This blog is run by Mike Toth and Rachel Henderson, residents of the Eden Gardens neighborhood in west Hayward, CA. It was originally started in early 2007 when we became aware of plans to site two power plants within a couple of miles from our home. At the time we were told that one plant, the Russell City Energy Center (RCEC, owned by Calpine), was already approved to be built, and a second plant, the Eastshore Energy Center (EEC, owned by Tierra), was starting the approval process. Therefore we focused our efforts on educating ourselves about the EEC plan and we set up this site to share what we learned and to educate the public about how they could get involved.

After attending many meetings and reading publicly-available documents, we became concerned about several aspects of the EEC plan, including its impact on human health and safety and environmental issues, particularly the impact on local air quality. Many other neighbors were also concerned and began to investigate, ask questions, and demand answers and action to protect our health, safety, environment, and quality of life. The grassroots efforts of people in the community increased the scrutiny on the EEC plan by government agencies, and ultimately the EEC was denied approval by the California Energy Commission in October 2008.

Meanwhile, as residents became more informed about power plants and the power plant approval process, some began to look more closely at the RCEC which had been approved with little to no input from the community a few years before. The RCEC also changed significant aspects of their plan after the initial approval, including a change in the site location and in the frequency of startups and shutdowns. Primarily through the efforts of resident Rob Simpson, in July 2008 the EPA revoked the RCEC’s air permit issued by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), because they found that the BAAQMD did not adequately inform and request input from residents about the project. This effectively halted the RCEC project and required the BAAQMD to go through the permitting process again, with proper opportunity for public input, before approval could be granted.

As of this writing in August 2009, the BAAQMD is developing a new permit for the RCEC and is taking public input on the proposed permit. As with the EEC, there are many concerns about the impact of the RCEC on the health, safety, environment and quality of life in our neighborhood. Our personal main concern about the RCEC is that the air quality impact analysis and subsequent pubic health analysis are based on the assumption that the plant will be operating in a steady-state mode of operation, while the permit actually allows the RCEC to start up and shut down as many times as they desire (effectively acting as a “peaker” power plant), which significantly increases the amount of pollution and toxins the plant produces. These potentially frequent startups could negatively affect the acute and long-term health of residents, yet the BAAQMD has not analyzed them in their proposed permit.

Please check the blog and links for more news, analysis, and information about these power plants and feel free to add additional information as comments.

9 Responses to “About Us”


  1. 1 winston ho March 25, 2007 at 7:46 pm

    Mike, you must read the pages from the greenpoint/williamsburg waterfront task force in their successful effort to stop the transgas energy system in building a 1100 mw plant in the middle of city block.
    (www.stopthepowerplant.org) and pass it on to others if you can.
    Thanks.I find it very uplifting that others have done it and were successful…
    Let me know what you think…winston(Thayer ave)

  2. 2 Dr. Susan Sperling October 29, 2007 at 7:18 am

    Hello,
    Concerned staff are forming a Taskforce here at Chabot College to address potential environmental hazards issues posed by both plants.

    We would appreciate contact numbers for any speakers on these issues.

    Thank you,
    ~Susan Sperling
    Anthropology Faculty

  3. 3 cherrylyn cawit November 8, 2007 at 9:06 pm

    hi my name is cherrylyn cawit, i go to UCSC and i am required to do a report on an issue at my hometown, and being a resident in hayward i found that this topic to be interesting. i was wondering if there was anyone i could speak to and interview so i could get more information on this topic?

  4. 4 Nancy Day December 6, 2007 at 9:01 pm

    Hi, I am very concerned about the proposed power plants in Hayward. I have sent in letters of opposition. I would like to ask you about air quality. I know that the power plants will impact the air quality which is my greatest concern (even the approved “cleaner” plant). Would either plant greatly impact the air quality of Castro Valley? I know the wind blows east…just not sure if it blows in a southeast or northeast direction. I’m thinking about relocating and wonder if I should exclude Castro Valley as a place to call home because of the power plants (I trust your opinion over Eastshore!)

