StopPATH WV
  • News
  • StopPATH WV Blog
  • FAQ
  • Events
  • Fundraisers
  • Make a Donation
  • Landowner Resources
  • About PATH
  • Get Involved
  • Commercials
  • Links
  • About Us
  • Contact

Grain Belt Express Will Still Need County Assent

2/28/2018

1 Comment

 
I woke up this morning and pondered whether Michael Skelly actually believes the things he says.  Like this:
“Today’s ruling is a significant victory for the Missouri economy and for dozens of Missouri cities that could save more than $10 million annually from the delivery of low-cost clean energy by the Grain Belt Express Clean Line,” Michael Skelly, Clean Line president, said. “After a thorough case that lasted for several months and involved testimony submitted by expert witnesses, the Missouri Public Service Commission determined the Grain Belt Express was in the public’s best interest. We are pleased that the Eastern District Court of Appeals reaffirmed the Commission’s authority in permitting and overseeing Missouri’s vital energy infrastructure projects.”
Houston energy company dabbler Michael Skelly's fake "concern" for Missouri's economy aside, the Court's decision really gets him nowhere.  It's not the "significant victory" he's pretending it to be.

One appeals court said the PSC could not issue a permit without approval of affected counties.  Another appeals court said they could.  The Missouri Supreme Court is going to have to decide this.  They could decide either way.  The Eastern District Appeals Court's decision doesn't guarantee or make it more likely that the Supreme Court will rule in Grain Belt's favor.  It's 1 for 1 and heading into the tie-breaking round.

Big deal.

So, what happens if GBE wins at the Supreme Court?  Nothing much.  It goes back to the PSC.  How much time will elapse before something like that happens?  Nobody knows, but remember, last time GBE tried to get the Supreme Court interested in taking their case, they got ignored.  And the time before that, the Supreme Court declined to review the Western District Appeals Court's initial ruling that said a transmission project must have county approval before the PSC can approve it.

And then guess what?  Even if GBE wins at the Supreme Court and even if the PSC issues a permit for the project, GBE will STILL need to get county assent to cross roads in the affected counties.  A completely different statue requires county assent.  The only thing the recent appeals court decision covered was whether or not a county must approve before or after the PSC issues a decision.  It does nothing to affect the county road assent statute.  That's an additional hurdle GBE would have to jump before it could build anything, and the bar is set pretty high.
"We’re somewhat disappointed but not entirely surprised,” said Wiley Hibbard. “We’ve been fighting this for five years and another year isn’t that big of a deal.”

Ralls County is one of eight counties that has either rescinded assent for Grain Belt or never gave it to begin with.

“What keeps me from becoming too alarmed is that they (Grain Belt developers) still have to get county assent before they build it or not,” Hibbard continued, clarifying that the PSC could still give approval without county assent. “Ralls County is in no way going to give assent to Grain Belt. All three of our commissioners are very steady in favor of protecting landowners from eminent domain.”


So, meh, big deal, Clean Line.  Another year is nothing to Commissioner Hibbard, but that's another year Clean Line's investors will have to pay outrageous legal bills without recognizing any revenue.  Do Clean Line's investors have the stomach (and the funds) for that?

Especially because the final ball has not dropped yet in Illinois.  They're still waiting for their appeals court to decide a case regarding whether or not Clean Line was a utility at the time it applied for its permit from the PSC.  If they rule that Clean Line was not a utility, it's back to square one in Illinois.  And considering that the Illinois Supreme Court ruled Clean Line was not a utility and vacated the permit the Illinois Commerce Commission issued for its Rock Island project, chances of GBE prevailing in Illinois are slim to none.  If RICL wasn't a utility, even after receiving a permit, then GBE certainly was not a utility before it even applied for a permit.   Done deal.

The current situation is nothing more than Clean Line going through the motions pretending it's going to get GBE fully permitted.  Does Skelly really believe that getting permits will guarantee him enough customers to finance the line?  Where's the customers, Clean Line?  Even with permits, the project fails without customers and will not be built.  The only "customers" GBE has are some Missouri municipalities who believe they will get below cost service from a project that expects to make up the difference by charging the other customers more.  Except there are no other customers.

This really doesn't sound like winning to me.  It sounds more like Clean Line is only trying to pretend GBE is viable.  And why would they do that?  Maybe they're trying to sell GBE to the first rube that comes along?  After all, that's exactly what Clean Line did with its "fully permitted" Plains & Eastern Clean Line.

A long time ago, affected farmers became suspicious that Clean Line never actually intended to build anything, but was trying to set up a project that it could flip to some other investor.  You've got to get up pretty early in the morning to fool a farmer.
1 Comment

Quit Wasting My Money, PJM!

