Clean Line Energy Partners has been busy joining Chambers of Commerce in Arkansas towns outside its Plains & Eastern Clean Line project's route.

I guess the idea is that Clean Line is going to help Hot Springs, Conway, and North Little Rock develop economically by providing opportunities for these communities to profit from the project.  And here's proof!

Clean Line Energy Partners has opened an office in Arkansas!

Here's a picture of it.

That's right, Clean Line's new membership in the North Little Rock Chamber of Commerce lists its business address as 400 River Market Ave. #406, Little Rock, AR 72201.

That's Room #406 at the Homewood Suites Extended Stay Hotel in downtown Little Rock.  Sounds totally legit to me!  The only thing more legit would be a rented mailbox at one of those mail drop places.

Why should Clean Line rent a real brick and mortar office space in Arkansas when they can operate their "business" out of an extended stay hotel?  It's not like they're going to be around long enough to need permanent housing or a permanent office.   And Clean Line's rental of an extended stay hotel room is just pouring money and jobs into Arkansas!  It's going to take hundreds of new employees to service Room #406!  Arkansas will be a much more prosperous place because of Clean Line's temporary largesse!

So, if someone in Arkansas tells you that Clean Line Energy Partners is a fly-by-night company, be sure to tell them it's just not so.  They've rented a room at an extended stay hotel that they're using as a business office.  It won't be awkward at all to sell a right of way across your property to a company with office space at an extended stay hotel.  Instead, it shows their ongoing, long-term commitment to the people of Arkansas!

The collapse of Clean Line Energy Partners has begun.  Although a long, screaming, fantastic flameout would tickle everyone's schadenfreude in a most delightful way, the death of Clean Line is more likely to look like this:

Now you see it, now you don't.  You simply wake up one morning and it's gone.  Snuck out of town in the middle of the night with its tail between its legs.

So, it looks like the company doesn't have enough "development" funds from its investors to continue running "full steam ahead" in Iowa.  The company was faced with filing very expensive exhibit material at the Iowa Utility Board, while its Illinois permit for the same project has been ordered void by a court.  It ended up being cheaper to withdraw its applications in Iowa.  If the company chooses to refile at a future date, it will  have to go through all the IUB requirements for a new application, such as landowner meetings in each county.  Although time consuming, and disastrous from a public relations standpoint, withdrawing was the cheaper of the two options in Iowa.

Cheaper.  Now all of a sudden Clean Line is concerned about costs?  Have they burned through $200M in "development funds" already?  Is the treasure chest getting a little low with no replenishment in sight?  Maybe that's because Clean Line has been using its "development" funds to pay for parts of its projects that should be financed.  Things like final engineering, environmental studies, purchase of rights of way, procurement of parts and labor, are all project costs, not development costs.  Development costs are the costs of obtaining a permit to build.  Once a permit is received, project costs begin.  Except Clean Line still has its cart before its horse and is funding project costs with development money.  Because it has no project financing.  Because it has no customers.

Wow!  How panicked are they in Houston right now?  Yesterday's press release on the Iowa withdrawal screams false bravado.

No, Clean Line will NOT be breaking ground on Plains & Eastern any time soon.  Landowners in Arkansas and Oklahoma have refused to grant Clean Line right of way across their property.  Clean Line does NOT have eminent domain authority.  The most it can do is to run crying to the U.S. Department of Energy and ask that DOE begin condemnation proceedings against landowners who refuse.  And guess what?  The DOE has already written in stone that it will only begin condemnation proceedings against any landowners AFTER Clean Line reaches certain milestones with its project.  First and foremost, Clean Line must have customers for its transmission capacity.  Clean Line must have a contracted revenue stream sufficient to support financing to build its project.  Clean Line has no customers.  Therefore, Clean Line won't be breaking any ground until it has customers.

And on top of that, there is a lawsuit against DOE pending in federal court that claims DOE exceeded its statutory authority and trampled on the due process rights of Arkansas citizens.  DOE is unlikely to move forward with this project until the matter is settled.

Clean Line is going nowhere fast.  There is no "need" to build thousands of miles of "clean" lines.  No transmission planner has determined a "need" for these lines, and the lines have no customers.  No customers, no need!

No "clean" line!

