In a response to my post about the DWR’s Hetch Hetchy  report, sasha from Left in S.F. challenged the power replacement aspects of the restoration.

That’s all true as far as it goes, but as I’ve written before, the price tag of restoring Hetch Hetchy is better calculated in new asthma and lung cancer cases. Hetch Hetchy provides something like 20% of San Francisco’s electricity. If the dam were torn down, that power capacity would have to be replaced.

That power will almost certainly end up being replaced by gas-fired power plants, and those plants will be located in poor communities of color, because that’s where they put power plants. As long as advocates ignore the direct effect of the Hetch hetchy teardown, which will be more children tied to their asthma inhaler, more seniors unable to breathe, and more people in neighborhood clinics with shortness of breath, they are only confirming the worst stereotypes of the environmental movement, where environmentalists care more about trees than about people. 

Yes, the power would need to be replaced, but we need more power generation regardless of whether HH is dammed up or not. 

The E.D. report, however, has provided an analysis of where our power comes from and how Hetch Hetchy affects our power generation.  To be precise, the HH system provides only “0.6 percent of California’s electricity supply and represented 5.5 percent of statewide hydropower production. Also, only the Moccasin and Kirkwood plants actually generate power using water stored behind O’Shaughnessy Dam.”

Follow me to the flip…

And we must consider also where the bulk of HH power really goes: into pumping water.  Pumping water is the state’s single largest use of power.  If the Turlock and Modesto Irrigation District’s begin to make more substantive efforts toward conservation, much of the power loss can be made up throug small holding dams to increase hydropower generation along the Tuolomne.

The E.D. report also suggests other conservation measures including dynamic pricing for large energy consumers (ie industrial users) and local micro-conservation efforts. 

But more directly to your charge that we will have to build more gas-fired plants, well, that’s not necessarily true.  First of all, there were some members of the Assembly (Tim Leslie, a right-winger Rep, amongst others) who suggested trading off new dams for the restoration of the HH Valley.  While I’m not convinced this is the greatest idea, it is a reasonable consideration.  If we so desired, there are places on the rivers from the Sierra that we could build new dams.  Of course, there is plenty of environmental damage from dams as well.  Fish are unable to spawn properly and we could end up severely damaging our salmon population.  I think we’ve seen how perilous the salmon situation is already with the tight restrictions this season, building more dams would only accentuate that.

But as I said a few days ago on Calitics when we set a record for power consumption (which has likely been broken or will be broken today), we need more power generation facilities, specifically more alternative power generation facilities, with or without Hetch Hetchy.  I suggested requiring solar panels on all new construction, but I don’t think that’s the only option.  California has at least two resources in abundance, wind and sun, both of which are largely untapped.  And news that Vermont is now looking to produce energy from methane from cow manure offers another promise of new energy sources.  And of course, we could consider nuclear power productionm but the question of where we dump our spent fuel might hold that one back a while.

So, I think the accusation of environmentalists caring more about trees than people rings pretty hollow.  It’s not environmentalists that are pushing gas-fired plants on the world.  Environmentalists are working to decrease emissions and decrease the effects of global warming.  Heck, E.D. has other campaigns, Fight Global Warming and Clean Air for Life, running concurrently with their Restore Hetch Hetchy campaign. I think pointing fingers at E.D. and its partners is the wrong place to start.  If LA can save Mono Lake, why is it now so absurd to start talking about restoring Hetch Hetchy.  Look, I agree with the fact that we need to ensure secure water and power replacements, but that is not sufficient to kill the debate.

E.D. is working harder than anybody out there to clean up the air.  It’s a little disconcerting to see people on the left attacking them when it’s inconvienent for us.  I love the fact that we have HH and its resources, but if LA can save Mono Lake, why can’t we work to restore the Hetch Hetchy Valley?

Arnold Schwarzenegger spoke at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco.  I had the honor to view the Governor’s splendid presentation.  Ok, that’s all I could do of that.  After making the crowd wait in the very hot, very stuffy Herbst Theater on what could be one of the hottest days in SF of the year, he strolls in 45 minutes late.  I can deal with that, but then he strolls on stage to pronounce how he has “sold California.”  Yeah, more like “sold California out,” but I held my tongue.  No point getting thrown out of there. I sat through his whole “selling California” lecture and waited for the Q&A portion.

One of the first questions was something to the tune of “Why do we go over there and support the Chinese regime that has been brutal to its citizens, especially the Falun Gong.” Well, I’m pretty sure Arnold didn’t know what or who the Falung Gong was and preceded to say how business is business and how they don’t muddle in the affairs of our government and we shouldn’t mess with theirs.  Well, that’s all well and good, but we don’t systematically suppress any religious organizations as the Chinese government does.  But, Arnold is no Chinese scholar, so I could understand his confusion.

