A picture is worth 1,000 words.
But sometimes pictures aren't enough.
StopPATH WV |
|
This morning, PATH held their "Open Meeting" for interested parties and others PATH doesn't consider to be interested parties but who were nevertheless "invited" to "participate" in the meeting.
A picture is worth 1,000 words. But sometimes pictures aren't enough.
0 Comments
As if transmission towers falling over in downbursts isn't bad enough, badly designed and maintained transmission lines have been fingered in a Utah wildfire that gobbled up 52 homes and killed one.
"A Utah wildfire that destroyed 52 homes and left one man dead was caused by arcing between power transmission lines that were built too closely together and sent a surge to the ground that ignited dry grass, a fire investigator said Wednesday. The central Utah Wood Hollow Fire began June 23 and wasn't fully contained for 10 days, costing nearly $4 million to fight, according to state officials. Officials said 160 structures total were destroyed. The 75-square-mile blaze began when winds caused two sets of high-voltage power lines to either touch or swing close enough to each other to create a surge than swept down the poles into dry brush, said Deputy Utah Fire Marshal Troy Mills. Rocky Mountain Power, which owns the lines, said a thief stripped protective cooper wire from its poles that may have prevented the surge. "The investigation into the Wood Hollow fire is a top priority for Rocky Mountain Power. We want to understand exactly what happened," the company said in a statement Wednesday. "We are in the process of doing our own detailed technical analysis in addition to cooperating with fire investigators. There are aspects of this investigation that have yet to be fully analyzed." Mills, however, insisted that even with the copper wire in place, the surge would have easily overwhelmed the protections. "That is the cause of the fire. There's some things where you've got to take a stand. It is what it is," Mills said. Some residents of destroyed homes in the area say they're considering a lawsuit against the utility." Well, there goes the utilities "best practice" of creating transmission corridors with multiple parallel lines, such as PATH's little fantasy of a 138kv line parallel to a 500kv line parallel to a 765kv line, along with their love of steel lattice transmission towers. Rocky Mountain Power's only defense seems to be to blame it on some phantom vandals who made off with protective wire. Why wasn't the power company inspecting and maintaining their equipment on a regular basis? Why aren't power companies performing required maintenance? Maybe because it cuts into their bottom line and their first responsibility seems to be to their stockholders, not to the consumers they are supposed to serve. Dominion has recently sent a letter to "property owner/resident" with information about the time table for their rebuild. They have also finally updated their website to incorporate the information in the letter. While it's more information than we had before, it doesn't really answer the public's questions about their project.
If you would like to "contact Dominion about its project" you can send an email to a generic email address or call a generic phone number where you and your questions will most likely be ignored, judging from the recent experiences of a concerned citizen. Dominion doesn't want to answer real questions from real people, such as how the project will affect roadway access and public safety. Or perhaps you have more complicated questions, such as wondering if Dominion's rebuilt towers are designed to withstand downburst winds, or should you expect that one of these towers could end up in your living room during a future thunderstorm? Dominion doesn't care to develop a positive relationship with the citizens of Jefferson County, or any other county affected by their project. Just get out of their way while they go about their business and if this inconveniences or upsets you or jeopardizes your safety, too bad. Dominion's really no different than PATH after all. Great story by The State Journal's Pam Kasey, who has managed to pry more information out of the PJM Kremlin.
Read the story! UPDATE: And now the AP has gotten a hold of the story. Just got a phone call from a friend who heard on the radio that "PATH is no longer needed and will be canceled in the fall." Buh-bye, PATH ;-) See PJM's Transmission Expansion Advisory Committee Reliability Analysis Update for July 12, 2012.
