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

DOE Uses Your Money to Bribe Transmission Advocates

7/25/2024

1 Comment

 
Picture
The U.S. Department of Energy announced yesterday that it is handing out a stunning $371M of your tax dollars to purchase advocates for proposed transmission projects.  However, DOE's spending spree will only be disbursed when the transmission project begins construction.  That's a long time from now...

I have written about this absurd use of your tax dollars to purchase advocacy for transmission projects here, here and here.

If a transmission project is needed, then regulators will approve it.  Should regulators approve an unneeded transmission project simply because someone not impacted by it gets a freebie?  This turns transmission permitting and siting into some sort of advocacy battle.  Who has more people in their army, and what motivates them?  On one side are impacted landowners, who have to live with the transmission project in perpetuity.  These are the ONLY people who are impacted by new transmission, which can lower their income by taking land out of use, harm their property values, pose a dangerous hazard on their own land, and a daily eyesore forever.  On the other side are a bunch of people who will not have to look at transmission and will not have to suffer any impacts whatsoever.  These people are motivated by pure GREED.  They are being offered something in exchange for the suffering of other people.  The landowners must be compensated for something that was taken for them, but those greedy people don't deserve a damned thing.  They are disgusting people who want to profit off the misery of others.

Advocacy battles like this have been taking place for decades.  Utilities always buy advocacy to try to shout down transmission opposition.  The DC Court of Appeals recognized such transmission advocacy efforts by describing the actions of one such project, PATH:
From 2009 through 2011, PATH spent more than $6 million on various activities to support its applications for Certificates. Through hired public relations contractors, PATH organized "reliable power coalitions" that would recruit individuals—often prominent business and labor leaders—to testify before the state utility commissions in support of PATH's certificate applications. PATH's contractors also polled public opinion of the project, ran promotional advertisements, and sent lobbyists to persuade state officials that the Certificates should be granted.
There is little question that PATH made these disputed expenditures to influence the decisions of public officials. The record is full of statements to that effect. The internal communications of PATH's public relations contractors, for example, declared that "[w]e have but one singular goal—to help get PATH approved," a goal that would be achieved by "generating the political cover that commissioners/legislators need to ‘do the right thing.’ " J.A. 66; see also J.A. 142-44 (contractor agreement with public relations firm). And the advertisements PATH's agents ran were persuasive rather than merely informational, focusing on arguments in support of approval and construction of PATH's proposed transmission line. See, e.g. , J.A. 115, 117-18, 121.
Newman v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 27 F.4th 690, 693-94 (D.C. Cir. 2021)
And now, the federal government, under the auspices of "reducing inflation", is providing the proverbial carrot for greedy people by promising them some free money if they can successfully advocate for a transmission project that doesn't affect them.  They only get their carrot if they can outshout the impacted landowners and other opponents and convince the regulators to approve the transmission project based on advocacy alone.  I have never been so thoroughly disgusted by my own government, and believe me, I have seen A LOT of bullshit coming out of DC over the past sixteen years.  This is the epitome of government graft.

So, let's look at who bellied up to the bar to get some free money in exchange for transmission advocacy.  

There were two different kinds of awards made under this program.  The first is grants to an entity with regulatory authority to approve a new transmission line.  That's right DOE is even bribing the regulators who make these decisions!

The Illinois Commerce Commission got $8.2M to speed up its approval of MISO's Tranche 1 projects.

The Public Service Commission of Wisconsin got $3M for doing the same, plus it will "increase its outreach and engagement with the public, improve its coordination with other siting entities, and develop plain language educational materials on high-voltage transmission lines."

The Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commission got $4.5M to "accelerate its siting decision-making process on certain PJM Regional Transmission Expansion Plan Projects traversing the state by expanding its public and community engagement, participating in more site visits and public input hearings, and providing education and training opportunities to its staff."  Which "certain" projects are those?  Maybe someone wants to ask them?

And Alamosa Co. Colorado got $1.7M to study three different routes for a transmission project and pick one.

And now let's look at a couple of the "economic development" awards for communities "along major new and upgraded transmission lines."  What the hell does that mean, and how close does a community have to be, exactly?  DOE never would say.  As the awards show, these projects are not actually for impacted individuals, but their greedy neighbors who are not impacted at all.

First, there's a couple of merchant transmission projects owned by Michael Skelly's GridUnited that were showered with multiple grants.

Southline Transmission project:
$1.8M to Lordsburg, NM to revitalize their town.  I'm going to bet the revitalization isn't going to include a gigantic transmission line in the middle of Main Street.  Instead, the transmission line will impact some landowners outside the town.
The City of Willcox, AZ got $10M to create a new conservation area.  I'm going to bet that the conservation area won't have a gigantic transmission line running through it.  Instead, the transmission line will impact some landowners elsewhere.

North Plains Connector Transmission project:
City of Mott, ND got $14.2M for a community center.  I'm betting the transmission project is nowhere near the community center.
The Montana Department of Commerce got $47.4M to distribute to the counties of Rosebud, Fallon and Custer and the Northern Cheyenne tribe for "funding critical community infrastructure, including emergency and medical services, transportation, water, and sewage services, and climate mitigation projects."    Here, North Dakota, have a handful of colorful beads while we rape and pillage your state.
The Roosevelt Custer Community Council got $700K for a new Fire Hall in Amidon.

It used to be that the transmission company had to pay these bribes out of their own funds, especially merchant transmission companies that don't have guaranteed cost recovery from ratepayers.  Merchant transmission is not found needed or planned by regional grid planners.  Merchant transmission is a speculative proposition based purely on profits.  The merchant bets its own capital that if it can build a transmission line between point A and point B that it can attract enough voluntary customers to pay for the line and provide a profit.  Why in the world are taxpayers paying bribes to buy advocacy for transmission developers who are supposed to be paying for their own projects?  It boggles the mind!

But DOE wasn't done supporting the merchants with GridUnited... there's also a couple of grants to Guymon, OK totaling $167.5M to build a new school and a water project.  Only one of these projects seems to be tied to transmission at all.  The other one seems to be an unrelated gift to the City of Guymon.  Spending Other People's Money is such a generous activity!

Barnstable, Massachusetts, is getting a new school in exchange for a landing zone for offshore wind transmission.  I'm going to guess the school will be nowhere near the transmission line.

