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

The Path of Least Resistance Doesn't Exist

7/23/2019

0 Comments

 
Here's another transmission battle that's heating up, this time in Florida.

NextEra wants to build a 176-mile transmission project across seven counties in north-central Florida.  Finding out WHY they think they need to build this project is elusive.  The only thing certain is that NextEra went sneaking around trying to buy rights of way and build its project before opposition developed.  The Tallahassee Democrat nipped that plan in the bud, and opposition blossomed.  Lots of opposition.

Local governments have been hard on NextEra, and rightly so.
Jefferson County Commission Chair Betsy Barfield was sharper in her opposition to the project.

“This is not an ask. This is ‘we’re tired of messing with you and this is what you need to do,’” she said in an interview. “The utilities, they really are the big gorilla and they’re the ones that think they can run roughshod over everybody. NextEra has not been a good community partner at all.”

Jefferson Commissioner Walker was there but said by that time the company was already far along in developing its plan without input from local officials. He’s driven his proposed route with NextEra's Bryant.

“I showed him the exact route but getting information from them is hard to do. I think they want to take the path of least resistance,” Walker said. “They should have communicated with every county along the way and got our input on it.”

But they didn't.  NextEra tried to fly under the radar while selling "benefits" to impacted counties.
Property taxes associated with it could top $17 million in both counties over 30 years, with as much as $960,000 accrued in the first year. During the line's construction, 200 local jobs will be created and business to hotels, restaurants and stores could see an uptick.
Gosh, where have we heard these tired claims before?  I know!  It's part of every lame transmission project everywhere.  And what have we discovered?  The tax benefit claims are overblown.  Utilities are taxed at different rates on a state level and the distribution of benefits often siphons them away from affected localities.  Actual benefits are always less than proffered.  But let's look at that claim... $17 million divided by two counties = $8.5M each further divided by 30 years = $283,000 per year per county, further diminished by state utility tax policies.  Doesn't sound like much, does it, especially when offset by lowered property tax values for properties affected by the project, who can petition to have their assessed value lowered because of the depreciated value of their properties when crossed by a high voltage power line.  These counties would be lucky to break even, tax wise.  Oh, but wait!  Local jobs will be created by the transient workers on location to build the power line who will stay at local hotels, eat at local restaurants, and shop at local stores.  But 200 jobs?  It's going to take 200 temporary employees to serve a couple hundred line workers for a few weeks or months, before they move on?  This is utterly ridiculous, as transmission company claims usually are.

The county governments proposed a re-route, but NextEra lied about its viability.
NextEra has said the Highway 27 route was not viable because it would require co-locating with Duke Energy, a major utility competitor, and working within Florida Department of Transportation easement restrictions. A path completely down I-10 wasn’t workable because of existing development on private property near Tallahassee.
Barfield said after being told by Tim Bryant, NextEra’s senior manager of external affairs and new development, FDOT had denied their request to use Highway 27, she spoke with agency officials.
“They never told NextEra no, that they couldn’t do that,” she said. “Frankly, I don’t like people lying to us. To straight up lie? That’s just unprofessional and unethical." 

FDOT spokesman Ian Satter confirmed NextEra has not approached the agency with plans to consider Highway 27.
“Gulf Power has contacted our department to make us aware they will submit permits to cross state roads,” Satter said.
Oh, no, NextEra, you didn't!  You lied to local governments?  Lying about the viability of alternative routes doesn't work.  Just ask Transource, whose posturing against using existing transmission rights-of-way has pushed the company into the desperate position of trying to settle with opposition to build on those previously "unworkable" routes in order to avoid having its project denied outright.  My Magic Eight Ball tells me NextEra may soon find itself in the same position.  Seems like NextEra is simply opposed to sharing its golden egg with Duke Energy.  Building new transmission is a profit center for utilities, a golden egg of long term riches, where the utility collects a generous return on its investment over the decades of a project's useful life.  It's nothing more than a grandiose mortgage, and electric ratepayers are making the payments.

So, what's a company to do when the opposition tiger has escaped its cage and none of the proposed routes are viable?  Go underground.  If Tallahassee is looking for transmission that can withstand 130-mph winds, how about transmission that can withstand winds of any velocity?  NextEra will say it's too expensive to bury the project and ameliorate the opposition.  But how much money will it spend, and how much time will it waste, trying to overcome opposition?   Where's the tradeoff, where's the sweet spot when the cost of opposition equals the cost of undergrounding?  It's about double the cost of the project.  If the project is too expensive to be prudent if buried, then maybe it's just not prudent at all.

