(and apparently the Forest Service--another branch of the Department of the Interior--is being slippery about it)

Sorry--Forest Service is the Department of Agriculture something I can never remember even though they tell me every time I drive through a National Forest and read those signs that say "Land of Many Uses."

[BlueBirdPoof]

Nevada already has that incredibly cheap hydroelectric source (federally funded) that it has used to light up the sky over Las Vegas (a town that would never have been built if weren't for the cheap power) with tacky neon so they can fleece Californians, have no state income tax and then sneer at the people they leech off of.

Actually, we DO have to decide where (not if) to build and how. And maybe this is a good new technology that will burn coal cleaner. But if we put this in, lets be sure that it's a clean plant, that the locals will benefit, and that it's not a boondoggle.

And I got to wonder about that 16,000 acre feet a year. More draining of Pyramid Lake?

[stuart]

black outs were not shortage related.

how bout we find out where the ceo of sempra lives, or where his kids go to private school and put it in his back yard? If the resource issue does not pan out, try going through the board members back yards 1 by 1.

why fucking coal? Why not NG? don't get on me about the cost. Make the juice more expensive. We need to internalize our costs in order to put NIMBYism into a better perspective otherwise it is always a legitimate gripe.

[Chai Guy]

More output? How about less consumption?

[unjonharley]

More output? How about less consumption?

/
Fat Americas think the other guy should consume less.

[Rob the Wop]

why fucking coal? Why not NG? don't get on me about the cost. Make the juice more expensive. We need to internalize our costs in order to put NIMBYism into a better perspective otherwise it is always a legitimate gripe.

Are you going to pony up a few million for the initial investment? Problem is that, while NG may be cleaner, coal plants will be built because they are cheaper. Brainthink as the typical investor. You didn't get to have the money you have from making stupid investments. You are in the market to make money from the money you possess. Who do you give it to so that you get the most back?

I'm still of the mind that we have too many fucking people. Enforce birth rate laws, move people out of the city, and institute laws that only allow personal vehicles for vital industries (ambulances, fire trucks, etc.) Place reliable electric light rail everywhere. Form more "cluster" population centers that make it possible to walk anywhere you need to go. Small cities with agriculture inbetween. Dissolve the large urban centers.

But guess what? It ain't gonna happen. I know this. The folks pulling the power and money strings don't live in the slums or coal mines. Seems I recall this happening somewhere, sometime before... Hmmm... Maybe, the world's entire history involving large urban centers? The "untouchables" outside the city walls/fortifications?

I would love to see all power plants be either solar, wind, geothermal, or water powered. I also know that we won't see this in our lifetime, if it ever happens.

So where do you put the plant? Assume a reasonable amount of nastiness coming from it.

[naga brain]

Now correct me if I am wrong here, but 6 miles northwest of Gerlach would put the plant due west of the Playa right? And correct me if I am wrong here, but coal puts off the worst exhaust possible. And finally, aren't the prevailing winds north west? So, wouldn't that put the exhaust right out into the playa, where we are that one week + a year?

Time for BMorg to start throwing around the weight of the largest permit fee in the system perhaps?

[stuart]

what I am suggesting, rob, re: NG vs Coal, is to internalize the cost of the horrendous polution of the coal plant, via legislation, by making NG a more viable fiancial choice. Otherwise it is required to be thunked down upwind of the CEO and company.

[Chai Guy]

Holy power outages and mass pollutants Batman, this looks like a job for Buckminster Fuller!





http://www.geni.org/


"Graphs of each of the world's 150 nations showing their twentieth-century histories of inanimate energy production per capita of their respective populations together with graphs of those countries' birthrates show without exception that the birthrates decrease at exactly the same rate that the per capita consumption of inanimate electrical energy increases. The world's population will stop increasing when and if the integrated world electrical energy grid is realized. This grid is the World Game's highest priority objective."
- Buckminster Fuller

[KellY]

Hey Rob,

I think you do have some interesting points. As for where it should go, I'll quote Gerlach resident John Bogard, from the original article:

“They should put it where the coal is or where the power is used. This is probably one of the last spots on the map where you can breathe the air,” he said.

Or as rancher David Rumsey said:

“If this power project goes ahead and is built, the developers will make money, Los Angeles will get the power, and all Gerlach will get is the pollution and environmental degradation.”

