10 Reasons to Vote Yes for Measure A

10 Reasons to Oppose AES Redondo Beach Power Plant Rebuild 

1. Emissions from the new power plant would increase 700%. 
2. 6,850 students go to school within 1.5 miles of it. 
3. AES management has a horrendous track record and has been involved in several law suits and financial crisis issues including Enron.  Read this "AES Corporation: Rewriting the Rules of Management". 
4. AES's largest customer is J.P. Morgan according to the AES company fact sheet on the web site.  A bank as your largest customer?  Sounds a bit like Enron to me.  This Redondo Beach power from this plant is not needed per the CAISO and CEC reports.
5. Power plant lines bring down property values at least 25% in the Redondo Beach & South Hermosa Beach areas and block ocean views.  The power lines may go as well. This has not been studied. 
6. AES hurts the fiscal health of the Redondo King Harbor area surrounding businesses.  New waterfront developments have been put on hold because of the power plant rebuild issue.  Many new restaurants would likely follow the new Shade Hotel being built on King Harbor more money would flow to the City if the power plant was gone.  
7. Opposing it costs nothing & AES only needs the Council and others to do nothing and we all lose.  Doing nothing plays right into their hands. This is not about the future zoning of the site.  We definitely don't want a new power plant.  See map below of what this area could be. 
8. AES pays little in taxes only $385,000 / year in tax revenue to the city. 
9. AES plant borders on South Hermosa Beach and most HB residents will be affected. 
10. The loud steam blasts in the middle of the night are simply ridiculous and this beautiful park rendering (see picture below)  done by the California Coast Commission would be incredible the area. 

In a 3-2 vote, the Redondo Beach City Council decided to continue its discussion on a resolution opposing the repowering of AES Redondo Beach at the July 10 meeting. After a meeting that lasted more than seven hours until 1 am, the Redondo Beach City Council decided to delay its discussion on whether to pass a resolution opposing the repowering of the AES Redondo Beach power plant on Harbor Drive until the July 10. This will allow city staff time to hire an independent consultant to perform an amortization report on the current structure. Councilmen Matt Kilroy and Pat Aust both said they wanted to read such a report before making a final decision.  Is this just a delay tactic?  Read more on Redondo Patch and Easy Reader. 

Redondo Beach City Council 

Matt Kilory, Steve Aspel, Bill Brand, Pat Aust, Steve Diels

Hermosa Beach, Torrance, Manhattan Beach and Palos Verdes should participate as well in support of removing the power plant. NIMBY thinking and waiting is just plain lazy and stupid.  All surrounding City Council members need to work together because this is such a big issue.  Lets set politics aside and be proactive about finding a solution to do the right thing.  This is not just about Redondo Beach and we all stand to benefit with cleaner air and potentially new development that we all can use. The King Harbor area has so much potential. Its a developers "wet dream" and huge private money would follow the opportunity to create something amazing.  

It Redondo Beach City Council's job to find an alternative solution for the power plant land.  However, we all know political people are lazy and always need LOTS of "hand holding" so they feel safe. Why would City Council members be reluctant to oppose the new power plant remodel that produces a minuscule $200,000 in tax revenue per year which is less money than the city makes from its parking garage at the pier. 

Is AES threatening Redondo Beach City Council members with a law suit?  Any initiative by the city residents is not likely to provide AES with any basis to sue the city. Finally, there is an amortization process through which a city, or a citizen's initiative, can allow businesses adequate time to get a return on their investment in a property before a specific use is banned. The proposed citizen initiative would eliminate industrial uses by 2020, which I think is plenty of time (8 years) for AES to get adequate return on their investment in the property, especially considering the majority of the equipment is old and obsolete, and esentially worthless at this point.  