Keep fighting, Florida!
0 Comments

Another One Bites The Dust

7/23/2019

0 Comments

 
Good riddance, Northern Pass transmission project.  Last week the New Hampshire Supreme Court denied Eversource's appeal of the state Site Evaluation Committee's rejection of the project.  The project is dead.

But that didn't stop Eversource's posturing.  Eversource did what every annoying transmission project does... searches for "options" to try again.  These guys just don't know how to take "no" for an answer.
Eversource, in a statement, said it was “deeply disappointed” with the decision.
“We will closely review the Supreme Court’s decision and evaluate all potential options for moving forward. It’s clear that the need for new energy sources in New England is greater than ever, and we remain focused on innovative solutions that will lower costs for our customers, improve reliability and advance clean energy.”
Ah... give it a rest, Eversource.  Northern Pass was a bad idea that you just kept dumping money into way past the point of prudence.
Eversource spent $249 million on Northern Pass through September 2017, including engineering, property purchases, attorney fees and application fees. Eversource was funding the construction through borrowing and stockholder equity.
Won't Eversource have some fancy explaining to do at its upcoming earnings call?  What fun!

Meanwhile, second place finisher Central Maine Power continues to lose support for its New England Clean Energy Connect project.  But perhaps that's an understatement.  It's an opposition wildfire!  And these folks aren't backing down... ever.

Here's the thing... "flyover" merchant transmission is a thing of the past.  It's a horrible idea that has been shot down over and over again.  Flyover merchant transmission is NOT happening.  Anywhere.

Why?  Flyover merchant transmission proposes to impose on one state or region with new transmission that serves people in other areas, often places that don't want energy infrastructure in their own backyards.  Making choices about your own energy use should never visit your choices on others.  It's hubris of the highest order.  And it leads to nemesis.

If Massachusetts sets "clean energy" goals, it's up to Massachusetts to bear the cost of them within its own borders.  Northern Pass is dead.  And NECEC is barking at its heels.
0 Comments

Consumer Organizations Drop a Little Common Sense on FERC Transmission Incentives Inquiry

6/26/2019

2 Comments

 
Back in 2005, Congress passed sweeping reform to federal energy law that became known as the Energy Policy Act of 2005.  A portion of this act was a knee-jerk response to the northeast blackout that occurred in 2003.  The blackout was caused by an overloaded transmission line in Ohio owned by FirstEnergy that got so hot it sagged into a tree that shouldn't have been on or near the right-of-way.  Compounding this error, FirstEnergy employees had turned off important warning software in its control room, so it was unaware that a fault had occurred on its line.  Because of that, it didn't respond by switching loads, and many other lines, and then generators, tripped off line to protect themselves from the surge caused by the fault.  And the next thing you know, a large portion of the northeast U.S. and Canada was in the dark for many hours.  It was reported that FirstEnergy didn't even know there was a problem until the lights went off in its control room.

One of the fixes Congress designed to prevent this happening again was what became codified as Section 219 of the EPAct.  Sec. 219 tasked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission with devising a rule to create financial incentives for transmission development.  FERC did so, and began awarding financial incentives to new transmission projects.  This increased utility willingness to build transmission by making such investment financially lucrative.  Of course, the cost of these incentives got tacked onto electric bills of consumers.  FERC wasn't handing out taxpayer money, FERC was handing out YOUR money.

In 2011, FERC issued a Notice of Inquiry to review its transmission incentives policy.  Hundreds of comments were filed by utilities, trade organizations, regulators, investors, environmental groups, and others, including a small group of organizations opposed to the PATH transmission project.  What came out of that review was a new policy statement from FERC in 2012 that maybe slowed things down a little, but not enough.  As time passes, this train speeds up when nobody is paying attention.

In March of this year, FERC issued another inquiry to review its transmission incentives policy.  Initial comments are due today.

This time, an even bigger group of consumer organizations (18 signatories from 14 different states) filed initial comments on FERC's inquiry.

You may read the comments here.

Consumer organizations use Sec. 219 as their touchstone in the comments.  If an idea for an incentive is not in the statute, out it goes.  Some of the ideas proposed by FERC are new incentives for big, new,  interregional transmission projects, incentives for big, new, transmission that "unlocks constrained resources", incentives for public utilities that participate in non-public utility transmission projects, automatic award of incentives without regulatory review, and other bad ideas that will cost consumers a lot of money with little reward.  FERC will also be looking at changing its current policy restricting incentives to new transmission to make incentives available for the upgrade of existing transmission.  Some good ideas may come out of this review yet.

