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

Who Do You Think You're Fooling, Invenergy?

9/29/2020

6 Comments

 
 Now who do... who... who do you think you're fooling?
I got notice yesterday that Invenergy is sending this letter out to landowners along GBE's route.  There's a lot to argue about in this letter, in particular this imperious statement by Invenergy:
"Grain Belt Express will be seeking regulatory approval for this plan, which would also allow for project construction to proceed prior to approval in Illinois. In the meantime, as the proposed changes do not affect the approved route, project development activities are proceeding based on existing regulatory approvals.”
It sort of makes your head hurt, right?  "We need regulatory approval for a new plan" but on the other hand "we're proceeding to try to negotiate an easement based on the approval of our old plan."  Sounds to me like Invenergy doesn't have a valid approval for its current plan.  The route has absolutely nothing to do with it!

And then I got to the end of the letter.  The last paragraph positively smacks of poorly concocted propaganda.
Positive Energy: Pass it Along

Finally, 2020 has brought some significant challenges to the world. We believe that Positive Energy is needed now more than ever. Grain Belt will bring affordable power for families and businesses, jobs for workers, and local investment in school districts, and public services - that's positive energy. With everything going on in 2020, we want to pass along positive energy to you, and hope you do the same. These days we all need it.

For more information about the project visit the project website at www.GrainBeltExpress.com
and Follow us on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/GrainBeltExpress.
What in the world does any of that have to do with landowner notification or easement negotiation?  Not a thing.  It's an incongruous insertion that's maybe supposed to have some psychological effect on the landowner reader... a little bit of "feel good" siphoned off the national coming-together in the initial days of Corona.  Sorry, Invenergy, that ship has sailed.

Did Invenergy and its PR contractors have a virtual meeting lately where landowner distrust and hatred were discussed as a problem to solve?  Did they cook up a new marketing slogan to deploy on landowners in order to make "feel good" happen while reading a letter talking about acquiring easements, and distract the landowner to engage with GBE for a positive reason?  Geek out, public relations geeks! 

The new branding statement is "Positive Energy."  It's capitalized like a proper noun.  It's designed to pop up with annoying frequency in GBE's marketing to landowners in order to replace all those hateful thoughts about GBE with Positive Energy!

Convinced that Positive Energy was some poorly designed marketing ploy, I took GBE up on its invitation to visit their Facebook page because I was pretty certain I'd find a glowing roll out of Positive Energy on social media.  I wasn't disappointed.  In fact, the whole exercise made me laugh for hours.

On GBE's Facebook page, there was this video. *
With everything going on in the world right now, we couldn’t think of a better time to focus on the positives. We’d love to hear your stories. We’ll start – We’ve been working with landowners across the country to build clean, reliable, low-cost energy solutions for communities. Let’s keep that energy flowing! Tell us stories of positive energy being passed in your community.
And someone had already commented to share their Positive Energy story!
Katie Hatfield-Edstrom
I've noticed more of those sidewalk share libraries pop up in our community lately. I love seeing them and so does my kiddo. The idea is so simple...give what you don't need anymore and take what you do. I've also seen small community pantries with non-perishables and small farmer stands. In times like this, it is nice to see people thinking of how they can share and help others out. I guess the food and books are just the Positive Energy that feeds our souls these days!
Isn't that interesting?  Miss Katie had capitalized Positive Energy in her comment.  Now what random person would be so cued into the marketing scheme of capitalizing the catch phrase like that?

I found it completely irresistible. 
Turns out that Katie the Commenter works for HDR.  HDR is a "strategic communications" contractor "that works to help our clients manage the social and political risk associated with infrastructure development."  HDR does this by "...specialize[ing] in grassroots education and outreach through existing social groups in communities. Our teams leverage web, video and social networking and are experienced with wide-scale media campaigns that include targeted digital, print, television and radio material."  Katie is the "Strategic Communications Power Sector Lead & Senior Coordinator" at HDR.  Her skills are:  "Katie is a skilled communication strategist that has expertise in message construction, audience analysis, and is trained in facilitation. Prior to her tenure with HDR, Katie was a university professor, specializing in public communications, campaigns and social movements, and media communications. As a senior coordinator, she is responsible for leading strategic communication efforts for our clients. Katie practices her understanding of communication while leading local, regional, and statewide projects. She excels in leveraging existing communication strategies, while employing fresh tools and technologies to achieve the best possible outcome for our clients."

Considering that Katie was the only commenter, and had her comment answered by "Grain Belt Express" saying "We love that!", I got a little curious about who was using the "Grain Belt Express" account as their sock puppet.  So, I asked:

Make sure the branding slogan is in caps, Katie from HDR, Grain Belt's public relations contractor.  Nice touch!  I just hope some other HDR employee is using the GBE profile, and you're not talking to yourself.
Picture
Suspecting what was about to happen next, I preserved this comment thread...  And wouldn't you know it?  GBE deleted my comment and Katie uncapitalized the words "positive energy" in her post within minutes.  If I was totally off base with my theory, there was no reason for Katie to edit her post (and it does say "edited") and certainly no reason to kill my post like a surprising hidden rattlesnake.

So, I renew my question... Who do?  Who?  Who do you think you're fooling, Katie, HDR and Invenergy?  Your attempts to change landowners' feelings about GBE don't seem to be working.  I'm not sure you really understand the problem you're trying to solve.

You've got to get up pretty early in the morning to fool a farmer.

Positive Fail.
P.S.  No hard feelings, Katie (because I know you're reading this).  I've been eating PR geeks for breakfast for more than a decade now.  You're certainly not the first.
*UPDATE:  Whoops!  It looks like Positive Energy has died an early death.  Invenergy/HDR/Katie simply deleted the entire Facebook thread about Positive Energy yesterday.  Positive Energy has been chucked out with the garbage.  However, it looks like Invenergy found something new to use while it was rooting through the trash yesterday.  Stay tuned!
6 Comments

MO PSC Complaint Alleges Grain Belt Express Can No Longer Claim Eminent Domain Authority

9/3/2020

2 Comments

 
Picture
Transparency is a great thing for the public.  But sometimes it's not such a great thing for a company who's trying to pull the wool over the public's eyes.

Invenergy's recent dish about how its project has changed was not accepted in the spirit in which it was issued.  I'm not sure what Invenergy expected... that citizens, local governments, elected officials, and electric utilities across Kansas and Missouri would stand up and cheer to know that the project's original plan to make a bunch of money shipping electricity from Western Kansas to PJM states on the east coast has been thwarted.  Instead, GBE claims it will simply move power around the two states instead.  Clean Line's plan brought money from PJM's more expensive electric market to Kansas and Missouri.  Invenergy's plan brings no new investment to the states.  GBE is supposed to cost more than $2B to build.  Someone has to pay for that.  It's not going to be rich east coasters anymore, but the people of Kansas and Missouri.

Missouri landowners have apparently had enough.  The Missouri Landowners Association, Eastern Missouri Landowners Association, and an individual landowner have filed another complaint at the Missouri PSC alleging:
The Commission in that case granted a Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (“CCN”) to Respondent Grain Belt, authorizing it to build the transmission project described in the Application filed by Grain Belt at the outset of that proceeding. However, one condition attached by the Commission to the CCN was as follows:  “If the design and engineering of the project is materially different from how the Project is presented in Grain Belt Express Clean Line LLC’s Application, Grain Belt Express Clean Line LLC must file an updated application with the Commission for further Commission review and determination.”  In a press release issued on August 25, 2020, Respondents announced plans for changes to the project which will clearly make it “materially different” from the one approved by the Commission in the CCN case. A copy of that press release is attached hereto as Exhibit 1, and is available to the public on the Grain Belt website: www.grainbeltexpress.com.

