Re “SDG&E power line may total $1.62B” (Aug. 11): I read that the California Independent System Operator is considering the $1.62 billion Golden Pacific Powerlink, with San Diego ratepayers responsible for 9% of the cost.
If ratepayers are already funding so much of SDG&E’s infrastructure, why are we paying more for distributing electricity than for the energy we actually consume? It feels like paying rent on properties we already own.
— Rudy Lizada, Mira Mesa
For years SDG&E has vociferously, successfully argued that incentives for homeowners who reduce the overall need for local power generation by installing rooftop solar should be curtailed, primarily under the theory that those who do not own homes cover some of the costs of the incentives. Ironically, more recently they have also opposed “balcony solar,” which allows everyone to generate solar power.
Now the U-T reports that SDG&E is arguing for construction of a power line, that may total $1.62 billion, to transport power from outside San Diego, which will be paid for by all power consumers, construction of which will substantially boost SDG&E profits. Part of the rationale? To address the need for clean power. Does this reveal a long-term scheme by SDG&E to stifle local production of clean power because it cuts into profits SDG&E can generate by building power lines under the guise of protecting customers?
— B. Chris Brewster, Pacific Beach