2/27/2018

2 Comments

 
Dear PJM Interconnection,

Stop wasting my money on the Transource Independence Energy Connection! 

I know it's hard to admit when you've screwed up (and PJM screws up A LOT!), but with the abandonment incentive granted by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission it also means that your screw up is costing me money.  Real money.  Dollars and cents added to my electric bill that provide absolutely no benefit to me.  Because Transource was guaranteed the ability to file to collect all its sunk costs in the event the IEC is abandoned, it doesn't cost Transource anything to continue this farce.  In fact, the longer they continue, the more money they can stuff into their capital cost accounts, and then apply to be paid back over 5 or 10 years with an 10.4% interest rate.  They're also in a hurry to do it now because their debt to equity ratio will change in 2020 and later investments won't be quite as lucrative.  As well, any capital costs over $210M will only earn at 9.9%.  It's a spending free-for-all right now as Transource tries to spend as much as possible, as quickly as possible.  Transource predicts it will spend $5.2M of capital in 2018, even though it doesn't plan to even stick a shovel in the ground until 2019.  That's nearly half a million dollars of pure profit this year!  Transource also estimates that it will spend another $1.6M on operations and maintenance in 2018.  The only thing that can stop this out-of-control spending of my money is the cancellation of the IEC.

And we all know that's where we're headed with this thing, right PJM?  The "bats" that you saw as the only impediment on your "constructability report" are revolting!

They've formed StopTransource bat groups. 
They've roosted at the Pennsylvania PUC (Docket Nos. A-2017-2640195 and A-2017-2640200) and the Maryland PSC.  Some of them have even acquired representation by bat lawyers.
They've gotten the support of their bat legislators.  Pennsylvania Representative Kristin Phillips Hill writes,
The PUC should question if the applicant has fully evaluated the use of existing transmission lines in Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland Interconnection (PJM's) regional planning process before proposing a new line, which will be constructed parallel to three established high-voltage transmission power lines operating in York County. Since the intention of the applicant is to relieve congestion on the energy-grid, why not utilize transmission lines that are not operating at
full capacity? I strongly encourage the Administrative Law Judge to modify this application to use these existing transmission lines, thereby minimizing the impact of this project on the community and preserved open space, as well as protecting private landowners from being subject to the oppressive use of eminent domain actions when other utility-owned infrastructure
is available.
Why, PJM, why?  Why are you trying to build a new transmission line with my money when there are parallel lines with available capacity?  Why? 

I'm not buying your story that the existing lines aren't big enough to build your project.  They're brand new and are only half-utilized.   In addition, there's an existing corridor that's de-energized.  With all this at your disposal, PJM, why did you select a project built on greenfield right of way?  Is it because, Transource, as a new entry to your market (well, sorta, heh, heh, heh, AEP has been a member since, like 2002, right?) doesn't own any existing right of way or assets and therefore cannot upgrade something it doesn't own?  How does that save consumers money?  I thought saving consumers money was the whole purpose of this project?  Or is it now more about actually getting your first competitive market efficiency project built, and not about saving consumers money?  I think it would be much, much cheaper for me if you ordered the owners of the two existing, half-utilized lines running parallel to the proposed IEC to each build one of the two 230kV circuits you say you need.  And don't give me any of that "reliability" nonsense about having too many circuits on one pole.  It's no different that your current proposal to double circuit the IEC on one set of poles.

Meanwhile, the important bats of the community are opposing the project.  L. Michael Ross, president of the Franklin County Area Development Corporation writes:
PJM/Transource has managed to unite virtually every constituent group in Franklin County in opposition to the project. 

...neither PJM or its surrogate, Transource, has been able to establish a quantified need for the project; more importantly, they have never been able to articulate the benefits to Franklin County.

Finally, it is worth noting that the FCADC has not received a single call, email, or letter from a Franklin County business voicing support for the project.  (As an aside, one should be aware that Transource simply assumed that because the FCADC is involved in economic development that we would automatically support the project.  We all know the definition of assume.)

I guess Transource spokeswoman Abby Foster "assumed" Mr. Ross's comments meant that nobody was buying Transource's fake economic claims and vague assertions of benefit to target communities.  So she responded:
Transource officials believe the project would alleviate congestion in the high voltage grid and would create an economic benefit locally. Abby Foster, community affairs representative with Transource, released a statement saying in part: 

"The project will bring investment in the region’s local economies during the construction phase with a direct investment in the project area communities. Construction activities alone are projected to support 112-147 full-time jobs with 50-60 of these being in Franklin County."