So yeah, if this thing needs to be built, let them build it in the area where all the power is going to be used. Or perhaps next door to Sempra headquarters.

However, I really don't think it needs to be built at all. I don't think it's an all-or-nothing, "completely remake society or live with it" situation. Yes, I too want less people, solar power, etc., but until then doing things like making an effort to conserve energy can make a big difference. During the 2001 energy crisis (artificial as it was), California was able to cut down its energy use by a signifigant amount. Here's a quote from the Lawrence Livermore Labs Environmental Energy Technologies Division ( http://eetd.lbl.gov/newsletter/nl8/Crisis.html ):

"At this writing, the programs encouraging conservation and efficiency were having a substantive effect in reducing the magnitude of the crisis. According to CEC statistics, in May 2001, Californians reduced monthly peak demand by 10%, 14% in June, 11% in July, and 9% in August, compared to the previous year. Energy use declined by 11% in May, more than 12% in June, 5% in July, and 7% in August...State authorities have been thanking Californians for their conservation efforts, to which they attribute in part the sharp drop in wholesale electricity prices since June."

And from the NRDC ( http://www.nrdc.org/air/energy/fcal2001.asp ):

"So how did California reverse its supply crunch so quickly? The answer, to a large degree, is conservation. In the midst of the crisis, state legislators and Gov. Gray Davis scrambled to assemble a far-reaching, $730 million statewide conservation campaign that included a blitz of "kill-a-watt" TV and radio ads, tougher efficiency standards for new homes and office buildings, and financial incentives for curbing electricity use, such as utility bill rebates. At the same time, the state expanded programs shielding low-income residents from higher electric rates, while utilities beefed up their own efforts to encourage energy efficiency.

Together, these actions spurred Californians to embrace conservation in ways both large and small, from buying more efficient refrigerators to turning off idle computers. The result: an unprecedented drop in power demand. Electricity use fell 6 percent in the first nine months of 2001 compared with the same period the year before. The reduction in peak use was even more dramatic; in June alone peak demand dropped 12 percent -- the equivalent of 4,800 megawatts, or the output of 10 giant power plants."

I think it would be very easy for Americans to use less energy, and if the need is pointed out, it's not that hard to convince them to.

[Rob the Wop]

via legislation,

Ah.

I was wondering what you were getting at. This is cheating. Forcing legislature through Congress adds yet another level of difficulty in getting ANYTHING done. Trick is to bring giant Crayon diagrams, strippers, and cigars. Plan on taking up a lot of time between nap time and crap yer Depends time. Throw money at them so they can use it to wipe up their drool. Talk v-e-r-y v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y and try not to use big words at them. Kill off all lobbying interests from coal industries prior to doing any of this.

The good news is that occasionally laws do get passed to help the environment. Sometimes you get the whole "road paved with good intentions" that takes you somewhere you don't want to go. I'm still miffed on how the government backed down on the "zero emissions" legislation in California. The auto manufactorers said, "We don't wanna." And BINGO, nothing really happens. Enforcability is the other half of the coin.

Crap. Enough political ranting from me.

[III]

>>I'll quote

don't forget all their other quotes. (you do know who you're quoting, don't you?).

i'm thinking if this isn't a hoax, i'm gonna go to church and thank the lord for delivering me some delicious irony.

[Jean]

[quote="BlueBirdPoof"]Nevada already has that incredibly cheap hydroelectric source (federally funded) that it has used to light up the sky over Las Vegas (a town that would never have been built if weren't for the cheap power) with tacky neon so they can fleece Californians, have no state income tax and then sneer at the people they leech off of.

I hope this statement was made tongue in cheek. If not you painted all of us Nevadans with a pretty broad brush. I know plenty of people who not only don't sneer at tourists, we welcome them. We are very aware that the state of our economy is heavily dependant on tourism.

As for the statement about Las Vegas using all of that cheap power, the following was copied from a table I found on the Bureau of Reclamation's Hoover Dam website. It looks like Nevada is allocated about 25% of the power generated by the dam.