In addition, the Consumer Organizations review FERC's current buffet of incentives and make recommendations for beneficial change.

The consumer organizations also let FERC know what it's really like to have new transmission and energy projects imposed on communities.  It's a view they can't see from their DC office building.  We've all been through the trenches of battling unneeded transmission.  Some of the organizations have been successful, and projects have been withdrawn, cancelled, or altered.  Some are still fighting.  When we come together to speak with a common voice we leverage our successes and prepare for the battles ahead.  While many voices will be heard at FERC, ours will be the only one from actual consumers who pay for transmission incentives.  Without our participation, it's just a bunch of self-interested entities claiming they speak for us.  Now they don't have to (and if they do, nobody will believe them).  Without our voice, FERC is likely to expand its incentives in order to encourage even more transmission!

Why does this matter?  Because what FERC does after reviewing comments can either encourage more unneeded transmission for profit purposes, or put the brakes on bad policy that gives away our money in exchange for transmission ideas of little value to consumers.  FERC has jurisdiction over interstate transmission planning and rates.  It does not have jurisdiction over transmission siting and permitting.  Only states have that authority.  So while FERC may make transmission highly profitable with incentives, it lacks the jurisdiction to get it built.  FERC can only spend our money, not permit or site new projects.  Giving away our money is not a substitute for the jurisdiction FERC lacks.

And just like last time, everybody who stands to profit from transmission incentives has an opinion that protects or furthers their own financial interests.  You can read other comments on the docket here.  Enter PL19-3 in the Docket Number field, and then click "submit" at the bottom.  This will bring up a long list of all comments filed.  Click on any one of them to read it.  And while you're reading, here's a little mood music...
2 Comments

Central Maine Power Steps In It

6/5/2019

0 Comments

 
CMP has been acting really crazy lately.  I mean really out there.  Unbelievable.  Totally nuts!

How can they expect that sane and logical people are being influenced to support their project while watching this crazy circus?

Watch this.
CMP sent out a glossy postcard last year promising 3500 new jobs if its NECEC transmission project is built.  Last week, they sent the same glossy postcard promising only 1600 new jobs.  The new postcard also changed the purported "investment" in Maine's economy into a totally different number "injected" into Maine's economy.

Original:  "NECEC will change this with close to a $1Billion investment in Maine's economy and support of 3500 jobs."

Revised:  "NECEC will change this with close to $573 million injected into Maine's economy and support of 1,600 jobs."

The postcards also differ with the name of the website recipients can visit "to learn more."  The original tells recipients to visit "3500mainejobs.com"  The revised version tells recipients to visit "goodformaine.org"

How bad is it when your revamping of your PR program makes your original website obsolete?  (Note, visiting the original redirects to the revised).  Does CMP think people are stupid?  That they have no memory at all?

Geez, CMP, your PR contractor completely screwed this up!  You weren't supervising them at all, were you?  Or maybe you were too busy fighting off the Russians?

Facebook group Say No to NECEC reports:
May 30 - Today at an energy conference in New York, Thorn Dickinson from CMP/Avangrid gave a presentation where he complained that corridor opponents are like the Russians trying to influence elections. https://www.spglobal.com/…/…/northeast-power-and-gas-markets
He complained of artificial intelligence used to spread fake news like the Russians.
Unfortunately there doesn't appear to be any transcript or intense power point featuring Boris and Natasha, just a report from a person who attended and listened to the crazy.

Somebody seems to be cracking up here.

To underscore this, listen to Thorn's excuse for the inconsistent postcards, when he insists that was an "on purpose."
The difference between these two numbers is easily understood by anyone familiar with this project and Maine's approval process. One refers to the average number of jobs supported each year over the six years of development, and the higher number is the expectation during the peak year of construction. Both mailers are accurate. These numbers have been consistent since the onset of the project and were confirmed by two, independent economic analyses using standard modeling techniques. -Thorn Dickinson, Vice President of Business Development, Avangrid
"Anyone familiar with this project and Maine's approval process."  Was this the target of the postcards?  Judging by their wide circulation, I don't think so.  They weren't sent to "anyone," but to "everyone," even those unfamiliar with this project and Maine's approval process.  This is the epitome of stepped in it.
Picture
What a clown!  Oops, I meant клоун.
When I'm done laughing hysterically at this ridiculous circus, I'm probably going to conclude that CMP is making crap up as it goes along.  And nobody is buying it.