People are scratching their heads this morning.  How could construction of something like 16 miles of transmission line require 50-60 permanent full-time jobs in Franklin County?  Are 50-60 people going to be climbing the poles in people's backyards and physically squeezing the electricity through the lines so that it may reach the Washington, DC metro area and save those city folks twenty cents a year on their bills?  What would that look like?
Picture
In the photo above, one of Transource's full-time permanent, local Franklin County workers discusses where he will place the ladder when he climbs the pole to squeeze electricity through the brand new transmission line. Other workers look on in awe, so grateful they have jobs that they don't mind climbing a ladder to the top of a transmission tower and manually squeezing electricity through the wires.
Silly, isn't it?  However, it's no sillier than Abby's job claims.  Where did she get those?  From some economics computer program where you plug in a price tag for your project and then it spits out some wacky numbers based solely on the price of the project?  Probably.  Fact is there will be few local jobs during the year or so Transource is planning to build the project.  Maybe some ground clearing or some concrete.  If you own a company who does that, perhaps you think it's okay to toss your community under the bus to make a few bucks.  It takes very specialized labor to construct a high-voltage transmission line.  Transource's contractor will import the workers with the right skills for the duration of the project.  Transource will not be cruising the K-Mart parking lot looking for day labor.  There will be zero permanent jobs created by the proposed project.  If it is ever constructed, it pretty much does its own thing unassisted.  Repairs and maintenance will be handled by crews who already have a job.  Trust me, maintaining 29 miles of new transmission is not a full-time job for anyone.

I think Abby should spend her time improving Transource's website instead.  Perhaps she can find the missing number that belongs here.
Picture
Are easement owners supposed to guess or make up their own number?

Or how about this.  Maybe Abby can figure out how to spell "publicly?"
Picture
And while she's at it she can get rid of the half-truths, such as this:
Why is this project needed? Through its regional transmission expansion planning, PJM identified concerns with the delivery of electricity on the high-voltage grid into the region.
Now, PJM, you know this just isn't true.  It's weasel words.  PJM supposedly identified economic congestion on its existing transmission system.  That means that the cheapest power available in the region cannot be delivered to all the customers in the region at certain times.  It does not mean that power cannot be delivered and the lights will go out.  It means that some load pockets that use a lot of electricity on a hot day may have to buy their power from more expensive generators closer to home.  It might cost those people some scary number... like 21 cents a month to buy that expensive power on certain days!  So, PJM, you mean to tell me that a twenty one cent savings for someone in Washington, DC is reason to tear up four rural counties in Pennsylvania and Maryland?  I don't think so.  We all know that more than 80% of the benefit from this project will be exclusive to the Washington, DC and Baltimore metro areas.  Those are places that will never allow a nasty power generator to be built in their midst, but yet they have a huge demand for electricity.  What makes you think, PJM, that rural places want to look at transmission lines strung across their communities so that those city folks don't have to make any sacrifice for their own huge appetite for electricity... not even 21 cents a month?

You're ridiculous, PJM.  The IEC project is never going to happen.  There's too much opposition and the communities threatened know the truth about the project.  You know what happens in rural communities in times of trouble?  They gather together and defend their community.  There's a lot you don't know about "undeveloped spaces," PJM.  Some land is "undeveloped" on purpose because its highest and best use is being undeveloped.

It's time to admit this project isn't really needed.  How many former PJM projects have been cancelled without being built?  How many millions of dollars have those projects cost ratepayers like me because PJM didn't want to admit its process is flawed and its projections wrong?

Stop wasting my money, PJM.  Cancel the IEC project.  Now.
2 Comments

"Clean Line Builds..."

2/18/2018

2 Comments

 
...the answer is NOT "transmission lines for wind and solar projects."  I'll spare you the lecture about verb tenses (but you can get it here) but basically there are three verb tenses -- past, present and future.  Clean Line has not built anything, therefore to say it "builds" is incorrect.  Clean Line is not currently "building" a transmission line.  Clean Line has not "built" a transmission line in the past.  Clean Line perhaps hopes it "will build" a transmission line in the future, but I don't think that's likely.  The only thing Clean Line seems to be building anymore is Michael Skelly's ego.

What purpose did the Houston Chronicle article serve?  Was the reporter actually trying to make a point?  That renewable energy isn't "lonely" in Houston?  Michael Skelly may be about as lonely as they come these days.  Nobody seems to care about the transmission lines he hopes to build anymore.  It's all about Michael Skelly, just like it was all about Michael Skelly back in August, when Skelly practiced heroics with his feet on a table during Hurricane Harvey.  And back in 2014, when he showcased his heroism in building a compound of historic homes in one of those terrible "poorer" neighborhoods.  Building -- something that was actually done.  Not something one aspires to in order to pretend it's happening.  Michael Skelly sure has "built" quite the ego.