To Complainants’ knowledge, Respondents have not sought Commission permission to make any changes to the project as it was approved in the CCN case.

Inasmuch as Respondents have publically announced that they no longer plan to build the project for which the CCN was granted, at this point Grain Belt does not have a valid CCN to build anything in Missouri.

GRAIN BELT EXPRESS DOES NOT HAVE A VALID CCN TO BUILD ANYTHING IN MISSOURI!
Another issue with MO PSC CCN conditions:
Invenergy’s press release also indicates that it plans to begin construction of the Missouri portion of the line before obtaining approval for the line from the Illinois Commerce Commission. However, another condition to the CCN imposed by this Commission was that Grain Belt could not begin construction in Missouri until it has obtained commitments for funding of the entire multi-state project.  Obviously Invenergy cannot obtain financing for the large segment of the project in Illinois, including the converter station there, without approval from the Illinois Commerce Commission.
GRAIN BELT EXPRESS DOES NOT HAVE A VALID CCN TO BUILD ANYTHING IN MISSOURI!
Either Invenergy is building GBE in Kansas and Missouri, or it's also building it in Illinois.  It cannot be both.  Invenergy cannot rely on a situation that may never happen to support its permit request today.
Picture
There's also this:
In contrast, the project approved by the Commission was to deliver 500 MW to the converter station in Missouri, and 3,500 MW to the converter station near the Illinois/Indiana border for delivery to the PJM system. If 2,500 MW are delivered to Kansas and Missouri, then the total capacity for delivery into what the Commission found to be the more lucrative PJM market would be reduced from 3,500 MW to only 1,500 MW.

The drastic reduction in sales into the PJM system will obviously have a material impact on the economic viability of the project, as it was presented to the Commission by Grain Belt in the CCN case.

That's right!  Who is going to pay for Grain Belt Express?  It's not GBE's below-cost contract with MJMEUC.  And it's not the itty bitty contract Clean Line signed with some energy trader in Illinois.  In fact, one may wonder if either of those contracts are even valid anymore with the elimination of service from Missouri to PJM?  I'm pretty sure those contracts included additional options to purchase that service.  If Invenergy is no longer committed to building that service by seeking regulatory approval for its project in Illinois, then perhaps those contracts are as void as GBE's CCN?

Let's think about Invenergy's admission... it wants to build part of its project.  What happens if Invenergy does not follow through in Illinois, or is denied by the Illinois Courts? (Because that is a very real possibility thanks to the efforts of the Illinois Landowners Alliance.)  Who is going to pay for this partly constructed project?  Will the cost of the unfinished, uneconomic project fall upon the taxpayers and ratepayers of Kansas and Missouri?  These are serious questions the regulators of both states must determine.  Allowing GBE to continue on with a permit that doesn't match its plan is not an option.  Allowing GBE to provide "updates" to select portions of its project application is not an option.  An entirely new application for an entirely new project is required!

What does this all mean for affected landowners?
Respondents (Invenergy) and their land agents are now in the process of seeking easements from landowners on the right-of-way for the project as initially proposed. At the same time, Respondents are telling the public on their website (and possibly by other means as well) that Grain Belt currently has the right of eminent domain for the line in Missouri. Obviously, having the right of eminent domain would give Grain Belt a powerful advantage in its negotiations for the easements it is seeking. But if Grain Belt no longer has a valid CCN in Missouri, then Grain Belt and its agents are currently negotiating with landowners under false pretenses. Grain Belt’s continued pursuit of easements for a project for which it does not have a valid CCN, under threat of eminent domain, constitutes a violation of the Commission Order which initially granted the CCN.

MLA/EMLA have asked the MO PSC to act on their complaint expeditiously.  Meanwhile, perhaps landowners should refrain from negotiations with GBE that could be taking place under false pretenses?

And what about Kansas?  Nobody has filed a complaint at the KCC (yet), but Invenergy's permit from the KCC has just as many conditions that are now being violated by Invenergy.  There's the requirement that GBE must be approved in all 4 states before beginning construction in Kansas.  Illinois is named as one of the 4 states.  And then there's the requirement that GBE commits to not recover the transmission project's costs ... from Kansas ratepayers.  I must have missed the part of Invenergy's press release where it was planning to provide service to Kansans for free.  It sure looks like Invenergy plans to recover a portion of the cost of GBE from Kansas ratepayers.

Invenergy has lost this game of permit Whack-a-Mole!  It's back to start in all states.  Any easement agreements signed under false pretenses may be deemed invalid.
2 Comments

Invenergy Finally Admits It's Not Building Clean Line's Grain Belt Express

8/26/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
Nudge, nudge, nudge... did it get a little hot under that magnifying glass, Invenergy?  Seems like Invenergy rushed its gush just a little bit yesterday, because it just doesn't make sense.  There are still crucial parts missing.  However, the fake news corporate-controlled media probably won't notice because they are no more than well-trained parrots anymore.  They don't know, and don't care, whether the "news" they report makes sense... they just re-print glossy press releases as if they mean something.

The media has never understood, and fails to understand now, that GBE is just a transmission line without enough customers to make it feasible.  GBE does not sell electricity, wind powered or otherwise.  It is nothing more than a toll road.  So when Invenergy and the media gush on about how much a transmission line will save consumers, it's complete and utter garbage.  Without the wind farms built and in operation (and they're not, not even on any planning list) nobody knows how much the power would cost, it's nothing but a guess.  As well, nobody knows how much the transmission line is going to cost consumers.  The rates GBE will charge its VOLUNTARY customers are still to be negotiated.  If the rates negotiated with customers who so far don't exist are high, so are the costs consumers will pay to use the transmission line.  If the rates negotiated in the future are low, then costs consumers pay to use it will be low.  GBE has NO IDEA how much it will charge its customers to use the transmission line in the future, but it's a given that GBE will try to charge the highest prices it can negotiate.

GBE only has ONE rate scheme.  It has been authorized to negotiate with voluntary customers to sell service on an open-access transmission line under FERC rules.  It has no state rate mechanism where it can add its costs to the rates captive electric customers pay.  Saying that Grain Belt Express + some vague generation that doesn't exist will save the citizens of Missouri up to $50 per month on their electric bill is nothing more than a shell game.  It's just guessing.  GBE's "report" from a hired consultant is nothing more than speculative garbage.  It tries to sound all scientific, but it actually says nothing more than... "We created an equation that produced this number.  We can't let you see the actual equation, or the actual data we used, or the variables we tossed in, but just trust us on this one.  Our answer is valid!"

Oh, please!

Unless, it's not an open-access merchant transmission line selling capacity at negotiated rates, but instead the GEN-TIE Beth Conley mentioned.  A gen-tie would combine Invenergy's generation with Grain Belt Express and sell buyers generation delivered to eastern Kansas or Missouri, instead of just transmission service (plus a contract for generation that would have to be negotiated with a third party).  That would look sort of like this statement:
The transmission line and associated wind generation (collectively referred to as “Grain Belt Express” or “Grain Belt”) are projected to create significant cost savings for electricity ratepayers in Kansas and Missouri.
Who is going to buy this service or product?  Grain Belt Express has been trying to sell 500 MW of transmission service to Missouri since like 2014, and has only managed to sell "up to 200 MW" to MJMEUC at a loss leader price.  During PSC hearings, project owners said they would make up for the below-cost price MJMEUC was paying by selling service from Missouri to Indiana and charging more for it to make up the difference.  Without the leg to Indiana, who is going to pay more than their share to support MJMEUC's sweet deal discount?  And if GBE had so much difficulty selling "up to" 200 MW of its offered 500 MW of service in Missouri that they had to reduce it to sell at less than it costs GBE to provide the service, who is going to buy the other 300 MW of service to Missouri, much less the additional 2,000 MW Invenergy now says it's offering to Missouri customers.... and pay way above cost of service for it?