Who's paying for this comedy?
0 Comments

There's Nothing Natural About Contrived Utility Talking Points

5/15/2019

0 Comments

 
Advice from a spinner: 
How about something like this...in you own, natural voice, and therefore maybe a little less contrived...
There is nothing less contrived about delivering the canned talking points written by public relations spinners.

Contrived - adjective - deliberately created rather than arising naturally or spontaneously.
Created or arranged in a way that seems artificial and unrealistic: the ending of the novel is too pat and contrived.

What is "your own, natural voice," and how does one master using it when delivering a contrived statement?

This is pure garbage, brought to you by Central Maine Power's paid public relations spinners as they advise officials from the Town of Jay on what to say at various meetings and hearings on CMP's New England Clean Energy Connect transmission project.
Picture
C'mon, either the Town of Jay naturally supports the project and can come up with their own talking points, or its simply acting as a shill for CMP and needs talking points handed to it.  Obviously the latter.

What kind of collusion is this?
Picture
CMP's spinners can "craft specific statements for anyone in Jay" that can be delivered by human puppets operating remotely without strings.  Isn't technology wonderful?  No strings!
Except that kind of stuff always appears to be the contrived nonsense it is.  But now we learn it can simply be overcome by using your own "natural" voice.  Easier said than done, Spinmeister Lady, easier said than done.

So, now Mainers find out that the Town of Jay has been nothing but a mouthpiece for CMP.  I don't think many of them are surprised, however they are angry, as they have every right to be.  Just two nights ago, the Town of Jay illegally rejected a citizen petition to allow a Town vote on the NECEC.  You have to wonder if that action was also orchestrated by CMP.  In fact, does the Town of Jay do anything of its own "natural" initiative?

While shocking, this kind of utility puppeteering of elected officials, regulators, and sycophantic business and community groups is nothing new.  It has happened so much in the past that it's been a regular part of the utility transmission approval playbook.  I'm sure Connie and Elizabeth know it well.  Front groups, advertising, closed-door-lobbying, and advocacy buys are how the utility tilts the playing field in its favor, and these same tactics have been used over and over again on different transmission projects.

It all costs money.  Lots of money.  Who pays for it?  The utility may wrongly believe that it is the consumers who ultimately pay the cost of the transmission project.  In a traditional cost-of-service project, that would be the captive ratepayers who benefit from the project.  In NECEC's case, as a merchant project, it will be the electric ratepayers in Massachusetts, who have voluntarily contracted to purchase transmission capacity on NECEC for a set price.

Do Massachusetts ratepayers want to pay for this kind of nonsense?  Is it legal to require them to do so?  Many states have strict rules regarding the kinds of costs that may be folded into cost-of-service rates.  Lobbying and advocacy buys are generally prohibited from recovery and must be absorbed in utility profits (shareholders pay these costs because they only benefit the company, not the ratepayers).  In addition, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued an Opinion in 2017 prohibiting recovery of these kinds of costs in interstate transmission rates.  It's pretty cut and dried that the cost of advocacy programs shall not be recovered from ratepayers.

Except NECEC is a merchant project.  Its rates are voluntarily negotiated and a price is set in the contract.  The transmission owner cannot increase that rate later to cover the cost of advocacy buys.  CMP probably built in a fixed budget for advocacy in its contract with Massachusetts, and it has been spending freely.  Massachusetts ratepayers will pay that cost regardless, with any difference between the budget and actual costs either becoming additional profit for NECEC, or decreasing CMP's profit.

All the costs of CMP's advocacy buys end up in the electric bills of Massachusetts ratepayers.  Every last one of them needs to think about that every time they flip the light switch to use some of that great "clean" Canadian hydropower their government has mandated.  And it's going to get pretty expensive, because the citizens of Maine aren't backing down.  At some point, CMP is going to meet or exceed its advocacy budget, and then the cost of continuing this farce comes out of company pockets.  How might CMP decrease services elsewhere to make up for this loss?
0 Comments

Maryland State Agencies Recommend Denial of Transource Independence Energy Connection

4/15/2019

1 Comment

 
Maryland's Power Plant Research Program (PPRP), the Maryland Office of People's Counsel (OPC), and other intervenors in Transource's Maryland permitting process filed testimony on Friday.  It's not looking good for Transource.  In fact, it's probably high time for them to throw in the towel and quit wasting my money.

