By Julie BUTCHER

“We have a project before us – and the question is what’s the best way to confront climate change while keeping the lights on?” It was close to midnight on Tuesday night and Glendale Mayor Paula Devine urged her colleagues on the Glendale City Council to act on the proposed repowering of the Grayson plant.

“There are costs to delaying, costs in construction, in selling bonds, in timing. We’ve seen the graphs and the numbers showing that the amount of generation we need requires the five units – I don’t see what more time will do. Now three LA council members want to get involved at the last hour? Where were they months ago when we were asking for their help?” said Devine. “If we vote to repower Grayson with the five, are we going to stop looking for alternatives? No. This is not the end; it’s just the beginning. We’re going to do everything Mr. Brotman has put on his list. We’ve asked the Glendale Environmental Coalition (GEC) to help us do that – it’s in the plan. I’m not going to vote for stalling or delaying.”

The Grayson plant is old, Glendale Water and Power general manager Mark Young reminded the council, and it is “no longer reliable.”

“The oldest generator was built in 1941,” said Young. “The newest we’re proposing to replace was built in 1977.”

Glendale depends heavily on transmission, Young noted. Units 1-5 cannot be upgraded and will be forced to be shut down in 2024.

“GWP is obligated to ensure reliability,” he said. “We must maintain adequate reserves to ensure that reliability and we have to answer to LA as our balancing authority.”

Young explained the limitations of adding additional energy transmission: local lines are oversubscribed and new transmission lines are improbable. GWP has made a formal request to LA Dept. of Water and Power (LADWP) requesting long-term purchase or transmission agreements and has been advised that there are more than 2,000 megawatts of requests pending – “We’d be last in that long line.”

“We’re always looking for ways to expand transmission and were lucky enough to get a share of the Intermountain Power Project. We heard the council in 2018 and have increased reliance on energy efficiencies, demand response, work on the Virtual Power Plant, renewable biogas at Scholl Canyon, increased clean and renewable imports, local solar developments on city-owned properties, an additional 72 MW from the Southwest Transmission System (in 2027),” Young said, adding that the utility’s long-term forecasting requires that it plan for “the worst-case scenarios.”

Young then introduced the team of expert engineers and environmental scientists responsible for preparing the plans, including project manager Dave Tateosian, and summarized the benefits of the repowering plans: to ensure the reliability of local reserves and power.

“It reduces air emissions and water use on a per energy output basis; adds large-scale energy storage to help store local and imported clean energy; includes utility-scale solar; enhances reliability and resiliency. All our thermal units will be less than 10-minute starts, which is vital with regard to reliability and contingency reserves and, more importantly, it builds a bridge to 100% clean energy. We are on the path,” Young said.

The council heard 10-minute presentations from both the GEC and an attorney representing the local chapter of the Sierra Club and then heard from more than 60 callers. A petition with 1,350 signatures and 180 comment cards collected at the GEC’s rally on Feb. 6 were submitted and acknowledged by the council.

“I’m going to buy an electric car, but I need reliable electricity to run it,” two callers said, speaking in favor of the plan as proposed.

Patrick Diamond of Adams Hill urged the council “not to pass this proposal in its current form.”

“The cost of solar, wind and battery storage energy has rapidly declined over the past decades and is expected to continue to decline into the future,” Diamond said. “Why risk spending millions on a gas plant that will likely be obsolete in the near future? It seems like a huge waste of money that will be a setback in our fight against climate change.”

“I support the Grayson repowering project and Alternative 7 and the final EIR. Glendale’s power is already 64% clean energy,” Kurt Sawitskas told the council via phone. “None of our neighboring cities are this clean. Zero carbon emissions at this time, at this scope, is as feasible as finding a unicorn – it just can’t be done. So just buying more power from LADWP will deeply affect us by outside rate influences, so negotiating there doesn’t make much sense, either.

“We need internal generation to avoid uncontrollable rate hikes and GWP won’t have any control over where LADWP sources the power it transmits to us. With a repowered Grayson, we’ll have a local, reliable source of energy that can quickly respond to local demands. Grayson will be available in case we lose an external resource be it through transmission line failure, wildfire, earthquake,”

The calls were divided between those supporting the plans as presented and those advocating for no fossil fuel at all at Grayson.

Advocates from the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) urged the council to consult the commission for input on the historic aspects of the project. City attorney Mike Garcia acknowledged that the HPC’s approval of the demolition clearance would be required but added that it would be premature to ask them to weigh in before the council had acted to approve a plan.

Councilmember Vrej Agajanian urged the council to delay action for two weeks after he read a statement emphasizing the importance of renewable energy.

“We import 85% of our energy. Transmission is restricted into the LA basin. I wanted to see this at 100 MW or less. We cannot decide based on ideology – we have to depend on science,” Agajanian said, seeking to clarify the requirements of “N-1” and “N-1-1” reserve planning. [N-1 means the loss of the largest contingency; N-1-1 is the loss of the second largest contingency.]

“Whether we accept or reject the N-1-1 or use the M90 reserve of 80 MW and before we start bashing LADWP, let’s remember when we went looking for additional transmission from LA – we stood on the steps of City Hall, not Glendale City Hall but LA City Hall – and announced our participation in the Eland Project, from which we’ll be getting 75 MWs once it’s up and running,” said Councilmember Ara Najarian sharing his thinking about the proposed plans. “The LA City Council getting involved is good but our advocacy needs to be at the commission level. They’re going to have a new mayor soon and they may have one who is especially friendly to Glendale but we don’t know where that goes.”

“How much risk are you willing to accept? Advocates who only want renewable power and say they don’t want any fossil fuel burning at Grayson are willing to accept a greater risk of non-reliability and reduced power, be the event weather-related or due to an earthquake, an act of terrorism, whatever,” he added. “I’m a little more risk-averse. I feel like it’s my role to keep the most reliable sources of energy for our city. That’s just me; I feel like that’s my responsibility.

“However, I do accept that the technology is changing and we’re thinking more outside the box, focusing on peak load reduction, fuel cells, the potential of transitioning the Wärtsilä engines to hydrogen, firming up the deal with Sunrun – we’ll see how much power we can get from residential solar.”

He then relayed a discussion he had with fellow Councilmember Dan Brotman.

“[Councilmember Brotman’s] out there interviewing staff at the AQMD and meeting with LA councilmembers. I’m in favor of certifying the EIR and then pausing up to the last minute before purchasing any internal combustion engines, if at all. Every day we’re getting efficiencies from photovoltaic cells – and now there’s the possibilities of hydrogen.”

Councilmember Brotman offered detailed plans to certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) as a “modified alternative 7” and to move ahead with the demolition stages of the plan but to not purchase the five Wärtsilä engines. In the meantime, he proposed the city work directly with Los Angeles to purchase additional reserves or redefine the definition of reserves that requires Glendale to plan for more energy than it will actually require; to develop an additional 50 MW of distributed energy, through city-sited solar and storage and commercial- and industrial-sited solar and storage as well.

After more debate, the council voted 3-2 to certify the EIR and to adopt Alternative 7 of the proposed plans, as recommended by the GWP commission. Councilmembers Brotman and Ardy Kassakhian voted no. The “Brotman motion” to delay action on purchasing any gas-powered engines will be heard at the next council meeting on March 1.

“I believe we are at a critical juncture and the decisions we make today will determine how we generate power for the city moving forward. It is difficult for me to understand how spending hundreds of millions of dollars on technology that will be obsolete in 23 years makes financial sense. I think we can and should do better,” Councilmember Kassakhian explained his vote to the Crescenta Valley Weekly. “Our residents and businesses deserve no less.”