Looks like the Rock Island Clean Line finally admitted the futility of its game of permit wack-a-mole.

Today, the company withdrew its applications at the Iowa Utilities Board.

RICL says it wants to wait to see what happens at the Illinois Supreme Court before spending a bunch of money on its Iowa applications.

And maybe the investor cash is drying up and Clean Line's living large on investor funds is over.

Well, duh, Clean Line.  DUH!

Congratulations, Iowans!  Celebrate your victory!

After a year of telling investment wonks that it was planning to sell another one of its unprofitable coal-fired power plants to one of its regulated affiliates, while telling everyone else it didn't need any new generation capacity, FirstEnergy gifted itself with a big ol' sack of serendipity last Friday.

FirstEnergy's Mon Power subsidiary issued a Request for Proposals to acquire 1,300 MW of generation capacity, and 100 MW of demand respone.

Serendipity!  The Pleasants power station that FirstEnergy's competitive generation affiliate wants to "sell" to Mon Power is exactly 1,300 MW!  It's like some divine power has spoken!

I'm not sure whose gift that 100 MW of demand response is supposed to be, but maybe it was designed to placate someone?  Demand response is an aggregated group of power customers who agree to cut their usage during periods of high demand in exchange for payments.  So, why not 1,300 MW of demand response and 100 MW of generation?  Why not 100 MW of demand response and a 1,300 MW power purchase agreement from an economical regional generation source?  Why must we buy the cow, when the milk is available cheaply at the market?

Anyhow, Mon Power also limited its RFP to resources in a small geographic area.  Serendipity!  Pleasants is located in that geographic area!

And after talking about this "sale" and the issuance of an RFP for months, Mon Power issues its RFP on December 16 and allows one week for eligible resources to "pre-qualify" to submit a bid later?  Be sure to get your pack of pre-qualifying paperwork in by close of business on December 23, or you won't be able to bid later and there will be no Merry Christmas for you!  Bah!  Humbug!

Seriously?  They expect everyone to believe they didn't issue this RFP so close to the holidays, with a ridiculously short lead time, in order to limit any competition with the company's own resources?  I'm sure FirstEnergy's Allegheny Energy Supply Company has its paperwork all ready to be submitted... the rest of you?  Yeah, you need to start from scratch.  Right now.

So, why should you care?  Because the last coal-fired power station that FirstEnergy "sold" to Mon Power has cost you more than $130 so far.  Each.  You've gifted FirstEnergy more than $160M, but they still want more.

FirstEnergy is in big financial trouble, and they want you to bail them out of their bad business decisions.

And they arrogantly thumb their nose at customers, competitors, and regulators alike with their serendipitous RFP.  They must think this is a funny game, but uncompetitive RFPs can get companies in lots and lots of trouble.

What can you do in the mean time?  Why don't you ask Mon Power a question, such as why their RFP is so ridiculously unfair?  Or ask if Scrooge helped them with their response dates?

FirstEnergy doesn't even care how bad they look.  I guess they think they have this in the bag.  Stay tuned, pitckfork wielders...

Did you see Block Grain Belt Express- MO's facebook post yesterday?  It was a question/response from Clean Line regarding the company's "Code of Conduct."

Block GBE representatives talked with the subject of one of these complaints last night, when he came out to the public hearing in Faucett.  Hear it direct from the horse's mouth:

Who do you believe?

When Clean Line enforces its own "Code" there are no "violations."  Because there really isn't any enforcement.

The "Code" seems more useful in the outhouse than in your house.

Have you heard about the DOE question list?  There's plenty of wing flapping in the media over the umbrage of the Trumpsters to question the inner workings of a bloated political agency like the U.S. Department of Energy.  You probably won't have to look far to find it.  It's been likened to a "witch hunt" because it ham-handedly asked for names of DOE employees.

Whatever.  I'm far more concerned about the majority of the questions that deal with the way in which DOE has funneled my tax money into dubious "clean energy" programs over the past 8 years, and what there is to show for it.  Insistence that the whole pack of questions be disregarded because some people don't like the way a few were phrased is political posturing of the worse kind.  It's ad hominem deflection for a bunch of questions the Obama administration's clean energy minions don't want to answer.  But, the clean energy party is over now.  Employees who strongly back their own climate change science probably won't want to work there anymore.  And for the few who want to continue their employment while insubordinately sabotaging the directives they receive from on high... well, shame on you!  You're probably setting yourself up for a righteous firing.

