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

Grain Belt Express Moving Forward With Eminent Domain Threats

6/29/2021

1 Comment

 
Picture
There, fixed the headline of this awful article on NPR that proclaims, "Grain Belt Express Moving Forward With Land Purchases."  How is it that this reporter gets everything wrong?  And I do mean everything.  I'm not sure there's even one sentence in this "news" article that is factual.  It's nothing but Invenergy's propaganda, and this lazy reporter bought it hook, line and sinker.  He did not talk to any other sources to verify any of the information he was given.  Did he learn that at journalism school?  Did he even earn a degree in journalism?  Or did he get a degree in political schmoozing?  Did he develop the lazy habit of simply reprinting corporate propaganda because it was quick and convenient?

Here's where the facts don't support the narrative in the article:
A project to generate electricity using wind turbines in Kansas and distribute the power in the Midwest and east coast is moving forward.
Invenergy has purchased nearly half of the land it needs in northern Missouri for the construction project that will begin in earnest in 2023. All of those deals have been the product of voluntary negotiations with landowners willing to sell, according to the company, although Invenergy could have used eminent domain to acquire the land.
Moving forward?  What does that even mean?  It's not fully permitted, it has no interconnection agreement to connect to the rest of the grid, and it has no customers.  It's been that way for pretty much the last decade.  It's not moving anywhere.

I seriously doubt that Invenergy has purchased nearly half the land it needs in northern Missouri.  Qu'est-ce que c'est "nearly," Invenergy?  Wasn't it something like 45% of the land in both Kansas and Missouri in Invenergy's recent letter to landowners (with nearly all of it in Kansas)?  So, 45% is "nearly" half?  Nearly only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades, Invenergy.  Did Invenergy really make this claim, or did the reporter misunderstand the information he was given and Invenergy hasn't bothered to correct him because they *like* the misinformation being presented?

What is "earnest" construction?  Is that unlike GBE's current quasi-construction on property purchased outright in order to avoid time and other constraints placed on its permit by the MO PSC in order to "protect" landowners?  Invenergy is currently engaged in apathetically building a bridge to nowhere.  Fact:  Invenergy won't be building anything anywhere until it is fully permitted, has interconnection agreements, and enough customers to make the line economic (GBE's loss leader pricing to Missouri municipalities doesn't count).

Voluntary?  Didn't use eminent domain to acquire land? 

***BREAKING NEWS FLASH for Reporter Ahl***

Invenergy has been sending a vaguely threatening letter to all landowners who refuse to sign.  It says
In certain circumstances, for example when landowners have stated their intention not to
engage in a voluntary negotiation process or have repeatedly refused attempts to be contacted by the Project, the only option available to Grain Belt Express is to pursue a legal proceeding for right-of-way acquisition. Missouri law requires landowners be notified in writing no less than 60 days in advance of the intended initiation of any right-of-way acquisition legal proceeding. Kansas has no prior notice requirement, however the Project intends to inform landowners prior to beginning any legal proceedings. To be clear, this letter is being mailed to all landowners for informational purposes and does not constitute such notice.
That sort of looks like a threat of eminent domain action to me.  I suspect that's Invenergy's intention as well.  You can take your "voluntary" and "willing to sell" and line the manure pit with it.  Landowners are being coerced to sign agreements under threat of eminent domain.

And if that's not factual enough, perhaps Ahl might be interested in one of the actual 60-day condemnation notices being sent to "selected" landowners?  These notices say:
If we are not able to come to terms on an easement agreement within 60 days of this letter, Grain Belt intends to file a condemnation action regarding the referenced property.
Any easement acquired as the result of this letter is in no way a voluntary action by a landowner willing to sell.  It's just another threat, this one more ominous.

Will Invenergy actually file on day 61?  We haven't quite gotten there yet, and the letter only says it will file, not when.  Both letters also sort of insinuate that the condemnation filing ends negotiations and sets the price.  In my experience, the condemnation filing was only the beginning of serious negotiation to acquire property.  The condemning entity would most likely rather not have to engage in the whole process and be willing to settle just to prevent a price for your property being set by a board of your landowning neighbors.  In fact, the letter itself says:
As it relates to the proposed acquisition, under the Missouri law, you have the right to:

b. Make a counteroffer and engage in further negotiations;
The list of landowner rights after condemnation is filed are required to be included in the letter under state law.  Landowners have plenty of leverage and can settle at any time, not just before condemnation is filed.  Maybe Invenergy isn't going to make condemnation filings until some time down the road when it has county assents, a permit in Illinois, interconnection agreements, and customers to pay for the project?  I dunno... just trying to apply a little logic because Invenergy's land acquisition cart is way ahead of its project pony.  I wonder why Invenergy is so interested in signing "voluntary" easements  for a project that is years away from actual construction?  Something smells here...

Maybe it's this?
The issue could come up again next year, but Luckey said the company isn’t concerned with that, as Invenergy is open to talking with lawmakers.
“It’s about coming to the table and letting them know we respect their point of view and the constituents they represent,” Luckey said. “We want to be a partner with them, and we are going to continue education and outreach with citizens and lawmakers.”
Coming to the table with legislators and playing a little footsie?  Respect must be earned.  Everyone knows those legislators are not acting in the best interests of their Missouri constituents, but in the interest of an out-of-state company's profits.  Missourians will vote accordingly.

And then there's this bold faced lie:
Luckey said linking the Grain Belt Express to the power grid could have helped avoid the massive power outage Texas experienced in February.
“The line would have made it possible to import substantial amounts of excess electricity to supply from other regions to address those outages,” Luckey said.

Except Texas has its own grid that is not connected to the rest of us.  They like it that way so they can control their own energy policy and avoid federal meddling.  Texas can't import anything from Grain Belt Express or anyone else, and that's not going to change. 

And let's end with this, which indicates that Invenergy's broadband promises may be going the way of the monopole... just an empty promise that falls to the wayside in order to increase Invenergy's profits.
Invenergy also lists benefits to Missouri including  the possibility of using the infrastructure to improve broadband internet connectivity to underserved areas.
Possibility?  Seems like it's getting less possible as time goes on.  When are Missouri legislators going to wake up and realize they're being played for fools?