And what happens if Invenergy dumps 2,500 MW of imported wind energy from Kansas (or other places, like Oklahoma - google "States Edge Wind") into Missouri's electric grid?  That's 2,500 MW of electricity currently produced in Missouri that will be supplanted by a variable source produced in another state.  That's more power than produced by Missouri's largest electric power plant -- no longer needed by Missourians to keep their lights on.  Will Missouri's electric generators be closed, causing massive unemployment and loss of tax dollars for the communities where they are located?  Did Invenergy figure that into it's phony equation?  And how much harder will the surviving electric generators have to work to cycle up and down to support such a large variable resource to make sure the grid's delicate balance is maintained?  Missouri needs to think long and hard about importing such a large amount of variable power, and sending its energy dollars to Kansas and Chicago.  When power produced in Missouri is used in Missouri, the economic boost and energy dollars stay in Missouri.  Supporting economic development in Kansas does NOT fix Missouri's economy!  The nonsense Invenergy is spouting simply doesn't make sense.

And what about Illinois?  Invenergy is pretending it ran into some sort of regulatory snafu there and that's what spurred this sudden change.  There's absolutely no evidence that Invenergy ever applied for a permit in Illinois!  And the one Clean Line obtained was cancelled by the ICC at the direction of the Appeals Court.  Invenergy would have to start from scratch by filing a new application for a permit before it could run into any regulatory snafus.  Invenergy's snafu seems to be of it's own creation by failing to actually file anything in the first place.

And speaking of regulatory filings and state permits...  Invenergy informs that it's going to have to apply to both Kansas and Missouri to make changes to its current permits.  What if one or both states require completely new applications for this completely new project?  This isn't the Grain Belt Express approved by Kansas or Missouri.  It's a completely NEW project that has simply appropriated GBE's name and a portion of its route.  It's a completely new project for a completely new purpose owned by a completely new company.  It deserves to be subject to a completely new state review.  So much has changed that relying on existing information under the guise that this is still the same project is nothing less than lying by omission.
And, hey, guess what?  If Invenergy's permits are no longer valid because they're no longer building the project they had permitted, then Invenergy/GBE no longer has eminent domain authority!  No reason for landowners to even acknowledge GBE land agents that have been calling.  GBE/Invenergy CANNOT take your land until it receives new or updated permits.

Way to win community support, Invenergy!  Now people probably think Invenergy is an even bigger liar than Clean Line Energy Partners ever was.  And the truth is still missing!
0 Comments

Big Wind's Big Bucks Bandwagon

8/12/2020

1 Comment

 
Picture
How obviously greedy does a wind turbine company have to be before a supposedly "clean energy" website poops all over their poorly written blog post?  That's what I wondered when I came across this "article" on CleanTechnica.  CleanTechnica is pretty famous in certain circles for its misinformed pandering to an arrogant bunch of sycophantic loyalists who post incessant, incorrect "facts" and argue with people in the "article" comments. 

So, I went looking for the source, although CleanTechnica conveniently "forgot" to link to its source material, it was easy enough to find.

It looks like this guy is the "president of sales" so of course he's interested in selling more product, in this case wind turbines.  I hope he's better at selling wind turbines and he is at selling ideas, because this one is dead on arrival.  Even CleanTechnica couldn't stomach it.

Chris's main problem seems to be that there's not enough transmission from the remote areas where his customers would put his wind turbines.  This is cramping Chris's profits (and probably his bonus).  So now Chris is an expert on electric transmission and has all the good ideas that nobody has ever tried before.  And he deploys it using the most trite of propaganda devices. 

The Bandwagon propaganda device attempts to persuade the target that everyone else thinks the same way as the propagandist.  Use of inclusive words and ideas, such as "everyone", "we", "our", or "most Americans" are a way the propagandist draws the reader in to think that if they don't agree with "everyone" and conform, they're missing the bandwagon and will be left out or become unpopular.  It replaces individual thought with group think.  And there's nothing more dangerous to personal liberty than mob rule.
Picture
Find the use of bandwagon in this short quote:
Every week you open your browser, scan the headlines, and see something to the effect of, “fossil fuels are out and clean energy is in”. The recent court decision upholding the shutdown of the Dakota Access Pipeline and Dominion and Duke’s decision to abandon their Atlantic Coast pipeline project indicate a changing tide in how consumers and utilities view our energy future.

Most Americans want clean energy. People want electric vehicles and a cleaner environment. But, our policies on building the infrastructure to deliver this clean energy future have not caught up to public sentiment.

In June, the leading renewable energy trade associations made a goal to reach 50% renewable energy by 2030. Meanwhile, if elected, Joe Biden will push for a carbon-free power sector by 2035. Goals aside, the fact remains we need more transmission to move cheap wind and solar from more rural areas to load centers if we want to reach ambitious clean energy goals. We need a new wave of electron pipelines.

Not me.  Chris doesn't speak for me.  He probably doesn't speak for you either.  You know who he speaks for?  Vestas and himself.  But yet he has imposed his personal and business views on "most Americans", "you" (the reader), "consumers", "utilities", "people", "public sentiment", "we, we, we" (all the way home!) for the express purpose of convincing someone that his ideas have merit.

Let's look at some of these ideas:
The Plains & Eastern transmission project exemplifies this problem. In 2009, Clean Line Energy Partners announced plans for a transmission line that would carry 4,000 MW of clean power from Oklahoma to load centers in the southeast and Mid-Atlantic. Years of navigating state and local regulations and gathering, then losing, federal support ensued.

By 2019, Clean Line had divested most of their transmission projects, including the Plains & Eastern Clean Line project, selling them off with the hopes someone else could overcome the endless regulatory and political battles associated with interstate transmission lines.

It NEVER had the support of its desired government customer, Tennessee Valley Authority.  It had hopes and dreams and a MOU that TVA would consider the project.  Ultimately, when TVA considered it, TVA decided Clean Line wasn't economic or needed for serving its customers.  Meanwhile, Clean Line could not find any other customers.  If TVA wasn't buying or was dragging its feet, Clean Line was free to go sell service to other eager customers.  Except there weren't any.  There were no utilities interested in buying service on a "clean line" from Oklahoma.  This is what ultimately killed the Plains & Eastern.  Get your facts straight, Chris!

And here's the inconvenient truth Chris misses -- it's not lack of transmission connections that is preventing utilities in other states from buying remote wind.  Even when the transmission connection can be made, customers fail to materialize, as the lesson of Plains & Eastern demonstrates.  Why?  Because states want to develop their own renewables because development of new renewables bring economic development to the state.  Why send your energy dollars to Oklahoma when you can create new industry and new jobs in your own backyard?  Offshore wind is coming!  Onshore wind profiteers like Chris are nearly hysterical over it.