Skelly likes to pretend that the abandonment of his dream and the sale of a portion of his project to NextEra was a "success."

Michael Skelly, the company's president, told Arkansas Business that the direct-current project, which would have transmitted 4,000 megawatts of renewable energy from Western Oklahoma to eastern Tennessee, is basically on life support.

"Everybody knows that if you can delay a project, you can hurt it or force a different outcome," Skelly said after devoting nearly nine years and some $100 million in private investor money to the project, which would have crossed 12 Arkansas counties with 200-foot-high transmission towers. "We're ending up with an outcome that's just fine for us business-wise, but not as good for Arkansas."
Actually, Arkansas will be just fine without a "clean" line.  The project was never purposed to benefit Arkansans anyhow.  It was about Michael Skelly and his investors making a bundle of money riding the renewable energy wave to sell a bunch of clueless people something they didn't want or need.  Except it turns out they really didn't want or need it, and the project went broke.  Clean Line gladly cannibalized its Plains & Eastern project and sold the juiciest cut to NextEra.  What's left isn't even good for soup.  Not only doesn't Clean Line's Arkansas and Tennessee assets not connect with anything, but the company withdrew their interconnection requests.  There's nothing to interconnect.  Clean Line is over.

As far as that delay thing goes, he's partly right though.  It may have turned out oh so differently for Michael Skelly and Clean Line if they had honestly attempted to engage landowners along the route and find out what would inspire them to sign a voluntary right of way agreement.  Instead, Clean Line acted like an arrogant, entitled, smart ass, figuring it only had to make it look like it was negotiating with landowners, while desperately attempting to acquire the power of eminent domain to force involuntary easements.  Any cost conscious, astute developer would have given up many years ago, however.  Only Michael Skelly continued for 9 years, wasting increasing amounts of funds supplied by his silly investors.  Business-wise, Clean Line is a bust.  I'm thinking they didn't get anywhere near the $100M they spent on Plains & Eastern in the NextEra sale.  Only Skelly's ego is pretending that was a good outcome.  Maybe if he says it enough, money to repay the investors will fall from the sky?  Maybe if he says it enough, he won't be a 50-something year old failure?
So Skelly is pretending he and his company are still viable in order to maintain the old ego.  But what's wrong with Vicki Ayres-Portman?  Did someone forget to send her the memo about Clean Line's sale of its Oklahoma assets, or is she quite insane?  I received numerous copies of this article last week.  It says:
Clean Line Energy spokeswoman Vicki Ayres-Portman explained the impact wind energy has had on local county budgets and what it would mean to be the member of a state that divests in wind energy at Monday's get-together.
Ayres-Portman was taking the place of originally scheduled speaker Mark Yates, Oklahoma director for the Wind Coalition.
“Most of you have probably heard there are two bills running on the floor of the house today that would have a detrimental impact on the future and possibly retroactive on wind development,” she said. “So Mark felt like he really needed to stay at the capitol today and asked if I would stop by on my way to the capitol and give you guys an update on wind energy in Oklahoma.”

What interest does Clean Line have in Oklahoma wind at this point?  Or are they simply a registered lobbying agent for NextEra?  And why was Vicki on her way to the capitol?  Clean Line sold its Oklahoma assets, remember?
Ayres-Portman detailed the well publicized and still working 9-year-old Clean Line project set to run from the Oklahoma Panhandle to Tennessee. The $2.5 billion, 4,000 megawatt project that was set to provide energy to customers in Arkansas, Tennessee and other markets stalled recently. The issues hamstringing the plans come after President Trump began pushing coal and nuclear power options.
"The market has really changed since Clean Line started this effort eight, nine years ago,” Ayres-Portman said. “At that time, the bioenergy centers to the East were really looking forward to more renewables. We had a new President elected. And although I agree with a lot of great things he’s done, one of the things, pushing coal and nuclear has really dampened the power purchase agreements from big utilities that were looking at doing renewables, whether that was natural gas, wind or solar.”
So those companies that had memorandums of understanding to come onto the Clean Line transmission line, have pulled away from those agreement.
Still working?  What the hell does that mean?  How can Clean Line be "still working" in Oklahoma when it doesn't own anything in Oklahoma?  The demise of Clean Line is Trump's fault?  Anything but!  The demise of Clean Line is Clean Line's fault.  It failed to attract any customers. No customers, no revenue, no "builds."  What "companies" had memorandums of understanding to "come onto the Clean Line?"  No company had such an understanding, so there's nothing to "pull away" from.  Clean Line acts like it has some firm commitments that were cancelled after Trump was elected.  That's just not true.  Ayres-Portman looks like she's quite insane in that article.  Maybe she'd like to make some corrections so she doesn't "build" herself a reputation as a fabulist?