This is possibly the worst reporting on GBE... ever.
1 Comment

Illinois Legislature To Vote On Energy Bill Next Tuesday

6/9/2021

1 Comment

 
This story says the Illinois legislature will be called back into session for one day next Tuesday, June 15.  There are a couple better stories about it, but they're behind paywalls so we won't provide links.  One blathered on about how they think they have enough votes in the Senate to pass the bill, however, that appears maybe sort of iffy.

Your mission... peel away at least one state Senator.  Here's a list.  Of course, the Senator doesn't have to vote against the energy bill, s/he just needs to remove the language that changes the definition of "public utility".  It should be really easy for the Senator to find just by searching the document for the words "public utility," and even easier for the Senator to amend the bill to remove it before the vote on Tuesday.

Would the Illinois senate hold up this important energy bill to argue over whether Invenergy should be a public utility?  Or will they throw Invenergy under the bus in order to pass this legislation that fixes other more important energy issues?  Invenergy is an opportunistic parasite that has attached itself to fast moving and popular legislation in order to increase its corporate profits.  Invenergy is not worth the sacrifice.

Here's a little background music to play while you work.
1 Comment

Invenergy Wants To Change Illinois Law To Give Grain Belt Express Eminent Domain

6/5/2021

3 Comments

 
Picture
Was it just last month that Invenergy told the Missouri legislature that it wasn't fair to change state law if it hurt their project?  Well, guess what?  Invenergy is busy trying to change state law in Illinois to help Grain Belt Express by allowing it to become a public utility so it may use eminent domain to site the project across Illinois.  Hypocrisy at its finest!

As many of you may remember, the Illinois courts vacated Grain Belt's permit (and eminent domain authority) several years ago because Grain Belt Express did not own any utility property in the state.  Because it did not own utility property, it was not a public utility, and because it wasn't a public utility it was not allowed to use eminent domain to acquire easements across private property.  Clean Line was unsuccessful in overturning this decision. 

However, Invenergy is attempting to change the law upon which the court's decision was based.  As part of an extensive new energy bill in Illinois, the following language changes have been proposed to the statute.
Picture
By changing the definition of public utility, Invenergy could be be a public utility now, if it only intends to own property later.  It merely has to apply at the ICC and receive a permit.  Our private property rights are under attack all across the Midwest by greedy merchant transmission developers who want to use your private property to make money on speculative renewable energy projects.

Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker says utilities did not write this energy bill.
Pritzker, who vowed in the wake of the ComEd scandal that utilities and energy companies would no longer write the state’s energy policy, declined to comment on the specifics of his offer, saying that negotiators were “still working on the bill.”

“Utilities did not write the bill that we have worked on. That is clear,” Pritzker said. “We have done everything that we can to stand up for clean energy principles, to make sure that we’re expanding renewables in the state. I have set out the principles, I have stuck to those principles, and so my hope is that we’ll end up with a good energy bill.”

So, we're supposed to believe that Invenergy did not have its thumb on this rather opportune language change?  Illinois is still reeling from a recent utility scandal where ComEd exerted undue influence on the state legislature.  It sure looks to me like Illinois has simply traded one utility master for another.  Instead of the legislature being under ComEd's thumb, now it's under Invenergy's thumb.
Something sure stinks in Springfield!

Invenergy wants to take the most profitable route for GBE, and that's using eminent domain to take private property across three states.  It doesn't want to fairly negotiate with landowners without the sledgehammer of eminent domain.  Here's another news flash:  eminent domain is not necessary to build merchant transmission!  When eminent domain for overhead merchant transmission was outlawed in Iowa several years ago, a better project emerged.  SOO Green Renewable Rail is developing a merchant transmission project buried its entire length on existing railroad rights of way.  No eminent domain!  No changing state law, no sacrifice from landowners.  It's a complete no-brainer!  Maybe Invenergy should make a better project instead of using its influence to manipulate state law for its own benefit?

Fortunately, the Illinois energy bill did not pass before the legislative session ended, however, there's talk that it may come to a vote in a few days, or maybe this month, or next month, nobody is really sure and reports change day by day.  If it does come to a vote, the public utility definition change needs to be stripped out.  Let Illinois legislators know!

Does Invenergy's legislative hypocrisy stick in your craw?  Want to do something about it?  Well, you can!  It's quick and easy, and probably extremely satisfying as well!  You don't have to be an Illinois resident to contact Illinois legislators.  The bigger the voice, the more impact it has! For complete instructions on who to call or write, visit BlockRICL or send an email to [email protected].
3 Comments

Gag Me With A Spoon

5/21/2021

3 Comments

 
Picture
As if the 17-year locusts weren't enough for this spring, there's a more revolting creature crawling out of the ground lately.

Yesterday, Michael Skelly testified before a Congressional Committee in love with the Green New Deal.
He introduces himself like this:

My name is Michael Skelly and I am founder and CEO of Grid United, an early stage transmission development company. I have spent the last 25 years developing a wide variety of energy projects. I got involved in the US wind industry in the late 90’s, and helped put together thousands of megawatts of new wind projects. In 2009 I started a company called Clean Line Energy which focused on interstate power lines to move renewable energy around the country. We successfully permitted a three-state high voltage, direct current transmission line. We sold off our projects several years ago to other developers who are carrying them forward. Indeed, our Western Spirit project is now under construction in New Mexico.

What's an "early stage transmission development company?"  Is that what happens when you register a corporate name in Delaware, throw up a one-page website announcing you are "Coming Soon!", but you don't have any employees or funding, just another grandiose brain fart?  How soon is too soon to once again begin tilting at windmills after being kicked squarely in the mouth by spectacular, flaming failure?

The people have not forgotten.  Michael Skelly's reputation will precede him.  Who's going to give this guy another $200M to spend on crackpot transmission ideas?