It's simply not true that if new transmission is built utilities will voluntarily elect to use it.  Building new transmission is an attempt to FORCE utilities in other states to purchase imported power.  The industry keeps bellowing (without support) that remote wind from the Midwest is "cheaper" than building renewables near coastal load.  But how cheap is it really when the cost of the generation is combined with the cost of hundreds of billions of dollars of new transmission?  Not so cheap anymore... and it provides no economic benefits to the importing states.  The only way to make imported generation "cheaper" is to allocate the cost of building new transmission for export  onto captive electric consumers who may not benefit, instead of the current requirement that the generator must pay its own costs to connect to the existing system.  This idea cannot work because it upends the long-held principle that beneficiary pays for utility costs.

Of course Chris has ideas because he can solve any problem!  Let's make "coordinated transmission working groups" to change the siting dynamic, "transmission NIMBYism" and community involvement.  You mean Interstate Transmission Line Sighting Compacts?  Yeah, that hasn't worked in 15 years.  Why?  Because no state wants to subject itself to mob rule of other states.  Just because Chris has suddenly found the interstate compact idea doesn't mean it can suddenly work.  It won't work. 

Next idea...
In addition to state input, there should be back-stop federal authority when transmission projects reach an impasse. The 2005 Federal Power Act attempted to give FERC this authority, but the rule framework was convoluted and limited in scope, leading to several court challenges. Through a clearer and more definitive act of Congress, FERC can serve as the final decision-maker when a transmission project cannot garner all permits from state and local authorities, or the permitting process is delayed beyond a year.
If the majority of a transmission line’s route has received proper permits, but a small portion has been denied or delayed by regulatory challenges, a transmission developer should be able to bring the case before FERC for final adjudication.

To address the aesthetic concerns of high voltage transmission lines, policy-makers can consider tax incentives or direct pay reimbursements for companies that bury their power lines near residences and towns or work with communities to design more aesthetically-pleasing structures.
To aid in the clean energy future, these incentives should only be available to power lines that predominately transfer renewable energy. This would allow transmission developers to accommodate the very real concerns of citizens and not break the bank.

Again, you're 15 years too late for this party, Chris.  Backstop siting authority didn't work because it was plain usurpation of state authority.  And Chris has made it even dumber with his plan for FERC to sit as some state transmission permitting court of appeals.  FERC has no such authority to overrule state permitting decisions.  Various iterations of FERC and special interests have been begging Congress to give FERC siting and permitting authority over electric transmission for years, but it's never even gotten close to happening.  It's unlikely to happen now, when Congress is at its most dysfunctional.  States do not want to give up their authority to the federal government.  End of story.

Chris also needs to learn that there is no such thing as a "power line that predominately transfers renewable energy."  Power lines are open access... electrons from all generators get mixed up and there's no way to separate them.  A transmission line cannot prevent "dirty" generators from using its line.

So who is all this propaganda directed at?  Your elected representatives.  If your elected representatives don't hear from you, they may believe Chris's lie that "most Americans" want huge increases in their electric bills to pay for new transmission lines in their own backyard that they'll have to fight in Washington, D.C. before people who have never set foot in their communities.  Make sure your elected representative hears the truth from you today!
1 Comment

Building Community Trust

8/9/2020

1 Comment

 
That's an important part of any infrastructure project, and Invenergy has completely failed at the task.

Behold!  An Invenergy/GBE door hanger left on a landowner's door.  Know where it ended up?  The trash can.  It had to be separated from the household refuse in order to sit for its recent photo session.  I'm going to guess that's a giant grease stain at the top, and not a weird, gray cloud.
Picture
And how does Invenergy attempt to build community trust with this door hanger?  
NOW UNDER NEW OWNERSHIP!
Obviously, Invenergy understands that nobody trusted the prior owner of the project, Clean Line Energy Partners.  But simply stating there's a new owner doesn't get the job done.

Clean Line spent years holding community meetings and events with pulled pork sandwiches, bouncy houses, and other "fun" attractants for local residents to come and develop a cordial relationship with the company based on trust.  There was even a ham dinner, where one lucky landowner filled up his own sack with a pile of ham slices.  That event was so successful, it transformed an ordinary house cat into the amazing Miss Kitty Hamm, who is able to communicate through the internet for brief periods of time.
Picture
Unfortunately, like all cats, Miss Kitty Hamm has developed a little bit of an attitude.  She recently penned a note asking for more Grain Belt Express ham, but Invenergy is a cheap date.  It prefers to do ABSOLUTELY nothing to foster trust in the local community.  I tried to explain that there's little a company can do during these trying times.  There's a pandemic raging and person-to-person contact and sharing of food isn't a good idea.  But Miss Kitty Hamm can be incredibly stubborn...
Food is the key to a kitty's heart, however, the humans at Invenergy have underestimated the intellectual abilities of the average feline and the people who serve the cat kingdom.  We can read!  Where's the news stories?  Where's the colorful community advertising?  Where's the outdoor music festival where kitties and humans can cavort at a distance while enjoying music and speeches?  Where's the donations to food banks?  Where's the new parks being built for the communities?  Where's the cash donations to help the local schools with the added expense of distance learning?   Where's the catnip mice for the local animal shelter? There's plenty a "new owner" can do to win the hearts and minds of your average kitty.  Invenergy is failing to do anything to build trust with the communities in Missouri!  Without a pile of free ham, I simply cannot trust these people!
P.S.  That's not a grease stain.  My litter box needed changing.
The community's mistrust of Invenergy is raging.  First thing they did was eliminate Clean Line's proposed monopoles and replace them with cheaper and more invasive lattice structures.  Invenergy has not bothered contacting local county commissions to seek assent for its project.  Without assent, this project is not fully permitted.  And speaking of permits, Invenergy STILL has not bothered to submit an application for a permit in Illinois.  There's no end point for this project.  Where's the end point?  Well, Invenergy isn't saying.
Western Kansas and the surrounding area to customers in Missouri and other states in the region.
Well, that's sort of like dialing your binoculars out of focus, isn't it, Invenergy?  Clean Line's project used to go from Western Kansas to a substation in Indiana for delivery to eastern states.  But now Invenergy's project begins in "the surrounding area" of Western Kansas.  What "surrounds" Western Kansas?  Other states, like Oklahoma, where Invenergy owns the unfinished States Edge Wind Farm.  Other states like Colorado, Nebraska, New Mexico, and even Texas.  How many potential wind farms does Invenergy own in those states?  On the eastern end, what other states are in the same "region" as Missouri?  Illinois, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas?  Where are the customers in those states?  How big is a state "region"?  Invenergy could be planning to build a transmission line through Missouri that begins and ends anywhere... or nowhere at all.  And since Invenergy is just so vague these days, should we ask ourselves who does that?  Who builds the middle of a highway to nowhere that doesn't connect with any known roads on either end?  You can bet that Invenergy has a plan... it's just not one it wants you to know about right now.  In fact, it appears that they don't want anyone to know about their actual plan right now, including regional transmission organizations, other utilities, and especially state regulators.  Not exactly a way to win your trust, is it, Kitty?
Meow!  Err... no.  I trust Invenergy about as much as I trust that smiling sadist at the veterinary clinic with the syrupy voice and greased fanny pole behind her back.
Trust in Grain Belt Express is at an all time low in Missouri. 
UPDATE:  Ya know how Facebook spies on you and attempts to show you things you may like?  Miss Kitty Hamm hopes this means that Invenergy is planning another community ham dinner!  And sometimes the jokes just write themselves...
Picture
1 Comment

The Truth About The Macrogrid Initiative

7/7/2020

8 Comments

 
Picture
Renewable energy companies, transmission builders, and Bill Gates have come together to brainwash the American public into thinking that they need a "macrogrid."  And, of course, the mainstream media is only too eager to assist by publishing thoughtless propaganda designed to guide your thinking towards their goal.  Here's one of the first examples, from the Los Angeles Times.