PJM's PATH Project Analysis Update begins on page 9. Page 12 says PATH is not needed for reliability reasons. Under 15 year thermal test: "No 500 kV potential thermal overloads identified." Under MAAC Load Deliverability Voltage: "CETL > CETO" CETL stands for Capacity Emergency Transfer Limits and is the actual emergency import capability of the test area. CETO stands for Capacity Emergency Transfer Objective and is the import capability required by an area to comply with a Transmission Risk of one event in 25 Years. An area passes the deliverability test if its CETL is equal to or greater than its CETO. So, how about it PJM, can we toss PATH onto the great scrap heap of failed transmission projects that have cost consumers millions without providing any benefit now? Oh no, not yet! PJM still has one more test to run, the N-1-1 power flow modeling test, which they say will be completed before the next TEAC meeting on August 9. N-1-1 means they look at every combination of two separate – one after the other - transmission line outages throughout PJM to make sure PATH really isn't needed after all. Not only are PJM's N-1-1 scenarios highly unlikely to ever occur, but they defy common sense. If a grid-killing disaster happens (derecho, anyone?) that takes out two separate transmission lines, who's to say that said disaster won't also take out the PATH Project, or any other transmission line they propose as a backup? As we've all found out over the past couple of weeks, a "robust" transmission system is only as good as the distribution system that brings the power to your home or business. And as a group of Consumer Organizations pointed out to FERC last month, transmission incentives are pulling investment away from the distribution system. The good news from today's TEAC meeting is that if the analysis continues to show that the PATH and MAPP lines are not needed, the TEAC will recommend to the PJM Board that the projects be dropped from the RTEP (and no longer held in abeyance). Thank you, PJM Magic 8 ball! Great article about the sad state of reliability in West Virginia's electric distribution system in this morning's Charleston Gazette!
Nobody's perfect, and typographical mistakes happen. I will admit to probably making more than my fair share over the years. Typos are no big deal and happen in ALL publications from time to time and aren't a reflection of the quality of any news source. You need to look deeper into content and the ability of the reporters to report news the old-fashioned way, through research and investigation, which will result in a balanced, informative, fact-based story. The traditional role of the media, to provide all relevant facts for the public's use in forming an opinion, has been one of the essential pillars of democracy in this country. In this era of 24/7 "news," blogs, and regurgitated corporate press releases presented as "news," we are increasingly subjected to having a fully-formed opinion presented to us as "news." This is what is known as "card stacking" and is a propaganda tactic that's been around for years. For all these reasons, I greatly appreciate reporters and publications that take the time to do news the old-fashioned way, such as Ken Ward, Jr. at the Charleston Gazette. "The 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: The growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy." -- Alex Carey, Australian social scientist who pioneered the study of corporate propaganda And thus ends the serious part of this post. Now we will turn our attention to the humor our bizarre world presents to us every day (because it's much healthier to laugh than it is to carry a grudge)! Great things are often created by mistake. Take the Reese's Peanut Butter Cup for example. Something great was created this morning when I read Ken's article in the Charleston Gazette! A minor typo, since corrected, accidentally created the term: Power Outrage! Power outage: Localized electric outages that last hours, minutes or even mere seconds (just long enough to require you to reset every stinkin' digital clock in the house!) Power outrage: Wide-spread power outages that leave people without power for days or WEEKS (which is a situation many West Virginians still find themselves in 12 days after the "derecho") that are caused by lack of maintenance in order to increase corporate profits. The only thing needed to turn a power outage into a Power outrage! is you. Ut-oh, trouble in paradise already? It seems that PJM's new state PSCs group is already falling apart and nothing is ever going to get built at this rate.
