Image 01 Image 03

Closure of Three Southern California Power Plants Likely to be Postponed

Closure of Three Southern California Power Plants Likely to be Postponed

Another development to add to the growing list of green energy dominoes that have fallen this summer.

The summer of 2023 may be remembered as an important point in human civilization as the threat to critical and efficient energy supplies began to recede.

Sweden’s government has ditched plans to go all-in on “green energy,” green-lighting the construction of new nuclear power plants. Fossil fuel giant Shell announced it was scaling back its energy transition plans to focus on . . . gas and oil!  Specific wind farm projects began to topple due to strong economic headwinds because the cost of the electricity to be generated was deemed too high.

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced his decision to open the North Sea to more oil and gas drilling. French President Emmanuel Macron is surrendering to reality and asked for a “regulatory pause.

A little closer to home, Deep Blue California has recently announced the state is delaying the closure of 3 fossil-fuel-based power plants.

The reason? The green energy fantasies are not compatible with actual power realities.

The California Energy Commission voted Wednesday to extend the life of three gas power plants along the state’s southern coast through 2026, postponing a shutoff deadline previously set for the end of this year. The vote would keep the decades-old facilities — Ormond Beach Generating Station, AES Alamitos and AES Huntington Beach — open so they can run during emergencies.

The state is at a greater risk of blackouts during major events when many Californians simultaneously crank up their air conditioning, such as a blistering heat wave.

“We need to move faster in incorporating renewable energy. We need to move faster at incorporating battery storage. We need to build out chargers faster,” commissioner Patricia Monahan said. “We’re working with all the energy institutions to do that, but we are not there yet.”

The vote was not even close:

Tuesday’s 5-0 vote was a reminder of how hard it will be — and how necessary it still is — to stop burning fossil fuels.

The three gas plants were originally supposed to shut down three years ago, as the Golden State worked to generate ever-larger amounts of electricity from solar panels, wind turbines and other climate-friendly power sources. But after two evenings of brief rolling blackouts in August 2020, the water board decided to give the gas plants a three-year shutdown extension.

Newsom’s appointees initially expressed confidence that California would be able to build enough clean energy resources by the end of 2023 to close the polluting generators in Huntington Beach, Long Beach and Oxnard before the new deadline.

But that’s not what happened.

Global supply chain constraints delayed the construction of large solar farms, as well as batteries designed to store solar power for after sundown. Some proposed renewable energy facilities moved forward more slowly than expected amid opposition from local residents and arduous environmental reviews meant to protect wildlife habitat and scenic landscapes.

The most significant source of power in this state is natural gas.

As has long been the case, the largest single source of electricity in California comes from natural gas.

The amount of natural gas in the state’s mix of energy resources has been reduced by about one-fifth in the past 10 years, falling from 130,995 gigawatt-hours in 2012 to 104,495 in 2022.

Data from the energy commission show that a decade ago, gas made up 43.4 percent of California’s total energy mix. Last year, that number came to 36.38 percent.

But in more recent years, the proportion of natural gas in California’s energy mix has not moved much, hovering each year since 2016 between 33 and 38 percent.

I am amazed that rational adults are still present in California and empowered to make such critical decisions.

Let’s add this development to the growing list of green energy dominoes that have fallen this summer.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Who would have guessed wind a rabbit tracks is a good source of energy?

It takes energy to heat the ovens they are herding Humanity into.

    Amazing that someone downvoted this comment.

    But then, the Nazis did get a very sophisiticated population into turning a blind eye to just this very thing. And the left has adopted all of the Nazi propaganda techniques.

How much more of California’s energy is now coming from other states, compared to past years?

They are actually nowhere near being able meet their demand themselves, never mind doing so with “green” energy sources.,to%20the%20Los%20Angeles%20area.