The DOE has been having a politically-biased fun fest with the taxpayers' money for the past 8 years and has bloated itself up to epic proportions.  It's been one payday after another for companies styling themselves as "renewable" so that they may be annointed king by the DOE in order to make a huge profit.  It's gotta end.  Stab the bloated beast!

So, here's one take on "the list" that attempts to comment on the questions.  Except this "expert" got the facts completely wrong on the sole question that I found interesting.

To add confusion to chaos, there appears to be two different copies of "the list" being circulated in the media.  While the questions are the same, their order, and assignment within DOE, appears differently.  The question below is #57 on one list, and #21 on the other.

It would help immensely if the authors of the list had managed to cite statutes correctly.  Is this what we get to look forward to for the next 4 years?

The "expert" got his answer to this question wrong because not only does the question list the wrong statute, but the "expert's" quick research of this section of the Energy Policy Act only found PART of the referenced statute.

Sec. 1221 of the Energy Policy Act (hint - search "1221" in this link, don't rely on third party excerpts of this section, they're not complete) provides the framework for the DOE to prepare triennial "studies" of transmission congestion and designate National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors, which would (on paper) give FERC backstop authority to site and permit transmission in these corridors.  (Except when challenged in court Sec. 1221 proved completely worthless -- doesn't work as DOE and FERC tried to interpret it.)  It also provides for that "interstate compact" thing that no state wants to get involved in.

Neither one of these statutory responsibilities require DOE to sign a "Participation Agreement."  DOE has statutory authority to study and designate corridors.  FERC has backstop siting authority if a state fails to act.  States have statutory authority to enter into compacts.  DOE does not "participate" in compacts, nor siting and permitting transmission projects in NIET corridors.

But, DOE *does* have authority to enter into agreements with third party transmission developers under Section 1222 of the EP Act, Third-Party Financing.  In a nutshell, Sec. 1222 allows the DOE to "participate" in transmission projects owned and financed by third parties.  DOE would need a "Participation Agreement" to participate in a project under this section of the statute.

And DOE announced just such a participation earlier this year, and signed a Participation Agreement.  Said "Participation Agreement" stinks like collusion.  Affected landowner groups in Arkansas have filed a complaint in federal court alleging that DOE overstepped its statutory authority.

Ya think that's perhaps where that question was intended to go?  Proofreading saves lives!  Let's hope the typo gets corrected.

And there's another question on that list I find really interesting.

Assuming that there are no typos in that question, what is DOE's "grid modernization effort"?  Where does the millions this program hands out for R&D come from?  And what statute authorized DOE to set up this program and use it to justify all this spending?

How does the work of this "initiative" dovetail with the work done by regional transmission organizations that plan and operate the electric grid and electric markets?  How much of what DOE's initiative does is simply hypothetical repetition of the work the RTOs already do?  Electric consumers fund RTOs, and then they're hit again in their taxes to fund DOE's repetitive planning and studies.  And then there's even conflicting programs within DOE.  How does its "Grid Wind Integration" program align with its "participation" in supposedly "wind integrating" transmission projects under Sec. 1222?  Has DOE's "participation" in a 1222 project been vetted under the department's own grid wind integration standards?

Who's in charge of electric transmission in this country?  States have authority over siting and permitting of new transmission.  FERC has jurisdiction over interstate transmission rates.  RTOs have responsibility granted through FERC to plan and operate the regional grids.  What statutory role does DOE have regarding transmission?  Pretty much none.  DOE is the political house of federal energy concerns.  What it does is politically motivated.  Political fortunes at DOE can change every 4 years.  Sometimes the change isn't very noticeable.  This time it will be.  But not just because the incoming administration has radically different ideas.  Part of what makes this change so extreme is the bloated nature of today's DOE, fueled by political actions taken outside of Congressional purview over the past eight years.

We need to slim down this disgusting bloat and statutorily define who is doing what in Washington.  Allowing a little sunshine into DOE's actions under Sec. 1222 of the EP Act is a good start.