Michigan is getting $35M to "...invest in workforce development initiatives to build a skilled workforce to support transmission construction and clean energy investments in the two counites affected by the Helix-Hiple transmission line, one of the MISO Long Range Transmission Planning Tranche 1 projects. LEO will provide specialized education and training through electric utility apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship programs, as well as training for EV infrastructure construction and installation. LEO will also invest in a low-income energy fund to support a residential weatherization program, as well as provide utility stipends to residents in disadvantaged communities (DACs) impacted by the siting of a new transmission line."  This is garbage.  It doesn't actually help landowners impacted by the transmission line.

​There's more... LOT$ more... read it and weep (while clutching your wallet and your private property rights.)

So, just like I thought in the beginning, no communities that are actually impacted by new transmission are benefiting from these grants in any way.  Communities impacted by new transmission are linear, just like the transmission itself.  They do not coincide with traditional cluster communities.

Absolutely NO LANDOWNER EVER said that they would gladly give up their own property for new transmission if a nearby town could only have a new school, a new fire hall, a Main Street makeover, or a park, or any of this other ridiculous nonsense DOE found grant worthy.  Landowners will NOT give up their fight in the face of federal government bribes.

DOE simply gave the money to anyone who applied, not to impacted communities.

How does this "reduce inflation" again?  
1 Comment

Transource Says It Will Refile IEC Project With Pa PUC

7/16/2024

1 Comment

 
Picture
Everyone was blindsided by the announcement last week that Franklin County, Pennsylvania, has inked a deal with Transource to drop its opposition to the Independence Energy Connection (IEC).  This project was originally proposed in 2016 as a "market efficiency" project planned by regional grid operator PJM Interconnection to create a new pathway for cheap power generated in Pennsylvania to reach electric consumers in the DC-Baltimore area.  The Maryland PSC approved the project in 2020 contingent upon a reconfiguration that assigned the eastern part of the project to local utilities to add to an open position on existing transmission structures.  However, the Pennsylvania PUC denied Transource's application altogether in 2021.  Transource has pursued appeal of the PUC's decision through the court system, first in the Pennsylvania courts, then in federal district court.  The PUC then appealed the federal district court's decision, and the case is currently before the federal Third Circuit.  Briefing has not yet completed, and oral argument has not yet been scheduled.  This case has not been resolved one way or the other.

PJM initially "suspended" IEC in the wake of the PUC denial, putting the project on a shelf for further re-evaluation.  Recently, PJM stated during its Transmission Expansion Advisory Committee (TEAC) that IEC "causes uncontrolled congestion and reliability issues."  That means that the project, if built, would raise prices all over the region, which is the exact opposite of what PJM testified to during the state utility commission hearings.  Last week, PJM stated that it would be making an announcement regarding the fate of the IEC at its September TEAC meeting.  That meeting is open to the public, if you would like to attend and make comment.

Despite what looks like certain doom at PJM, along with a court case that has not been resolved in its favor,  Transource has been busy!  It announced an agreement with Franklin County to drop its opposition.  The agreement was a mystery until now.  It comes in the form of a partial settlement between Transource and Franklin County in the PUC case (which ended with a denial in 2021).  You can read it here:
transource-franklin_co.
File Size: 202 kb
File Type: transource-franklin co.
Download File

Why is Franklin County agreeing to drop its opposition to a PUC case that is over?
Transource PA intends to refile the IEC Project with the Commission.
Seems like Transource is trying to reconfigure this project as a reliability project.  However, it is going to need PJM's approval or it won't be able to recover its costs from ratepayers.  Is Transource going merchant with IEC, or is PJM going to come out in September and negate what it recently said about IEC causing uncontrolled congestion and reliability issues?

So, what does Franklin County get from this deal?
Transource PA will pay Franklin County a one-time payment of $5,000,000.00 (Five Million Dollars and No Cents) to off-set potential environmental impacts, if any, of the IEC West Project in Franklin County caused by the actions of Transource PA or its contractors. The funds may be used at Franklin County's discretion. In addition to the conditions set forth herein, this payment is conditioned upon Transource PA receiving all necessary, independent third-party permits, recommendations, or approvals otherwise required by law from the Franklin County Planning Department, Southampton Township, Greene Township, Guilford Township, Quincy Township, and Washington Township related to the IEC Project, including, if necessary, an NPDES permit, substation notification and compliance letters and driveway permits.
Transource PA shall notify Franklin County within fifteen (15) days after the line is energized and shall remit the payment required in this paragraph to Franklin County within thirty (30) days after the line is energized and placed in service.
In exchange for $5M, Franklin Co. agrees to take on all liability for environmental impacts caused by Transource or its contractors.  That seems rather risky to me.  What environmental impacts could Transource cause while building IEC, and how much could those cost to remediate?  This is more like an insurance policy without any limit on how much Franklin Co. may have to pay out.

​In addition
As part of this Settlement, Transource PA also agrees to provide an allowance of up to $4,000,000.00 (Four Million Dollars and No Cents) associated with micro-siting within the
1,000-foot corridor granted by the Commission upon approval of the IEC Project. This allowance will be used by Transource to accommodate siting needs that may be identified prior to construction.
What?  Transource will allocate up to $4M of ratepayer money to micro-siting?  How much does micro-siting cost?  The paragraph reads like this extra $4M is an internal budgeting issue.  This allowance will be used by Transource, it's not being paid to Franklin County.  It is completely unclear how money can solve micro-siting issues.  Micro-siting refers to making slight adjustments to the project's alignment to go around certain impediments.  It can require different transmission structures, or slightly longer spans.  $4M is a very small amount of money when it comes to building transmission lines.  Who gets first dibs on having their micro-siting issues settled before Transource runs out of money?  Will Transource pick and choose which landowners benefit?

​An what about eminent domain?
Franklin County agrees not to oppose any of the eminent domain applications related to the IEC West Portion of the IEC Project associated with PJM Project 9A that are currently pending before the Commission. Franklin County further agrees not to oppose any eminent domain applications as may be necessary for the reconfigured East Portion of the IEC Project.
So Franklin County won't oppose any eminent domain.  Not sure they really have a say in it, unless it is land owned by the County.

And what about land, or conservation easements, owned by the County?
Transource will not be required to obtain from Franklin County any additional land rights associated with County property interests (e.g., including situations in which the County has rights associated with an agricultural easement) as Transource may identify.
Franklin County has agreed not to interfere with any land rights Transource wants, including the right to cross conservation easements that the county may have purchased from landowners with county taxpayer funds in the past.  If you put your land in an easement thinking that it was protected, Franklin County has agreed that it is not protected from Transource.