  5. 5 miketoth December 6, 2007 at 10:23 pm

    I think that these plants should be of concern to anyone living in the 880 corridor with respect to particulate matter emissions. I don’t think that Castro Valley will be disproportionately affected, because by the time the emissions go that far, it will have dispersed enough to be primarily a regional concern.

    That said, my primary concern about these plants, especially Eastshore, is their effect on people who live, work and study immediately downwind, before the emissions have a chance to disperse into the atmosphere.

    An analogy- If I am 6 feet away from someone smoking a cigarette and the wind is blowing in my direction, I will likely inhale a decent amount of secondhand smoke. If I am 60 feet away, I’m not going to get very much at all in comparison.

    There are a lot of people who live -very- close to Eastshore- under 1 mile and way too close for comfort. On a smaller scale, this is like your neighbor wanting to idle his car in his driveway all day on a hot day with the exhaust blowing through your windows into your living room.

  6. 6 Rob Simpson March 3, 2008 at 3:55 pm

    Hearing regarding Calpine’s Hayward Shoreline plant

    BAY AREA AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

    STATE OF CALIFORNIA

    939 Ellis Street

    San Francisco, California 94109

    415-749-5000

    THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2008

    http://www.baaqmd.gov/brd/hearingboard/calendar/02-28-08hbcal.pdf

    The California Energy Commission gave Calpine a choice of using modern cleaner technology in its planned Hayward plant and eliminating most of the emissions like other California plants are doing or using antiquated technology and buying Emission Reduction Credits ERC from the Bay Area Air Quality District BAAQMD. The BAAQMD permit does not require the cleaner technology in fact it requires them to use the plan that pollutes more and buys its ERCs. This represents roughly 6 times the Carbon Monoxide output and twice the particulate matter output for a total of 172,000 pounds of particulate matter emitted into the air per year, that’s about 6 times as much as all the diesel trucks in the port of Oakland.

    http://www.portofoakland.com/pdf/airEmissions_executive.pdf

    It can emit about 3 times as much Greenhouse gas as the entire rest of the city.

    If BAAQMD passes its Carbon Tax they will also collect much more tax money by requiring that this plant pollute more.

    http://www.insidebayarea.com/search/ci_8216583?IADID=Search-www.insidebayarea.com-www.insidebayarea.com

    The equipment approved is no longer manufactured. BAAQMD staff confirmed that Calpine may utilize used equipment retired from another facility. It is so much cheaper to pollute in the Bay Area because the ERCs cost less, that Calpine can bring old equipment from Southern California and earn $40,000,000 in ERC’s there.

    http://yosemite.epa.gov/OA/EAB_WEB_Docket.nsf/Filings%20By%20Appeal%20Number/7BB6B665C9F21B15852573EF005B44B7/$File/Exhibit%2016…16.90000.pdf

    I have personally filed an appeal to the EPA.

    http://yosemite.epa.gov/oa/EAB_Web_Docket.nsf/f22b4b245fab46c6852570e6004df1bd/d8e4c0304975fdc9852573ca006989ad!OpenDocument

    I have documented violations of the Clean Air Act, the Endangered species act, the Coastal zone management act, the principles of environmental justice and the will of the people.

    The EPA has granted review of at least parts of the appeal. This has effectively stopped Calpine and BAAQMD at least during the appeal. http://yosemite.epa.gov/OA/EAB_WEB_Docket.nsf/Filings%20By%20Appeal%20Number/D2B9A6D344255698852573F60069CAC8/$File/Response…180000.pdf

    I also filed an appeal to BAAQMD. They are claiming that they do not have jurisdiction over their own permit and may dismiss the case at the hearing on Thursday

    After I discovered the extent of the threat, I have spent 500 hours of my own time fighting these polluters . I have also spent thousands dollars of my money to try and protect our city. .

    This all stems from the City Councils unanimous approval of Calpine’s Hayward shoreline facility. I don’t call it Russell City because the name is patently deceptive. It is in the city of Hayward. The 145 foot stacks and 1000 foot plume will be the first thing visible when you enter Hayward from the Hayward San Mateo Bridge. The City Council can no longer ignore the totality of these disclosures. They should not give the city owned shoreline to Calpine. They have opened the door to an unlimited number of these plants and they can close it.