Maryland, Delaware and the District of Columbia submitted this letter to PJM recently, disagreeing with OPSI's earlier position that "public policy" transmission projects should be paid for entirely by the states with renewable portfolio standards that cause them to be built. The eastern PJM states believe that everyone should pay for regional projects that are made necessary to meet their state laws because these other states may receive some "benefit" from the project. They even quote from FERC's Order No. 1000: "[T]he regional cost allocation method for such a transmission facility may take into account the transmission needs driven by a Public Policy Requirement, who is responsible for complying with that Public Policy Requirement, and who benefits from the transmission facility. If a regional transmission plan determines that a transmission facility serves several functions, as many commenters point out it may, the regional cost allocation method must take the benefits of these functions of the transmission facility into account in allocating costs roughly commensurate with benefits." This is how FERC intends to charge you for some illusory "benefits" in order to spread the cost of new transmission projects over a wider base of rate payers in order to get more new transmission built without you noticing and discussing it over dinner. So, what does FERC consider "benefits?" FERC tipped its hand with their Order on Remand, where they refused to find a more equitable cost allocation methodology for the PJM region, preferring instead to put forth some make-believe "system-wide benefits" of PJM membership. These "benefits" are not commensurate with allocated costs. Western PJM states end up paying for the bulk of new transmission that benefits eastern PJM states. It will be no different when states like Maryland, Delaware and DC decide to sponsor long-distance transmission lines to ostensibly transport "wind" (although western coal-fired generation will still be cheaper and dispatched into these lines first) from the Midwest. So, get ready to pay to meet other state's renewable energy laws in your monthly electric bill, in addition to hosting new transmission lines passing through your community that don't actually supply you with electricity. The beauty of renewables is completely tarnished when these new sources of power come with the expense and burden of new long-distance transmission lines. Developing in-state renewables not only obviates the unreliable centralized generation model, but provides economic benefit for the individual states. Why would Maryland want other states to profit from their renewable energy policies when they have much better local resources at hand waiting to be developed? P.S. Your English teacher asked me to slap you with a ruler. The word "incentive" is a noun. It does not have a verb form. Stop trying to invent one. You only sound unintelligent and illiterate. The word "incentive" has many synonyms that can very easily be correctly transformed into verbs. I suggest you use one of them and stop making up words like "incent." Pick one: inducement, motivation, motive, reason, stimulus, stimulant, spur, drive, propel, inspiration, encouragement, impulse, incitement, goad, provocation, attraction, lure, bait. Thousands of landowners in West Virginia, and other states, have been left wondering about the structural integrity of high-voltage electric transmission towers. FirstEnergy's public relations dingbats thought it would be a good idea to publish pictures of a transmission tower failure that occurred in Ellenboro, WV during the June 29 derecho. However, instead of eliciting sympathy, the pictures were met with fear and wonder. If this 500kV transmission tower could fail in a violent thunderstorm, why not the one hanging over their own home, roads they travel, or parks they frequent? How safe are transmission towers, anyhow? Not very. FirstEnergy is currently fighting the WV PSC against setting reliability standards that may have prevented at least some of the storm damage that left consumers in the dark for more than a week, and is going to cost the consumers millions to repair/replace. FirstEnergy also fought against a WV PSC staff attorney's petition "requiring both TrAILCo and PATH and their corporate affiliates to file within thirty (30) days of receipt of this petition a plan in regards to the condition of their transmission facilities and a plan for the upgrading or replacing of their transmission facilities." The WV PSC decided not to speed up the submission of the condition report and upgrade plan, even though the WV Legislature had "urge[d] the West Virginia Public Service Commission to insure the reliability of West Virginia’s transmission system by proceeding as quickly as possible with a review of the condition of the Pruntytown to Mt. Storm transmission line and encouraging Monongahela Power and its parent company, FirstEnergy to rebuild this line, if the Commission’s study concludes that such construction is needed." Instead, the PSC allowed FirstEnergy to submit a report months later. In their report, FirstEnergy said that everything was hunky dory with their transmission lines in the state and therefore no repairs or upgrades were needed, and the PSC has taken no action to verify FirstEnergy's contentions or to require the actual upgrade plan they originally ordered. In their report, FirstEnergy did a whole bunch of whining about who would pay for the upgrade of their failing infrastructure. Who will pay for the recent failure? You will, of course, through future rate increases approved to allow the companies to recover their "spare no expense" response to the storm, and still make a hefty profit. But, let's get back to that transmission tower failure in West Virginia and why the tower failure doesn't correlate with FirstEnergy's NOAA storm wind speed map, showing 20-40 mph gusts in the area of the failure. Did a 20 mph wind knock over a transmission tower? Probably not. Take a look at FirstEnergy's failed tower: Now take a look at a transmission tower failure that occurred in Minnesota last summer. Wow, twins, right? It looks like these two very different towers experienced the exact same failure during very different thunderstorms.