It also contains the condition that other utilities also receive their land rights, including on the eastern portion of the project in York County.  If that doesn't happen, Franklin County gets zilch.
​This Joint Partial Settlement is also conditioned upon Transource PA, Mid-
Atlantic Interstate Transmission, LLC ("MAlT") (or an affiliate), and PPL Electric Utilities
Corporation receiving all necessary land rights in York and Franklin counties in order to
construct the IEC Project, as reconfigured.
It's also contingent upon approval for a new filing in Pennsylvania, and an amendment to its approval in Maryland.
This Joint Partial Settlement is further conditioned upon approval of the IEC Project, as amended in Pennsylvania and Maryland. If either the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission or Maryland Public Service Commission deny the IEC Project, as amended, either Transource PA or Franklin County may elect to withdraw from this settlement and may proceed with litigation, including litigation of their original positions.
And Franklin County agrees not to oppose any of those fillings, as well as any other filing Transource may make.
Transource PA will be able to represent in its filings before the PA Commission, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and any other regulatory agency or court that it has reached settlement with Franklin County and Franklin County withdraws its opposition to the IEC Project and no longer opposes it.
Transource now owns Franklin County in any future filings.

Why, Franklin County, why?  Seems like this is not going unnoticed by the voters of Franklin County, tossed under the bus.  The elected officials who thought this was a good idea did so at their own risk.

And why would the PA PUC approve this settlement?  Settlements need to be approved or they are not valid.

Get out your battle gear, folks!  Here we go again!  It seems transmission never truly goes away, it just crawls behind the baseboard for a while to take a nap.
1 Comment

PJM Opens New Transmission Window To Serve Data Centers

7/15/2024

0 Comments

 
Here we go again!  

As if all the new transmission that came out of PJM's 2022 Window 3 isn't enough already, guess what?  PJM miscalculated.

That's right... the data center load in Northern Virginia is much bigger than PJM thought when it planned and selected a bunch of new transmission projects last year.

Here's PJM's latest plan.

PJM shared at its TEAC meeting last week that it was going to open a new window for transmission to import an additional 4,500MW of generation to "data center alley."  This time, the generation is supposed to come from wind, solar, and storage in Illinois.  Illinois, people!  Numerous new transmission lines from the Midwest to Loudoun County, Virginia.  That's 700 miles of new transmission!

How is it supposed to get there?  PJM burned up all its existing transmission corridors last time by using up the Doubs-Goose Creek corridor to save the Sacred Cows.  There won't be any new transmission going through Doubs this time around.  There also won't be any new transmission coming from the east.  Seems Pennsylvania is tapped out for exports this time around.

PJM claims:
Most of the additional generation required to meet load growth 2028 vs 2029 is sourced from PJM West.
That's going to look like this:
Picture
PJM is targeting new project approvals for this window at the end of this year so that transmission owners can get started failing at building them next year.

Sometimes, I get up in the morning and wonder if PJM is just punking us all by pretending that all this new transmission can actually get built.  When project after project fails, the data centers causing this problem are going to leave for more powerful pastures elsewhere, and then PJM can shrug and say, "Well, we tried!"

It's time to start participating in TEAC meetings again.  I'm sure they've missed all of us these past couple months...  see ya there!
0 Comments

PJM Sets A Precedent

7/15/2024

0 Comments

 
At its July 9 Transmission Expansion Advisory Committee meeting, PJM proposed a re-route of the MidAtlantic Resiliency Link (MARL).  MARL is a giant extension cord for importing West Virginia coal-fired electricity to Loudoun County's "data center alley." 

Loudoun County just can't stop approving new data centers, even though it has no way to power them.  Now Loudoun's data center addiction is impacting people in other states... people who will have their property taken using eminent domain so that Loudoun can have more electricity for its data centers.  Loudoun County is not going to stop building data centers until its voters MAKE them stop building data centers.  That would happen in a hot minute if Loudoun County's SACRED COWS were impacted by the data centers.

This is the Sacred Cow Zone.  A look at an electric infrastructure map shows a pristine donut hole surrounded by high voltage transmission lines, substations, and generators on all sides.  But there's nothing in the Sacred Cow Zone!
Picture
What's a Sacred Cow?  A person with more money (and therefore more political influence) than you.  Examples include Jackie Kennedy, who took umbrage at a proposal to run a power line through her pony club in the Sacred Cow Zone back in the 1960's.  Legend has it that caused the line to end up in Jefferson County, West Virginia instead.  It's the reason we have that 500kV transmission line right across the middle of our county today.  Another example might be the movie stars and their wine-making friends who objected to a different 500kV high-voltage transmission line in the mid 2000s called TrAIL.  That line got pushed south into Fauquier County instead of impacting the Sacred Cows.

If you want to nauseate yourself a bit you could read the fakeass "report" the Sacred Cows threw together to plead their case that they are much, much too sacred to be impacted by the MARL.  They really think they are much more special than you.  Their views!  Their wine!  Their horses! Their environment!  They even claim to be DC's "central park", where harried rich and important people can go to escape the daily grind of grinding the less fortunate into the dirt.  If they thought they were going to get some sympathy from that report, I suggest it's time to buy a mirror and take a really good look.  Your arrogance is showing and people are laughing at your utter snobbery.  Get over yourself!

Because of Jackie Kennedy's pony club and resident movie stars, PJM was also attuned to the history of the Sacred Cow Zone.  It created a "work around" re-route up front, and now it has pulled the ejector button before even TRYING to propose a route through Loudoun.  It went from this
Picture
to this
Picture
It's a miracle!  The Sacred Cow Zone has been saved again!  However, in doing so, other landowners who were not previously affected are now affected.  In fact, those landowners in Northern Loudoun will have their property taken using eminent domain to widen the existing right of way, as confirmed by FirstEnergy's representative at the meeting.  Those sacrificial lambs get no consideration because they are not rich or important.

You may find it surprising that the Sacred Cow Zone is more important than the C&O Canal National Historical Park!  The re-route crosses the C&O twice whereas the original route didn't cross it at all.  Let's trash a national historical park that regular people from all over the region visit to escape snobbery and selfishness... in favor of snobbery and selfishness.  Is the Sacred Cow Zone really more important than a national park?

What is not really surprising is that the Sacred Cows didn't even think about using their Sacred status to actually help others.  Maybe if they did, they wouldn't be sacred anymore?  In exchange for continuing their Sacred status, the Cows proclaimed their mission:  

To support the overall PJM Regional Transmission Expansion Plan (RTEP) to inter alia supply the rising power needs of the region’s data center industry

Keep that in mind... the Sacred Cows love PJM, transmission lines, and data centers... as long as they are Not In My Back Yard!