Renewable energy has been using your tax dollars for years to build infrastructure that provides small amounts of intermittent energy.  Because they are financially rewarded with your money for building, they've built more than the people can use in certain areas, like the Midwest.  They have gobbled up a lot of the available transmission capacity to export their product to cities, where people expect all the benefits of energy without any of the sacrifice that goes along with creating it.  In order to keep building renewable energy generators in places where there is no need for the electricity, these piggish profiteers want to build a whole bunch of new transmission.  They presume if they can get their energy to populated areas, consumers will be forced to buy it.  Absolutely not true.  The populated areas are also busy building their own renewable infrastructure so they can create both renewable energy and economic development in their own cities, states, and regions.  We don't need new transmission to switch to renewable energy.  Even if we overbuild transmission, it doesn't mean distribution utilities in New Jersey will choose to buy wind energy generated in Iowa.

Let's take a look at the one-sided propaganda these racketeers are spreading.

1.  A macrogrid can save consumers billions of dollars per year.

THE TRUTH:   The "studies" that supposedly proved all these savings are skewed.  The biggest problem?  All renewables studied were terrestrial sources.  Offshore wind wasn't part of the study, although offshore wind provides the best source of wind power and is conveniently located near the largest population centers -- both coasts and the Great Lakes.  When offshore wind is removed from the equation, the best sources of wind become the Midwest, and the best sources of solar are the south and southwest.  But is it cost effective to build a gigantic new grid to move this generation to the population centers?  No, they already have a better source closer at hand.  I also don't trust the magic math taking place here that prices this new grid.  It's going to take a lot longer, and cost a lot more, than a bunch of scientists think it will.  None of these guys know the first thing about utility ratemaking.  And what are these scientists comparing their new utopia to in order to produce a "savings"?   The most expensive sources of energy they can find shipped the longest distance they can imagine on the most congested transmission lines they can find?  That's how magic math happens... change the variables until you arrive at the desired answer.  If we don't build a macrogrid and force people to use energy produced thousands of miles away, how much will energy prices actually rise?  But it's not really about the price of energy, it's about "climate change" and changing how we produce energy.  Telling the people that it's going to save them money on their power bill is a dirty lie.

2.  We can power our country with 100% renewable energy.

THE TRUTH:  Not feasible with today's technology.  Just the other day, the Midwest ISO ran into an issue with not having enough supply on a hot day.  This is a region that has built a lot of wind turbines.  But those turbines weren't producing when the region needed it most on a hot day.  Here's a graph showing the generation sources for MISO's power on a hot, summer afternoon.
Picture
Without coal, gas and nukes, the power would have gone out. 

MISO was also importing more than 5,700MW of power from neighboring PJM Interconnection, the grid authority for a number of eastern states.  MISO was importing an astonishing 39% more power than scheduled from PJM in order to serve its load.  Here's a graph of the generation sources operating in PJM at that time.
Picture
Again, coal, gas and nukes.  Without them, a good two thirds of the country would have blacked out yesterday afternoon.

These graphs show the cheapest resources available being dispatched in real time.  If renewables were cheap and available, MISO and PJM would have been using them.  The resources necessary to run everything on clean "renewable" energy do not exist.

However, some "studies" and "reports" have suggested a massive build out of new industrial wind and solar under the pretense that we can have enough renewables to meet load.  How much wind and solar does it look like we're going to need to meet peak load on a hot day?  This report calls for 62,626 square miles of new wind and solar installations.  For comparison, that's an area just a little bigger than the state of Georgia, and just a bit smaller than the state of Wisconsin.  Imagine the entire state of Georgia covered end to end, side to side, with industrial wind turbines and solar panels.  How much do you think that would cost?  And if the government keeps giving them tax credit handouts with our tax dollars, how much additional cost would that add?

The capacity factors for renewable energy are surprisingly low because they cannot store fuel on site to run when called.  When they produce energy, it's a happy accident, not on purpose.  Because renewable generators can only be counted on to produce energy a very small percentage of the time, you'd need to overbuild them by perhaps factor of 10.  Example:  If you need a generator with a dependable capacity of 100MW, you'd need 10 wind farms with a nameplate capacity of 100 MW each.  Even then, you're taking your chances that those resources would produce the power you need when you need it. 

Wind and solar are poor choices for a 100% carbon-free power source.

3.  Renewable energy provides jobs and we need jobs to restore our economy after Coronavirus.

THE TRUTH:  Are we supposed to spend money building stuff we don't need in order to create jobs?  That's absurd.  We build stuff we need, and jobs happen.  Why would we spend a bunch of money creating make work jobs building stuff we don't need?  The renewable energy industry isn't at any greater risk than any other industry in the wake of Coronavirus.  In fact, they seem to be getting additional help other industries aren't.  Because Coronavirus put a short pause on the renewable energy industry, the federal government has extended the amount of time they have to claim the fading production tax credit.  What other industries are getting taxpayer handouts for making things?  Are restaurants getting tax credits for each meal they sell?  Of course not.  Renewable energy, however, is getting a tax handout for each unit of power they generate for 10 years after being put in service.  Remember, that money they're earning comes directly from your pocket because the government does not have its own source of income.  All its income comes from you!

We've been subsidizing industrial wind and solar for decades.  At first, perhaps it needed a leg up to compete with conventional generation, but over time it developed an appetite for government handouts and now doesn't want to exist without them.  In fact, the renewable energy industry has asked the federal government to convert the tax credits it currently earns into straight up cash payments.  A tax credit is just that... a credit for the recipient's tax burden.  Because many renewable energy companies pay little taxes, they have been converting the credits they earn into cash by selling them to other corporations that can use them to reduce their tax liability.  But just like those companies that will convert your long-term legal settlement payments into instant cash, they only give you a portion of the value of the settlement (or tax credit) in exchange for some cash now.  Renewable energy companies don't want to lose the full value of tax credits they earn but can't use, so they want the government instead to just give them cash they can use.  Pretty bold, isn't it?

And then the industry speaks out of the other side of its mouth about how mature its industry is, how cheap the power they generate is, and how mainstream it's become.  They claim they are competitive with conventional generation.  If that is true, why do they still need a handout to stay in business?

Renewable energy companies have opportunely seized upon the Coronavirus crisis to pretend they can solve the economic crisis.  Never let a good crisis go to waste!

Renewable energy is back in business, and they're building things.  We don't need to give them more money to create new jobs... we need to concentrate on other industries that haven't fully re-opened in order to restore jobs.  We don't need to spend our money building out an existing industry.

4.  We need to "modernize" our grid.

THE TRUTH:
  Our grid is adequate for its purpose.  Old lines and equipment are constantly re-built and upgraded.  Transmission operators and reliability organizations make sure the grid stays reliable.  They order fixes, re-builds, and new lines as needed.  Interestingly enough, this call to build a new "macrogrid" doesn't even contemplate fixing the existing lines, it just wants to build a new system to work in conjunction with the existing one.  If the existing one fails, it's going to take the new "macrogrid" down with it.  The macrogrid is about building new transmission to ship energy further from its point of generation.  It's got nothing to do with the existing grid.

And a couple more things about that crazy LA Times article...