AES is no stranger to crisis and law suits.  In 1992, AES flirted with disaster when its Shady Point generating facility in Oklahoma was discovered to have been discharging polluted water and to have falsified the samples it provided to the Environmental Protection Agency. In the same year, AES was forced to abandon its rebuilding of a power plant at Cedar Bay, Florida following a dispute with state officials and the local community. These events caused AES’s share price to fall by half.  AES has multiple law suits against the company (see AES Law Suits) search results.  

AES is a $9 billion public company (NYSE: AES) planning to make a $500M+ investment on a power plant that might be worth an estimated $135M (comps based on AES Huntington Beach valuation performed in 2011). AES is looking to repower the plant in 2018. They are currently using the plant only 5% of the time right now, and with an investment of $630 million for a new plant, the amount of energy needed to pay back the investment will mean lots of particulate matter in the atmosphere in Redondo, Hermosa, and surrounding communities. While the footprint will be smaller (12 acres vs the current 50 acres, 4 stacks instead of 5), any chance for revitalizing the waterfront will be lost for 50+ years as no one will want to invest in the area. Here are some points and a link to FAQs Tear Down Redondo Beach Power Plant Blog:

California Coastal Commission's study for AES power plant area

Hermosa Beach Oil Drilling Municipal Code Law

5.56. 000E adopted June 25, 1985

Ord 85-803, adopted June 25, 1985 provides for the establishment of an oil code. Such oil code is on file and available in the office of the City Clerk.

5.56. 010 Oil drilling unlawful.

The drilling, boring or otherwise sinking of an oil or gas well, or oil or gas wells, or the maintenance, pumping or operation of any oil well or oil wells or gas well or gas wells in the city is declared to be a nuisance and is to be unlawful. It is unlawful for any person to drill, bore or otherwise sink or maintain, pump or operate or cause to be drilled, bored or otherwise sunk, or maintained, pumped or operated, or to aid in the drilling, boring or otherwise sinking, or maintaining, pumping or operating of any gas or oil well or wells for the purpose of procuring oil, gas or other hydrocarbon substances within any portion of the city. It is unlawful for any person to commence the construction or to construct or maintain any derrick, or any oil well apparatus in the city for the purpose of drilling for or maintaining any oil or gas well in the city; except, however, the oil wells now constructed or under construction or in actual operation in the city. (Ord. 95-1139 § 2, 1995; prior code § 21-10)

Oil & Gas Drilling Time Lapse Video

Does Oil & Gas Drilling Belong In Hermosa Beach, California?

Public OpinionPoll Results

What is an Environmental Impact Report (EIR)?

Hermosa Beach is about to begin the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) process and its important that you know what it is, the timing, costs, players, politics & process.  An EIR is the planning document which describes the environmental impacts associated with a oil drilling project.

17 Environmental Impacts

The EIR will analyze 17 different environmental impacts and will determine which ones are significant. Aesthetics, Agricultural resources, Air Quality, Biological resources, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gases, Hazards, Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population, Real Estate, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation and Traffic, Utilities, Mandatory Findings.  It also describes mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to an appropriate or acceptable level.

Planning Commission & City Council

The information within an EIR allows the decision-makers (the Planning Commission and/or the City Council) to make an informed decision when considering whether or not to approve a project. The report also assists with deciding if approval conditions (entitlements) are necessary. The ultimate decision to approve a project, however, remains with the decision-makers. When the Planning Commmission or City Council approves an EIR, it is simply an acknowledgement that the EIR is true and accurate. It is only a step towards project approval, not a guarantee. The Planning Commmission or City Council may decide to instead decide to approve or deny the project based on overriding considerations. For example, the Planning Commission may find that a proposed project may provide monetary benefits to a community that don't outweigh a problems identified in the EIR, such as unsafe air quality, heavy truck traffic & real estate price decline that will negatively impact property tax revenue.