And the whole debacle is going to cost all ratepayers in the region $167 MILLION more!  We're going to have to pay $167M to keep the Sacred Cows sacred and free from all that nasty infrastructure needed to power the data centers that keep their tax burden low.  What a world!

The real irony here may be the fact that a transmission line necessary for Loudoun's data centers has been pushed out of Loudoun and onto landowners in other states.
PJM claims it is not setting a precedent by re-routing a transmission line to spare certain rich and powerful people and dump it on others without the resources to fight back.

How are you enjoying the email bombardment, PJM?  The Sacred Cows just couldn't wait to strut their arrogance for the people impacted by the Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project and assure them that if they, too, started having a tantrum at PJM that they could have the transmission line moved out of their community, also.

See?  I'm already right about that.  PJM IS setting a precedent that if you don't want a transmission line in your community you simply have to make some demands and pull the ejector button and you're spared, like magic!  But if PJM is NOT setting a precedent, like Stu assured me they were not last week, then PJM is going to have to explain to those folks in Maryland why they are not Sacred Cows that deserve special treatment.  What'll it be, PJM?
0 Comments

Why Can't We Use Existing Rights-of-way for MPRP?

7/13/2024

3 Comments

 
This question has been asked over and over and the answer is multi-faceted and much too long for Facebook.

First, let's acknowledge that existing transmission lines in the region are serving a purpose.  They are providing a public service to provide electricity to customers.  Public utilities have service territories, where they either generate power or buy power to serve their customers.  They may own some of the transmission lines in their service territory, but sometimes another utility may own a line through their territory that was constructed to serve its own customers elsewhere.  You would have to do some research to find out who owns any particular transmission line you see.

A utility owns both the transmission line and the existing easement or property it sits on.  The easement has to be a certain size to meet safety code requirements.  The bigger the lines, the bigger the easement.  The utility has exclusive rights to the easement it owns, and the transmission lines on it.  The company paid for and constructed that line, and it was only allowed to take the amount of land it needed for the line, and no more.  The cost of this public service is reimbursed to the company by ratepayers who use it.

When the line needs repairs, the company that owns it is responsible.  When the line needs to be upgraded, the company that owns it is responsible.  Under current law, a company would have "first dibs" to upgrade or expand its line when it's needed.  Some have asked why PSEG cannot use eminent domain to take another company's line and use the land for the MPRP?  Utilities are immune to eminent domain in most cases.  Isn't it ironic, since they can use it on us?  Utilities are immune to eminent domain because they are providing a public service on that land.  If another entity was allowed to take that land from them, there wouldn't be a transmission line and the public service of providing electricity would end.  I'm sure you can appreciate that nobody is going to take the lines that serve you.

Therefore, PSEG has no right to take another company's transmission line that is in use and tear it down to erect their own line.  Heck, PSEG is not even a legal public utility in Maryland and has no utility rights at all at this time.  If that line needs to be rebuilt, the company that owns it has "first dibs" to rebuild it on the easement it already owns.

Some have asked why PSEG can't just hang some new wires on the existing towers owned by another utility?  Because those towers were not designed to carry that extra circuit.  Transmission towers are structurally engineered to carry the load they are designed for.  They are the property of the utility that owns them to use to maintain and expand its own system when needed.  If BGE was ordered to let PSEG use its transmission system for its own line, what would happen when BGE needed another line?  It would have to take a new right-of-way, since PSEG had used theirs for its own line.  PSEG cannot own a line that is on someone else's right-of-way.  Furthermore, it would be unsafe to try to string some new lines on a tower that doesn't even have a place to put them.  Sometimes, transmission companies think ahead a bit and build oversized towers that leave room for a future circuit to be added.  That is not the case in the MPRP area.  

So, what is PSEG doing in Maryland anyhow if they're not a public utility that serves customers in the state?  Our regional transmission system is operated and planned by a regional transmission operator called PJM Interconnection.  PJM makes sure the system is safe and reliable and that your lights stay on.  PJM is constantly monitoring its system, which consists of transmission lines owned by many of its members, like BG&E, or PSEG.  PJM runs a robust planning process and orders new lines, upgrades, and rebuilds that are recommended by its Transmission Expansion Advisory Committee (TEAC).  TEAC meetings are held once a month, and are open to the public.  But most of what PJM talks about is way too complicated for regular people and they are generally not involved.

Last year, PJM opened a new planning window to find transmission solutions to a reliability problem caused by 7,500MW of increased data center load in Northern Virginia, combined with 11,000MW of generation closing around the region.  Numerous companies submitted 72 different project ideas for PJM's consideration.  For big projects such as this, PJM's planning process is competitive.  That means all those transmission ideas were competing with each other to be selected.  PJM evaluated them for constructability and price, trying to find the best projects that solved the reliability problem for the cheapest price.  In order to be competitive, some companies submitted their project ideas with financial cost caps that would guarantee a final price for the project, no matter what happens in the mean time.  There are all sorts of ways to increase the price even with a cost cap, but I'm not going to get into that really complicated topic just now.

Maryland public utility BGE submitted a bunch of project ideas wrapped into a package in conjunction with other local public utilities.  None of those projects had cost caps.  While they had estimated costs attached, they are not held to the estimate.  Spend as much as you want!  One of the project ideas in this package was to rebuild  existing transmission lines from Pennsylvania to a substation named Brighton.  That project did not connect with the Doubs substation.  It looked like this:
Picture
This transmission idea wasn't just one transmission project but a series of transmission upgrades that were considered as a package.  None of these lines connected to Doubs, which feeds power to Northern Virginia.  We do not know why BGE didn't propose connecting to Doubs, and we don't really know why PJM selected PSEG's MPRP project instead.  The only clue we have is PJM's project evaluation risk matrix.
Picture
PJM decided that PSEG's MPRP was the best project in this list, and they ordered it and assigned it to PSEG.  PSEG is being held to its guarantee that it will have this project finished on time and on budget.  It is in a big ol' hurry because, for PSEG, time is money.

Once PJM selects and orders a transmission project, it's like a momma bear with a cub.  PJM will protect that transmission project and refuse to second guess itself at all costs.  The only thing that can stop PJM is a denial by the state utility commission in the state(s) where the project is located.  In that case, PJM will have to go back to the drawing board and start its planning process all over again.  Because these are competitive projects, PJM can't just pick another one.