Funny he doesn't mention his failure in his comments.  He says he "successfully permitted a three-state" transmission line.  Except there were no customers and the government cancelled its participation in the project, so there wasn't actually a permit after all.  The project (and the non-permit "permit") were cancelled.  That's not success.  The U.S. DOE never issued a "permit."  It issued a participation agreement based on certain conditions.  One condition was that the project had to have customers.  No customers, no project.  And furthermore, there is no developer who is "carrying forward" the Plains & Eastern Clean Line.  The project got chopped up and a portion bought up for an entirely different purpose.  That's not success, either.  Western Spirit?  You mean some other company did it better than Skelly?  That's also not success.  That's failure.

So, blah, blah, blah... you folks are just so nettlesome!
A decade ago, we as a country did not have such a fantastic opportunity set in front of us. However, in the ensuing years, both utilities and independent developers have been sorting through the nettlesome siting, permitting, cost allocation and grid connection challenges.
Nettlesome:  causing annoyance or difficulty. 

Michael Skelly wants you to stop annoying him.

Because "we as a country...".  Is that like last decade's "we as a society"?  Now Michael Skelly can speak for the whole country!  There ain't no "we" here.  Michael Skelly and his one-man band playing a nettlesome song for rural landowners.

Transmission plays a role in replacing the carbon and other pollution in these population centers with renewable sources of energy, thereby improving air quality for residents, and addressing long-standing environmental injustices.

Is that like the long-standing environmental and financial injustices Michael Skelly perpetrated upon Midwest landowners for a decade trying to build unneeded and unwanted transmission?  Oh, cry me a river of environmental injustice... then dam it up and generate electricity with it.  Make yourself useful.

Skelly tells the committee all about how transmission is paid for.  But he makes several critical errors.  On regionally-planned, cost-allocated projects with regulated cost-of-service rates:

While not a perfect policy tool, an Investment Tax Credit can make up for this deficiency in the planning process. The ITC would have the effect of lowering the denominator in the benefit to cost test. More lines would make it through the planning process, and we will end up with a lower carbon grid.

So, in other words, Skelly thinks that receiving a tax credit for 30% of the project's cost would lower the cost of the project at the regional planning level.  No, it would not.  The tax credit comes AFTER a project is put in service and is not guaranteed.  It cannot be fed into the RTO project cost estimate BEFORE is is planned.  Cart before horse.  The cost of the transmission project is the cost of the transmission project, sans tax credits.  Tax credits are completely separate things.  Utility ratemaking and taxes are complicated things.  Perhaps Skelly should ask someone who is an expert on these things before making crap up?  I was going to write a tutorial here, but then I figure why bother?  You don't care about the mechanics and I don't work for Michael Skelly.

Even worse is Skelly's take on merchant transmission rates:

The other type of transmission lines that get built are called “merchant” lines. These are typically built outside the conventional planning process, and their economics rely on generators paying the developers of merchant lines to deliver their power across long distances to get to market. An ITC will help reduce the cost of the transmission service, and therefore more lines would get built, and more renewable energy projects will follow.

Merchants assume all risk.  They also assume all costs.  The rate charged for a merchant project is negotiated between the customer and the transmission owner, not set by regulators.  A fair rate for merchant transmission service is set by market.  It's the highest cost a merchant can negotiate that is also attractive to the customer, a mutual agreement of the value of the project to the customer.  That value doesn't change because of tax credits.  Unless Skelly is proposing that rates are negotiated without the specter of tax credits, and then the value of the tax credit is subtracted from the agreed upon rate.  That's the only way the tax credit would reduce merchant transmission rates and pass through to ratepayers.

One last rate-geek thought here...  transmission is always, and I do mean always, paid for by the beneficiaries of the project.  If you don't benefit from transmission, you don't pay for it in your transmission bill.  The tax credit proposal completely upends this long-standing regulatory concept.  It replaces the beneficiary ratepayers with non-beneficiary taxpayers.  It's such a simple concept, even Michael Skelly might be able to understand it.  Just like we don't charge ratepayers in Alaska for a transmission line that serves Floridians, we don't charge taxpayers in Florida for a transmission line built in Alaska.

The transmission investment tax credit is a thoughtless, ignorant idea dreamed up by the greedy and stupid.  Its supporters keep digging a wider and wider hole.  There's no way out of this...  it simply doesn't work.

Maybe the most interesting thing about this is the fact that the "Macrogrid" disciples have hitched their star to Michael Skelly's Wagon of Failure.  That tells you all you need to know about the possibility of its success.

Gag me with a spoon!  A spoon?  Really?  I never understood the use of a spoon, but it makes me laugh nonetheless.  But who needs a spoon when you have Michael Skelly?
3 Comments

Grain Belt Express Seeks New $600 Million Taxpayer Handout

5/14/2021

4 Comments

 
Picture
At a recent ACORE webinar trying to sell a new transmission investment tax credit to a friendly, money-spewing administration, GBE owner Invenergy stated that it NEEDED the proposed tax credit to "enable" the Grain Belt Express.
Financing large-scale, interregional transmission can be particularly challenging for merchant developers, said Shashank Sane, senior vice president and head of transmission at Invenergy.  “The beneficiaries of these projects can be diverse, and so in order to monetize the value of those lines, we have to find the stakeholder who is willing to pay for a certain benefit and create those links,” Sane said. “That’s really not the right model.”

For example, he said, Invenergy’s Grain Belt Express project now under development is aimed at bringing wind power from Kansas across Missouri, Illinois and ultimately to Indiana, providing a connection to MISO and PJM.

“The ITC is the key tool that will enable [the project] because it addresses the cost allocation problem and paying for those multiple benefits a single beneficiary is not willing to pay for,” Sane said.

The ITC is a new tax credit that will allow the owner of new transmission to take a credit on their taxes of 30% of the project's cost.  If Grain Belt Express is supposed to cost $2B (latest estimate I could find), then it would receive $600M (that's 600 MILLION!) of federal tax credits paid for by U.S. taxpayers.  What's more, the ITC is proposed to be refundable, if the transmission owner does not pay enough taxes to offset the credit it earns.  If Invenergy only owes $50M of federal taxes in the year it puts GBE in service, under the new proposal it could pay no taxes at all that year and receive a $550M tax refund from the federal government.