Public Review

There may also be one or more meetings about the report, either as a separate meeting or as an item in a Planning Commission agenda. Note that approval of the environmental impact report does not mean that the project is approved. Once the report is approved, decision-makers review the project, taking into account the information in the report and other considerations. The public has an opportunity to review and provide comments on a draft of an EIR by contacting, in writing, the planner listed on the EIR. Public input is then included in the EIR, and considered by the decision-makers along with other aspects of the report.

EIR Project Managers

The Hermoa Beach City Council approved a contract with Ed Almanza & Associates, a Laguna Beach firm, to serve as the project manager.  However, there is no public information on this firm available on the internet as of today which is concerning.  The firm will oversee the city’s review of the proposed project at large. The Council also approved a consulting contract with former City Manager Stephen R. Burrell.

Opinion:  "Can Voters Rely on an EIR to Make a Voting Decision?"

It is important for the entire South Bay to understand this will be the 4th time in 80 years that Hermosa Beach has been faced with an oil drilling ballot measure. Hermosa Beach overwhelmingly banned oil drilling in public votes in 1932, 1958 and 1995. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will address many aspects of this process, but it will never fully disclose all the damage that oil drilling will bring about in a town 1.3 miles square. Our position as a great area to live will be severely tarnished. These safety and environmental damage resulting from oil drilling will effect generations to come.

An EIR is supposed to be a thorough analysis of: Air quality, Biological resources, Geology and soils, Greenhouse gases, Hazards and hazardous materials, Hydrology and water quality, Land use and planning, Mineral resources, Noise impact, Population and housing, Public services, Recreation, Transportation and traffic, Utilities & any other Mandatory findings of significance like real estate values. Upon the completion of the EIR, a thorough examination of the safety risks will be necessary as it was in the previous MacPhearson oil drilling project. A report like Bircher Report (safety study), which was done in relation to the MacPhearson project, will need to be done.

Its too complicated for the voters to rely on an EIR alone.  Its too complicated and does not address safety to the residents.  An EIR is meant to simply figure out how a project could get approved. Don't be surprised to see this EIR analyzed and separated by parts to make the environmental impacts appear smaller and insignificant to residents. It’s very important that the City Council get a report similar to the Bircher Report to fully understand the risks these kind of project present.

Hermosa Beach has been down this road before and completed an Environmental Impact Report for Macpherson Oil in the 1990's at this exact location. The City Council elected at that time showed great care and diligence in their decision making. They commissioned the Bircher Report and reviewed the EIR and concluded that it was unsafe and the air quality impact would have been too harmful on residents. Three City Council members Sam Edgerton, Julie Oakes and John Bowler unanimously agreed that to not proceed with oil drilling after reviewing all the findings. They felt that the safety risks were too great to allow the oil drilling project to proceed.

We need the EIR to be interpreted by professionals who will take into account the same safety issues our 1990 City Council had to. Our current council chooses not to heed this previous unanimous vote of their predecessors. It is unknown if they even read the prior EIR and related safety reports before agreeing to this settlement arrangement. The current city council viewed the outcome of a jury trail too risky and unlike our 1998 city council they put the citizens at risk, or in this case obviated the due diligence of a complicated project into a political vote where safety arguments and facts might get lost in the rhetoric..

How is Fracking Different from Oil Drilling?

How is hydraulic fracturing different from drilling for oil? And why is it called 'fracking'? CNN explains it to you.  CNN Explains.

The Environmental Protection Agency's new air pollution rules for the oil and gas industry may seem like odd timing, as President Obama has been trying to deflect Republican criticism that he overregulates energy industries. But the rules weren't the Obama administration's idea.  How a 'Western Problem' Led to New Drilling Rules.

Listen to this when you consider that E&B Oil wants to drill 30 wells in Hermosa Beach.  30 wells getting well completion in our neighborhood would horrendous.  The EPA has proposed new rules to control the problem but does this apply to slant oil drilling?

The fact that the EPA has acknowledged drilling is making people sick is a strong argument against doing so in the midst of a residential neighborhood, like Hermosa Beach. "The EPA says all of that drilling sends significant amounts of pollution into the air, contributing to smog and making people sick."