There have only been two instances where PJM has made a change to a transmission project it ordered.  The first occurred several years ago when it was facing a denial of its planned Independence Energy Connection by the Maryland Public Service Commission.  It got that far, folks, right up until decision time!  In that instance, there was a locally-owned and operated transmission line that had recently been built that had room for another circuit (remember the planning ahead thing?).  Citizens asked why PJM had assigned a whole new transmission line on new easements to a non-local transmission company similar to PSEG when there was an existing line with open space that could hold a new circuit on the existing towers.  The Maryland PSC wanted to know also, and PJM and the transmission company fell on its sword and re-assigned that part of the project to the local utility to construct on its existing towers.  However, there were other parts to this project in Western Pennsylvania that were not changed because there was no existing transmission line with room for another circuit.  Only part of that project was changed, and the company continued trying to get approval from Pennsylvania.  Pennsylvania denied their permit and the entire project was shelved.  Turns out the years-long delay in permitting obviated the project and it was no longer needed anyhow.  The project was never built.

The second instance is happening right now.  PJM selected a transmission line connecting West Virginia coal-fired power plants with Loudoun County, Virginia's "data center alley."  A portion of this project is a greenfield line through western Loudoun on new easements.  When PJM evaluated this project, it noted that obtaining approval for new easements in Loudoun  might be a problem, so it created a "work around" on a different route, if needed.  PJM planned for this project's route in Loudoun to be rejected.  Just as PJM thought, the people in Loudoun opposed the line, and they used their money and political power to get their county government to demand PJM pull the ejector button and put the project on the alternate route.  PJM is currently considering the re-route.  However, this re-route is not exactly on "existing rights-of-way," no matter how they try to spin it.  The re-route "along existing lines" expands the existing easement and takes more property from people on the existing line using eminent domain.  The people on the re-route got mowed over by the important people in Loudoun who didn't want to have any impacts from new transmission to serve Loudoun's data centers.  They were stabbed in the back and thrown under the bus in order to save the rich people in Virginia's wine and horse country.  And they're going to remember it for a long, long time.

"Using existing rights-of-way" is not always the panacea it seems.  It's basically a NIMBY argument and pushes impacts on to others.  Even when a transmission line is rebuilt entirely on existing easements, there are still impacts from construction, as well as permanent impacts from having much higher voltage running on an easement you may be so unlucky to have on your property.  Rebuilds need new access roads for construction.  A new gravel road across your field, even temporary, will cause permanent and lasting impacts.  Just try getting all the rock out of there afterwards, or fixing the compaction that has happened.  You probably won't enjoy living with the construction traffic on it during construction either.  A rebuild on the existing easement may take out more trees along the easement, proclaiming them "danger trees" to the new transmission line.  It's a way of widening the easement without actually paying you anything.  Rebuilds aren't fun for the people who are subject to them, and horrendous for people whose home gets gobbled up by an expanded easement.

The lesson here is that moving a planned transmission line to an existing easement has only happened under certain circumstances.  The first is having space available to take a new line on existing towers.  That isn't present with MPRP.  The second was PJM having an alternate route already in mind.  That also isn't present with MPRP.

Getting PJM to change its mind and cancel MPRP entirely in favor of some other project that has not even been proposed is a very heavy lift.  So heavy, in fact, it may be nearly impossible.  PJM will have to be forced into it, and that's not going to happen quickly, easily, or inexpensively.  If you want to pursue this strategy, my advice is to hire a licensed engineer with experience and credentials working cases just like this before a regulatory commission to take a look at the PJM system and come up with an alternate plan.  Citizens don't have the right credentials to design the transmission system and PJM will just ignore them (and the PSC will ignore them as well).  You need to point to a viable plan that has been thoroughly vetted by a professional with experience designing the transmission system.  Even then, PJM will fight you on this and attack your expert.  He needs to be flameproof.  But, if you're in it for the long haul, this is your avenue, and the choice is yours.  It won't be quick.  It won't be cheap.  It won't be easy.  

Perhaps by the time you're done fighting that very long battle (with no guarantee of success) the transmission line will have obviated itself.  The data centers aren't going to wait around for a new extension cord that is mired in years of legal battle, they're going to go somewhere else with available power.

If you're going to find another solution for MPRP, make sure it's one that the entire community finds acceptable, otherwise you're playing into the NIMBY game PJM and PSEG hopes you will play.  Nobody really wins that game.  Someone alway gets stabbed in the back and tossed under the bus to save yourself.  The transmission planners and companies want you to do this because they're the ones who win... they get to have their project and someone who has to live with it is miserable.

There are plenty of transmission projects that have been cancelled entirely without anyone being thrown to the wolves because the community came together and presented a united front... we won't have this here in our community in any way, shape, or form.

​Good luck, MPRP opponents!  Carry on!
3 Comments

Digging Into MPRP

7/11/2024

2 Comments

 
Picture
Get your hip waders, folks, it's going to get deep in here!

Last night I attended the MPRP "Open House" in Brunswick.  It made the guy from Assedo pretty nervous that we wouldn't sign in and give them our information, but he said we were welcome to look around.  So, I did.  I think maybe he changed his mind later when he spied us chatting with the reporter from Fox because he found it so intriguing he needed to document it with photographs.  I saw you, dude.  Somehow, I don't think PSEG is going to be using those photos for public relations purposes.

MPRP's "Open House" was right out of the utility playbook.  Free food and beverage, free tchotchkes, and plenty of free propaganda from subject matter "experts" that sometimes couldn't stay within their specialties.  Most of them were very nice, heck, they're just doing a job.  A couple were quite snotty when they realized I knew they were blowing smoke.  And I got so far under the PJM guy's skin that he started "m'am"-ing me.  The sickest part of these open house meetings to me is always the Indoctrination Station for the kiddos.
Picture
Don't leave your kids here coloring propaganda under the watchful eye of strangers.

The first stop was the table with the PJM guy.  Stu Widom had lots of helpful information, but didn't know much about the actual planning process, and it showed.  Got himself all tweaked when I mentioned the precedent PJM has recently set by changing the route of a different project so it doesn't affect wealthy and politically connected people in Virginia's wine and horse country.  Why don't you ask Stu about that tonight?  He likes to pretend that it was for "environmental reasons" but it was nothing of the sort!  The new route crosses the C&O Canal NHP TWICE.  Environmental my foot.  Of course, poking the rich and powerful might affect Stu's own personal environment as one of PJM's political schmoozers, so maybe that's what he meant?  He obviously wasn't there to talk with citizens, but to use his bee smoker on any angry legislators or government officials who showed up.