Engineers have known for years that old transmission towers, such as FirstEnergy's, aren't designed to withstand the "downburst" winds that can occur with thunderstorms. Downburst wind has a different effect on transmission lines than the regular wind they were designed to withstand. Downburst wind creates tower failures that look like the pictures above. "An investigation of the collapse of transmission towers due to downbursts has shown that damage of the members in the second and third panels above the bottom was quite significant, but no damage was observed in the bottom panel of the tower." When will FirstEnergy and other companies who own the average 40-year old high-voltage transmission lines that criss-cross our state and nation, be required to upgrade their infrastructure to avoid these costly and dangerous failures? And when will these companies be required to design their towers to withstand downburst winds? Or are costly repair/replacement and occasional human casualties simply one more "acceptable" risk that landowners are expected to bear in order to serve "the greater good?" PATH made the above quoted admission today in their Answer to Comments in the matter of Alison Haverty vs. Potomac Appalachian Transmission Highline LLC, FERC Docket No. EL12-79-000. It's about time PATH realizes that it's in a "no-win situation," and the reason it finds itself in its current predicament is because they're wrong, plain and simple. "PATH is in a no-win situation. In the past, PATH has permitted individual end users to participate in Annual Update open meetings and has provided data in response to information requests propounded by those individuals. However, those individuals, including Complainant and Ms. Newman, abused their access to the information provided by PATH within the context of the Annual Update review by posting the data on the Stop Path blog. See generally www.stoppathwv.org PATH then agreed to provide the information under a protective order but the individuals refused to sign the protective order. PATH filed a motion with the Commission for adoption of a protective order, but the Commission did not act on PATH’s request to adopt the proposed protective order and request for an administrative law judge to be appointed as discovery master. See PATH Companies’ Motion to Dismiss the Formal Challenge and Motions to Compel, Docket Nos. ER08-386-000 and ER09-1256- 000 (filed Oct. 20, 2011)." Awww, c'mon Randy, don't be such a sour puss! How many outright lies can you count in that footnote? I see at least three.
1. "...abused their access to information by posting data on StopPATHWV Blog." Any of you seen any confidential "data" here? Yeah, me neither. Any of you seen PATH documents used as exhibits in publicly filed documents at the FERC that were linked here? Guess what? Once information is publicly filed with FERC, anybody with an internet connection can download it and use it for any purpose they desire! No where in PATH's protocols is use of information generally restricted. That's what protective agreements are for. Nobody ever signed one. *hiss* 2. "PATH agreed to provide the information under a protective order..." No, PATH didn't. They attempted to coerce interested parties to sign retroactive protective agreements to cover up PATH counsel's discovery errors that provided certain highly sensitive information that was never requested, disclosure of which could probably put them in serious legal jeopardy if the owner(s) of the information only knew what PATH counsel disclosed to interested parties. It is not incumbent upon interested parties to sign protective agreements to cover up PATH counsel's legal blunders. *growl* 3. "...request for an administrative law judge to be appointed as discovery master." What request? That flat out never happened. PATH only requested a protective order, not a discovery master. If they had, things would have run a lot smoother last year, and from the look of things, this year as well. *screech* Nice kitty, calm down, kitty! And again, PATH invites FERC to come have another ex parte with us on the blog. So, if PATH doesn't mind if we have this little private conversation with FERC's decisional staff here, let's get this parte started! All that and they still couldn't come up with any cites to support their contention that consumers have no interest in rates, and therefore no legal recourse against unjust and unreasonable rates they must pay that are under the Commission's jurisdiction (because further misuse of North Star Steel doesn't count!). One member of FirstEnergy's inept in house counsel team has missed his calling. "Potomac Edison's" response to Sugarloaf Conservancy's complaint to the Maryland Public Service Commission regarding the company's failure to read electric meters over the past year would make a better Disney film than it does a logical and truthful answer to the matter at hand.
Applicable adage for FirstEnergy: "Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part." None of what this guy says even resembles the truth and is nothing more than a series of overly elaborate excuses that will now have to be repeated over and over again in different jurisdictions. It's nothing more than a series of boring planning gaffes that take corporate incompetence to a new level. No wonder so many consumers are still waiting for FirstEnergy to get their power back after more than a week. And I do so love the whiny, aggressive tone Mr. Paparazzi takes with Sugarloaf Conservancy for having the temerity to file a complaint. Fail. |
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
|