Laserfiche WebLink
5 Comparison of Comparison of Alternatives <br /> A comparison of the alternatives is included in Table 5-1 and the following sections. <br /> Table 5-1. Alternatives Comparison <br /> Resource Area Project No Project Southeast Corner -Northern SitJ <br /> Aesthetics Impacts determined to be less than significant + <br /> Agriculture and Forestry Impacts determined to be less than significant = _ <br /> Resources with mitigation incorporated. <br /> Air Quality Impacts determined to be less than significant + _ <br /> with mitigation incorporated. <br /> Biological Resources Impacts determined to be less than significant <br /> with mitigation incorporated. <br /> Cultural Resources Impacts determined to be less than significant + <br /> with mitigation incorporated. <br /> Energy Impacts determined to be less than + _ <br /> significant. <br /> Geology,Soils,and Impacts determined to be less than significant =/ _ <br /> Paleontological Resources with mitigation incorporated. <br /> Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts determined to be less than + _ <br /> significant. <br /> Hazards and Hazardous Impacts determined to be less than = _ <br /> Materials significant. <br /> Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts determined to be less than <br /> significant. <br /> Land Use and Planning Impacts determined to be less than <br /> significant. <br /> Mineral Resources No impacts determined. <br /> Noise Impacts determined to be less than significant =/ _ <br /> with mitigation incorporated. <br /> Public Services No impacts determined. <br /> Transportation Impacts determined to be less than = _ <br /> significant. <br /> Tribal Cultural Resources Impacts determined to be less than significant + <br /> with mitigation incorporated. <br /> Utilities and Service Systems Impacts determined to be less than <br /> significant. <br /> Wildfire Impacts determined to be less than = _ <br /> significant. <br /> "=less impact than the Project;"+"=greater impact than the Project;"_"=similar impact to the Project <br /> 5.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES <br /> A comparison of the alternatives achievement of Project objectives is presented in Table 5-2 and <br /> described in subsequent sections below. <br /> 1. Construct and operate a 400-megawatt (MW) battery energy storage system (BESS) in <br /> San Joaquin County with an interconnection at the Tesla Substation (located in Alameda <br /> County) in a cost-competitive manner. <br /> 2. Assist California utilities in meeting their obligations under California's Renewable Portfolio <br /> Standard Program and Senate Bill (SB) 100, which calls for 100 percent of all electricity <br /> sold in California to come from carbon-free resources by the year 2045, including <br /> 60 percent renewables by 2030, and SB 1020, which requires utility providers to supply <br /> Griffith Energy Storage Project 5-4 Tetra Tech/SCH 2022120675 <br /> Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2023 <br />