Hermosa Beach Slant Oil Drilling Maps

These maps are speculative drawings based in information we have gathered from the Macpherson proposals.  E&B oil has not submitted their drilling proposal yet.  

Map of the proposed Hermosa Beach slant oil drilling site will reach out into the ocean.  What is slant oil drilling?  The drilling will also go underground into Redondo Beach likely.  The California Coastal Commission has full authority of this drilling and has thus tidelands restrictions on where money from oil can be spent.  The oil site will also be less than 100 feet from homes when Colorado requires a 350 foot setback and California recommend 300 feet.

Do we really know what is underground nor want to disturb the environment with oil drilling pipes possibly poking through the ocean floor?  Do want want to risk the dangers of the ocean floor and our beaches sinking (subsiding)?

The proposed drilling site effects more than 50% of residents of Hermosa Beach.  Noise, air pollution, explosions or dangerous gases are all a potential consequence.  Not to mention the drilling site will be within a few hundred yards of your kids playing in the park.  If you run on the greenbelt in Manhattan Beach or Hermosa Beach there could be an oil pipeline to under it to Chevron Refinery in Torrance and/or a natural gas pipeline AES Power Plant in Redondo Beach.

Lets not forget about the fault line that runs across the Santa Monica Bay and the South Bay.  We have had several earthquakes offshore in Hermosa Beach and Santa Moncia bay in the past few years. 

 27 oil wells and 3 water injection wells for Fracking and Natural Gas

Horrible Air Quality

I am told by oil experts in the business that the odor from gases and drilling will be "awful" around the site.  There is no way to contain the odor or poisonous gases that come up our of the ground.  This map depicts 3 different wind scenarios we get in the area.  An onshore, offshore and no wind where the smell and gases get trapped in the valley.

Emissions generated during the drilling/development phase include vehicle emissions; diesel emissions from large construction equipment and generators, storage/dispensing of fuels, and, if installed at this stage, flare stacks; small amounts of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulates from blasting activities; and dust from many sources, such as disturbing and moving soils (clearing, grading, excavating, trenching, backfilling, dumping, and truck and equipment traffic), mixing concrete, and drilling. During windless conditions (especially in areas of thermal inversion), project-related odors may be detectable at more than a mile from the source.  Excess increases in dust could decrease forage palatability for wildlife and livestock and increase the potential for dust pneumonia.  See source.

250 Yard Heavy Impact Zone from Noise, Odor, Dangerous Gases and Explosions.   There are two parks, hundreds of homes and a jogging trail in the vicinity which I think is disgraceful.   There are probably 10+ kids under the age of 10 years old that live in the red boxed area.  Its just sad that no one thought through the ramifications.  

Projected Ripple Affect of Real Estate Losses

This is a Scenario of What Could Happen

comments powered by Disqus

Huntington Beach Residents Want Oil Facility Shut Down

The Angus Petroleum production facility on Delaware St. in Huntington Beach from which odors and noise have been emanating.  Huntington Beach residents say fumes, noise from Angus Petroleum are unbearable. Officials say the company is following regulations. This Huntington Beach oil facility has also been connected with oil spills in the area which cost the city $1.5M to clean up.

Residents in the neighborhood near Springfield Avenue and Delaware Street continue to complain to the city and the Southern California Air Quality Management District but say they have yet to see results. City officials and the AQMD say they have been fielding complaints on the facility but so far Angus has been cooperative and complied with regulations.  Last summer residents appealed to the city for help, saying the fumes were causing health issues including headaches and burning eyes. The Fire Department sent a violation notice to Angus Petroleum and said company officials were responsive to residents' concerns.

The Angus Petroleum facility on California Street had been inactive for nearly 11 years but started work again last summer. Oil production began on the site in 1992 but was shut down in 1998.