    CommoChief in reply to DaveGinOly. | September 1, 2023 at 8:34 pm

    One way to actually help the environment is cut down on additional transmission lines. How about limiting imported electricity in each State to 10% of peak demand and tying that to the ability of the State to receive any waivers? So if CA isn’t generating 90% of peak electricity demand (they ain’t) then CA no longer gets to set their own more stringent standards for fossil fuels, types of appliances, airborne particulate matter, fuel efficiency in vehicles and so on. All they gotta do to regain their current ability to disrupt national markets is be willing to generate 90% of their peak electric demand. Maybe add in State refining capacity for special fuel blends as well; not just from already ‘cracked’ product imported from elsewhere but from crude oil. Surely CA would want to do that in their State with their enlightened and virtuous environmental safeguards? Since they’re so much smarter, better, virtuous and more caring than the rest of us. /s?

Why are so many blithering idiots wielding power in allegedly sane and affluent societies?

Below is from John Braun’s news letter.. Braun is a state senator in wa.

Sorry for the long copy paste- I did cut the end off to shorten it- but it tell you how horrific and corrupt the lying has become in Washington state.

The catcher is that Wa’s AG is telling PSE to NOT inform customers how the new tax is raising energy prices.

Dear friends and neighbors,

Republicans have talked a lot about the record increases in the price of gas. We’ve been clear that the tax program the Democrats refer to as “cap-and-trade” or “cap-and-invest” (but we call “cap-and-tax”) is to blame for Washington having the highest/second-highest gas prices in the nation. The governor and the Democratic majority dispute this and use oil companies as a scapegoat.

FACT: Washington’s gas prices have risen 32%
since Jan. 1, 2023 — the same day the “cap-and-tax” program went into effect.

And it isn’t only gasoline that is increasing in price. The cost of home energy is also going up as a direct result of that same program, which is part of the majority’s Climate Commitment Act. Except Puget Sound Energy is not allowed to tell you that on your billing statement — a fact uncovered by the press.

The commissioners at the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC) ruled last week that it is illegal for PSE to disclose that information to you as a stipulation for approving a 3.25% increase to your bill to cover $16.8 million in losses PSE expects as a result of that program.

Todd Myers of the Washington Policy Center sums up the ruling as one of the “most brazenly dishonest rulings” he’s ever seen. In it, he says the UTC:

Admits the new CO2 tax increases energy prices
Contradicts another one of the false claims by Gov. Inslee and the Department of Ecology
Brazenly tries to hide those very facts from the public
Worse is that the office of Attorney General Bob Ferguson says including that detail would “unnecessarily complicate” your statement and that your bill should only share information that is “beneficial” to you.

“…this is not only dishonest but violates the spirit of Washington’s laws and constitution. The position of the Public Counsel in the Attorney General’s office is that they know what the public should know and what they shouldn’t. The claim that transparency is bad for the public is remarkable and revealing.”

Todd Myers, Washington Policy Center

This is lying by omission. By not being transparent about why your power bill is going up, the government dodges any accountability for it.

Their excuse — that full disclosure makes the bill too complicated for you — treats you like you aren’t smart enough to understand it. In reality, they fear that you are too smart not to realize they are at fault for another increase to your cost of living.

The sad irony is that the Department of Ecology claimed that the cap-and-tax program would decrease the cost of energy.

And, in the regulatory proceeding with the UTC, left-wing environmental activist groups who previously released statements blaming oil companies for price increases told a different tale. They admitted the cap-and-tax program, which is part of the Climate Commitment Act, is the cause. Were they lying then? Or are they lying now?

Any rebates offered to offset the increase are the equivalent of a store marking up a product and then offering a fraction of that as a discount. They want you to think you are getting a deal, but you’re really getting swindled.

One thing about the Swedes. The Swedes always do what’s best for the swedes. Review what they did throughout the 20th century. Direct opposition is usually the road to ruin, so the swedes dodge and weave.

Can’t openly join or oppose the Soviet-Nazi’s. What to do? Seal up a train full of Wehrmacht troops and transship them to Finland-Norway.

It’s the unwritten Scandinavian version of Tao or Dao.

Any Dumb-o-crat apparatchik agitating for “green” energy solutions, who isn’t staunchly supporting existing nuclear power plants and isn’t supporting the construction of new nuclear power plants, is a transparent fraud who possesses zero credibility on energy and environmental issues.