The PPRP coordinates the review of seven Maryland State agencies to provide a recommendation to the Maryland Public Service Commission.  The recommendation is denial.
The recommendation by the reviewing State Agencies to deny a transmission project is a
rarity and is not made lightly, or without significant analysis and consideration. Yet, this project contradicts Maryland’s well-established statutory planning and preservation priorities. While, the work of PJM is vital to assure the reliability of the electricity grid that serves Maryland, what is most beneficial for the applicant, or PJM and its stakeholders, is not always what is in the public interest of the State and its residents. This discretionary PJM-driven market efficiency project, and the process used to approve it, demonstrates this divergence. As described by the Direct Testimony of the Secretary of Agriculture, Joseph Bartenfelder, and the Executive Director of MALPF, Michelle Cable, Maryland’s agriculture industry is vital to Maryland as its single largest industry after the federal government, which is why Maryland has prioritized preserving farmland and ensuring the integrity of MALPF easements. Projects that diminish the State’s efforts and devalue its investments to preserve this finite resource should not be approved when existing infrastructure is available. PJM and transmission developers should reasonably be expected to incorporate Maryland’s stated policies and statutes into their project development and approval processes.
PPRP rarely recommends a transmission project be denied, however Transource's project is so awful that denial is the only option.  This opinion also takes PJM to task for approving a discretionary project that doesn't comport with Maryland's energy policy.  This highlights PJM's biggest shortcoming:  states have the ultimate authority to decide on transmission projects.  Over time, PJM has devolved into a regulatory paper tiger that serves the needs of transmission owners, not the consumers it is ostensibly created to serve.  Until PJM considers states the ultimate stakeholder that they are, this incredible waste of time and money will continue.  Since the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has granted Transource the right to make a filing to recover its costs of this horrible project in the event it is abandoned (and this event is becoming more of a certainty every day), the longer it continues, the more consumers will pay for a project that is never built and never provides one penny of "benefits" to anyone.

The PPRP puts great emphasis on the fact that viable alternatives to the project exist that would make use of existing transmission and rights of way.  PJM put absolutely no value on making use of existing assets, and Maryland law requires existing assets be considered before new rights of way are taken.

PPRP's opinion also points out that emergent "reliability" issues are the baggage of approving the Transource project in the first place.  Once Transource was approved by PJM and placed in its transmission expansion plan, new generators can be proposed that use it.  Since PJM must plan for transmission to serve generators in its queue, all of a sudden the Transource project becomes a "reliability" issue that would never have developed if the project wasn't approved in the first place.  It's a clear case of the tail wagging the dog.  Because PJM can only order new transmission, but not new generation, it becomes an obstacle to market forces that are supposed to drive the development of efficient and useful generation.  This is a fact that PJM's independent Market Monitor has highlighted in recent State of the Market reports.
The MMU recommends the creation of a mechanism to permit a direct comparison, or competition, between transmission and generation alternatives, including which alternative is less costly and who bears the risks associated with each alternative.
Transmission gets recommended long before any market-driven generation can solve issues.  When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail, right, PJM?

The PPRP's testimony and recommendation is long and consists of many parts, some really interesting.  Personally, I enjoyed the discussion of rare, threatened or endangered (RTE) species that will be impacted by Transource.  In addition to the bog turtles, made famous by Transource's civil suits seeking a court order to enter private property to survey for them, two other RTE species impacted by Transource were discovered, the Checkered Sculpin and the Allegheny Pearl Dace.  Wow!  Great names for things I've never heard of... what might they look like?  Are they some kind of tiny organism with huge names, or do they fit their auspicious monikers, falling into the realm of chupacabras, sasquatches, or mothmen?  They're fish.  Tiny, rare fish.  But even tiny, rare fish serve an important biological purpose.  And what purpose does the Transource IEC serve?  Oh, right, supposedly it will save someone in the DC-metro area a few pennies on their electric bill.

And, on that topic, the OPC's testimony, also recommending denial, highlighted an important fact.  The cost allocation for the Transource project was fixed in August 2016, when the project was approved by PJM.  The cost allocation, which was based on expected benefits at that time, will never change, although the benefits themselves have and will change constantly.  The testimony included an interesting table showing how the initial benefit/cost allocations have shifted over time.  For instance, in the Dominion power zone (DOM) the initial allocation of cost based on expected benefits from the project was 37%.  Dominion was supposed to see 37% of the benefits, therefore it was assigned 37% of the cost.  But since that time, Dominion's expected benefits have risen to 50%.  Dominion will receive 50% of the project's benefits, however its share of the cost of the project is fixed at 37%.  That means that other zones where benefit percentages have fallen will be paying for 13% of Dominion's benefits.
Picture
As an APS customer, I'm going to receive 6% of the benefits, but pay for 8%, taking on 2% of the costs for Dominion's increased benefits.