Next I talked to one of the land agent ladies, who pretended that's not what she was.  I asked her when they were going to release the land agents on the citizens impacted by this project and she acted all confused.  I asked her if land agents would be calling on people BEFORE or AFTER the Maryland Public Service Commission approves this project.  She assured me land agents would only contact you AFTER the MD PSC approves.  We both knew she was full of it, and my investigation of regulatory filings this morning confirms
The Project is a greenfield project for most of the project route, which poses uncertainty and risk. With an in-service date of June 1, 2027, the Project faces an aggressive timeline to execute and complete all construction activities. The Project must manage ROW permitting and land acquisition risks associated with the greenfield line routes in a compressed period of time. For instance, PSEG RT will need to obtain ROWs, rights-of-entry, easements, and temporary access agreements, and in these efforts, may encounter local opposition from landowners. 
Busted!  Those land agents will be on your doorstep as soon as the routing is completed in September.

Next was one of the routing guys who told me this project was needed to supply electricity to the local area.  I told him he was wrong, then he admitted that he wasn't the subject matter expert on that.  He suggested I go over to Stu's table to find the answer to that question.  I said I'd already been there and maybe HE should go talk to Stu.  He refused, so I suggested that he not lie to people about that anymore,

I talked with a delightful young lady at the structure/electrical engineering poster.  She showed me the selected H-frame structures and told me the poles were 40 feet apart and that it would be possible to drive farm equipment between them.  I asked her what happens if someone tried that and accidentally clipped one of the poles and it fell over.  Who would be liable?  She didn't know.  I didn't suggest that she volunteer for a farm machinery rodeo, where the power company person stands in a field with their arms outstretched and pretends to be a transmission tower while farmers see how close they can drive their gigantic pieces of equipment to the "tower" without knocking it over.

I talked with another routing lady who confirmed that paralleling existing transmission lines can actually be MORE destructive than cutting new greenfield lines.  We talked about how homes and other structures are often sited right outside transmission rights of way that have existed for decades.  Paralleling that corridor with a new 150-ft wide easement would destroy everything adjacent to the existing corridor.  She said MPRP would go around homes rather than over or through them, but had to minimize how many times its line crossed the existing line.  There was also a problem where a home stood on either side of the existing easement, preventing expansion on either side.  She didn't know what MPRP would do in that instance.  One of those homes would have to be sacrificed, that's what.  Whichever side of the existing easement has more homes wins.  However, when MPRP uses new easements, it can go around any home or other obstruction and won't have to destroy anyone's home.

And finally, I talked with PSEG's staff lawyer, who happened to be sitting at Stu's table.
Picture
Very nice person who pretty much told the truth and had the answers to my rather unique questions.  She admitted that perhaps some of the other "experts" at the meeting may be making crap up and she had asked them not to do that.  I grilled her on PSEG's federal regulatory filings and cost recovery system.  This morning I found the documents and they mostly confirmed what she told me. 

​PSEG has applied at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to be granted three transmission incentives.  The first is the Abandoned Plant Incentive.  If granted, PSEG would be able to recover all its prudent expenditures on MPRP in the event that it is abandoned before being built through no fault of PSEG.  This would include if cannot get the permits it needs, or if PJM's need for the project changes.  The second is to set a preliminary debt/equity ratio of 55/45%.  This isn't anything to get concerned about.  The third incentive is recovery of PSEG's expenses related to this project once the project has an approved formula rate.  PSEG's initial expenditures will be recovered over a 5-year period once it has a recovery method.  This means that all the money PSEG has spent preparing this project for PJM, ushering it through PJM's competitive process, it's legal costs to make those FERC filings, the cost of all its contractors (routing, engineering, land acquisition, public relations), the food, the coloring books, even those cute little hardhat flashlight keychains (be sure to get one!).  Everything PSEG has already spent will end up added to ratepayer bills once it has its formula rate established.  The one made up fib the lawyer told was that PSEG was paying for all the current costs of the project out of the goodness of their hearts.  I hope she knew as well as I did that those costs were being put in an account as a regulatory asset that would be recovered (with interest) at a later date.

First, PSEG is waiting for FERC to approve its incentives.  Afterwards, PSEG will file for approval of its formula rate and rate of return.  Bet your eyes glazed over just then, right?  Stick with me here...  A formula rate is a set of tables that calculate a yearly rate based on numbers that the transmission company plugs in from their ledger.  As things are paid for, the costs get added to certain accounts, and the account totals get transferred to the formula rate on a yearly basis.  The number that comes out the end of the formula is the amount that electric consumers pay for the transmission project on a yearly basis.  A rate of return is how much interest the company earns on its capital expenses.  That includes physical assets, like transmission lines, land they sit on, and it also includes the cost of building them in the first place.  It's heady stuff, but anyone with a little accounting experience can handle it just fine.

Once the formula rate and rate of return is set by FERC, you can help PSEG look over its costs every year to make sure they don't include any costs in their formula rate that shouldn't be charged to ratepayers.

To wrap up... I urge you to download and read PSEG's application for FERC incentives.  It may answer a bunch of the questions I have seen swirling around, such as where's the data proving need?  Why was this project selected instead of upgrading existing lines?  If you have questions, why not take them to the PSEG attorney at tonight's meeting?  She's fun to talk to.  Be nice. 

Another utility "dog and pony show" in the books.  Don't expect to accomplish much.  MPRP isn't going to be stopped at any of these meetings, but attending is your first step.  It's simply a networking opportunity.  Come hungry.  As one landowner remarked at one of these shows years ago... "We might as well eat.  It might be all we get."
Picture
2 Comments

FirstEnergy Files For Incentives For MARL, Delays Project

7/3/2024

0 Comments

 
Picture
The MidAtlantic Resiliency Link, or MARL, transmission project has been assigned by PJM Interconnection to two different transmission builders.  NextEra is assigned to build the majority of it, but FirstEnergy ended up with the portion that runs through Frederick County, VA and Jefferson County, WV.

Long ago, even before PJM ordered MARL, NextEra filed an application for transmission incentives with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.  FERC approved them back in January.  Nobody bothered to get involved and comment or protest.

Everyone's been treading water, waiting to get more information, but neither NextEra or FirstEnergy has held public meetings to share information with impacted communities.  Seems like nobody is in a hurry at all.

Remember that when PJM ordered MARL, it said the project was needed to be operating by June 1, 2027 or else there would be darkness.