As a supposed merchant transmission project, GBE is supposed to pay for its own project and collect all its costs from voluntary customers who negotiate rates for service on GBE.  GBE is supposed to shoulder all risk of its project.  If GBE fails, there are no captive ratepayers to cover its costs.  However, GBE is now proposing, indeed saying it NEEDS, a new handout from American taxpayers in the neighborhood of $600M in order to build its project.

Just yesterday, GBE "needed" eminent domain to take land from Missouri farmers cheaper than it could acquire the same land in the free market.  Keeping land costs low keeps Invenergy's costs low, and lower costs translate to higher profits.  Today, GBE "needs" a $600M taxpayer handout to further increase its profits.  GBE just keeps "needing," and taking, more and more from people.

Isn't it time to say enough?

Stop enabling Invenergy's profits!  Start supporting the citizens of Missouri who elected you.
4 Comments

Reliability Reality

5/13/2021

0 Comments

 
Picture
Seems like the idea of "reliability" is a big thing these days.  When applied to electricity, what does it mean?  It means that when you flip the switch on the wall at your home, the lights go on.  And that may be the extent of what the general public knows about the "reliability" of their electricity.   These folks are gullible patsies for  greedy, electric industry propaganda.  The best propaganda disseminates a self-serving idea that plays on public fear.

How many stories have you read lately about things that fail without warning:  bridges... pipelines... electricity.  Bingo!  You're being fed a bunch of lies about "the electric grid" and its "reliability."
Developers of the Grain Belt Express say the massive transmission line remains on track to open up by 2025, connecting wind power in western Kansas with voracious demand in the East.
The 800-mile project promises to add more reliability to the electric grid — all the more enticing since rolling blackouts in February left millions of Americans without power. While the $2 billion overhead transmission line aims at exporting wind energy from Kansas, it will also be capable of moving electricity both directions, which could have helped mitigate the electricity crisis that hit the United States earlier this year.

Zadlo understands the opposition to the project. But he said the benefits for people here and across the United States are immense. Just like railroad cars transport coal from mines to refineries, the Grain Belt will move a much-needed resource to customers, while also strengthening the electrical grid.

"Reliability benefits all people, right? Increasing the reliability of the grid is a good societal impact," he said. "Whether you're in the city or in rural areas, you will benefit from the increased reliability that Grain Belt will bring."

Well, gosh, you might think that we NEED GBE to make sure the lights go on when we flip the switch.  However, this is nothing but propaganda designed to make you think we're just sitting around watching the grid rot and waiting for some non-utility corporation to build enormously profitable new transmission that serves their generation portfolio.  That would just be stupid!

Reliability is maintained through transmission planning by several independent regional transmission system operators.  Reliability planning is their main purpose!    In addition, utilities must meet rigorous reliability standards set and enforced by NERC, a federal reliability enforcement organization.  We don't leave reliability to chance!!!  Therefore when some vapid media piece tells you that our grid is "outdated," "creaky," "aged," "unreliable" you can be assured that none of that is true!  Our grid is kept reliable through strict regulation, planning and operation.  These are the organizations that deserve all the credit for keeping your lights on.

The regional transmission system operators have a robust transmission planning process that looks years into the future to ensure that the grid remains reliable in any scenario.  If we need new transmission for reliability purposes, then the buck stops there.  All transmission that we actually NEED for reliability is planned by the grid operator, assigned to a regulated utility, and ordered to be built, with the costs of the project allocated across the electric ratepayers who receive the benefit.  It works!

However, GBE is not one of these needed reliability projects.  No grid operator has planned, ordered, or allocated the costs of GBE to ratepayers.  Instead, GBE is an outside actor that is attempting to build transmission for its own purposes.  It is building transmission because it wants to make money.  It is not building transmission to be a public service.  GBE owner Invenergy has no obligation to serve electric consumers and it doesn't give a rat's patootie whether or not your lights come on when you flip the switch.  Invenergy simply wants to see lots of money in its bank account.

So when merchant transmission projects like GBE tell you that they will provide some necessary "reliability," it's nothing but bogus propaganda.  Any "reliability" provided by GBE is reliability we don't need.  If we needed it to keep the lights on, GBE would be a regional system operator planned, ordered and cost allocated project.  But it's not.  It's a private corporate foray into transmission whose only obligation is to its own balance sheet.

The reality of reliability is that we have an extensive, federally sanctioned system that ensures reliability.

Grain Belt Express is not part of that system.  We don't "need" it to make sure the lights go on when we flip the switch on the wall.
0 Comments

Moving Missouri Forward To New, Beneficial Solutions

4/23/2021

0 Comments

 
Picture
The Missouri Senate Committee on Commerce, Consumer Protection, Energy and the Environment held a hearing on SB 508 this week.  Dozens of Missourians came from all over the state to voice their support for this important legislation.  They spoke from the heart.

But a handful of folks on Chicago-based Invenergy's payroll, along with some who think they may personally profit from using the solemn power of eminent domain to force the acquisition of private property for Grain Belt Express, were also on hand to deliver company talking points opposing the legislation.

Those company talking points were balm for uneducated and closed minds.  It wasn't about reality,  it was about providing cover for those who have already made up their mind to support the project.  Let's take a look at the pure nonsense of these talking points.

1.  The legislation is unconstitutional and will result in a $30M verdict against the state.

REALITY:  It's not Invenergy's place to dictate to the Missouri legislature about the constitutionality of legislation.  Of course they said that!  It's one of the only cards Invenergy has left to play.  Constitutionality is determined by the judicial system.  Invenergy lawyers (and others in cahoots with them) are not judges.  They say whatever benefits their position that they think dumb people will believe.  As if a lawyer for one side can pre-determine what an impartial judge would decide.  Lawyers are always trying to convince people that the side they represent is right.   However there are always two sides before a judge and one of them will lose.  Which one will it be?  That's for the court to decide.