Clean Line needs to just go away.  The idea that consumers would pay a premium to import wind energy from far, far away wasn't viable.  And the idea that landowners would welcome a transmission line across their property if it carried "renewable energy" was completely bogus.  Enough time and money has been wasted.  Give the old ego a rest and just go away.  I think you might be on the verge of embarrassing yourself.
2 Comments

FirstEnergy Failure

2/14/2018

2 Comments

 
FirstEnergy's attempt to transfer its risky, money-losing coal generating plant to West Virginia ratepayers has failed.  Finally.  It's just too bad all that time and money got wasted on an idea that had no real chance of succeeding.  Only a corrupt regulatory system and galling arrogance made it seem like a good idea.

Because the WV Public Service Commission had approved a similar deal for a different company transfer several years ago, FirstEnergy thought it didn't have to try so hard.  Its idea to transfer the Pleasants Power Station from its competitive generation company to its WV distribution affiliate was a bold joke, flimsily wrapped in "need" and bad economic projections, submitted with a wink and a nod.  FirstEnergy knows that the WV PSC is more interested in the needs of the company than the needs of the ratepayers it was created to protect.  Oh, sure, the WV PSC pretends its mission is to "balance" the needs of ratepayers with the needs of the community at large and the needs of the utility.  However the utility is perfectly capable of advocating for its own needs, and the communities are so bought out by corporate profits that they act like yappy lap dogs, barking at corporate direction.  It is the ratepayers who rely on the regulatory system to protect their interests.  Indeed it is the very nature of a monopoly situation that requires regulation to protect ratepayer interests.  FirstEnergy's WV affiliate has been granted a monopoly franchise to serve West Virginians.  Because FirstEnergy has a monopoly, regulation serves to provide competition where none exists naturally.  It is regulation that controls utility actions to ensure a monopoly does not exert market power over captive ratepayers.  Therefore, the WV PSC exists first and foremost to protect the needs of WV ratepayers captive in a monopoly system.  Perish the thought that FirstEnergy would have to perform and earn its right to own a monopoly franchise.  That thought has probably never even crossed the minds of WV's PSC Commissioners.  They seem to think they exist to make sure the utility is treated fairly.  And that's what they did in the recent Pleasants transfer case.

Knowing that the WV PSC is a captured agency who dances at corporate will, it was much more productive for ratepayers to look beyond the first string of regulators who are supposed to protect them.  The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission isn't as wrapped up in the needs of West Virginia's economy or corporate profits, and is not captured in the same way as the WV PSC, whose commissioners are appointed as lobbied by state franchised utilities.  The chances were better that an impartial decision would be made at the federal level.  And it was.  The FERC rejected FirstEnergy's proposal to transfer the plant between affiliates, finding that the transfer resulted in improper cross-subsidization.  In plain speak, that means that it was not a fair arm's length transaction.  But FirstEnergy, in its sheer arrogance, attempted to apply its West Virginia bag of tricks to influence the federal agency.  That's right, FirstEnergy had its attorney call up a FERC Commissioner to try to influence the agency's decision.  Somehow, FirstEnergy was aware "that the Commission would shortly issue an order adverse to the interests of Monongahela Power."  How was it that a party to a FERC proceeding was aware of a decision of the agency before it was issued?  Because FERC is as much a revolving door regulatory agency as any.  It's a great landing spot for attorneys fresh out of law school with a mountain of student debt.  With just a few years of effort at marginal pay, a FERC staff attorney can make himself marketable to private industry as an "insider."  The regulated entities prize these FERC insiders and pay them handsomely.  FERC is just a springboard to fat paychecks for some attorneys.  That's not to say that all FERC attorneys are using the agency to pad their resumes, I found that there are plenty of staff who take their charge to protect public interests seriously and make a career out of it.  Those public employees are treasures, but as you can see, it only takes a handful of bad ones to trash FERC's public service mission.  I'm happy to realize, though, that one of FERC's Commissioners put a stop to this underhanded effort and reported the illegal contact from FirstEnergy's attorney.  Bravo!  But what happens to the attorney who attempted this improper influence?  I'm thinking that FirstEnergy's attorney knew calling up the Commissioner like that was against the rules.  But he did it anyhow.  Why isn't he barred from practice before the agency in the future?  The only thing he seems to have received is some exposure.  No harm, no foul, he's free to repeat this behavior in the future, perhaps with a Commissioner who may not blow the whistle on him.  It is only when improper behavior comes with significant consequences that it will end.

