In accordance with the Warren-Alquist Act, the California Energy Commission has complete authority and sole power to certify all sites and related energy facilities within the state. The CEC will issue a certificate in place of any other form of permit or certification which supersedes any local, state, or regional statute, ordinance or regulation (within federal law). The Energy Commission coordinates its review of the facility with the federal agencies that will be issuing permits to ensure that the Energy Commission certification incorporates conditions of certification that would be required by various federal agencies. CPV has filed an Application for Certification (AFC) under the CEC’s standard certification process.
As part of the CEC’s approval process, CPV is required to propose three alternatives to this project. A “no project” alternative was considered and rejected. The no project alternative fails to meet the basic project objectives of the CPV Vaca Station energy center as described in this AFC. For example, the no project alternative is inconsistent with one of the primary objectives of CPV’s program: to provide electrical power to support reliable supply and operational flexibility in the Vacaville area. Additionally, the no project alternative could result in greater fuel consumption and air pollution in the state: older, less efficient plants with higher air emissions would continue to generate power instead of being replaced with cleaner, more efficient plants, such as the CPV Vaca Station energy center. Also, due to limited availability of in-state generated electricity, imported electrical energy has proven to be expensive and is not always available.
In addition to the no project alternative, CPV Vaca Station energy center has analyzed two possible alternative power plant sites, each of which was rejected as infeasible. Each alternative fails to meet most of the project’s basic objectives because of poor site location, and also has the potential to result in more significant environmental impacts.
Alternative routings for the project’s linear appurtenances were not considered because connections to existing natural gas, sanitary sewer and water, and the transmission system are the most direct and shortest possible.
Several alternative generating technologies were reviewed in a process that ultimately resulted in the selection of a state-of-the-art, combined-cycle natural gas-fired combustion turbine power plant for the CPV Vaca Station energy center. The alternative technologies that were evaluated included conventional oil and natural gas-fired plants, simple-cycle combustion turbines, biomass-fired plants, waste-to-energy plants, solar plants, wind generation plants, and others. None of these technologies was capable of meeting the basic project objectives. The “F-Class” combined-cycle turbine technology selected for the CPV Vaca Station energy center was chosen as the technology that most effectively and efficiently meets the project objectives.
It is CPV’s philosophy that public involvement is the most vital aspect of the process. To that end, CPV will arrange public meetings, open houses, and other public forums designed to meet with local residents and agencies to discuss the various benefits and implications of the CPV Vaca Station energy center. We will do our best to ensure that all voices are heard, and that all concerns are adequately addressed as part of the final plan.
