The U.S. accounts for 15% of the world’s total GHG emissions, making it the world’s second largest emitter.
Only 28% of U.S. GHG emissions are attributable to the electricity sector.
Today, 22% of America’s 1,047.6 gigawatt (GW) utility-scale, electric generation capacity is renewable, while 67% of our electrical capacity produces GHG emissions. In 2050, the U.S. Energy Information Administration projects that 60% of the generation mix will still produce GHG emissions. Replacing this projected emitting capacity with pollution-free renewable power will require nearly 30 GW of additional renewable capacity each year between 2020 and 2050, a roughly 50% increase above the current growth rate of U.S. renewables.

Qualifying technologies should include all current and future resources that meet emissions criteria, including enabling technologies like energy storage and expanded interstate, high-voltage transmission that accesses clean energy resources.

Since energy is an unavoidable expense, putting a price on carbon could also, at least initially, have a disparate impact on lower-income households. To prevent that outcome, any equitable carbon pricing program should be designed to avoid economic regressivity. One possible solution is to return revenue from carbon pricing to citizens in the form of a pro-rata carbon “dividend.”

Additionally, Congress should clarify federal backstop siting authority by restoring Congressional intent of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which would encourage and accelerate investment and development of needed transmission infrastructure when that infrastructure is in the national interest and advances the objectives of a comprehensive climate plan.

The move comes in response to Louisiana Public Service Commissioner Eric Skrmetta’s call to create a code of conduct among OMS representatives — all of whom are state utility commissioners — governing how they transition into jobs in the industry they regulate.
“We’re asking for the OMS to consider adopting a code of ethics or a code of conduct policy,” Skrmetta told fellow regulators during a Board of Directors meeting Nov. 19 as part of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners’ annual meeting in San Antonio.
OMS leaders said the organization will begin the effort by examining state rules on post-employment restrictions before it decides to move forward with developing any policy.

Skrmetta said he was raising the issue after former OMS President and Missouri Public Service Commissioner Daniel Hall left both posts to become the central region director for the American Wind Energy Association earlier this month. Skrmetta said he took issue with the fact that there was no downtime before the transition and that the move wasn’t announced ahead of time.
“The turnaround is instantaneous,” he said. “It’s pretty obvious we have to take some steps.”

There can be no debate that our energy future will require more diversity in energy resources, particularly renewable resources. We are witnessing a worldwide, long-term and comprehensive movement towards renewable energy in general and wind energy specifically. Wind energy provides great promise as a source for affordable, reliable, safe, and environmentally-friendly energy. The Grain Belt Project will facilitate this movement in Missouri, will thereby benefit Missouri citizens, and is, therefore, in the public interest.

“We are excited to have Daniel on our team,” said Amy Farrell, SVP Public and Government Affairs for AWEA.  “His legal and technical expertise, along with his years of experience in regulation at the state level will help us work toward AWEA’s transmission vision of an increasingly connected, national grid.”
 
Hall will be responsible for policy concerning the efficient and affordable integration of wind energy, including consideration of seams issues between Regional Transmission Organizations (RTOs), RTOs and similar Independent System Operators (ISOs), are electric power transmission operators that coordinate, control, and monitor multi-state electric grids across much of North America.
 
“Wind energy has been a remarkable growth and success story, especially in our part of the country,” Hall said.  “But for that growth to continue, we need to update America’s electricity grid to meet 21st century needs. I look forward to bringing together state utility commissions, federal regulators and RTO’s to make that happen.”

“Avoiding the appearance of impropriety is an important goal for this body,” Skrmetta said. He suggested OMS adopt a recusal mechanism or require members to disclose extracurricular tasks that might conflict with the aims of their offices.

Kentucky Public Service Commissioner Talina Mathews suggested OMS begin the effort by taking inventory and comparing each state’s existing code of ethics on post-employment policies, a task the board assigned to an informal board subcommittee.

Skrmetta said initiating a code of conduct would create protections for OMS and create an “absolute armor plate” for the organization. He also argued that as AWEA’s central region director, Hall was active in MISO states immediately after leaving OMS.

Thomas suggested OMS might add some boilerplate language that directors are bound to their state’s individual code of ethics.


OMS President Matt Schuerger asked the subcommittee to wrap up its research in time for the board’s January meeting.
“It’s a reasonable question that’s been put before us,” he said, promising more discussion.

Harlan Electric representatives are securing subcontractors and will be working with local contractors such as Newville Construction of Newville.