However, Arnold is supposed to be an expert on California politics.  You know, maybe he would know what all of the propositions were on the upcoming ballot. Like say, Proposition 89, the CAN’s clean money initiative.  When asked about Prop 89, he hemmed and hawed about how he would have to read the proposition but he supports clean money.  Well, ok he supports clean money, but well not so much the clean part.  When the moderator asked him whether he actually supported public financing, Arnold immediately said no.  Perhaps he should take a look into at least a two sentence summary of all of the propositions.  It would be nice to have an informed governor. Frank at CPR has a good post on this.

But what really set me off was Arnold’s absolute denunciation of “universal health care.” In one sentence he said it was unacceptable to have 6.7 million Californians without health care, and then he states his hatred of “universal health care.” He goes on to say how he is against government interference.  What is Arnold afraid of about “universal health care.” Is it that universal health care would yield the worst results in terms of cost effectiveness in all Western industrialized nations? Nope, can’t be that, because the U.S. (and our wonderful private insurance system) already hold’s the title for that.  Is there any moral argument that you can present to me that those with the least are less worthy of medical than those with the most.  I challenge anybody to present me with such an argument.  What is more basic of a right than the right to live a healthy life?  We owe every one of our citizens, from rich to poor, the same level of care.  There should be no distinction, but Arnold is A-OK with such class distinction.

No, what Arnold really fears about the evil “universal health care” is the well of GOP dollars that might dry up.  And that is putting money over lives, a morally inexcusable position.

And that’s not a total, that’s the “platinum sponsor” price.  It’s a good thing that rich people, such as Arnold Schwarzenegger, can’t be bought.  You see, once you are as rich as Arnold, money has no meaning for you.  Well, it’s a good thing too.  Arnold has another fundraiser where $100,000 will net you some pictures with him and Prezzy Bush (the elder) and some quality time with the Governor over dinner at the head table.  Nope, no chance that the Governator would be influenced by special interests there.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will receive some high-profile help raising cash today as former President George H.W. Bush headlines fundraisers for him in Los Angeles and Silicon Valley. The former president will be the “special guest” at both fetes, where a $100,000 platinum sponsorship entitles a donor to head-table seating for two, premiere seating for 10 and six photos with the governor and former president — “two people per photo.”
***
Schwarzenegger was swept into office, in part, because of disgust over former Gov. Gray Davis’ prodigious fundraising — which Schwarzenegger has since outpaced. Since pushing the after-school initiative Proposition 49 in 2002, Schwarzenegger has raised more than $110 million for his campaigns and causes, according to an analysis by the government watchdog group TheRest ofUs.org. Now, he aims to collect $75 million for his re-election bid, with the help of GOP heavyweights including Bush and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Because donors can give only two $22,300 contributions to the governor’s re-election account, Schwarzenegger is also raising funds for the California Republican Party.(SJ Merc 7/20/06)

On the flip you will find the ghastly details of The Governator’s fundraiser, complete with the exact quid pro quo, but keep in mind, you’ll get a whole lot more from the Governator than a few pictures.  Just ask AT&T.

The full details.  Yes, $1,000 for the “cheap seats.”  Yikes!

Californians for Schwarzenegger 2006 and Victory 6 (CA Republican Party); Los Angeles Luncheon and Bay Area Dinner. Please join Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and former Pres. George H. W. Bush. Platinum Sponsor $100,000 (head table seating for 2, table of 10 with premiere seating, 12 tickets for Host Committee Reception, 6 photos with the Gov. and Pres., printed recognition in event program), Gold Sponsor $50,000 (head table seating for 1, table of 10 with premiere seating, 6 tickets for Host Committee Reception, 3 photos with the Gov. and Pres., printed recognition in event program), Silver Sponsor $25,000 (table of 10 with preferred seating, 4 tickets for Host Committee Reception, 2 photos with Gov. and Pres., printed recognition in event program), Bronze Sponsor $10,000 (table of 10, 2 tickets to Host Committee Reception, 1 photo with Gov. and Pres., printed recognition in event program), Ticket $1000. 

The Department of Water Resources revealed its report to a few selected officials and apparently the cost is pretty high.  I’ve done a fair amount of research on the issues surrounding the Hetch Hetchy Restoration, and this report only aggregates information from other sources.  From what I’ve seen cost estimates in the past have ranged from a low range of $1B to a high range of $10B.  The DWR’s report doesn’t give much more specificity than that apparently, pegging the estimates at between $3-$10B.  I suppose this is higher, but not really out of the realm of possibility.

It would cost anywhere from $3 billion to $10 billion to fulfill one of California environmentalists’ fondest dreams — draining Hetch Hetchy Reservoir and restoring a valley in Yosemite National Park that John Muir called “one of nature’s rarest and most precious mountain temples.”

That is the conclusion of a report worked up by the state Department of Water Resources, analyzing what it would take to bring back Hetch Hetchy Valley and find alternative sources of water and power for San Francisco, which operates the valley’s O’Shaughnessy Dam. The cost estimate is more in line with what critics of the idea expected, and as much as 10 times the figure floated by environmentalists.