The legislature's job is to craft law necessary to serve the state and its people.  In this instance, the legislature is closing a gaping hole in the state's eminent domain law.  The statutes that allow eminent domain for public utilities are old and never contemplated the rather recent creation of merchant transmission.  There was no such thing when the current statute was written.  Back then, public utilities served the public in the state.  Merchant transmission is not a public utility because it does not have an obligation to serve all persons who want service at the same rate.  Merchant transmission serves only those who bid the highest for its service.  Only those who pay the most are allowed to use the transmission line.  In addition, Invenergy has significant financial interest in electric generation, and there's little safeguard against favoring its own financial interest in selecting the project's users.  In fact, there's absolutely nothing stopping Invenergy from deciding not to sell service on Grain Belt Express at all and instead keeping all the transmission capacity for its own use as a private driveway across the state to move its own generation to higher priced markets.  Grain Belt Express doesn't have to allow any "public" in Missouri to use the project.  Do you trust that Invenergy will keep all its promises?  You know what they say... Marry in haste, repent at leisure!

Where are all the Missouri customers?  A handful of cities who were cut a sweet deal by old owner Clean Line Energy Partners in exchange for support at the Public Service Commission is only 10% of the service the company claims it could make available in Missouri.  Why are there no other customers?  I can't find where Invenergy has even opened another bidding window to negotiate with new potential customers in Missouri.  It's almost like they're not even trying to find new negotiated rate customers in the state.

The reality here is that a substantially similar law to limit eminent domain for overhead merchant transmission projects was signed into law in Iowa four years ago.  In that instance, the legislation was inspired by a different Clean Line project, the Rock Island Clean Line.  What happened after it passed?  Was it determined to be unconstitutional and was a $30M verdict against the State of Iowa awarded?  NO.  In that instance, Clean Line scrapped its project and moved on.  No court battle, no verdict.  If the legislation was so certain to be unconstitutional and worthy of such a huge payout, Clean Line would have taken it to the court.  But it didn't.  And it's not like Iowa even lost much when the project was abandoned.  In the wake of the new law, a better solution was proposed.  SOO Green Renewable Rail is in the process of developing an underground high-voltage DC transmission project built entirely on existing railroad rights of way.  The state still gets the "benefits" of new transmission without any of the impacts to private property.  Preventing eminent domain for overhead merchant transmission turned into a big win-win for Iowa!  Why would Missouri roll out the red carpet for a dated, invasive project when it could have the latest technology without any landowner impacts instead?

The Missouri legislature could accomplish the same thing by passing SB 508.  Invenergy's threats are empty.

2.  Grain Belt Express would prevent future blackouts.

REALITY:  Texageddon has become more than it was in order to use it to push new transmission for profit.  Dig past the shallow talking points.

First of all, Invenergy has not committed to building its project through Illinois and into the PJM Interconnection grid.  Lately, it's been claiming that it will only build the Kansas and Missouri portions of the project.  GBE's chances of being permitted in Illinois are far, far from certain, thanks to an Illinois Supreme Court decision in the Rock Island Clean Line case that questioned whether merchant transmission is even a public utility under Illinois law. 

However, Invenergy is pretending it can magically reverse its transmission project and suck power out of PJM on a whim.  The legal and practical ramifications of this are not even talked about, instead Missouri is being fed a glossed over fantasy.  Reality is that GBE's customers will own all the transmission capacity on the line... 100%.  Invenergy has not explained how it can commandeer that capacity back from the customers who own it in order to sell it to someone else for a different purpose.  In the Texageddon situation, which Invenergy spins for its own purpose, additional transmission would not have been useful.  Surrounding areas were also low on generation due to the weather event.  There simply was no power to be had.  Grain Belt Express is not for the purpose of "reliability," it's simply a profit center for Invenergy.  Building a DC transmission line with limited connection to Missouri's grid does not create reliability benefits.  If it did, the project would have been planned and ordered by one of the regional transmission organizations, such as SPP or MISO.  That it was not speaks to the lack of reliability "need" for GBE.

3.  The PSC and the Court has approved and upheld GBE's use of eminent domain.

REALITY:  The PSC shoehorned GBE into existing statute, although the statute did not contemplate merchant transmission and was a poor fit.  It's just the only statute that it had.  Ditto for the Court.  The PSC is a creature of statute.  It receives all its power from the legislature, not the other way around.  Likewise, Courts only interpret existing law, they do not create new law.  They have to work with what they're given by the legislature.  It is the Missouri legislature's job to craft the statutes that the PSC and the courts use for merchant transmission projects.  

Isn't it time for Missouri to update its statute to fit today's reality?  Opposing this legislation is nothing more than anchoring Missouri in the past where huge, outdated, overhead lattice transmission towers impede Missouri's agricultural progress and destroy the right to own and enjoy private property.  It is a wrong-headed obstruction to the possibility of a new, profitable energy future for Missouri.

Support SB 508!
0 Comments

The Assault on Rural America Has Begun

4/14/2021

1 Comment

 
Picture
Have you ever really contemplated the crackpot conspiracy theory fleshed out on various TV shows that there is some secret entity actually running our country?  That elected officials are mere puppets of some secret global cabal?  Why is it that most of the wealth is concentrated within a very small group of people?  Does money buy power?  If you've ever wondered about these things, pull up a chair, this blog is for you...

Last week I told you about Biden's plan for investment tax credits for electric transmission lines, though there was actually little information to be had.  My Alexa must have been on the job reading my mind, because the very next day the text of new legislation introduced in Congress to make the transmission investment tax credit a reality was revealed.  Thanks, Jeff Bezos, what would I do without you and your AI spy?  If I can think it, you can deliver it!

Here's a link to the bill.  Go ahead, click through.  It's amazingly brief and facile.  Not what you'd be expecting for a complicated giving away of hundreds of millions of dollars of your money.  The real "guts" are contained in the IRS code -- this just establishes a transmission investment tax credit at 30%.  The IRS has to figure out how to run the program.  The legislation just sets the parameters for it, such as what kind of electric transmission qualifies for the tax credit?

