Does Marin Energy Authority have a hidden agenda to benefit renewable energy investors?

From: charlessands@aol.com
Date: January 21, 2010 11:45:34 AM PST
To: spotswood@comcast.net, media@commonsensemariin.com, dbunnel@marinij.com, shenny@marinij.com, jstaats@marinij.com, mprado@marinij.com, rhalstead@marinij.com, cmcglashan@co.marin.ca.us, hbrown@co.marin.ca.us, cmurray@co.marin.ca.us, skinsey@co.marin.ca.us, sadams@co.marin.ca.us
Subject: Does Marin Energy Authority have a hidden agenda to benefit renewable energy investors?

Supervisor McGlashan:

Does Marin Energy Authority have a hidden agenda to benefit renewable energy investors?
To protect and grow their investments in renewable energy Pelosi and her California politically progressive cronies are privately pushing behind closed doors county government to take over and control the source of PG&E’s bulk electric power to create a market for their renewable energy investments.
Madame Speaker Pelosi’s 2007 financial disclosure form. Schedule III lists “Assets and ‘Unearned Income’” of between $100,001-$250,000 from Clean Energy Fuels Corp. — Public Common Stock. Clean Energy Fuels Corp is a start –up producer of renewable energy.
Perhaps this is the reason the Marin Energy Authority was quietly conceived and initiated in December 2008 by the Board of Supervisors?
The Marin County politicians have no role in creating a win lose situation that benefits “progressive” investors in renewable energy producers while limiting Marin electrical consumer’s power supply to renewable energy only.
The market rewards investors that can supply energy at affordable prices.
Supervisor McGlashan may be well intentioned but he has shown Marin County no documented cost/benefit reports proving that Marin Energy Authority’s bulk renewable energy is a reliable, competitive and affordable alternative to PG&E’s sources of bulk electrical energy.
PG&E currently buys bulk electrical from 5 sources of bulk power generators using: 47% natural gas; 2% coal; 1% other; 20% nuclear; 16% large hydro; 15 % renewable.
Marin Energy Authority will reduce PG&E’s source of bulk power generating sources to one source, renewable energy.
What is the carbon footprint of the bulk electrical power generated for Marin consumer’s consumption and that of renewable energy generated bulk electrical power including manufacturing?
We don’t know because the Chair Mr. McGlashan and his Marin Energy Authority hasn’t advised us. Perhaps he doesn’t know or care.
The Marin County politicians and Marin Energy Authority should get out of the way and let the market work
I feel it is time to start building nuclear power plants.
France produces over 80% of its electricity with nuclear power and even exports electrical power.
I feel that covering thousands of acres in Marin or any other county in California with solar panels or wind mils to supply solar power or wind power will have a catastrophically significant environmental impact on California’s landscape.
One nuclear plant in North West Marin on several acres of land next to the Pacific could be designed and constructed in less than 15 years (If Pelosi and her progressive investor cronies including the Sierra Club would pleased get out of the way) would eliminate PG&E’s use of fossil fuel entirely, guaranteeing a nearly zero carbon foot print and a serious reduction in electricity Marin County’s consumers electrical bill.
Unfortunately we listened to the same green environmental nonsense years ago and now. Not to protect the environment but to benefit the growth of progressive politician’s “Wall Street” investments in renewable energy.
Wonder if our Marin County Supervisors will disclose if they now own “Wall Street” stock in renewable energy?

Charles D. Sands