How is the firm energy generated at Hoover Dam allocated?
Arizona 18.9527 percent
Nevada 23.3706 percent
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 28.5393 percent
Burbank, CA 0.5876 percent
Glendale, CA 1.5874 percent
Pasadena, CA 1.3629 percent
Los Angeles, CA 15.4229 percent
Southern California Edison Co. 5.5377 percent
Azusa, CA 0.1104 percent
Anaheim, CA 1.1487 percent
Banning, CA 0.0442 percent
Colton, CA 0.0884 percent
Riverside, CA 0.8615 percent
Vernon, CA 0.6185 percent
Boulder City, NV 1.7672 percent

[Rob the Wop]

I think it would be very easy for Americans to use less energy, and if the need is pointed out, it's not that hard to convince them to.

Yes, but what happens to the 6% when you take into account population growth? Housing developement? If 6% energy usage is acheived, but next year there was a 6% housing increase without a similiar increase in power generation- you're fighting a losing battle.

[Wind_Borne]

I think it would be very easy for Americans to use less energy, and if the need is pointed out, it's not that hard to convince them to.

Oh, if it were only so. Yet SUVs grow in number and size; and people spend C-notes to fuel them!

[BlueBirdPoof]

I hope this statement was made tongue in cheek. If not you painted all of us Nevadans with a pretty broad brush. I know plenty of people who not only don't sneer at tourists, we welcome them. We are very aware that the state of our economy is heavily dependant on tourism.

Um Jean, you got me. Partly toungue in cheek, partly the sort of tension that we have out here in the west. I certainly wouldn't want to say that all Nevadans are alike. I do think there is a sort of (and this is a very off the cuff only had one cup of coffee term, so take it very grain of salt) "nativist libertarianism" in the rural west (I lived two years in the Sierra Nevada foothills on a dirt road, so at least some of this comes from experience, however faulty) that shows up as "in the aggregate" political decisions--ie how your elected officials behave--that is typical of Nevada--and Arizona, and Colorado and probably New Mexico that gets to ignore some of the concerns that we have in California. That being said, some small town and rural values are valuable. And there is a lot of variety within the cultural face that seems to outsiders to be the default setting.

Okay, okay, from my postings on the board, it can be seen that I have a problem with stereotypes and broad brushes. I think that such things can be useful in an outline sort of way, and I always try to bow to actual experience. Sometimes talking about trends is a good thing. Sometimes I don't see the trees for the forest.

I also think that it must be very difficult to live in a state where 80% of the land is owned by the Federal Government. I think that there must be times when Nevadans feel that they have no power over their own destiny and that they anti-government rhetoric that comes out of the state, must be in part fueled by that tension.

Soryy that this post is all over the place. Like I said, one coffee.

[BlueBirdPoof]

(you do know who you're quoting, don't you?)

Actually, I don't. From context, I'm guessing someone that has vocally complained about BM in the past. Can anyone give us newbies details?

[III]

>>details

it's all small town politics. john is generally involved with amy nimbyist type action in that area, including most of the stuff that's come up against burning man.

fer reference, just do a google search on "john bogard reno gazette". it might provide a bit of context.

[stuart]

the SUV thing is funny. The current trend is actually swinging to smaller vehicles (h2 not withstanding) built on car chassis. So called 'cross' vehicles (my people called them station wagons once). The automakers are now actively pushing this segment. They are cleaner, more fuel efficient and safer than trucks but more expensive to produce. Just so as you don't go thinking them all auto folks are all nicey nicey, this trend by the manufacturers corresponds with some legislation kicking in that phases out the truck exemptions for safety, fuel efficiency, and emissions. The industry manufactured the demand for SUVs while the loophole existed. Now that the loophole is closing they are manufacturing demand for something else.

[unjonharley]

How many of you knew the P T is mounted on a cheap Neon chassie. Americans get fatter and dumber every day

[BlueBirdPoof]

How many of you knew the P T is mounted on a cheap Neon chassie.

Perfect for driving across the Black Rock Desert at 70mph.

[BlueBirdPoof]

The industry manufactured the demand for SUVs while the loophole existed. Now that the loophole is closing they are manufacturing demand for something else.

Meh, meh, meeeh. Meh good sheep. Meh buy what Detroit tells meh to. Meh.
Damn, I'll miss my '78 Dodge full size 3/4 ton Army truck. . .