It starts out talking about a newly built power line in operation.  It mentions that there was opposition to the project because it would "saddle energy consumers with unnecessary costs, degrade sensitive wildlife habitat and interrupt a series of gorgeous landscapes."  And then the Times points out that it was built anyhow.  Logic leap!  Just because the project was built doesn't mean it obviated all those concerns.  It merely means that those concerns were run over in the process of approving it.  Unnecessary costs and degradation of habitat and landscapes happened anyway.  Building it didn't make them disappear.

The article tells you that building billions of dollars of new transmission will make you less likely to catch Corona.  So will wearing a mask, and that's only going to cost you a buck.

Landowner concerns about eminent domain and sacrifice for the benefit of people far, far away are glossed over and minimized with the idea that if they don't accept it, we're all doomed.  The idea that we have to sacrifice something and may only choose which sacrifice to make is overblown.  We can have it all if we choose to build renewables near load.  It's as simple as that!

On the subject of Clean Line Energy Partners... that company failed because it had no customers.  It wasn't the fault of landowners or regulation.  Those things merely slowed the projects, they didn't kill them.  CLEP failed because there were no places "where the energy is needed."  If nobody needs imported "clean" power, why would we spend billions building new transmission?

The article points out that California, a huge importer of power, has plans for 100% clean electricity by 2045.  But what happened when California recently debated the issue of installing wind offshore?  The fishing industry, the U.S. Navy, and coastal residents got their shorts in a wad, claiming that offshore wind would hurt them.  Where does California plan to get its renewable energy if it doesn't make it in state?  Why, it plans to put those hurtful burdens on other states to produce it and export it to California.  The politically disconnected are ground zero.  This is the epitome of environmental injustice!  If you want renewable energy, you must sacrifice.  You!  Not someone else!  Only when these states are forced to make their own sacrifices will all the impossible clean energy goals begin to wane.

One more thing... this "macrogrid" has been proposed in one form or another ever since I've been doing the transmission thing... a dozen years now.   Except it's only recently been about "clean energy."  It used to be about moving coal-fired resources around the country "cheaply."  It's just been re-packaged to fit today's narrative.  It's not about "clean energy."  It's about building a whole bunch of transmission in order to make billions of dollars of profit at consumer expense.

And about the House Democrat's newly released climate plan?  Ahh... that's another blog post soon to come!  Keep checking back!
8 Comments

Can Grain Belt Express Cure Coronavirus?

7/2/2020

2 Comments

 
OF COURSE NOT!
Leave it to the Missouri Times to publish a bogus editorial claiming that GBE could be solely responsible for Missouri "avoiding a catastrophic recession."

Hold your nose (and maybe a barf bag) while reading this pack of prevarications.  It's GBE spokespuppet Lee Barker, back again to try to convince Missouri how great GBE is going to be.  C'mon, Lee, who are you trying to convince?  GBE has been bumping around Missouri for at least a decade now.  There are no minds left to change.  Glossing over the repugnance of the project only serves to set more opposition to the project.  Is the purpose of this diatribe an attempt to make the guilty feel better about themselves?  I really don't think the guilty care.  They know they did wrong, but they did it anyhow because they wanted to please an out-of-state corporation who wants to make a whole bunch of money off the backs of Missouri citizens.

Where to start?
The developer of this clean energy infrastructure project has begun sending letters to landowners about the financial compensation they’re entitled to. Soon, rural Missourians will start to receive some of the more than $20 million that this project will pay to landowners over its life.
However, contributing landowners aren’t the only Missourians who stand to benefit from the Grain Belt Express Transmission Line.
Yeah, we know... and landowners simply don't care.  The "letters" are going right into the trash.  Nobody is going to receive anything because they're not signing easement agreements.  Tell me, Lee, how do you know how much GBE is going to pay landowners?  Did Invenergy share that information with you?  That would be untoward, don't you think?  Invenergy hasn't negotiated anything with anyone yet, but yet Lee knows how much this is going to cost the company.  $20M divided between 700 landowners -- but Invenergy stands to make billions BILLIONS on this project over its lifetime.  Does this seem fair to you?  I also noticed that Invenergy is trying to get landowners to select to receive their "compensation" over decades, instead of when their land is taken using eminent domain.  Why would anyone do that?  There's a whole lot to digest in an Invenergy "letter" and it's best to discuss it with your attorney and tax advisor before taking any action (other than using it for animal bedding).

Lee seems confused about the difference between compensation and benefit.  He uses both words.  They mean entirely different things.  Compensation is something, typically money, awarded to someone as a recompense for loss, injury, or suffering.  Compensation is an attempt to make a victim whole.  Benefit, on the other hand means an advantage or profit gained from something.  The landowners are gaining nothing in this deal.  Eminent domain merely requires "just compensation", it doesn't require "benefit."  There is no benefit for "contributing landowners."  Contributing?  Yes, these landowners are contributing a portion of their wealth, peace of mind, and sense of place to a for-profit corporation in Chicago, and they're being forced to do it against their will.  I wonder how much of Lee's 401(K) he "contributed" to Invenergy's profits?  I'm going out on a limb here to guess none.  Lee doesn't contribute anything, but he thinks others should.
Local energy suppliers will have the opportunity to use the more affordable electricity and pass the savings onto their customers. This will lower utility bills by more than $12 million every single year. 
Oh, please.  The savings aren't guaranteed and there is no requirement that any municipal utility "pass the savings" onto customers.  Your city utility could use the entire savings to host a ritzy shindig celebrating Michael Polsky and you'd get nothing.  Or maybe the woke mob can commission a statute to their new leader?  Tell me about the savings after they happen.  What guarantee is there that Invenergy won't pull out of the MJMEUC contract entirely?  Better check that contract again...
The Grain Belt Express will also put a serious dent in the staggering unemployment rate by hiring 1,500 Missourians to work on the transmission line. While most infrastructure projects demand massive tax breaks in return for this level of job creation, the Grain Belt Express hasn’t asked for a single state incentive. In fact, it will inject more than $7 million into local communities through taxes. 
1,500 jobs are going to pull Missouri out of a sure recession?  Doubtful, even if 1,500 Missourians were offered jobs building the transmission line, which they won't.  So far, landowners have seen a handful of land agents from out of state.  The highly specialized labor required to build a project like GBE is also going to be imported.  Jobs for Missouri aren't a part of GBE.

Of course GBE has asked for a state incentive!  It's asked for the solemn power to take private property for its own use in order to make a profit.  Much bigger than a minor tax break... and speaking of taxes... really.... $7M?  That's chump change!  How much will Missouri communities have to spend fixing roadways destroyed during construction?
Economic stimulation on this scale is quite rare, but it should come as no surprise. Under new ownership by U.S.-based Invenergy, the Grain Belt Express has become much more than a means of transferring clean, renewable energy across the state. It also includes a plan to bring broadband internet to communities in need. 
Today, over 40 percent of counties in Missouri are without improved health care, education, business, communication, and entertainment because they lack broadband. Grain Belt Express aims to bridge the so-called “digital divide.”

Well, maybe the local communities can use their $7M windfall (spread among 8 counties, mind you) to actually make GBE's broadband accessible?  Putting a wire on a pole doesn't create broadband by magic.  You make Missouri sound like a straight-up slum, Lee!  These poor communities don't have health care, education, businesses, communication or entertainment and only Invenergy can come to their rescue?  Pure hogwash!
Hey, maybe you could use your "letter" to wash your hogs, or other fattened pigs wandering around your communities spreading manure?
2 Comments

Not In Microsoft Bill's Yard

6/17/2020

5 Comments

 
NIMBY!