The longer this project drags on, and the longer PJM and Transource try to bang a square peg into a round hole, the more my 8% share of the costs increases.

STOP IT, PJM!  You have the power to stop it right now.  It's well past time to cancel the Transource IEC!
1 Comment

Ut-Oh, Dominion!

3/6/2019

0 Comments

 
What happens when a utility manages to buy approval to build a highly controversial aerial transmission project that could have been buried to avoid the biggest controversy?

It blows up in their face, that's what.  And it could end up costing ratepayers millions in increased electric fees.

Dominion spent years trying to permit its Surry-Skiffes Creek transmission line project on 300-foot towers across the James River at Jamestown, Virginia.  It agreed to pay out millions in "mitigation" in order to appease opposition (of course, the mitigation will be paid by ratepayers, not Dominion), and it finally got approval.  But not all opposition was bought out and the National Parks Conservation Association continued its legal battle against the project while Dominion was busy constructing its monstrosity across the river.

Dominion turned on the power last Thursday.

On Friday, a federal appellate court ordered Dominion's permit to build the project void and returned the case back to a lower court.

Read about it here.

What's about to happen next is anyone's guess.  The court could order Dominion to turn off and dismantle the project.  Perhaps it will order changes to the project.  Either way, the cost of winning a legal permit will fall onto ratepayers.

This is absolutely absurd.  And expensive.  It probably would have been more cost effective to bury the project across the river in the first instance.

Who's to blame here?  Dominion.  And grid planner PJM Interconnection, who "ordered" the project in the first place.  But who will end up paying for their mistake?  Electric customers.

PJM, you've got to go.  You're costing electric ratepayers too much money!
0 Comments

How Much Could PJM's Gaming of the System Cost You?

3/6/2019

0 Comments

 
If you live in Pennsylvania, it could cost you $514M in increased electric bills.  If you're a JCP&L customer in New Jersey, it could cost you $102.6M.  If you're a PSEG customer, you could pay $156.3M more.  Most customer zones in PJM will pay more for their electricity if Pennsylvania and Maryland regulators approve the Transource Independence Energy Connection.  The majority of customers who would see their rates decrease from this project are located in BGE (Baltimore), Dominion (Northern Virginia) and PEPCO (Washington, DC).  The net change to region wide electric rates amounts to just $12M.  And to realize $12M net savings, PJM has ordered a transmission project that will cost more than $500M to build.  Are they nuts?  Or are they nothing more than electric Robin Hoods, robbing the poor, politically disenfranchised power zones to benefit the rich, politically connected ones?  Either way, something stinks!

Stop Transource member, land and business owner, and party to the state cases Barron Shaw tells us where that smell is coming from in a new editorial.

Everyone probably already knows Transource would cause increased rates in Pennsylvania (and if they don't, it's up to you to share your knowledge with your friends and family).  What's new is Barron's revelation about how Transource parent company American Electric Power and PJM Interconnection have gamed the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission into allowing a skewed evaluation process for new market efficiency projects, and how Transource gamed the system it had set up to make its project appear "beneficial" by essentially stuffing 10 pounds of electricity into a 5 pound bag.
So how can PJM propose a project that doesn’t really save any money, hurts Pennsylvania ratepayers so badly, and costs nearly $500 million to build? 
 
The answer can be found at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”), the entity charged with regulating PJM.  FERC allowed PJM to implement a tiered system, with one set of rules for smaller projects, and one for larger projects.  Delineated by voltage, the lower tier rules allow PJM to completely ignore all zones that see increases, while the higher tier rules consider the net change to system production cost.  Transource realized that this created a loophole.  They designed the IEC to run at the highest voltage possible in the lower tier, but carry an astonishing 24 conductors.  Though run at only 230kv, the IEC has so many conductors it would have more power capacity than most 500kv lines that form the backbone of the grid.  One expert witness said it carried more power than any 230kV line he had ever seen.  Testimony showed that if the line were evaluated as a higher tier project, it probably would never have been proposed.