The Missouri Public Service Commission held four public hearings this week on Grain Belt Express' second application to build an enormous electric transmission line across Missouri that is intended to serve eastern states.  Four more hearings are scheduled for next week.

Dec. 13, 2016: Cameron, 12:00 p.m.*
Cameron Community Center, 915 Ashland Avenue
Dec. 13, 2016: Faucett, 6:00 p.m.
Mid-Buchanan High School, Multipurpose Room, 3221 SE Route H
Dec. 14, 2016: Polo, 12:00 p.m.*
Community Center at Stagecoach Park, 1010 Main Street
Dec. 14, 2016: Carrollton, 6:00 p.m.
Rupe Community Center, 710 Harvest Hills Drive

Landowners have filled the public venues, like they did during GBE's first run at the PSC.  Some have spoken quite eloquently about the detrimental effect the project will have on their land, their business, their heritage, and their life.  It doesn't have to be fancy, just heartfelt.  I encourage everyone to get up and let the Commissioners present know how this project will affect them.

Read many more landowner comments in news articles here and here.

In the second article, the pictures tell a story that the reporter failed to mention.  Notice the sea of Amish hats in the foreground?  That's right, these public hearings were well attended by the local Amish communities.  Several Amish folks spoke against the power line.  You might be thinking, "big deal," but it actually is a VERY big deal!  The Amish rarely involve themselves in what they consider "resistance" and "worldly things."  It is uncharacteristic for the Amish to participate in social protest, or to do anything other than "turn the other cheek" when they are threatened.  The fact that they came, and spoke, should take the PSC's breath away.

As expected, Grain Belt Express stepped up their game to deliver even more clueless advocates for their project than before.  The first day, they presented a bunch of students from St. Louis University.  FREE FOOD AND DRINK, and at a popular St. Louis brewery no less!  Do you all need me to buy you a drink in exchange for showing up and speaking your mind?  (Or really, my mind, because that's more apt.)  Pathetic!

So, what did these students, and their Sierra Club counterparts have to say for themselves?  They told the PSC that Grain Belt Express would shut down existing coal-fired power plants in Missouri and clean up the air.  Nothing could be further from the truth!!  I'm betting they didn't get a copy of Grain Belt's "contract" with Missouri municipalities to go with their free beer.  The "contract" also includes up to 50MW of transmission service from Missouri to Indiana, where the line is proposed to connect with PJM Interconnection, the regional grid that serves the mid-Atlantic states.  What are Missouri municipalities planning to ship to Indiana?  Will they be re-selling their "clean" electricity to eastern cities?  Of course not!  They are creating an arbitrage opportunity whereby they may sell their own dirty, stinking generation (such as Prairie State) into PJM markets when price differentials are favorable.  This will create new markets for dirty Missouri generation and prolong the life of the coal-fired power plants that currently foul Missouri's air.  Without a "clean" line to open new markets for them, these plants would be forced to close when competing with regional renewables.  With a "clean" line, however, they can continue to belch their dirty exhaust into Missouri's air, and sell their output into expensive eastern markets for many years to come.  Silly beer-powered advocates!  If you'd spent more time actually researching the project, instead of simply repeating Clean Line's glitering generalities, you might actually take some action to clean up the air you breathe.

The same goes for the GBE advocates who simply accept and repeat the falsehood that GBE will save consumers money on electric rates, instead of spending just a moment to research the facts.  Where did this magical "savings" come from?  Did you ask?  It came from here:

That's right... it came from Clean Line's guesstimate of savings that it used to promote its transmission line to Missouri municipalities.  No cost study was ever performed!  There are no firm generation costs included in pricing, because Clean Line does not own or sell generation, and the wind farms in its guesstimate have not yet been built.  What's wrong with that?  Clean Line's guesstimate includes hypothetical pricing from wind farms that are eligible for the full production tax credit.  Those farms have not been built, and the tax credit begins phase out after December 31 of this year.  Even if the wind farms are eventually built, they will receive a reduced credit, and that means that their cost of generation will be increased by an amount at least equal to the foregone credit.  Any actual "savings" will be much less than the quoted $10M, and then split between more than 30 cities, and millions of customers.  How much could ratepayers save?  Pennies, perhaps, but it could also end up costing them even more in the long run.  It's so hypothetical, nobody knows!