Are you ready?
‘‘(c) QUALIFYING ELECTRIC POWER TRANSMISSION LINE PROPERTY.—The term ‘qualifying electric power transmission line property’ means— ‘‘(1) any overhead, submarine, or underground transmission facility which—
‘‘(A) is capable of transmitting electricity at a voltage of not less than 275 kilovolts,
‘‘(B) has a transmission capacity of not less than 500 megawatts,
‘‘(C) is an alternating current or direct current transmission line, and
‘‘(D) delivers power produced in either a rural area or offshore, and

‘‘(2) any conductors or cables, towers, insulators, reactors, capacitors, circuit breakers, static VAR compensators, static synchronous compensators, power converters, transformers, synchronous condensers, braking resistors, and any ancillary facilities and equipment necessary for the proper operation of the facility described in paragraph (1).


Power produced in a rural area?  So transmission for power produced in an urban area  cannot qualify for this tax credit?  You may be thinking that they don't need transmission for power produced in an urban area because it can be used where it's produced.  But think a little harder... this discourages any future power production in urban areas and encourages lots of future power production in rural areas.  It provides the carrot on a stick to a future where rural areas operate as the power production serfs that serve their powerful masters in the cities.  Power production in rural areas is encouraged through a giveaway of your tax dollars. 

But what if they used that money instead to develop power production in the cities and suburbs that use so much of it?  That would probably be a cheaper scenario, by far.  But our government is pushing for a different reality where the cities are mere power parasites feeding off the sacrifice of rural areas.

Let's peel this onion to see just how many layers there are to this bold plan to enslave rural areas...  and discover that they're not even trying to hide it anymore.  When the elites control every aspect of the narrative, plus the puppets who will carry it out, there is nothing to fear from plebeians.

This article in Renewable Energy Magazine ties this legislation to ACORE, the American Council on Renewable Energy.  Of course the legislators who are sponsoring this legislation are nothing but lobbyist puppets, doing what they're told.  If they don't buck the system, they are rewarded with campaign contributions that keep them in office.  If legislators don't do any real work writing or reading legislation, what do they DO all day?  Run around like remote-control robots making sure things happen like they are ordered to happen, preening for the cameras, feeding their egos.

ACORE put out a brief press release.  Very proud of themselves and their legislative puppets.  ACORE says this tax credit will serve their Macro Grid initiative.
“Sen. Martin Heinrich, Rep. Steven Horsford and Rep. Susie Lee’s introduction today of the Electric Power Infrastructure Improvement Act adds to the growing momentum for a federal transmission investment tax credit (ITC). As we saw this winter, America’s outdated grid infrastructure is hurting consumers and our economy. With a transmission ITC, we can enhance grid reliability, create jobs, save consumers money, and provide developers with the long-term certainty they need to invest in a 21st century Macro Grid that’s capable of delivering the clean energy future Americans want and deserve. We look forward to working with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to pass this critically important legislation this year.”
So what, or who, is ACORE?  Here's a lovely photo collage of their rather extensive Board of Directors (for even more fun, there's also a doubly large Board of Directors Emeritus).  24 people on the BOD.  24!  How do they ever manage to get things done?  But, all that aside, look at who these 24 people are, and what "member companies" they represent.  NextEra, Pattern, Avangrid, Invenergy, Berkshire Hathaway -- all companies who stand to profit significantly by building new renewable generation and transmission to serve it.  The list also includes equipment suppliers of renewable energy technology and equipment.  But perhaps most disturbing of all is that it also includes lots of big investors such as BlackRock, JP Morgan, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs.  And then there are some really odd, but powerful, additions, such as Facebook and Amazon.  Hang on... my Alexa is going crazy trying to take my order for renewables right now...

ACORE's mission pretends it's just an educational, tax exempt organization that doesn't lobby.
The American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE) is a 501(c)(3) national nonprofit organization that unites finance, policy and technology to accelerate the transition to a renewable energy economy.
I guess they don't have to actually lobby... just place an Alexa in every legislator's home, office and car.

But isn't it funny that all these companies stand to make a bundle of money from new legislation that enables their business and profits?  And legislators get so "educated" about it that they write bills about things they know nothing about?  Wow!  Serendipity!

But wait... let's see what's in the next layer of this onion.  ACORE's Macro Grid initiative.  Who came up with that?  ACORE's 2020 Annual Report reveals:
Thanks to generous support from Breakthrough Energy, ACORE and Americans for a Clean Energy Grid (ACEG) launched the Macro Grid Initiative to promote investment in a 21st century transmission infrastructure that enhances reliability, improves efficiency and delivers more low-cost clean energy.
And is extremely profitable for ACORE's Board of Directors, don't forget that part.  Your beneficent pose isn't working for me.

Who is "Breakthrough Energy?"  Here's the layer where you really start to smell the rot that pervades this entire charade...
Breakthrough Energy Ventures is an investor-led fund that aims to build the new, cutting-edge companies that will lead the world to net-zero emissions.
Our strategy links government-funded research and patient, risk-tolerant capital to bring transformative clean energy innovations to market as quickly as possible.
Again, it's not about beneficence, it's about making money, lots of it.  And in order to do that, they have to influence government policies and programs at the highest level.

Even more revealing, take a good, close look at Breakthrough Energy's Board & Investors.

There you'll find some very familiar names... multi-billionaires you've heard of, along with a host of other filthy rich people from around the globe that you've never heard of.

The cast of characters includes:  Bill Gates, Michael Bloomberg, Jeff Bezos (Alexa, shut up, I'm trying to work here), and some Walton family members. 

And it also includes a huge list of other multi-billionaires from around the globe and includes members from Saudi Arabia, India, England, China, Canada, Germany, South Africa, France and Japan.  And China.  Did I mention China?

These folks who funded ACORE's Macro Grid initiative are intending to invest in renewable energy projects in order to get even richer.  But it's not just that... let's dial back out.

Where did the transmission investment tax credit first get mentioned?  In President Biden's "Infrastructure" thing.  Do you suppose he independently came up with that idea and it was just happy coincidence that it lined up with what the global elite wanted?

Or do these global elites, who control a substantial portion of the world's wealth, also control our elected officials?

Who really wants to make sure all energy of the future is produced in rural areas, and not in the cities?  Is it really about climate change, or is it simply a rent seeking operation?  And how would the .00001% distract the hoi polloi from their bold scheme?  Maybe they buy up the media, control the narrative, and create a crisis that pits the average American against his neighbor and uses up all their energy and attention fighting each other while the robber barons help themselves to what little wealth we have left.

