SocketSite™

ouch.

I'm all for cleaner power, but it seems kinda wrong to try and foist it on the Bayview.

Maybe they'll run it off of wood chips or natural gas. That would be great and not polluting.

Maybe they'll run it off Soylent Green.

Why is this a disappointment to the mayor? From the looks of this letter he was behind this move.

http://www.sfgov.org/site/mayor_index.asp?id=82105

And from what I've seen/read, the two peaker plants were going to be in the same vicinity anyway so I'm not sure how this is any worse for residents of the area. It sounded like what the main concern was between the options at this point is that eventually the City needs to come up with alternative sources of City owned "green" energy but they have to have excess capacity in the meantime. That's what the peakers would have supplied. But once the money was spent on the peakers they would have had to run for some time to make it economically reasonable. So then SF would be married to the peakers for longer than desired. With this option is sounds like Mirant will only use the retrofitted units for excess capacity and will eventually decomission them all together when that big extension cord from the East Bay is finished near 2010 and then SF can continue to pursue other greener energy solutions for the City's power.

So Potrero Hill will remain to be known as that area in the middle of the projects and the power plant. How glamorous.

I thought it was called the area between the highways?

But at least it's only a power plant, and not power plants.

Is anywhere in District 9 glamorous? Hell, I'm going to live there anyway! Viva La District 9! Down with 7 and 8! It's a lower class revolution! Wait, I paid over $500k to live in that area. I'm not lower class. Oh crap, what have I gotten myself into?