“Clearly, it’s not cheap,” said Assemblyman Joe Canciamilla, D-Pittsburg, one of a handful of officials who have been briefed on the findings. The report has not been made public.

“But we knew it was going to be expensive, no matter what the option,” said Canciamilla, who is nevertheless still intrigued by the possibility of restoring Hetch Hetchy.

The idea was first raised back in the 1980s by then-Energy Secretary Donald Hodel, but it really gained traction two years ago when the nonprofit group Environmental Defense issued a report called “Paradise Regained.” It put the cost of draining Hetch Hetchy, coming up with other sources of water for 2.4 million Bay Area customers and replacing the electricity that Hetch Hetchy generates for San Francisco at anywhere from $500 million to $1.5 billion. (SF Chron 7/19/06)

But, I don’t think this report really kills the discussions of tearing down the damn as much as some officials (DiFi, Leno, the SFPUC in general) would like.  The Environmental Defense people have acknowledged that their predictions of costs were very rough and have made provisions for higher costs.  The thing is, nobody truly understands how beautiful this place is.  When I first came at the issue, I thought it was nuts to dear down O’Shaughnessy Dam, and I still think it’s a bit crazy to give up our secure water and power resources.  However, have you seen the pictures of that valley? If you click on the picture above, you’ll be taken to the Sierra Club’s HH photo gallery.  You won’t be disappointed.  It is simply beautiful.

So the question that is now posed to us is: How much would we pay for a valley that has beauty that is only rivaled by Yosemite? I don’t think even billions should be considered crazy.

Jon Fleischman, propeitor of the FlashReport, a right-wing conservative California blog, has announced that he’s leaving the office of Sheriff Mike Carona.

Jon Fleischman, spokesman for Sheriff Mike Carona and publisher of the political daily e-zine the FlashReport, will be leaving the gig with Carona next month to set up his own public affairs operation. He will also be spending more time on his Web site, which advertisers have helped make an increasingly profitable venture. He will be subletting office space in Irvine from county GOP Chairman Scott Baugh.

Fleischman has close ties to the power center of Carona, District Attorney Tony Rackauckas, and Mike Schroeder, the former chairman of the California GOP who is a political advisor to Carona and Rackauckas. Fleischman, a longtime friend of Schroeder’s, served as executive director for the state GOP from 1999 to 2001, when he took the post with Carona and launched the first version of the Flash Report as a newsletter.  (OC Register Blog 7/18/06)

Fleischman has been a “PR Officer” at the OC Sherriff’s Office for several years now, all the while moonlighting with the various incarnations of FlashReport.  Now, I’m not against a little bit of blogging at work, I mean c’mon I love the blogosphere, but there have to be some questions about Fleischman’s role at the Sheriff’s Office Past and Present.  He was being paid off taxpayer dollars, and there should be some accountability to the people of Orange County. Jon actually once said, in a post that has now been removed about Amy Thoma, his departed Central Coast Correspondent, how fortunate he was to have a boss who understood his blogging and was supportive of it.

Well, now he’ll be doing it on his own time.  Good Luck Jon, I hope your services are in high demand due to the flailing of the California GOP.Jon Fleischman goes off the public dole

Matthew Dowd, Schwarzenegger’s key strategist and former George W. Bush campaign staffer, has more than one gig.  Not only does he work for Arnold, he also does some side consulting.  One of his clients? AT&T.  You know, the company that has a huge stake in the telecommunications bill currently up for debate and likely headed to Arnold’s desk before the end of the session in September.  Yup, that AT&T:

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s top campaign advisor is being paid to provide marketing strategy to AT&T Inc. at a time when the governor’s office is involved in negotiations on legislation potentially worth billions of dollars to the telecommunications giant. Political consultant Matthew Dowd’s involvement with the governor and AT&T at the same time presents, at minimum, the appearance of a conflict of interest, government watchdogs warned.

Dowd and his consulting firm are currently assisting San Antonio-based AT&T with the rollout of its U-verse service in Texas. The product is designed to compete with cable TV by sending television programming and a bundle of Internet and communications services over existing and upgraded telephone lines. At the same time, in California, AT&T is lobbying for passage of a bill being carried by Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez (D-Los Angeles), AB 2789, that would ease the financial and regulatory burdens of installing the new technology for the industry.

“If AT&T hired Dowd to sell TV, and Dowd also has been hired to sell Schwarzenegger on TV, you’ve got to wonder if Dowd also is selling your governor on AT&T’s legislative agenda for TV,” said Andrew Wheat, a public interest activist. Wheat is research director of Texans for Public Justice, which tracks the influence of money and corporate power in the state’s politics.(LA Times 7/18/06)

Arnold needs to inform Dowd that he can work for AT&T or him.  He can’t have it both ways; the impropreity is just oozing out of this situation.