And those Clean Line advocates from economic development and chamber of commerce offices?  They believe they will be showered with tax payments and jobs.  Reality will be far different, and not equal to the cost of hosting the line and a few temporary, low-wage jobs.  They're in it because they think they smell a big payday.

Which leads us to the another kind of advocate -- companies who think they will be awarded contracts for supplies and labor.  They support the project simply to fill their own pockets.

A landowner at one of the hearings observed that many of the Clean Line advocates left the hearing as soon as they had spoken.  They have no skin in the game.  Those sincerely interested in the project stayed through the entire hearing... those were the landowners.

And as far as the handful of landowners who have popped up to support GBE, isn't it funny that they all touted the same fictional "$10M savings"?  It's almost as if their comments and Letters to the Editor were heavily edited by Clean Line.  I wonder if that cost extra, aside from any easement payments made to date?  Greed can make some folks do despicable things.  At any rate, they are soundly outnumbered, hundreds to one.

So, week one of public hearings have come and gone.  Score one for the landowners, who won the moment by simply showing up and being genuine!  Bravo!

Transition teams... landing teams... 24 clowns in a VW Beetle who are subject matter experts, who hasn't heard enough of this nonsense yet?

Sorry.  I'm really sorry I feel compelled to actually write about a "transition team."  But I guess that's what happens when we elect buffoons to public office.  Well, let me revise that... when YOU elect buffoons to public office.  My hands are clean.

Yesterday, West Virginia Governor-elect Jim Justice announced his "transition team."  It's a list filled with corporate interests.  You voters are not on Jim's team.

I'll assume that's a rocket ride to the top of all the bad lists, such as the cost of electricity.  Thanks a bunch, Jim!

Jim surely likes his rocket rides.  Google "Jim Justice + Rocket Ride" and you'll find that he's been riding his rocket all over the place in the past few months.  Must be one hell of a rocket, carrying a big guy like Jim all over like that.

But it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why Jim named former FirstEnergy CEO Tony Alexander to his scheme team.  Mr. and Mrs. Tony Alexander of Akron, Ohio, have historically been very, very concerned about the state of political affairs in West Virginia.  Do you think that someday, hopefully, we may be good enough for them to actually live here and be buffeted by the consequences of their own political dabbling?

Oh, my, look who contributed to Big Jim's gubernatorial campaign!

Wow, you're a pretty cheap date for a rich guy, Jim.  In fact, I could almost afford you myself.  But you're a fashion accessory I don't need. I don't think you'd go with my outfit... ever.

So, Tony the Trickster (and here I thought I'd have to give up that rather delicious nickname when he retired) listed his job as "Executive Chairman" of FirstEnergy.  Except FirstEnergy's list of its Board of Directors no longer includes his grimacing mug.

Whose interests does Tony represent as part of Jim's rocket team?  Does he still represent FirstEnergy's interests?  Or does he simply represent his own interests?  I'm pretty sure he still owns a sack full of FirstEnergy stock that he was awarded in compensation for his piloting of FirstEnergy's rocket down the highway to hell for a number of years.  Is FirstEnergy paying him for his time spent advising Big Jim?  Or is he a free agent, simply volunteering his time as a community service to a community in which he would never deign to reside?

But I'm sure our rocket will get some great polish from Tony the Trickster!  He's the one who bought up Allegheny Energy's antique coal fleet, then tried to be a merchant generator and dabble in customer choice markets until his FirstEnergy Solutions subsidiary nearly went broke.  I'm certain FirstEnergy was terribly sorry to see him retire before he reached age 65, and never would have considered jettisoning him due to fears that he would bankrupt the entire company before he left.

He's Tony the Trickster!  He's everyone's best pal!

This is like a classic horror flick... just when you think the monster has been vanquished he pops out of the closet and

Numerous agricultural associations and business groups across the state have recently expressed strong opposition to Grain Belt Express, a high-voltage electric line proposed to plow through northern Missouri on its way to the east coast.
 
In a recent editorial, Missouri Farm Bureau president Blake Hurst said, “Grain Belt Express has promised a series of steps it says will protect landowners, bragging that landowners will receive 32 million dollars in total compensation.   However, the landowner compensation anticipated from Clean Line is predicated on the use of eminent domain, which means that individual landowners will have absolutely no bargaining power.   Also the idea of promising energy savings to a few, but politically-influential, municipalities so Clean Line can then trample on the rights of others, is a precedent that is distasteful if not downright frightening.”
 