And if that isn’t gaming the system, then consider this: when PJM asked FERC to make the changes in the assumptions for future planned generation – the changes that affected the benefits last week – they didn’t provide much analysis.  In fact, they only gave FERC one table of examples.  Those examples showed what would happen to eight small projects with and without the proposed changes.  In all eight examples, the new rules reduced and usually eliminated the need for those projects by showing the projects no benefit.  PJM clearly was trying to tell FERC that they had historically been over-estimating the benefits of projects, and that the proposed rules would more accurately reflect lower benefits and result in fewer unnecessary projects.  But just days after the rules were changed, the IEC showed a $250M swing the other direction.  Bait and switch anyone?  You can almost hear the laughter in the PJM hallways.

PJM is a cabal of utilities interested in one objective: making money.  They have manipulated the rules to allow the proposal of a project that will lose hundreds of millions of dollars, destroy preserved farmland, and raise rates for Pennsylvania residents, all while ignoring existing alternatives.  If nothing else, this process has convinced any objective onlooker that PJM needs tighter regulation.  FERC has been too trusting, and the effects are clear.
That's right, with the help of AEP, PJM created a two-tiered evaluation system based on voltage that allowed the lower voltage projects in the bottom tier to take no notice of increased electric costs in parts of the region that wouldn't see benefit from the project.  And once that system was set in place, AEP designed (and PJM selected) a bottom tier "lower voltage" transmission project that actually moves more power than those in the upper tier that would have to balance cost decreases in beneficiary zones against increases elsewhere in the region.  Because a higher voltage project normally used to move this amount of power would not pass a cost/benefit test, Transource created a monster of a lower voltage project in order to pass the test.  One has to wonder whose interests PJM has in mind when it approves adding additional conductors (wires) to a lower voltage project in order to make it move as much power as a higher voltage alternative using less conductors.  Which configuration is actually more efficient?  Better designed?  Able to be upgraded without building new lines?  As non-engineers, we can't really say, however we can depend on the knowledge of power engineers who don't build this kind of project.  Transource IEC is truly one of a kind, from an engineering standpoint.    And this leads me to believe it's probably not the best idea.  What were you thinking, PJM?  Aren't you supposed to have the best engineering staff in our region in order to keep the lights on?  This isn't a great example.  In fact, it looks like PJM is part of some kind of conspiracy, like a cartel, or a cabal, or both.

Read Barron's entire editorial.  He makes it easy to understand PJM's outrageous manipulation and abuse of its authority to enrich its biggest members.  PJM needs to go!
0 Comments

Follow The Money:  $258M Smells Like A Backroom Deal

2/28/2019

0 Comments

 
Okay, now I've officially seen everything.  A foreign, investor owned utility is complaining about "a pretty nasty ad" that exposes its backroom deal with Maine's Governor to sell the state's pristine wilderness for $258M in payola.
CMP has drawn attention to the ad this week, calling it part of a well-funded, dark-money campaign against the project.
Dark money?  An investor owned utility is pointing at a low budget internet ad campaign and calling it dark money?  Investor owned utilities are the kings of dark money!  They dole out millions in political contributions each year with the hope of influencing laws and policy in states where they do business.  They spend buckets of money hiring the top public relations spinners to lie to their customers with smiles on their faces.  They create front groups and fake "coalitions" to advocate for their money-making transmission project ideas.  And, as CMP has so aptly demonstrated in the past week, they create monetary compensation packages to be traded for political support.  Fact:  Maine Governor Janet Mills has publicly supported the New England Clean Energy Connect project because the state and some private interests have been promised $258M in payouts over the next 40 years.

So, "wahhhhh, wahhhhh" CMP, let me call you a wahhhmbulance.  You're such a lily white, downtrodden, paragon of virtue being attacked for your extra large heart and spirit of charity by some big, powerful, "dark" interests who spent a whopping sum on attack ads, reported to be somewhere between $500-$999.  That's dollars.  Five-hundred dollars.

$500 vs. $258,000,000.  Yup, CMP, you poor, poor victim.

And, oh my gosh!  The ad has had 100,000 to 200,000 impressions, the number of times a post is displayed.  Why, I'm offended.  Soooo offended that this ad
has been viewed over 116,000 times on YouTube!  If I was a total geek who had no real evidence of anything but wanted to spin an opinion piece to make it look like CMP is a poor, poor victim of "dark money" interests, I'd dig up stuff like...  As of Wednesday, the highest number of impressions, 12 percent, has come from men, ages 25-34. The next-highest, 11 percent, from women ages 55-64.  Because this would matter greatly in making my point.  Or covering up the fact that I really had no point.

I mean, don't watch this ad

because it increases the impressions and amount of "dark" money spent by Satan and his anonymous henchmen attacking the purity of Janet Mills.  Just look at her, even her jacket is white as snow!