Back in May, FirstEnergy finally got around to requesting transmission incentives for its portion of the MARL.  It asked FERC to grant it the abandoned plant incentive.  Grant of the abandoned plant incentive begins the tally of project costs that can be recovered if the project is abandoned (cancelled) before being built.  Anything FirstEnergy spends before receiving this incentive is only eligible to be recovered at 50%.  That would mean that FirstEnergy could only collect half of the money it spends on MARL in the case of abandonment.  The other half would come out of FirstEnergy's pocket.  Fitting, don't you think, since FirstEnergy insisted on being assigned this portion that rebuilds and expands lines FirstEnergy already owns?  However, that's not what FirstEnergy asked FERC for... it asked FERC to allow it to recover 100% of whatever it has spent (plus interest) if the project is abandoned.

FERC Commissioner Mark Christie is at war against certain transmission incentives.  FERC opened a rulemaking to examine and revise its incentives more than 4 years ago, but has punted it to the side without action, allowing the overly generous incentives to continue.  
​
I'm taking this opportunity to object to FirstEnergy's request for the abandoned plant incentive.  Do they really need it, since they were so eager to have this project that they engineered some secret deal behind the scenes at PJM?  

NextEra's cost cap for MARL (as crappy as it is) did not transfer to FirstEnergy when it took over this section of the project.  FirstEnergy can and will spend however much it wants... currently estimated at $341M for a very short "rebuild" segment.  How much will they actually spend, and how soon will they spend it?  How much spending is planned *before* state approvals, which if denied can cause abandonment?  FERC should place a limit on running up the spending before project approval.

These are the comments I submitted to FERC.
er2401998.pdf
File Size: 112 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

And here's the worst part!  As part of their filing, FirstEnergy included a copy of its acceptance letter of PJM's designation of a portion of the MARL.  In their acceptance, FirstEnergy has changed the in-service dates for its portion of the MARL.  The Virginia portions (both in Frederick and Loudoun counties) are supposed to be in-service by June 1, 2028, delayed a year from the date PJM said they were needed.  The in-service date for the West Virginia portion in Jefferson County is delayed until June 1, 2030.  That's right... 2030!  MARL is not planned to be completed and transmitting energy until 2030!  That's six years from now!  Are Virginia's data centers going to hang around waiting to build and be connected to the electric grid for another 6 years?

NO!  They won't wait.  They will go somewhere else where they can build a data center and get electric service before 2030.  The bottom may be about to fall out of Virginia's data center craze.

​Here's what FirstEnergy's acceptance letter looks like:
potomac_edison_designated_entity_acceptance_letter.pdf
File Size: 339 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

Once the in-service date for PJM's transmission projects starts slipping, it often keeps slipping... right off into oblivion.  It can be delayed if expected load doesn't show up (but goes elsewhere). It can be delayed if the utilities run into permitting problems, such as taking a state denial in a NIETC to FERC for permitting.  It can be delayed if the utilities have difficulty procuring project components; there is a huge supply chain issue for transmission components right now.  It can be delayed if there are issues with land acquisition.  It can (and will) be delayed even further.  And, as I said in my comments...
MARL’s in-service date is already slipping. Why is that relevant? Because the electric grid abhors a vacuum. When a planned transmission (or generation) project fails to come online when needed, other projects will take its place. That’s exactly what happened with the PATH project, and what is likely to happen with the MARL project, including the Potomac Edison portion that is the subject of this filing. 
Giving these transmission companies the greenlight to spend as much of our money as they want before they finally abandon MARL many years in the future is not just and reasonable.
This transmission project may never happen, but PJM and the utilities involved feel they should pursue it anyhow. Is that because there are no other options? Or is it because there’s no harm done to them if it fails. All the burden of failure falls on ratepayers, and this encourages the utilities to take more of a chance than they would it they had some skin in the game. Utilities shoulder no risk, while collecting all the rewards. 
​

Consumers have zero control over the project’s risk factors, but they are the ones left holding the bag when it fails. As consumers, we simply cannot afford to continue to financially cover the failures of grid planners and transmission developers simply because we are the one entity without a voice in incentive awards. 
FirstEnergy has asked FERC to approve its incentive request before July 15.  Once consumers have thus insured the reimbursement of FirstEnergy's project spending, then maybe FirstEnergy can actually start working on MARL.

But what happens if FERC doesn't grant this incentive?  Will FirstEnergy still want to build its part of the MARL?  Or will it have to go back to PJM for revision?

​Stay tuned...
0 Comments

Maryland Energy Security

7/3/2024

0 Comments

 
by Patti Hankins, Harford County Maryland ratepayer
Picture
Pennsylvania State Senator Gene Yaw wrote to the PJM Board of Managers on June 14, 2024 in response to a letter the PJM BOM received from the Governors of Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland and Pennsylvania  regarding FERC Order No. 1920.  Senator Yaw is the Chair of the PA Senate Environmental, Resources and Energy Committee. Senator Yaw states in his letter:
"We must recognize that many of the challenges we face today which are accelerating very quickly — namely concerns over sufficient transmission capacity, loss of electric power generation and the inability to site and build new baseload-power generation — are tied directly to poorly-thought out state public policies which have prioritized political considerations above the needs of consumers.
For example, while many states surrounding Pennsylvania have touted their climate goals and reductions, they have conveniently ignored that they have achieved many of these goals simply by shutting down their in-state generation. As a result, they rely on imports of electricity from states like Pennsylvania, which is the largest electricity exporting state in the nation, increasing transmission costs, line loss due to distant transport of electricity and increased risk of blackouts or brownouts."

"Other state policies have upset the balance of competitive power generation by subsidizing

preferred energy resources — many of these resources incapable of providing baseload power generation on demand — or threatening coal and natural gas generation with onerous carbon taxes.
For example, just the prospect of Pennsylvania entering the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) has cost the commonwealth billions of dollars in private capital investment and thousands of jobs, and at the same time failed to demonstrate any commensurate environmental benefit to the public. Too often energy policy is being hijacked to serve politically expedient objectives rather than to meet the most fundamental objective that it should serve: ensuring the lights go on when
we flip the switch."
Maryland's energy public policy and efforts by the Sierra Club of MD have threatened the energy security of Maryland consumers. The forced closure of the Brandon Shores Power Plant by the Sierra Club has resulted in an emergency transmission project to send electricity from PA to MD via Harford County. Over 1 million BGE customers have been placed at risk for having reliable electricity for their basic needs. Maryland's energy policy focuses on wind and solar generation. Both are intermittent energy sources that are completely dependent on Mother Nature. Our Maryland Governor and progressive leaders in the House of Delegates and Senate are just fine with shutting down baseload-power generators in our State. Where do they think the power is going to come from? BGE touts the Brandon Shores Retirement Mitigation Project as "Good Energy at Work" with a website named "good energy in progress".