And why did FirstEnergy think improper influence on FERC would save their bacon?  Probably because it works in other jurisdictions.  I believe that if the same situation played itself out in West Virginia, for instance, that ending the contact and reporting the encounter would not occur.  FirstEnergy only does this because it works.

So here we are again at regulation acting as safeguard in a monopoly situation.  It's a lesson the WV PSC never seems to learn.

And what happened in West Virginia after FERC disapproved the transaction?  The WV PSC approved the transfer, saying that the unfairness of affiliate transactions didn't matter.  The WV PSC was totally unconcerned about the fairness of the transaction and whether it violated the concept of competition in an open market where a utility did not have a monopoly.  The WV PSC tried to pretend it actually listened to public comment and considered it in its decision.  That's a first, but it was contrived nonsense.  The WV PSC's decision to approve the transfer was nothing short of a display of disgusting arrogance.  Someone's fee-fees seemed pretty bruised that the company did not accept their offer to approve the transaction with a delay.  Everyone got some backlash.  The Consumer Advocate gets chastised for protecting consumers:
The CAD takes no prisoners in its attempt to “advise” the Commission of its responsibilities. In its Reply Brief, the CAD emphasizes the gravity of the situation by stating that, if this Transaction is approved, “the harm that redounds to West Virginia captive ratepayers will be a legacy of this Commission.”
Seriously?  The CAD exists to protect ratepayer interests.  Why shouldn't it be direct about the harm to ratepayers?  Its job IS to advise the Commission, no quotation marks needed.  If the CAD can place a little nugget of guilt into the mind of a compromised Commissioner, it's still not a fair trade for years of increased electric rates.  And a Commissioner who resents this effort obviously doesn't have the best interests of ratepayers in mind.  If he did, then the CAD's attempt to inspire guilt would have no effect.  Think about that.

The WV PSC treats "risk" as a non-starter.  The PSC thinks risk exists everywhere and assumption of risk should not be a primary concern in their decision.  Except the company failed to accept the PSC's conditions on approval, stating:
Additionally,the Companies will not accept the conditions included in the Commission Order that would result in Mon Power assuming exposure and significant commodity risk, which is inconsistent with FirstEnergy’s announced corporate strategy.
So it is about the risk after all?  While the ratepayers are supposed to be unconcerned about taking on additional risk from the transaction, the company can base its decision to abandon the transaction on its aversion to risk?  FirstEnergy was trying to transfer its risk to WV consumers, but it was unsuccessful.  And that's the bottom line.

FirstEnergy failed.  Although it was a rough ride with some hairy, scary moments, ultimately the company ends up stuck with their own mess.  We just get the bill.
2 Comments

Gunfight at the OK Corral

2/11/2018

7 Comments

 
There sure is a lot of money being poured into the battle to own and control the wind in Oklahoma.  If only the citizens of the state received a fraction of what's being spent on legal bills, lobbyists, public relations and front groups.

Say what?  Front groups?  You all know how much I love a good (badly constructed) front group!  I was really trying to ignore AEP's Wind Catcher project, but now their competition has constructed a really ridiculous front group.  It's an accident I simply can't drive by without rubbernecking.

AEP's Wind Catcher project is a ginormous wind farm under construction in Western Oklahoma by Invenergy that will be purchased by AEP upon completion.  AEP wants to build a 300+ mile "generation tie line" to connect the wind farm with one of AEP's large regional substations in eastern Oklahoma, and then distribute the energy to its customers in Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana and Texas.  AEP wants captive ratepayers in those four states to pay for its project, plus a generous return on AEP's investment.  AEP has greased its project and is trying to ram it through state utility commission approvals, pretending it's some kind of tax subsidy emergency.  If states don't approve, their ratepayers lose big tax handouts!  Ahem... where do tax handouts come from?  From taxes.  Who pays taxes?  The people... the same people who would "benefit" from their own tax payments.  Yahoo.  This project is a non-starter and not really worth my time.  While enough schmoozing and behind closed doors hanky-panky may get the project approved in Oklahoma, the other states get nothing but the bill.  Increased electric rates for all.   Wind Catcher isn't going to be happening so there's no need to get all excited, and certainly no need to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a front group opposing it.

But somebody did.  Somebody who claims to be
... dedicated to fostering clean energy sources that best serve the needs of local consumers.

Protect our Pocketbooks supports clean energy, but we believe that energy infrastructure investments should be made locally.

Well, hey, great!  I support that, too!  But probably not for the same reasons.  And I don't have enough money to buy a fancy lobbyist-lawyer to incorporate a front group about my belief, and I can't afford TV commercials about it.  But I do have a website, just not as slick, and not designed for you to "take action now!" and lobby lawmakers to support my idea.