We definitely have to stop the internet spread of this ad
because CMP says it's "dark money" and anonymous.

Even though it is clearly marked as paid for by Stop the Corridor, CMP and Janet Mills need to know where this coalition got its $500 to run the ad.
Maybe we can arrange a double reveal?  Stop the Corridor can show how it raised $500 and CMP can reveal how it raised $258M?  Maybe throw in a little spreadsheet of all CMP's political contributions, lobbying, and memberships for the past year or so?  Probably the public (and CMP's customers) would rather see that than some bake sale records and copies of personal checks for small amounts.  CMP may be surprised how easily citizen opposition groups can raise $500 - $999 to run ads like this:
Please don't do anything that increases the online impressions of this ad.
Central Maine Power doesn't want you to.
Stop it!
Stop it right now!
0 Comments

Transource Shoots Itself In The Foot At Hearing

2/24/2019

0 Comments

 
Maybe it was just the thrill of getting a last minute piece of evidence admitted into the record that made Transource do it?

Citizens to Stop Transource reports LATE-NIGHT EVIDENCE SUBMISSION PUSHES AN ADDITIONAL $200M IN COST ON PENNSYLVANIANS.  At hearing on Friday, Transource presented a brand new piece of evidence and then attempted to shoehorn it into the record.  It's a pretty cheap trick.  Evidence must be examined by all parties over a period of time that allows for discovery and consultation with experts.  The impetus for this last minute evidence appears to be a recent FERC order that removes potential new generation from the market efficiency evaluation.  Because PJM's new generation queue is chock full of possible new generators, and the vast majority of generators proposed never actually get built, FERC felt it was best to exclude these generators from market efficiency evaluations.  And because exclusion of these proposed generators increases the supposed "benefit" to electric ratepayers in Washington, DC, and increases the IEC's cost-benefit ratio, Transource thought it was a good idea to get this info. into the record.

Where did you think you were on Friday, Transource?  Did you think that your limo had dropped you off in Washington, DC? 
Picture
I can see the confusion though, and I am completely sympathetic.  I understand that utilities routinely arrive at regulatory hearings in black, chauffeured vehicles that also double as funeral conveyances, but if you were in DC you'd probably have been riding in a series of black Lincoln Town Cars.  Pay attention, Transource!  You were in Pennsylvania on Friday!

As Citizens shares, Transource's new exhibit increased electric rates for Pennsylvanians another $200M!  (In order to translate the exhibit to match increased costs to the actual location of PJM "zones," you'll need this map also).
The new figures raise the projected electrical rate increase in Pennsylvania rates from $350M to over $500M (NPV over 15 years).

The new simulation projects $982M in electrical cost reductions for the DC market, but $969M in increases elsewhere,
including over $514M in electric rate cost increases in Pennsylvania alone.
This also means that the actual amount of "benefit" to the PJM region as a whole (when both increases and decreases are averaged out) is just $12.5M.  For a project that is going to cost ratepayers hundreds of millions!  This is the stupidest thing ever!
If all benefits and costs were to be included, the total benefit of the project would be negative $439M NPV over the next 15 years. 
That's a negative number, which means that instead of receiving a financial benefit, we're all going to be paying more!  This is market efficiency?

At any rate, there Transource was in Pennsylvania, asking Pennsylvanians to take a look at it's sturdy new cost benefit ratio number!  Look!  It provides over $900M in benefits!  Except a look at the worksheet clearly shows that only those zones that showed a benefit (cost decrease) were included in the calculation.  For those zones that showed an increase in electric costs, Transource disregarded them and did not include in their "benefit" numbers.

Is it because Transource believes that the Pennsylvania PUC doesn't care about increased costs to Pennsylvanians and instead focuses on benefits for a handful of the most wealthy counties in the U.S. (not in Pennsylvania, BTW)?
Citizens to Stop Transource VP Barron Shaw stated: “Transource doubled-down on their bet that Pennsylvania would approve a project that effectively drains low-priced electricity from Pennsylvania in order to subsidize the wealthiest counties in the nation.  This project was bad before, and it is even worse now.  The PUC would be nuts to approve this project.”
Really stupid, Transource.  Really stupid.
0 Comments
<<Previous
Forward>>

    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

    June 2025
    May 2025
    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    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
    Valley Link Transmission
    Washington
    West Virginia
    Wind Catcher
    Wisconsin

Copyright 2010 StopPATH WV, Inc.