Super-rich Microsoft tycoon Bill Gates is funding a new initiative to brain wash the American people into believing they need a "national" transmission system.

Don't fall for it!

Of course, none of these new transmission lines would be in Bill's yard, they would be in yours!  He thinks you need a nationwide, high-voltage direct current (HVDC) network optimized for the nation's best wind and solar resources.
Thanks to generous support from Breakthrough Energy, an organization founded by Bill Gates that is working to expand clean energy investment and innovation, the Macro Grid Initiative will undertake wide-ranging educational efforts in support of transmission expansion to connect areas with low-cost renewable resources to centers of high electric demand. This can be accomplished by connecting grid regions like MISO, PJM and SPP.
Take a look at this propaganda group's maps of "America’s centers of high renewable resources".  What's missing?  Offshore wind.  Offshore wind doesn't exist in this group's scenario.  Why not?  Because offshore wind doesn't require a "national transmission system."  In fact, it requires very little new terrestrial transmission at all.  Now guess who's paying for this little brainwashing expedition, and who might benefit if they can succeed in making America dumber, and completely upend the way we plan and build transmission and generation in this country.

And how do they plan to do that?
The Macro Grid Initiative seeks to build public and policymaker support for a new policy and regulatory environment that recognizes the substantial nationwide benefits of new regional and interregional transmission. Priority areas include:

An expanded nationwide and eastern grid with a focus on the regions of MISO, PJM and SPP.

The next round of regional and interregional transmission planning.

A fully planned and integrated nationwide transmission system.

A new Federal Energy Regulatory Commission transmission planning rule.

Achieving the Macro Grid vision will require new policies at the federal, regional and state levels that recognize the substantial nationwide benefits of an interregionally connected transmission network.

New policies at the state and federal level?  Like usurping state jurisdiction to site and permit new transmission and planning the grid on a national level so that uncooperative states are run over in the process and affected landowners are left with nowhere to turn?  How else would they:
...reduce barriers to development...

...overcome the barriers to siting long-line transmission facilities...

...upgrade our nation's aging and creaky transmission network...

...connect all this clean energy to our homes...

...expand regional and interregional transmission...

... build a strong national power grid...

Barriers?  They mean you.  They mean hundreds of thousands of landowners whose private property will be condemned using eminent domain in order to place an unwanted transmission line on private property and generate a huge profit to the owner of the new transmission line.  Affected landowners will get nothing, not even one electron from the transmission line.  HVDC is an unbroken line from beginning to end and requires outrageously expensive substations to convert it from DC to AC in order to connect with our existing transmission system.  It's an electric highway on your property that you cannot use.  Landowner payments are merely compensation for the market value of the land taken.  They are an attempt to make landowners whole, not to realize any sort of profit.

Creaking?  I've honestly never heard a transmission line creak.  It whines, it hums, it crackles.  It doesn't creak.  Replacing existing lines to upgrade conductors and equipment happens when needed because our system must remain reliable at all times.  This is so much crap. Bill's NIMBY initiative is about building NEW lines, not upgrading existing ones.

Instead of connecting centralized electric generation to our homes, people are increasingly installing their own electric generation on their homes.  Corporations are installing on-site renewables on their stores, offices, and factories.  We don't need to "connect" anything, just generate our own clean energy!

And this one.  It deserves to be quoted in its entirety.
Michael Skelly, Founder, Clean Line Energy Partners; Senior Advisor, Lazard:
"Building out our grid brings jobs, efficient markets, and cheaper and cleaner power. No individual or company can do this alone. But together with a broad public and policy maker consensus I have no doubt it can and will be done. I'm excited to see ACORE and ACEG's Macro Grid Initiative take on this important effort."

YOU FAILED, Michael Skelly!  You proposed building the same kind of "national" grid a decade ago, and you failed miserably after wasting $200M of investor's money.  (Bill Gates beware!)  A national grid isn't feasible.  It's not what the people want.

Why not?  Because they want to build renewable generation for clean energy in their own homes, neighborhoods, states and regions.  They don't want to create a hole in their own economy where they stop creating local energy and economic development and begin to send their energy dollars to other regions.  For example, let's look at New Jersey.

Yesterday, NJ Governor Phil Murphy announced plans to build a new port in Salem County to support the development of offshore wind farms off the Jersey Shore.  Officials say the New Jersey Wind Port will create 1,500 permanent jobs, generate $500 million in annual economic activity, and help the state reach its goal of gradually relying more on so-called clean energy.

Does Governor Murphy want to pay for an outrageously expensive "national grid" so he can import energy from other regions and cancel his port project?  My suspicions point to "no."

Likewise other eastern states, who plan to jumpstart their own economies by creating a robust offshore wind industry.

Nobody wants an exorbitantly expensive "national grid."  And if you need an example of how such an initiative will fail, maybe you can ask Michael Skelly?

Take your propaganda and shove it, ACORE.  Quit pretending you represent consumer interests, ACEG.  Everyone knows where you get your funding, and it's not from consumers.

And while we're at it, next time your crappy Microsoft PC gets infested with viruses and quits working, toss it in the dumpster and buy a MAC.  It might cost more upfront, but you won't have to buy a new computer every couple years.  Unlike his proposed "national grid" your boycott of Microsoft products will end up in Microsoft Bill's Yard.
5 Comments

Show Me Your Front Group, Invenergy!

4/30/2020

6 Comments

 
The Missouri Legislature is back in session, and that means Invenergy's expensive front group is also back in session.  In fact, a key person managed to catch a clip of one of their ads yesterday.  The advertisement asked people to "contact your senators" about Grain Belt Express. Yes, please do, otherwise they're going to get their information from Invenergy's bloated front group.

What's a front group?  A front group is an organization that purports to represent one agenda while in reality it serves some other party or interest whose sponsorship is hidden or rarely mentioned. The front group is perhaps the most easily recognized use of the third party technique.  The third party technique has been defined by one public relations (PR) executive as, "putting your words in someone else's mouth."

Invenergy calls its front group "ShowMe Connection," and purports it to be a "Community Organization" on Facebook with more than 1,500 "likes." 

Let's dive in folks! 

Picture
Back in December of 2019, someone registered the domain name "showmeconnection.org" through an agent. 
Our Mission
We support access to broader vital services across the state through the promotion of innovative projects resulting in positive economic, environmental, and community impact.

Right... but don't waste your time folks... there's really nothing there except links to the front group's facebook and twitter accounts.  And that's where things get interesting and the strings multiply...

Let's look at Twitter first...

ShowMe Connection has only 4 followers.
Picture
Let's find out who they are.

MPUA is obvious and needs no explanation.  It's the overstuffed municipal utility organization hungry for a free lunch at everyone else's expense.

Craig Gordon is SVP of Government Affairs for Invenergy.  "Government Affairs" is corporate speak for lobbying.
Picture
What a coincidence that he's one of only 4 followers of a Missouri "community organization," right?

Courtney Ryan works for LS2Group.  LS2Group is a public relations company located in Iowa that does work for transmission companies, like Clean Line Energy Partners, and that work has included other attempts at front groups.

That "Jazz" guy?  Who cares.  Apparently he uses his Twitter account to monitor stuff for work... like front groups?

This Twitter account has been used to post garbage-y things related to Grain Belt Express.  It pretty much looks like nobody is paying attention except the bozos behind the front group. 