So, we support local clean energy sources, do we?  Which ones?  Where?  What are we doing instead of importing energy from Oklahoma?  Doesn't say.  We're all about the Wind Catcher hate and have no better ideas to promote.  Lawmakers love that shit.  No, really.  They love to listen to constituents whine about stuff they don't want without coming up with and supporting better ideas.  You'd think someone spending all this money would have a better grasp of what motivates lawmakers.  I mean they could at least pretend they're for something real.

But if they were actually for something, then they'd reveal who's funding this front group.  Supposedly it's "clean energy."  Would the fossil fuel industry really make a front group claiming to be a supporter of "clean energy?"  That's what all the enviro-wackos who support big wind will think... that the fossil fuel industry must be behind it.   Just like they think the fossil fuel industry pays me big bucks to write this blog (Hey!  Koch Brothers!  You're way, way past due on my payments!  I'm still waiting for the first one to arrive!).  I'm not so sure.  Is it more likely a shady front group would skirt the truth instead of out and out lying?  So what if this front group is being financed by other players in the wind industry who want to stop Wind Catcher so they can develop Oklahoma wind and transmission instead?  There's a huge gold mine for someone who ends up owning the Oklahoma wind.

Here's why I believe "Protect our Pocketbooks, Inc." is a front group.

A front group is described as:
A front group is an organization that purports to represent one agenda while in reality it serves some other party or interest whose sponsorship is hidden or rarely mentioned. The front group is perhaps the most easily recognized use of the third party technique.
  1. This group has no contact info on its website.  It has no physical office.  You cannot contact them.  I suppose you could write to them at PO Box 3835 in Little Rock, which is the principal address for the organization used by its incorporator.  Just don't expect a reply.
  2. This group has a slick, professional website that seems to be directed at inspiring people to "take action."  Political "action."
  3. This group does not mention who funds it.
  4. This group has incorporated as a "non-profit" corporation.
  5. This group does not list its members.
  6. This group does not list its employees, directors or management.
  7. This group was incorporated by someone named Justin T. Allen of Little Rock.  Searching for Justin T. Allen in Little Rock brings up this character.  He works for energy interests?  How very interesting!
  8. This group has videos that people say are TV commercials.  TV commercials?  Do you have any idea how much it costs to advertise on TV?  Who is paying the advertising bills?  Remember, this group has no funders, no members, and no directors.
  9. There's an awful lot of money being spent trying to convince people to oppose the Wind Catcher project.  Someone must stand to make a real bundle if this project fails.  Who could it be?
But at least Wind Catcher has accomplished one thing so far... it knocked the bottom out of Clean Line's Plains & Eastern project.  Here's Clean Line, trying for the last 9 years to build a transmission line between proposed wind farms in western OK and purported eastern "demand."  When along comes AEP, not only building and owning the actual wind farm, but proposing its own transmission line across Oklahoma to serve its own captive "demand."  AEP could have simply built the wind farm and used Clean Line's proposed transmission line to get the wind to its demand.  But it did not.  Whoever owns the infrastructure gets the profits.  AEP isn't splitting its profits with some wanna be utility like Clean Line.  So what happens next?  Clean Line intervenes in the Oklahoma Corporation Commission Wind Catcher case and tries to convince the OCC that its transmission line proposal is better than AEP's.  Then a competitor of Invenergy (AEP's wind farm builder) buys up the Plains & Eastern Clean Line assets in Oklahoma.  NextEra now owns Clean Line's transmission line assets (such as they are -- unconnected nothingness) and it also probably wants to develop wind in western Oklahoma, maybe even build some ginormous wind farm for a company like AEP.  It can offer AEP a half-purchased, right of way across the state, plus the bonus of some pissed off landowners and stubborn Native Americans.  Transmission fatigue is a thing AEP must surely recognize.  Clean Line has spent the last 9 years pissing off the people along its proposed route.  It's a trap! 

Invenergy should watch its back.  Hey, and maybe they can create their own front group?  The only thing more fun than a front group is two or more competing front groups... with TV commercials, and websites!  We are kind of in the winter doldrums now... entertain me, make me laugh!
7 Comments

Clean Line Wastes Time and Money on Missouri Appeal

2/9/2018

3 Comments

 
But, hey, at least Jay Nixon gets some press on his first (and only?) case since returning to the practice of law.  It's nice that he has something to fall back on now that he's no longer governor.  I'm thinking maybe he's a little rusty?

So, anyhow, E&E News gushes on about Nixon's arguments before the Missouri appellate court on behalf of Grain Belt Express.  They actually sent a reporter to listen to that?  Boring!  Same old confused arguments.  Same old pointless points.  Who cares whether it's an area certificate or a line certificate?  It simply doesn't matter.