"Jim spoke from his perspective as the owner of Eleven Oaks Farm on his experiences with utilities and agriculture. Transource has not yet made a selection of the construction companies that will build (the line), nor has it promised work to Newville Construction." 
Shuster said that is the case. He said he was approached by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers to appear in the video and testify about his experience with power lines and agriculture. He doesn't understand the opposition to the power line. "I wasn't paid a plugged nickel for that," he said. "I was not promised a dime's worth of work for doing it." 
The impact on the land is minimal, he said, and his company operates under the directive to leave the land in better condition than they found it, something that has earned the company awards and praise from conservation groups. 
Transmission and Agriculture video.mp4
"We're not some Ma and Pa operation with a backhoe," he said. "We're a $30 million-a-year business." 
He is angry with some of those who oppose the power line because, he said, they suggested that his farm is a hoax. About the opposition, he said, "It's one of the most hypocritical things I've ever seen." Unless those opposed to the transmission line have their own power plant, he said, the electricity they use flows through a power line on some other farmer's property. 

"I frankly don't understand what their problem is with it," he said. 

“Anytime jobs are created, it’s a win,” said Bernie Kephart, business manager for IBEW Local 126. “Our workers earn family-sustaining wages building the infrastructure that supports our daily lives. We’re proud to build infrastructure that saves customers money and reinforces the grid against power outages in Maryland and Pennsylvania.”
“We support clean, safe and affordable power,” said William C. Tipton Jr., business manager/financial secretary for Maryland IBEW Local 70. “Any conversation around energy comes to a quick halt if we do not have the transmission infrastructure to transfer that power to all who need it.”

Local companies contracted by Transource also completed much of IEC’s geotechnical survey work, which concluded last year.

“The problem originates with it being a privately-developed line. To acquire the right-of-ways across the state, the developer would use eminent domain.

“These wind farms that are not in our state, they are in Kansas, and that power, most of it is going to Boston or Philadelphia, they are going to drop it off to about 30 municipalities in Missouri. I want Farmington to get cheaper power, I want them to be able to take advantage of that, but I see this company dropping off a few municipalities for the purpose of trying to get by in Missouri.”

“My opposition to it, the way they got approval was going to create an environment where eminent domain was going to take on a new level and take away people’s property up in northern Missouri.
"The point was that a private entity was going to benefit from eminent domain more than the general public was. You use eminent domain because it will benefit the community as a whole.”

Because the revised phase-down schedule actually phases the credit "up" for projects beginning construction in 2020 (when compared to projects beginning construction in 2019), taxpayers who may have taken steps to begin construction on projects during 2019 to secure the 40% credit prior to the ultimate PTC expiration date, are likely to be frustrated to learn that they would have been better off delaying their construction efforts until 2020.
Nonetheless, because the determination of when construction of a project has begun is intensely factual and is subject to extensive IRS guidance, taxpayers overseeing projects that are otherwise on the cusp of the "beginning of construction threshold" may be able, with a careful planning, to structure their project and future transactions, so as to allow construction associated therewith to be treated as having begun in 2020 rather than 2019. Successful planning in this regard could translate to significant benefits associated with use of a 60% PTC rather than a 40% PTC.

“Trump and FERC are selling us out to the fossil fuel industry. They are adding billions of dollars in subsidies for coal, oil, and natural gas at the expense of green jobs and our health. They will now be getting over $6 billion a year just from our PJM grid alone, in addition to $15 billion a year in direct federal subsidies and all types of indirect subsidies. These dirty industries cannot compete with cheaper and cleaner renewable energy, so they are looking for a massive subsidy at our expense. This will hurt green jobs and public health,” said Jeff Tittel, Director of the New Jersey Sierra Club.

I believe that PJM should have conducted an evaluation to calculate the B/C ratio of the Reconfigured Project 9A with the H-L Project in the base case, consistent with its approach to evaluating Project 5E. Project 5E failed the B/C threshold in the latest reevaluation, but PJM repeated the analysis including the H-L Project in the base case because of its impending recommendation that the PJM Board approve the H-L Project. My understanding of the rationale for including the H-L Project in the base case is that with such a high benefit-cost ratio and a low total cost it is highly likely the H-L Project will be approved, and that project will impact the flows to Project 5E, making it more reasonable to review Project 5E with the H-L Project in the Base Case.
The Reconfigured Project 9A has a similar fact pattern, although the results are opposite directionally. The latest reevaluation of Project 9A passed the B/C threshold without the H-L Project, but it is reasonable to expect that, due to the proximity of the two projects, the addition of the H-L Project will alter the flows of power that produced the 9A benefits.
While we do not currently have all of the data needed to estimate the results of that case, it is possible that including the H-L Project in the Base Case will reduce the calculated benefits of the Reconfigured Project 9A.

