DATABASE: LAPD's Most Wanted

Well good for you Mr. Marquez, I am thrilled you stop 90 percent of all projects. So how do you propose we provide electricity and power for your future meetings?

Was an excellent story that was fair in reporting the facts and both side of the issue.

Rob R Barron wrote:

Well good for you Mr. Marquez, I am thrilled you stop 90 percent of all projects. So how do you propose we provide electricity and power for your future meetings?

I among many environmental groups do our homework and research to find real green alternatives and sustainable energy resources. We can invest in solar and wind energy. Sea energy is now be tested and demonstrated and will provide another resource.

As an example at the Port of Los Angeles, our Environmental Justice organization and the Sierra Club Harbor Vision Task Force have had an on-going campaign for over seven years to convince the port to invest in solar energy, until the Port agreed they could have solar energy. In 2007 they announced their plans to to build 10MW's of Solar Power and on April 2, 2009 annonced the beginning construction of the first 1MW to be built on the crews ship terminal roof. A win win for the port, the public and our childrens future.

We have also recommended wind energy to be built at the Port of Los Angeles and the Port of Long Beach. but again doing our research we realized that the traditional wind mill type turbine could not be used because it might kill some of our endangered coastal birds so we found an appropriate non-polluting solution. A vertical wind turbine that turns around a tall pole and submitted two companies that each have their unique designs.
Last week the Port of Long Beach announced that they are currently researching the feasibility of wind energy at their port.

So now we can capture solar energy during the day and wind energy at night when the ocean breezes blow inland. Our organization members, college and university student interns help us on our research. Often members of the public just contact us to advise of information they have found.

My reading of the article makes it clear the economics of the sequestration ended the project more than fear of some future neighbor campaign opposition. I think Marquez may have overstated his role and influence in the decision. No mention was made of how much power would have been produced by the project, nor the unit cost for that power (usually 7 to 8 cents per kWh) versus somebody's desire for renewable energy power (usually costing 18-20 cents per kWh). In the end, though, the decision not to build the project is environmentally costly if it would have replaced power already produced with significantly higher emissions.

This project benefited no one but the oil industry. Time we look more into alternative energy projects such as solar, in-line hydro, algae to biodiesel, waste to energy, improved wind if possible and encourage hydrogen on demand for todays vehicles. All of these types of energy are available today. We need to stop the emphasis on oil and natural gas and begin to look elsewhere.

Green beats green!

Mr. Marguez, this all sounds fine and dandy, if you live and work in a controlled enviroment. Now, how about powering all the operations that take place in the port? But even better, do you invest, or consult for any of those companies that manufacture or will constructe any of the devices stated? And isn't all the talk of "green or renewable" supposed to come from and can return to its natural state at the end of it's lifespan? So I take it that all of the material and manufacturing from nuts to bolts, where is that coming from. Isn't that all "Man Made"? But your group must weigh the short term cost to justify the long term savings? This story leaves many questions unanswered for me. Sounds alot like the off shore LPG terminal that was shut down in LB.