From Huntington Beach City Council Member Joe Shaw: My letter opposing Poseidon, written to the Coastal Commission. Re: Coastal Development Permit No. 10-014, “Poseidon Seawater Desalination Project" (Poseidon CDP). Dear Commissioner: I am joining four other Huntington Beach city council members in writing to oppose the Poseidon Desalination Project In Huntington Beach. In April, the majority of our City Council was prepared to authorize Mayor Connie Boardman to send you a formal letter from the council opposing the Poseidon project. However, Poseidon, through its attorneys Latham & Watkins, presented us with a letter saying they would sue us if we issued a joint letter opposing the Poseidon project. Therefore, to avoid legal fees, we have written five separate letters to you. I have attached the original letter we were going to send, which has many of our reasons for opposing this project under the Coastal Act. There are a variety of other reasons why this project is bad public policy including the issue of privatization of water, the extravagant costs of Poseidon’s water, the fact that Orange County does not need the water and the extraordinary amount of energy this plant will use to produce water. Speaking directly to the Coastal Act, I would like to add two areas of deficiency that I believe exist in Poseidon’s application. First, I believe the application is deficient in addressing the effects of climate change and sea level rise. As a director serving on the board of the Orange County Sanitation District, located only a mile or so down the coast from the proposed Poseidon plant, I am aware of the concerns that agency has about sea level rise. Both the OCSD and Poseidon’s proposed plant are at similar elevations ranging from 9-12 ft. above sea level. The OCSD has the following concerns about sea-level rise: • Rising sea level impact on operation of our ocean outfall and pumping system. • Rising sea level impact on outlying sewage pump stations near the coast. • Rising sea level impact on potential flooding of Plant No. 2 in Huntington Beach. • Potential for changing precipitation patterns, such as larger more destructive winter storms resulting in higher peak flows. • Potential for warmer temperatures resulting in increased corrosion in the collection system. • Potential for warmer temperatures resulting in more frequent power outages during the summer I believe these concerns are very real and would also impact Poseidon’s proposed plant. However I do not believe these issues have been addressed in Poseidon’s application. Second, I believe that there is inadequate mitigation for the greenhouse gases that the proposed plant will generate. Poseidon’s application states that it will possibly install solar panels to offset some of the energy use, however doing so would still only offset one percent of the 315,360 MWh per year it will take to run the proposed plant. Less than one percent. Finally, imagine what it must be like to be a resident of Adelaide, Australia. Their water authority tripled their water rates to pay for a $1.8 billion plant one of the largest in the world. But guess what? They don’t currently need any of the water! That’s right! This $2 billion plant will now sit idle at a cost to ratepayers of $30 million a year. For all these reasons, plus those laid out in the attached letter, I add my letter to the four letters my council colleagues have already sent you. Sincerely, Joe Shaw Huntington Beach City Council
Posted on: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 22:09:33 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015