Faulty argument for battery energy storage
A recent Ramona Sentinel article by Julie Gallant reported on a meeting regarding a proposed battery energy storage project. There is a quote, from Jarod Cole, operations manager for EnerSmart Storage Holdings, that contains a gross misstatement of fact. The sentence in question is “Ultimately, it results in cleaner air and increased public safety because it will take the place of coal-fired peaker plants and other non-renewable resources.”
In my professional experience in the power generation field it was my understanding that coal-fired power plants could not be used as peaker plants because they take considerable time to build up the steam required to drive the generators. Peaker plants must be able to come on line very quickly. So this statement is disingenuous and could lead the intended customer to think that the battery storage system would replace coal-fired power plants.
I would challenge Mr. Cole to give an example of such a coal-fired “peaker” plant that is, or has recently been used for peaker service. The fact is that it is natural gas fired gas turbines that have been used for such a purpose — not coal-fired steam power plants.
The Ramona Community Planning Group and any other local agencies involved in making the decision will need to carefully review such specious arguments. Hopefully, any decisions will be made on the facts, and not false assertions. The decision does not involve the retirement or building of any coal-fired steam power plants.
Harvey Levine
Rancho Bernardo
Mutual respect is the answer
I found it interesting that the Sentinel would publish a letter, “Tolerance is being misplaced,” July 14. It quotes Roman Catholic doctrine, where it might have been better placed in a church newsletter. The retired Catholic Archbishop quoted in the letter, Charles J. Chaput, liked to talk and write about how the world and the U.S. were sliding away from the teachings of the church and toward liberal nihilism, leading to a life that is meaninglessness, because they no longer fear God.
In other words, to Bishop Chaput and apparently the author of the letter, any life outside the dogma of the church is meaningless and is destroying the fabric of the nation. The letter is replete with right-wing dog whistles, “personal feelings,” “destruction of the good and innocent,” “unbridled selfishness” …etc.
In response to the letter writer, I think using “tolerance” as a basis for argument wasn’t a good idea because I agree that what America does not need is more “tolerance,” or putting up with what others consider correct behavior, when we don’t. Declaring that tolerance is destroying our independence, when at the same time writing that Americans must instead cling to Catholic doctrine is a no-win argument with people of other religions and secularists alike.
Instead, I think Americans need to apply what we learned from the first days in school, that America is a melting pot, of people from all over the planet, with different cultures, lifestyles and beliefs, and that respecting each other while working toward the common good is what our forefathers planned.
While some Americans put their trust in God, others must be willing to work to make the system fair to everyone and vice versa. Telling people that their life is wasted and worthless, nihilism, is not being respectful.
I am curious what type of groups specifically the author was writing about that should not be tolerated and would appreciate a laundry list of those Americans that need to watch out for themselves when the tolerance of the religious right is exhausted?
Mutual respect is necessary for this melting pot to work, and the result without mutual respect and cooperation will likely be the same result as the author claims will happen without the fear of God, anarchy. Do we go forward respecting each other and working together or destroy the system fighting in the streets?
David Patterson
Ramona