That's because Grain Belt Express will still need the assent of all counties for its transmission line to cross county roads.  That's an entirely different statute that isn't part of this appeal.  Section 229.100 says:
229.100. No person or persons, association, companies or corporations shall erect poles for the suspension of electric light, or power wires, or lay and maintain pipes, conductors, mains and conduits for any purpose whatever, through, on, under or across the public roads or highways of any county of this state, without first having obtained the assent of the county commission of such county therefor;...
And Grain Belt does not have the assent of the county commissions.

What is on appeal is whether the PSC should deny a certificate to a project that does not have county assent, or whether it may issue a conditional certificate contingent upon the transmission owner gaining assent at some time in the future.  That is the only issue on appeal.  Even if GBE wins this appeal, it would still have to receive county assent before it builds anything.

The E&E News reporter must have gotten this information from an unreliable source:
And the counties the project would cross initially gave their assent to Clean Line, only to see some of them later try to withdraw their approvals.
"Try" is not correct.  The counties did withdraw their assent, and one of the counties has already had their withdrawal affirmed in court.  Caldwell County's prior "assent" was determined to have occurred illegally by a court.  GBE never had a valid assent from Caldwell County.  Not now, not ever.  No "try" about it.

The issue of assents would have to be tried as a separate matter.  This appeal is a colossal waste of time.

And then even E&E questions whether the project would actually be built.
Even if the court agrees with Clean Line, the fate of the Grain Belt Express is uncertain.

"We are committed to moving this innovative project forward," Mark Lawlor, vice president of development for Clean Line, said in a prepared statement. "With increased customer demand for low-cost renewable energy, new transmission projects are more necessary than ever."

What rock has Mark been hiding under?  Clean Line has only one customer in Missouri who has been promised transmission service below the company's cost to provide it.  Who's going to pay to build this project?  Where's the rest of the customers, Clean Line?  Generalized claims of "demand" don't produce revenue.  Without committed customers to support the cost of the project, the project fails.

Maybe Mark is just trying to polish the GBE turd in order to try to sell the entire project to some other sucker, such as the way it sold Plains & Eastern to NextEra?

For Sale:  Distressed transmission project.  Championed by former state governor who is now practicing law.  Millions in debt and no guarantee it will ever have enough revenue to come to fruition.  Only needs some minor county government assents.... and paying customers.  Make offer.
I kinda wish they'd quit wasting everyone's time.
3 Comments

    About the Author

    Keryn Newman blogs here at StopPATH WV about energy issues, transmission policy, misguided regulation, our greedy energy companies and their corporate spin.
    In 2008, AEP & Allegheny Energy's PATH joint venture used their transmission line routing etch-a-sketch to draw a 765kV line across the street from her house. Oooops! And the rest is history.

    About
    StopPATH Blog

    StopPATH Blog began as a forum for information and opinion about the PATH transmission project.  The PATH project was abandoned in 2012, however, this blog was not.

    StopPATH Blog continues to bring you energy policy news and opinion from a consumer's point of view.  If it's sometimes snarky and oftentimes irreverent, just remember that the truth isn't pretty.  People come here because they want the truth, instead of the usual dreadful lies this industry continues to tell itself.  If you keep reading, I'll keep writing.


    Need help opposing unneeded transmission?
    Email me


    Search This Site

    Got something to say?  Submit your own opinion for publication.

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    October 2024
    September 2024
    August 2024
    July 2024
    June 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010

    Categories

    All
    $$$$$$
    2023 PJM Transmission
    Aep Vs Firstenergy
    Arkansas
    Best Practices
    Best Practices
    Big Winds Big Lie
    Can Of Worms
    Carolinas
    Citizen Action
    Colorado
    Corporate Propaganda
    Data Centers
    Democracy Failures
    DOE Failure
    Emf
    Eminent Domain
    Events
    Ferc Action
    FERC Incentives Part Deux
    Ferc Transmission Noi
    Firstenergy Failure
    Good Ideas
    Illinois
    Iowa
    Kansas
    Land Agents
    Legislative Action
    Marketing To Mayberry
    MARL
    Missouri
    Mtstorm Doubs Rebuild
    Mtstormdoubs Rebuild
    New Jersey
    New Mexico
    Newslinks
    NIETC
    Opinion
    Path Alternatives
    Path Failures
    Path Intimidation Attempts
    Pay To Play
    Potomac Edison Investigation
    Power Company Propaganda
    Psc Failure
    Rates
    Regulatory Capture
    Skelly Fail
    The Pjm Cartel
    Top Ten Clean Line Mistakes
    Transource
    Washington
    West Virginia
    Wind Catcher
    Wisconsin

Copyright 2010 StopPATH WV, Inc.