Now let's take a look at the front group's Facebook page.  Again, garbage-y GBE stuff that nobody seems to be following.  Despite its claim to have 1,500 "likes," the posts only have less than 5 "likes" and many of those come from people involved in the front group.  Here's an example:
Picture
Worked with landowners?  How is drawing a line on a map "working with landowners?"  Best path?  The landowners don't agree.  The 39 communities aren't in the "best path," although this bogus post sort of tries to make the reader think that the supporting communities are composed of landowners who think it's the best path.  Garbage.  Misinformation.  Lies.  That's what front groups do.

Now let's start adding string....  According to the "Page Transparency" box, this Facebook page is owned by "James Brian Gwinner." 
Picture
Who is this guy?  He's a partner at LS2Group.   He's also an active Missouri lobbyist.  Facebook requires this transparency for pages that run ads about social issues, elections, or politics.  And sure enough, this front group is running advertisements on facebook.  So far, it's spent up to $500 on "social issues, elections or politics" ads.
Picture

Wasting taxpayer dollars working to stop the project?  These heroic legislators (nee "politicians") are doing the work guided by their constituents, the people who vote for them.  They're not doing the work of out-of-state for-profit corporations with bloated lobbying and public relations budgets.  Missourians truly do deserve better than Invenergy and its stupid front group games that treat them like stupid sheep.

Facebook pages that advertise in this category are required to disclose who paid for the advertisement.
Picture
Oh look, ShowMe Connection has an address.  It's a UPS Store.  Nope, nothing shady here, folks....

Does ShowMe Connection really exist?  Let's ask the Missouri Secretary of State, Jay Ashcroft.

ShowMe Connection was registered as a domestic non-profit corporation on December 31, 2019.  Non-profit?  I'm pretty sure if you dug below all the astroturf, you'd find that Invenergy is funding this "corporation" and they're all about the profit.

ShowMe Connection's Articles of Incorporation filed with the Secretary of State show still more names associated with this front group.  There's an Iowa lawyer (because what does an Iowa PR group know about registering a Missouri corporation?) and then it needed a Missouri lawyer to be its registered agent.  These guys are just figureheads.  They don't matter.  But, they do manage to shield the real people running this front group, don't they?

The Front group was formed for the following purpose(s):
Focus on What Matters, Inc. (the "Corporation") is a nonpartisan organization having as its primary purposes the following: (i) the education of our local communities on public policy, including economic policy, relating to local communities and governments; (ii) the education of the general public on economics and public policy; and (iii) generally advancing and preserving the rights and responsibilities of citizens to appreciate the benefits of and ensure the continued existence of competition, economic freedom, and free markets. Notwithstanding the foregoing, however, the corporation is organized exclusively for charitable, religious, educational, and scientific purposes, including, for such purposes, the making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations under section 50l(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (or corresponding section of any future federal tax code).
Focus on What Matters, Inc.?  Was that the original name of this front group?  Or is it some fake DBA name?  I'm guessing it was a name that changed to make the front group sound "more Missouri" by using the state's popular "show me" in its name.  Focus on What Matters, Inc. (FOWM) doesn't seem to actually exist anywhere (except in the minds of the LS2Group, who thought it up in the first place as a sparkly front group name).  Furthermore, ShowMe Connection amended its Articles just a couple months later to remove the reference to FOWM.  Looks like these hired gun lawyers filed the wrong corporation name.  Auspicious!  Obviously not the sharpest knives in the drawer...

ShowMe Connection says its purpose is "charitable, religious, educational, and scientific ."  Which purpose is served by asking Missourians to contact their Senators to support Invenergy's for-profit transmission project?  Not charitable.  Not religious.  Not educational.  Not scientific.  Political!  It's a political purpose.  It's lobbying on behalf of Invenergy.  Seems like maybe these two sharp knives pretty much lied to the Missouri Secretary of State about their corporation's purpose.  The evidence of this is attached to all this front group's strings.

And isn't it interesting that ShowMe Connection supports free markets?  There's no "free market" being carried out by the taking of private property via eminent domain instead of allowing the landowner to negotiate with the company in a free market that recognizes the true value of his land.  Invenergy can cut off any negotiations that go above what it wants to pay by threatening to begin the eminent domain process.  Either the landowner agrees to Invenergy's price, or else!  There's no free market going on where Invenergy needs to meet the landowner's price in a freely negotiated purchase.  And this, right here, is why for-profit merchant transmission projects that sell their service in a free market should not be able to circumvent that same free market to take private property at a low price.

Let's sum all this up... There's some entity calling itself "ShowMe Connection" advertising in Missouri to encourage voters to contact their Senators.  This entity is a front group for Grain Belt Express project owner Invenergy and is run by Invenergy's public relations company in Iowa, with the help of some local folks.  It's not a "community organization."  It's a corporate front group.

However, you should contact your Senators, folks!  In fact, why not contact all the Missouri Senators, if you have time?  Let them know you support legislation to prohibit eminent domain for Grain Belt Express and want to preserve private property rights!  If you don't, the only voices these Senators may hear could come from Invenergy and its front group puppets.  Don't let some Chicago corporation run your state government!  Now is the time to act!
6 Comments

Battle of the Special Interests Masquerading as Consumer Advocates

4/22/2020

0 Comments

 
In this corner we have the "shadowy" and "secretive" New England Ratepayers Association, which describes itself as "...established to give a larger voice for the families and businesses that are served by regulated utilities," and "NERA will advocate on behalf of ratepayers across a wide range of issues in every state in New England."  However, the media has kind of described NERA as an industry front group.  Nobody knows where NERA gets its funding.
NERA includes 12 company members and received $245,000 in total revenue in 2018, Public Citizen pointed out in its testimony. Contributions make up the entirety of the group's revenue, according to its 990 tax forms, averaging approximately $20,000 per member. 

"A $20,000 financial contribution to become a 'member' of the New England Ratepayers Association orients its membership more in line [with] a corporate trade association," Public Citizen wrote in its comments.

NERA describes itself as "an independent non-profit" that was "established to give a larger voice for the families and businesses that are served by regulated utilities." NERA's Brown did not respond to multiple Utility Dive questions about its funding and membership.

"NERA isn't some rag tag bunch of dreamers. They are a well financed corporate front group pursuing a smart, aggressive playbook," said Slocum.
And in the opposite corner is Public Citizen, who describes itself as "a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization that champions the public interest in the halls of power," and claims "we don’t participate in partisan political activities."  However Influence Watch claims Public Citizen is a "liberal lobbying and advocacy organization created by left-wing activist and former Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader. The organization supports a broad liberal policy agenda focused on opposing to the free-market interests of American business owners."  Public Citizen gets a lot of its funding through shadowy and secretive grants and "gifts" from private environmental "funds".  No consumers are guiding its energy work.

The referee for this match is the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, who has recently embarked on a campaign to reverse the past decade of energy policy set by earlier Commissioners and remake the agency into a partisan political stooge for the industry it regulates.  You might call it a new era of regulatory capture.

The prize for this fight is net metering, a subject that was thoroughly adjudicated nearly a decade ago and firmly decided as not within FERC's jurisdiction.  However, NERA now says that it IS FERC jurisdictional and that the Commission should regulate excess energy production that feeds back to the grid and set its price as the utility's avoided cost.  All this has been thoroughly picked over and decided long ago, but NERA believes it can now get a different result from the new FERC.

Public Citizen wants to make this a slugfest over who actually represents consumers and who represents special interests.  Somehow they believe having this sideshow argument is going to derail NERA's petition.  NERA is probably laughing themselves silly while they wave their red cape at Public Citizen.

Who will win?  It doesn't matter, because we all lose.

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

    August 2025
    July 2025
    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.