So... transmission investment tax credits.... yes or no?
1 Comment

Updating an Old Law to Reflect Today's Reality in Missouri

4/13/2021

3 Comments

 
Picture
Ever read something and feel that it made you dumber?  That's pretty much my summation of a news article and OpEd that recently appeared in Missouri, along with an article in a law school journal.  A law school journal?  Isn't that supposed to be an in depth examination of the law using facts?  The things they're teaching kids these days...

Let's start with the law journal piece, because it's just so much fluffy opinion.

Missouri’s Chance at Low-Cost Renewable Energy ‘Gone with the Wind’? in the St. Louis School of Law Journal uses references to opinion pieces to make its point.  Is that how current law students intend to win future court battles?  "Because Sierra Club told me this should be my opinion, therefore, it shall also be the opinion of the Court...".  All "facts" are unproven, one-sided claims and studies.  There is no balance here.  If this was a journalism student writing for the school newspaper, he should receive a failing grade.  But it's law, where reality is molded to support a desired outcome.  Works great unless there is an opposing side. And there's always an opposing side!  Maybe the author should have spent more time researching eminent domain and its requirement that property taken must be put into "public use."  Public use and public "benefit" are two separate things.  The public may not use  Grain Belt Express.  It's a privately owned project for the exclusive use of its selected customers.  Just because some wrongly believe it provides some economic public "benefit" does not mean it's for public use.  Building a Walmart in your Mom's backyard would provide economic benefits to the public, right?  Or how about a casino in your spare bedroom?  A McDonald's next door?  All businesses spur commerce, new taxes, and convenience to users, however we don't use eminent domain to site them.  It's not like anyone can come in off the street and sell its cheap Chinese goods at Walmart, sell their own burgers at McDonald's, or set up their own shell game in the casino's lobby.  That would be public use.  I hope the law school soon includes a class on the 5th Amendment, maybe some study of Kelo v. City of New London.  It's desperately needed before these new lawyers are unleashed on society.  This piece discusses political opinion, not the law.

Next let's look at this article in The Kansas City Star.  It also concentrates on purported "benefits" and opinion, not the law.  Granted, it is a newspaper, but the article is about proposed legislation to change the law.  Shouldn't they be concentrating on the law?  There's nothing in there that sheds any light on changes to the actual law, or why legislators and voters believe the changes are necessary.  It nothing but a trojan horse of "benefits" that aren't really necessary.  It toots loud and long about "reliability" benefits, claiming that GBE will bring "needed" reliability to the electric grid.  However, reliability is something studied, planned and ordered by regional grid operators, such as Southwest Power Pool (SPP) and Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO).  If you need new transmission for reliability, SPP or MISO will order it to be built.  GBE has not been ordered for reliability.  It is a merchant project planned by private interests for their own pecuniary gain.  Its only purpose is to make money for Invenergy.  It's "reliability" you don't need.  If you did, SPP or MISO would order it, but they have not.  It also makes some crazy claims about the ability to redirect the project to bring power to Missouri from Indiana, instead of the other way around.  Maybe that would work if it was a public access transmission line, but it's not.  GBE plans to sell 100% of its capacity to generators on the Kansas end of the line and load serving entities who supply power to consumers at the Indiana end of the line.  These entities would own all the capacity on the line for their own use.  The idea that MISO or SPP could commandeer this private use transmission line and use it to ship power from generators in Indiana to load serving entities in Missouri doesn't work.  How would the contracted customers be compensated for that?  What would happen if the load serving entities on the Indiana end of the line were counting on GBE's capacity to meet their own power needs, and GBE suddenly stopped delivering power and, instead, began sucking locally generated power out of Indiana for use by load serving entities in Missouri?  There's a lot more to this story that isn't told.  It's an idea that makes little sense but it is spoon fed to an ignorant public as possible.

The article also attempts to convince that we need to "upgrade" the wider electric grid, and GBE will accomplish that.  No, not even close.  Our current grid is often compared to an interstate highway, open for the public to use.  However, GBE is not a part of the wider electric grid.  It's a private toll road from Kansas to Indiana that charges a fee to its contracted users.  Only those contracted users can use the highway.  It does not provide benefit to communities crossed because they cannot use it.

In addition to providing a source of affordable, renewable energy to communities along the route, Invenergy says it expects to provide broadband capability to internet service providers — connecting as many as 1 million Missourians with high-speed internet.
No, it does not provide a source of energy to communities along the route.  And it doesn't provide broadband either.  Just putting broadband capabilities on the project does not connect communities along the route.  The communities would still have to make the connection and construct the "last mile" of infrastructure that makes the actual connection to users, and that's expensive.  Another "benefit" that's not useful.

And then perhaps we should consider the comments of Invenergy's Kris Zadlo, and maybe the MO PSC wants to consider them as well during its hearing this week regarding purported changes to the project.  Is Invenergy changing the project?  Depends on what day it is.  In some media, they claim they will build the project without the leg through Illinois that connects to Indiana, and increase the offering of capacity to Missouri.  But it tells the PSC it's not changing the project... and then it reverts back to the original project it had permitted for purposes of lobbying against new legislation.  Which is it, Invenergy?
Aside from Missouri’s proposed legislation, Zadlo said the project only needs final regulatory approval in Illinois before construction begins. It’s expected to be online by 2025, he said.
Invenergy has more personalities than Sybil!

Last, let's take a look at today's Op Ed from Senator Bill White in The Missouri Times (still pretending to be a news source?)

White claims that the legislation is unconstitutional because it changes the law.  Hang on a minute... is he saying that the legislature is prevented from changing the law?  The legislature's job IS to change the law! 

