StopPATH WV

The "Rapid Response Transmission Team's" pilot project to "fast track" seven transmission projects has been written about ad nauseam.  Unfortunately, most of the reasons given by various government officials for this "fast tracking" it is pure fabrication.  Let's take a look at some of the claims being made:

1. Will create 10,000 direct and indirect jobs.  Will put America "back to work."  Have you noticed that there's nothing to back up this claim?  Ten thousand jobs on 7 transmission line projects is an absurd number!  They're probably counting the same workers on different projects as different "jobs" in order to inflate this figure, if they are counting anything at all.  For all we know, the administration pulled this number out of their... hat.  As we have seen here in West Virginia during the construction of the TrAIL transmission line and the planning of the PATH transmission line, all the temporary jobs associated with a new transmission project go to out-of-state companies who import workers for the duration of whatever specialized task related to construction is being performed.  The transmission project owners hire a general contractor (for TrAIL & PATH it was Kenny Construction, an Illinois company).  Land clearing and road construction (Supreme Industries, Connecticut), wires (PAR Electrical Contractors, Texas), land acquisition (Contract Land Services, Texas), engineering and environmental (Burns & McDonnell, Missouri; Louis Berger Group, New Jersey) and every other aspect of the project will be bid on by and awarded to specialized, out-of-state companies who do this type of work on location as their business.  When a helicopter crashed while stringing wire for the TrAIL project, it turned out to be owned by an Oregon company, and the workers on board were from Georgia, Kentucky and Indiana.  All these professionals already have jobs -- their job is to construct a certain specialized portion of transmission lines on temporary location.  A transmission company will not be hiring local labor or putting anyone "back to work."
2. New transmission projects will "upgrade the grid."  New transmission lines won't do a thing about existing, 40 year old transmission lines.  There are no plans to remove or take current lines permanently out of service.  New transmission projects are simply an addition that does nothing to "upgrade" our current grid.  The new lines are high capacity projects intended to trade electricity over long distances.  What we should be doing to "upgrade the grid" is rebuilding existing transmission lines completely within existing rights-of-way to increase their capacity and update their technology.
   
3. Will give consumers "more energy choices."  You're not going to be getting a "choice" of where your electricity comes from.  Electrons can't be categorized by source -- whether wind, solar, coal, gas or hydro generates your electricity, it's all mixed up in transmission lines.  While you may be able to choose your own electric provider, you will never be able to choose your transmission company or energy source.  Your local electric provider buys power off the grid for the cheapest price it can, no matter who or where it comes from.
4. Will transport renewable energy.  Not necessarily.  The Susquahanna Roseland project, one of the 7 "pilot" projects, is part of PJM's Project Mountaineer, a scheme to transport an additional 5000 MW of coal-fired electricity from the Ohio Valley to the East Coast.  Check out this post on The Power Line to learn how some of the other projects are really intended to increase reliance on coal-fired electricity.  See also Piedmont Environmental Council's coal dressed as wind map.
   
5. Will accommodate the growing number of electric vehicles on America’s roads.  A transmission line by itself does not provide electricity for cars or anything else.  A power generating source does.  Locate more of them in close proximity to the "growing number of electric cars" and you're in business.  Transmission lines are NOT needed to power electric cars.  In fact, some are thinking about using the batteries from plugged in electric cars to provide additional power to the grid at times of peak demand.  Seems that the grid needs the cars more than the cars need the grid.
   
6. Will help avoid blackouts.  This has to be the most ridiculous "reason" to "fast track" transmission projects.  Additional wire in the air does not make a system more reliable.  Out-of-control grid additions will actually make it LESS reliable and prone to blackouts as control of the grid gets more complicated and harder to manage.  The most reliable "grid" is one where generation is located as close as possible to use.  We don't need more transmission lines to avoid blackouts, we need more generation of power on a small, localized scale close to where it will be consumed -- distributed generation!
   
7. Will enable restoration of power more quickly when outages occur.  No, it won't.  An outage is an outage -- until it's repaired, it will exist.  Most of the outages experienced by consumers are due to faults in the DISTRIBUTION system, not the TRANSMISSION system.  Distribution lines bring power from a substation in your area to your home.  Transmission lines transport electricity from a generating source to a substation.  If your power is out, another transmission line isn't going to get it back on any faster, unless the distribution system that brings it to your house or business is repaired first.
   
8. Will reduce the need for new power plants.  As stated above, a transmission line without a generation source is just a wire.  If we need more electricity, it has to be produced by new power plants.  To really trip up the idiots parroting this myth, ask them how these transmission lines will increase renewable power if no new wind or solar farms (power plants) are built.  Then have fun debating further about which came first, the chicken or the egg.
9. Getting a new transmission project permitted takes a decade or longer and must be "fast tracked."  Allegheny Energy's TrAIL project went from drawing board to reality in 5 years.  Other recent projects have been built in less than 10 years.  A transmission project that drags on for 10 years or more is rare.  Most projects that can't get approved are cancelled or withdrawn voluntarily by their owners or regional transmission organizations when the need for them cannot be demonstrated. 
   
10. Will serve as important links across our country to increase our power grid’s capacity and reliability.  Who says we need to increase our grid's capacity from coast to coast?  The industry, who wants to turn electricity into a commodity to be traded over great distances in order to make a hefty profit.  They're not doing it out of the goodness of their corporate personhood hearts in order to "give you more choices" and "make electricity cheaper."  Gimme an E, gimme an N, gimme an R, gimme an O, gimme an N.  What does that spell?  Enron!  Enron!  Rah!  Rah!  Rah!  In addition, these "important links across our country" will cost hundreds of billions of dollars to construct that will be paid for by electric consumers, raising your electric rates.
    
11. Will move our nation toward energy independence.  "Energy independence?"  What is that?  The vast majority of electricity in this country is produced from coal and natural gas, both domestically plentiful.  In order to be truly "energy independent," install your own solar or wind system and stop feeding at the corporate energy trough of centralized power generation and expensive transmission lines.  Those "economies of scale" are getting smaller and smaller as the cost of new transmission lines to transport centralized generation get added to their cost, while the price of installing your own solar generating system gets cheaper and cheaper.
    
12. Will promote energy savings.  No, new transmission projects will make your cost of electricity go up.  Someone has to pay for the new transmission projects (and profits to their developers) and that someone is Y-O-U!  Another way to make energy cheaper is to locate new generation near load.  Transmission lines will not "promote energy savings."
13. Will increase energy efficiency.  Not in your wildest dreams!  There's nothing "efficient" about transporting electricity hundreds or thousands of miles.  Transmission lines "leak" electricity.  The longer the distance, the more electricity is lost and wasted.  Go hold a fluorescent light tube underneath a transmission line at night, if you don't believe me.
    
14. Will "speed up" federal environmental reviews.  Let me introduce you to NEPA, the National Environmental Policy Act.  It's a LAW.  The only way to speed up a law is to circumvent it.  Is the Obama administration suggesting that the federal government break the law?  Seems that way if the rumors that the outcome of the NEPA review of the Susquehanna Roseland project has already been "fixed" by agency heads in collusion with industry lobbyists.

I know there are more, so I'm asking you to add to the list.  A few days ago, I found a long article with vapid quotes from all the federal agency heads who don't know diddley squat about the electric grid that had me snorting with laughter.  Unfortunately, being away from home for 5 days with only a blackberry and a borrowed, crappy microsoft pc (not recommended!) caused me to lose the source of my mirth.  The myths are out there...