Regarding “public utility,” the relevant statutory definitions contain no explicit requirement that an entity be operated for a public use in order for it to constitute a public utility. However, Missouri courts have held that such a “public use” requirement was intended.

Here, the evidence showed that when the Grain Belt project is constructed and begins operation, it will transmit energy from wind farms in Kansas to wholesale customers in Missouri. In the case of MJMEUC, those customers are Missouri cities and towns that serve as electric providers to approximately 347,000 Missouri citizens. An entity, such as Grain Belt, that constructs and operates a transmission line bringing electrical energy from electrical power generators to public utilities that serve consumers is a necessary and important link in the distribution of electricity and qualifies as a public utility.  Therefore, Grain Belt’s project will serve the public use, and Grain Belt qualifies as a public utility.

“We vigorously disagree with the court’s ruling upholding the Public Service Commission’s decision authorizing the use of eminent domain for the Grain Belt Express merchant transmission line. Grain Belt Express is not a public utility. Investors who want to negotiate rates privately and enter into contracts to sell electricity to the highest bidders should not be able to condemn land in order to build their dream project. Contrary to the court’s assertion, the Missouri Supreme Court has not suggested otherwise.”

One more potential obstacle that GBE faces is at the capitol. Legislation was recently pre-filed in both the Missouri House and Senate on our behalf. The House bill was filed by Representative Hansen and the Senate bill was filed by Senator Brown. We came very close to passage of the bill last session before time ran out. Since this year’s bills have been pre-filed in both houses with continued strong support from the Speaker of the House and other key leaders, we are optimistic the bills will be passed this session which begins at the first of the year. Stay tuned as we may be announcing a rally in Jeff City for the bills sometime this winter or early spring.

It is important to note that if Project 9A or Alternative Project 9A were to be removed from further consideration, PJM’s RTEP analysis has previously identified a number of reliability criteria violations starting in the 2023 study year. Some of these reliability criteria violations include conductor overloads on 500 kV transmission lines which, in PJM’s experience, are likely to be resolved only through the construction of additional greenfield transmission. Should these combinations of projects inclusive of Project 9A or Alternative Project 9A be removed from the RTEP, resultant reliability criteria violations would be identified during the 2020 RTEP analysis, and potential solutions to such reliability criteria violations would not be identified to the Board until late 2020 or early 2021. Furthermore, removing these combinations of projects from the RTEP would fail to address the congestion that would be re- introduced into South-central Pennsylvania and Northern Maryland. Any proposal window to address this re-introduced congestion would not be held until 2021, with solutions not likely to be presented to the Board until late 2021. In light of this timing, and based on the likely need for greenfield transmission, PJM predicts that new CPCN applications for not-yet-identified reliability and market efficiency drivers would not be filed until 2022 or 2023. Conservatively assuming one to two years for state siting proceedings, reliability and market efficiency solutions likely could not be constructed sufficiently quickly to remediate reliability criteria violations, and further would leave customers subject to significant congestion for a number of years to come.

Under the cost allocation formula attached as Exhibit B to the October 17, 2019 Petition
for Adoption of Settlement, PEPCO zone would be allocated Net Load Payment equal to 20.23% of the total costs for the Independent Energy Connection West (“ICE West”)
project under PJM analysis dated September 25, 2019. This represents a net present
value of $170,915,03, based on current assumptions.

District ratepayers represent approximately one-third of the load in PEPCO zone and
thus would be responsible for approximately one-third of any costs allocated to that
zone. Under current assumptions for the ICE West project, that would amount to a cost
allocation to District ratepayers of more than $55 million.

Significant outreach events in Kansas in the third quarter of 2019 included representatives of Invenergy, on behalf of Grain Belt Express, meeting with various state legislators and county officials to discuss the Project; additional, similar meetings are planned for the fourth quarter of 2019. Further, a representative of Invenergy presented at the Kansas Renewable Energy Conference, hosted by the Kansas Department of Commerce, on October 4, 2019 to discuss the Project.