GBE was approved using a law that doesn't fit.  The MO PSC's authority to approve transmission and grant eminent domain was created before merchant transmission was invented.  The  law was written for public use projects that the PSC determined were needed for reliability, economic purposes, or to provide service to customers who don't have it.  Missouri doesn't have any laws regarding merchant transmission, therefore the PSC tried to shoehorn GBE into the existing law, even though it was a poor fit.  The current legislation amends the existing law to include provisions for merchant transmission.  Because merchant transmission is for private profit, and not for public use, it shouldn't receive eminent domain authority.  It is entirely within the purview of the legislature to update existing laws to fit today's reality, and that's exactly what the legislature proposes to do.  Senator White purports that Invenergy could sue the state for making new laws that frustrate its profits.  How ridiculous is that?  Why is Senator White inviting an out-of-state corporation to sue the state for making laws that benefit its citizens (but not necessarily foreign corporations)?  Does Invenergy want to invest more time and lots more money engaging in a long-term legal battle?  At some point, Invenergy needs to cut its losses and move on.  Either bury this project on existing rights of way to quell landowner opposition, or abandon this project entirely.  What would people in Senator White's district think if a merchant transmission project was granted eminent domain to take their land?  I don't think they would be any happier than landowners in other parts of the state.  White isn't thinking long term for the benefit of his constituents, he's only thinking about the immediate effects in his own backyard.  Not In My Back Yard?  Sure, great, let's build it!  How short sighted and self indulgent is that?

Every year about this time, Chicago-based Invenergy pours money and influence into Missouri in order to protect what it sees as future profits.  Isn't it about time for Missouri to shrug off out-of-state lobbying and make laws that benefit its citizens?  Support HB 527!

Why is this legislation needed?  Because existing eminent domain laws are dangerously out of date.  Changing old laws to reflect today's reality provides vital protection to Missouri's citizens!
3 Comments

Cockamamie Congress

3/25/2021

2 Comments

 
What do "we" need?  I mean, really.  Do we all "need" to spend trillions on a collection of new high-voltage transmission lines overlaying our existing grid?  Bill Gates thinks we do.  The media thinks we do.  But what makes them think they're experts on the subject of dictating what energy consumers "need"?

A plethora of cockamamie energy ideas has been let loose in the re-watered D.C. swamp lately, and the public is being fed a pack of propaganda about the "need" for all of them.

The Bloomberg OpEd (coincidentally in cahoots with Bill Gates and maybe other filthy rich guys) tells us what "we" need...  We need an omnipotent Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) run amok:
FERC’s powers may be limited, but it can do more. Taking a firmer line on transmission investments proposed by utilities could push more of them to put their planning in the hands of independent regional bodies. In addition, the 2005 Energy Policy Act grants the Department of Energy the power to designate priority transmission corridors; if states refuse to comply, FERC has the authority to approve projects. Court challenges stymied early efforts, yet the legislation remains on the books. The Biden administration should work to revive it.
What's "a firmer line on transmission investments?"  A firmer line?  What line?  This is nonsense language.  Perhaps they meant to say FERC should offer bigger incentive packages to transmission operators who are ordered to build new transmission by regional transmission operators (RTOs)?  If that's what you mean, why not say so?  And then you can tell everyone where the financial incentives that FERC awards come from... they come from the pockets of electric consumers.  That's right... FERC is handing out YOUR money to transmission developers, promising them a bigger pay day if they use the cover of RTOs to push through transmission projects of questionable need.

Bloomberg also failed to elaborate on the DOE and FERC "power" to approve new transmission projects "on the books."  What's currently "on the books", as interpreted by a federal court, allows states to deny applications for new transmission and end the issue.  FERC currently has no authority to approve projects that are rightfully denied by a state utility commission.  However, if transparently presented, perhaps they meant to say that new legislation is needed to usurp state authority to site and permit electric transmission, because that's what's included in proposed legislation.  HR 1512 changes "what's on the books" to allow FERC to issue a permit for new transmission in the event a state denies one.  So imagine a new transmission project threatens your community, and you marshal your resources to oppose it at your state utility commission.  If you are successful and the state denies the permit, you still can't win because FERC will step in and issue a permit for the project against the better judgment of your state utility commission.

And in the realm of cockamamie... Congress recently heard testimony about creating new CO2 pipelines.  What is that?
CCUS at gigaton scale from power plants and industrial facilities will require a major CO2 pipeline infrastructure and significant hubs for geological CO2 storage. In addition, reaching net zero emissions – and eventually net negative emissions – throughout the economy will require carbon dioxide removal (CDR) from the atmosphere and upper ocean layers.
We're going to remove CO2 from the atmosphere and pump it underground?  Wanna bet the underground storage cavern to contain that isn't under Beethoven's house?***

Now here's a really awful idea...
I recommend that Congress create and fund a Federal Electric Transmission Authority with the capabilities and funds to manage and coordinate national-scale transmission planning, design, and construction. This Authority should work closely with FERC, the states, DOE, and existing industry and reliability authorities to expand, build and adapt a robust transmission network that meets our nation’s needs over the long term. This will require decades of effort. Therefore the Transmission Authority must be created by statute to maintain mission, expertise and funding continuity (much like the Federal Highway Administration) and protect it from changing administration policy preferences.
Oh, just what "we" need... a new bloated government bureaucracy to run over all the entities that now plan, permit and cost allocate transmission.  If this is going to be anything like the current state "Transmission Authorities" operating in western states, it's not going to end well.  In New Mexico, the "Transmission Authority" is unfunded by the state.  Instead, it is funded by the transmission operators who want to build new transmission in New Mexico.  What could go wrong with a government "authority" fully funded by private interests?

You'll find a mine field of dumb ideas of what "we" need if you peruse the testimony currently being given before the House Energy and Commerce Committee.  Went looking for something particular the other day and felt quite like Alice after tumbling down the rabbit hole.  It's not about "we", it's about what the elite want to impose on us to check a few items off their personal political wish list.

What a mess!  A costly conglomeration of cockamamie Congressional conceptions.

***It has been confirmed.  The CO2 storage caverns will be nowhere near Beethoven's house.  How close will they be to yours?
Picture
2 Comments
<<Previous
Forward>>

    About the Author

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

    About
    StopPATH Blog

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

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


    Need help opposing unneeded transmission?
    Email me


    Search This Site

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

    RSS Feed

    Archives

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

    Categories

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

Copyright 2010 StopPATH WV, Inc.