So baseload-power generation, namely coal, natural gas and nuclear are good if they come from Pennsylvania but bad when it's home grown in Maryland? How many Pennsylvania extension cords are going to be needed to keep the electricity on in Maryland? We know that the PJM 2022 Window 3 projects will bring another extension cord from the Peach Bottom Nuclear Plant's substations to be colocated with the Brandon Shores "good energy" project. And another extension cord from Chanceford Township in York County, PA to Frederick County via Northern Baltimore County and Carroll County. And yet another extension cord from Hunterstown, PA to Carroll County. What happens when Pennsylvania runs out of power generation to send?


Pennsylvania is now starting to see data centers and Bitcoin mining companies locating near generators in the State. In March, Amazon Web Services purchased a 1,200 acre data center campus adjacent to the Susquehanna Steam Electric Nuclear Station. This acquisition allows AMS to purchase energy directly from the Station.

And just this month Bitfarm, a Bitcoin mining company announced it would locate in Sharon, PA where it would have access to an abundant energy supply. Bitcoin mining like data centers uses massive amounts of power. 

Maryland has become much too dependent upon Pennsylvania for its electricity generation. I ask each Maryland state legislator, what steps will you take to secure Maryland's energy supply before it's too late?
0 Comments

Whoopsie!  GBE Bites Off More NIETC Corridor Than It Can Chew

7/2/2024

2 Comments

 
Picture
Everyone is incensed by the U.S. Department of Energy's preliminary 5 mile wide National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor (NIETC) that was magically centered on Invenergy's proposed Grain Belt Express transmission line.  How and why was that preliminary designation made?  And for what purpose?

A NIETC's purpose is to designate a geographic area where one or more transmission projects serving the "national interest" can be sited.  A transmission project inside an NIETC can apply for a federal permit and eminent domain if its state application is denied.  NIETCs are a way to overturn a state decision you don't like.

But GBE claims to have all the state approvals it needs.  So, why the corridor?

Why is it 5-miles wide?

And what ever happened to GBE's Environmental Impact Statement being prepared by the U.S. Department of Energy's Loans Program Office to facilitate a "get out of debt free" card provided by taxpayers if GBE cannot repay its loan?

All these questions (and more!) were answered recently, and the answers did not come from DOE.  DOE has put its interactions with greedy transmission developers under lock and key.  No, the information came from another (anonymous) source whose accuracy can be trusted.

The Midwest Plains Preliminary NIETC was submitted to DOE by GrainBelt Express (GBE) as a National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor because of the federal funding opportunities that a NIETC designation opens up, as well as the potential last resort option of the use of federal backstop siting authority in States where the initial state approval is currently under appeal, such as Illinois.  The corridor was originally submitted as five miles in width because GBE thought that it had to be at least wide enough to encompass two lines. 

Because of all the stink you made, GBE has submitted comments to DOE requesting that the corridor be substantially narrowed to no wider than is necessary to site just the GBE line. 

But would a narrow, specific "corridor" that only enables one transmission line actually be something that DOE can do?  It positively smacks of government graft.  Wouldn't a wider corridor give the DOE plausible deniability?  It seems like the DOE was only too happy to create a 5-mile wide corridor (which is supposed to be based on DOE's factual transmission needs study, btw, not greedy requests).  Who knows what DOE will do with this corridor in the fall.  Will they stick with their 5-mile wide corridor, or will they prove that they are nothing more than a corporate puppet by granting GBE's second request to narrow the corridor just wide enough for GBE?

If designated this fall, this NIETC will have to undergo a federal Environmental Impact Study, just like the one GBE is already involved in required by its request for a government loan guarantee.  But the study already underway only studies the very narrow GBE corridor.  It doesn't study a 5-mile wide NIETC.  If the NIETC is any wider than GBE itself, then GBE's EIS will have to go back to start.  But perhaps that is required in any instance, since the basis for the EIS and governmental action will have changed completely between a government loan guarantee and a NIETC.  You could probably litigate on changing purpose in midstream for a long time.  Maybe GBE will have to fund two separate EIS reports, one for each purpose?  Each EIS takes a minimum of two years.

Meanwhile, back at the DOE, the right hand has no idea what the left hand is doing.  Don't these gals ever see each other in the hallways and stop to chat?  Maybe not because they are all likely "working from home".  I hear that nobody answers the phone at DOE HQ anymore.  Is any work being done in that empty building we pay for?

DOE says the LPO (Loans Program Office) will publish the draft EIS for public review and comment this winter.  DOE is plunging ahead with the EIS for the loan, while not even acknowledging another one has to be done for the NIETC designation.  At least they're only wasting GBE's money with this duplication of effort.  Carry on, ladies!

And here's another thought brought on by the preliminary NIETC designations.  GBE's western terminus will be in Ford County, Kansas.  We've been told that for years.  The story goes that GBE will ship all that untapped wind energy in Kansas to "where it's needed most" (Mars?  Polsky's imagination?  Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous?).  GBE is now asking for approval of two "collector lines" in southwestern Kansas for wind AND solar projects not yet built.  See KCC docket 24-GBEE-790-ST available at this link for more info.

Kansas, huh?  Then what is the Plains - Southwest NIETC for, and why does it reach its cold little finger up into Ford County Kansas?  Is it trying to export even more Kansas wind, or is it importing wind from other states that will be shipped through Kansas on GBE?
Picture
Kansas officials who have been falling all over themselves to give GBE whatever it wants because they think it's going to cause massive economic development in Kansas may end up with a massive Dodo bird egg all over their faces if it turns out that Kansas is just being used as another "fly over" state facilitating Invenergy's profit.  Who remembers that Invenergy owns "the country's largest wind farm" in the Oklahoma panhandle?  Whose idea was this Plains - Southwest corridor, and who is going to profit from it?  Invenergy's giant wind farm was planned and construction began (to preserve tax credits) way back in 2018 as part of AEP's ill-fated WindCatcher project that was supposed to connect Invenergy's wind farm to the Tulsa area via a new transmission line AEP wanted to build.  AEP did not receive approvals for that scheme and the project was cancelled.  And there was Invenergy with the country's biggest wind farm in process and no transmission line to serve it.  Invenergy bought the remnants of Clean Line's Grain Belt Express later that same year.  Kismet!

Anyhow... maybe, just maybe, the longer this debacle goes on, the GBE koolaid that some of the project's biggest cheerleaders ingested seems to be wearing off.  Wakey, wakey, little officials!  There's a wolf among your sheep!
2 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.