    My name Is Rob Simpson. I live at 27126 Grandview Avenue in the city of Hayward. I serve on the Keep Hayward Clean and Green Task Force where I established the City of Hayward’s first sustainability Committee. I also serve on the board of directors of the Hayward Area Planning Association HAPA we are litigating against both fossil fuel fired power plants currently planned in the City of Hayward. I can be contacted at 510-909-1800 grandviewrealty@comcast.net

  7. 7 Fernando Munguia September 10, 2009 at 2:54 pm

    Hey my name is Fernando M and I am a chabot student and Hayward resident and i am shocked that this has been going on for such a long time and i was never notified why would the city of Hayward, and the BAAQMD not properly advise the hayward residents!?!?
    I work with the chabot spectator and am trying to reach to all the students at chabot and address this issue to anyone that is willing to listen. I would like to contribute to the cause and help out where ever possible. now is our time to unite it may be close to being approved but that doesnt mean its impossible this is our city and no one has any right to take that away from us!!!1 please email me if you have any information regarding the power plant, meetings, get togethers. my email is HWDxBASSIST@AOL.COM

  8. 8 Fernando Munguia September 15, 2009 at 1:04 pm

    hey guys its me Fernando i just wanted to get in contact with you guys i had a quick question and its very important its about the BAAQMD’s plan; are they allowing them unlimited start-up/shut downs i believe you guys stated that they are I also want to know where you got that information. Also you guys put that they found a loophole in the state law that they are exploiting?? i just wanna get those questions answered because i am writing a report about it for the chabot spectator a newspaper we publish every week. please get back to me as soon as possible i would appreciate it very much
    thank you

    =Fernando

  9. 9 miketoth September 17, 2009 at 1:33 pm

    Hi Fernando,

    Apparently, there is no limit on start-ups or shut-downs. The BAAQMD and the CEC have offered wildly contradictory “assumptions” regarding the number of start-ups and shut-downs (the CEC estimates 2 per day, the BAAQMD estimates 9 cold starts per year and 100 warm or hot starts), but neither organization has imposed a permit condition limiting the number of start-ups and shut-downs.

    It is part of the public record that RCEC requested that the BAAQMD and the CEC not impose a limit, but it would probably take days of research for me to find out where that particular statement comes up. You might want to look at the transcript for the July 2007 hearing.

    Most of the community issues with the CEC and the BAAQMD permitting process are about what the regulatory agencies have -not- done to protect the public. The taxpayer funded CEC and BAAQMD, as perceived by the public and supported by a growing body of evidence, appear to be prioritizing the issuance of a permit for the RCEC over defending the health and safety of the public.

    Of course, this is my opinion based on my familiarity with this and the Eastshore case. Both the CEC and the BAAQMD, as well as Calpine (whos attorney Gregg Wheatland worked for the CEC before he went to Calpine) are -extremely- careful not to put anything in writing that could create a basis for a permit challenge. We discovered a lot of issues by looking at what was -omitted- from this permit as compared to other permits.

    With regards to a loophole in state law, if the CEC and BAAQMD are able to get this permit issued, this case will be used as a precedent for future cases. Generally, the “loophole” I refer to is based on wholly inadequate public notice provisions of the law, inside knowledge of the regulatory process by Gregg Wheatland (Calpine’s attorney who used to be an attorney for the CEC), and the lack of any provision in the law to prevent “revolving door politics”- government officials who use their positions to gain advantage for future employers. This has allowed Calpine to do an end run around the regulatory process and get a CEC permit issued before the public had a fair chance to represent itself.

    Luckily, Rob Simpson won a last minute appeal with the EPA on the basis of the flawed public notice. Unfortunately, the issues here are extraordinarily complex and there isn’t really a single paragraph or two that I can point you to that implicates the agencies, so you’ll have to do some of your own research on this issue… See Rob Simpson’s post above for a good starting point.

    Mike


Leave a Reply




a