Mike Deering of the Missouri Cattlemen's Association (MCA) said his organization stands firmly behind the protection of private property rights.  “The actions to-date of Clean Line Energy are best characterized as a pervasive invasion of private property rights. MCA fully supports the efforts of Block Grain Belt Express-Missouri to protect landowner rights and opposes Grain Belt Express Clean Line's application to the MO PSC,” Deering stated. 
 
Other agricultural groups opposed to the project include Missouri Corn Growers, Missouri Sheep Producers, and Sydenstricker Implement, one of the largest John Deere businesses in the state.
 
Owner Eddie Sydenstricker, whose business has been serving the Missouri agricultural community for more than 70 years, supports agriculture and landowner rights, and opposes a private-for-profit company obtaining the power of eminent domain.
 
“I believe Grain Belt Express' massive high-voltage DC transmission line will not only violate property rights, but will reduce property value far beyond any token compensation, spoil our rural landscape, create obstacles in fields for our agricultural producers resulting in reduced productivity and increased costs, and it will also limit future options for farms and cause the potential for adverse health risks for residents and their livestock,” said Sydenstricker.
 
Also expressing opposition to the project were several Missouri lawmakers, including 40th District Representative Jim Hansen.
 
"I hope the Public Service Commission can continue to stand with Missouri citizens and their property rights. They voted in support of Missourians the first time around and I hope they will the second time. As a strong supporter of agriculture, which is the key industry in my district, I oppose the efforts of Clean Line Energy, the Grain Belt Express project, and their efforts to obtain eminent domain. I feel it is not right to put the interests of an out-of-state company ahead of Missourians' private property rights. Going forward, I will continue to do all that I can to preserve landowner rights and ensure that the Public Service Commission does not grant Clean Line a certificate of convenience," said Hansen.
 
Eight Missouri county governments have formally withdrawn support of Grain Belt Express, including Caldwell, Clinton, Chariton, Monroe, Audrain, Pike, Marion and Ralls Counties.
 
Ralls County Commissioner Wiley Hibbard said, “The citizens of Ralls County oppose this mega power line.  It is, in my opinion, just an attempt by a small group of investors to make profits from the clean energy movement.  Please know that this is not the only way to get wind-generated power to Missouri or Ralls County.  We are receiving wind energy now. I think that anyone who wants to take our land by force to provide wind energy to the East Coast is just providing another example of the East Coast elitists telling us we do not matter!”
 
The Missouri Public Service Commission has scheduled public hearings in eight counties across the state beginning next week.
 
Jennifer Gatrel, spokeswoman for Block GBE-Missouri urged citizens concerned about this and other attacks on private property rights to attend.  “The PSC listened carefully to our concerns last time they denied this project,” she said, “It is very important that they hear our voices again.”
 
The public hearing schedule:
 
Dec. 7, 2016: Monroe City, Knights of Columbus Hall, 12:00 p.m.*
424 South Locust
Dec. 7, 2016: Hannibal, Theater Auditorium, 6:00 p.m.
Hannibal-LaGrange University, 2800 Palmyra Road
Dec. 8, 2016: Marceline, 12:00 p.m.*
Walsworth Community Center, 124 East Ritchie
Dec. 8, 2016: Moberly, 6:00 p.m.
Moberly Municipal Auditorium, 201 West Rollins
Dec. 13, 2016: Cameron, 12:00 p.m.*
Cameron Community Center, 915 Ashland Avenue
Dec. 13, 2016: Faucett, 6:00 p.m.
Mid-Buchanan High School, Multipurpose Room, 3221 SE Route H
Dec. 14, 2016: Polo, 12:00 p.m.*
Community Center at Stagecoach Park, 1010 Main Street
Dec. 14, 2016: Carrollton, 6:00 p.m.
Rupe Community Center, 710 Harvest Hills Drive
 
*In order to be able to move equipment to the next local public hearing that same day, 12:00 p.m. local public hearings will end no later than 4:00 p.m.
 
For more very important info please visit: http://blockgbemo.com/