Basic laws of physics are hard to crack. Unless there are new gas or nuclear plants coming on line or there is some mass reduction in energy usage by 2026, those three plants will be in operation for many years to come..

Simply adding solar cells to grid will not do the trick as there needs to be utility scale energy storage. I haven’t seen anything effective to be built and deployed any time soon. And wait until people get the bill to replace their solar cells and energy storage units much more frequently than the life of a gas fired plant.

When we transition from gas power plants, we need to transition to a better quality energy source and that is not wind and solar.

    henrybowman in reply to Arnoldn. | September 2, 2023 at 2:41 pm

    “Basic laws of physics are hard to crack”

    Another aspect of this is people who refuse to understand what “source” means in the phrase “energy sources.”

    True energy sources are mined, exploited, or otherwise acquired, at an upfront cost that is much less than the energy obtained.

    You dig a hole and find coal or oil or uranium that was sitting there unused, or even plain old geothermal heat energy, those are energy sources. You use natural gravity to pull natural water through a dam, that’s an energy source.

    You burn coal to power your garage outlet to power your “ee vee,” that doesn’t make your outlet an “energy source.” Hydrogen is not an “energy source” unless you mine it from the sun or Jupiter’s atmosphere; otherwise, it’s just a “storage medium,” like a battery.

    Solar and wind are valid energy “sources,” they’re just not dense enough to power a productive society. Nothing says you can’t use a windmill to fill your water tank, but it isn’t going to air-condition your house.

      The only relevant law of physics here is the physics of gunfire. It’s coming sooner than you think.

      The IRS has spent $35.2 million on guns, ammunition, and military-style equipment since 2006, including $10 million in weaponry and gear since 2020. These purchases are used by the IRS’ Criminal Investigation Division that has jurisdiction over federal tax crimes.

      “The taxman is fully loaded at the expense of the taxpayer,” Ernst said. “As the Biden administration has worked to expand the size of the IRS, any further weaponization of this federal agency against hardworking Americans and small businesses is a grave concern. I’m working to disarm the IRS and return these dollars to address reckless spending in Washington.”

      “The IRS isn’t going to war, so just who are they preparing to battle? Our OpenTheBooks auditors found the IRS spent millions of tax dollars on AR-15 style rifles, semi-automatic shotguns, and even purchased submachine guns while stockpiling 5 million rounds of ammunition in their gun locker. The IRS special agent is starting to look less like a desk worker or rule maker and more like a SWAT team from a Hollywood thriller. It’s the blurring of the lines between a tax agency and traditional law enforcement,” said Adam Andrzejewski, Founder and CEO of Open the Books.:

      From NASA To Amtrak, These Are All The Government Agencies With Tactical Teams:

      Why Are Federal Bureaucrats Buying Guns And Ammo? $158 Million Spent By Non-Military Agencies:

      ‘There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know’.
      – Jonathan Swift in his ‘Polite Conversation

Enviros need to sue to make the government keep its promise. Unicorns can provide all the energy we need.

Gruesom doesn’t want any rolling blackouts happening during the 2024 election cycle. Once he’s in, we’re all screwed.

Unfortunately doesn’t do anything about the nuclear plants and power-generating dams they’ve already decommissioned and destroyed.

Subotai Bahadur | September 1, 2023 at 10:10 pm

If California chooses to cut its own energy throat, who are we to object? I’m sure some Leftist organization will sue to make sure that those plants are shut down.

Subotai Bahadur

It’s only appropriate that California persist with fossil fuels considering that it is hanging on to its fossil fool Senator.

Democrats like any energy source…. unless it works

CA has an unused nuclear power plant (Rancho Seco) sitting about 50 miles south of Sacramento. It was proposed, commissioned, and built, only to be shut down by the greenies right before it was to come online.

I imagine the turbines that were installed have been sold off, but the nuclear fuel is still there (they did startup testing at 10% power, rendering the fuel radioactive and thus must still be on site). Basically, the 2 GW plant is sitting there idle.

It would take less than a year to get that plant running. The only reason it is not is political.