What did you do over the holidays? If you spent time with friends and family, unplugged from business and transmission line nonsense, congratulations! If you're Clean Line, though, you spent your holidays pumping out the most unbelievable crap in the media. Not that it really mattered though -- nobody was paying attention because we couldn't be bothered to do more than laugh at Clean Line in private venues.
However, the holidays are now over. It's time to take a look at the silly things Clean Line wasted their holiday time doing.
First, let's address the article claiming that the Hannibal (Missouri) Bureau of Public Works is considering "buying power through Grain Belt Express." I'm sorry, but Clean Line is not selling power. Clean Line is selling capacity on its proposed transmission line. That's all Clean Line can sell. It is not a power generator and will never own any wind farms. The power generated by any future wind farms will be sold by the wind farms. The wind farms have yet to be built (or even planned with any conviction). What is Clean Line doing going around "selling power" at a certain price from generators that don't exist and that they will never own? It's a fairy tale that Clean Line is selling.
However, the holidays are now over. It's time to take a look at the silly things Clean Line wasted their holiday time doing.
First, let's address the article claiming that the Hannibal (Missouri) Bureau of Public Works is considering "buying power through Grain Belt Express." I'm sorry, but Clean Line is not selling power. Clean Line is selling capacity on its proposed transmission line. That's all Clean Line can sell. It is not a power generator and will never own any wind farms. The power generated by any future wind farms will be sold by the wind farms. The wind farms have yet to be built (or even planned with any conviction). What is Clean Line doing going around "selling power" at a certain price from generators that don't exist and that they will never own? It's a fairy tale that Clean Line is selling.
General Manager Bob Stevenson said Clean Line contacted the BPW about a month ago, offering the utility a draft letter of intent. Clean Line hasn't made a firm proposal, but Stevenson called prospective prices "very attractive." He declined to disclose them, citing confidentiality, but Lawlor estimated Grain Belt Express could deliver electricity in the 3- to 4-kilowatt-hour range.
If Stevenson thinks Clean Line's offer is anything more than fiction, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell him.
But, all that aside, the ultimate goal of getting utilities like the Hannibal BPW to sign a "letter of intent" is to prove to the MO PSC that there is customer interest in Missouri to be used in another possible run at a MO PSC permit. The PSC isn't going to be fooled by this nonsense. They also know that Clean Line can only sell capacity on its line, not energy. If Hannibal BPW wants to sign up for some capacity on a fictional transmission line, that doesn't keep the lights on. It also doesn't set a price for purchase of future energy from fictional third party generators that may be built. How about if I offer you tomatoes grown by a farm that doesn't exist at a great price? Of course, my offer will include a whole bunch of legal gibberish that absolves me of actually producing the tomatoes at the price named in the contract. What's a contract like that worth? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. And that's what this article does because it's not going to convince the MO PSC to grant approval to Clean Line, and that's all that matters in this game right now.
Next, Mark Lawlor attempts to convince Illinoisans that his "Green Belt Express" project will provide jobs and lower rates, therefore they should continue their chummy relationship with Mark and continue to invite him to their backyard barbecues and cocktail parties. Fail.
Beth Conley also interrupted her holidays to "respond" to Iowa legislators, who condemned her project in a hugely popular "Open letter to Rock Island Clean Line from lawmakers" that ran all over the state just before the holidays.
Except Beth didn't actually "respond" to anything in the open letter, but pulled up her soap box to go off on her predictable tangent about wind energy being an Iowa product that needs to be exported like beans and hogs. Yawn. Everyone's heard this before and nobody is convinced. She also claims, "Clean Line has been working in Iowa for over five years and has invested millions of dollars in the Iowa economy developing the Rock Island Clean Line..." What? Where? The only "investment" in the Iowa economy that Clean Line has made to date is the funding of its law firm to make redundant runs at the IUB to bifurcate the process (now on third attempt). Do Clean Line's lawyers filter their "millions" down into Iowa's economy in a way that makes a difference? Maybe they're funding Beth's political aspirations to run for a seat in the Iowa legislature? Puh-leeze!
But, all that aside, the ultimate goal of getting utilities like the Hannibal BPW to sign a "letter of intent" is to prove to the MO PSC that there is customer interest in Missouri to be used in another possible run at a MO PSC permit. The PSC isn't going to be fooled by this nonsense. They also know that Clean Line can only sell capacity on its line, not energy. If Hannibal BPW wants to sign up for some capacity on a fictional transmission line, that doesn't keep the lights on. It also doesn't set a price for purchase of future energy from fictional third party generators that may be built. How about if I offer you tomatoes grown by a farm that doesn't exist at a great price? Of course, my offer will include a whole bunch of legal gibberish that absolves me of actually producing the tomatoes at the price named in the contract. What's a contract like that worth? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. And that's what this article does because it's not going to convince the MO PSC to grant approval to Clean Line, and that's all that matters in this game right now.
Next, Mark Lawlor attempts to convince Illinoisans that his "Green Belt Express" project will provide jobs and lower rates, therefore they should continue their chummy relationship with Mark and continue to invite him to their backyard barbecues and cocktail parties. Fail.
Beth Conley also interrupted her holidays to "respond" to Iowa legislators, who condemned her project in a hugely popular "Open letter to Rock Island Clean Line from lawmakers" that ran all over the state just before the holidays.
Except Beth didn't actually "respond" to anything in the open letter, but pulled up her soap box to go off on her predictable tangent about wind energy being an Iowa product that needs to be exported like beans and hogs. Yawn. Everyone's heard this before and nobody is convinced. She also claims, "Clean Line has been working in Iowa for over five years and has invested millions of dollars in the Iowa economy developing the Rock Island Clean Line..." What? Where? The only "investment" in the Iowa economy that Clean Line has made to date is the funding of its law firm to make redundant runs at the IUB to bifurcate the process (now on third attempt). Do Clean Line's lawyers filter their "millions" down into Iowa's economy in a way that makes a difference? Maybe they're funding Beth's political aspirations to run for a seat in the Iowa legislature? Puh-leeze!
Starting Line now hears about a number of people interested in running for Rick Olson’s house seat. That includes Beth Conley, Marc Wallace and Connie Boesen. Conley works at Clean Line Energy Partners, and has a history of working with wind energy projects.
Beth also claims, "With so many power plants retiring, it is essential to maintain our nation’s electric power supply. The energy is needed and the Rock Island Clean Line project is too important for Iowa and the nation not to pursue." But, as usual, she provides no facts. Where are these power plants retiring? How would RICL fill the void? This claim is nothing but crap. The "need" for electric transmission is managed by regional grid operators, who monitor retiring plants and order transmission to fill any void. No regional grid has ordered RICL to fill any need. There is no reliability need for RICL and it has no customers.
Beth prattles on about Clean Line's "market leading compensation package." What market? There is no eminent domain condemnation "market." Eminent domain avoids any free market principles by taking land from its owners instead of negotiating a price both parties agree upon. The proof is in the pudding, Clean Line's compensation package has attracted only 11% of the landowners crossed. It must not be such a good deal after all. Duh, Beth.
She tries to sell bifurcation as "without any cost to Iowa ratepayers." However, bifurcation is also without cost to Clean Line's investors. Although Clean Line pledged to accept ALL RISK of its merchant project to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and Clean Line was well aware of Iowa's regulatory process before planning its project through the state, Clean Line now wants to change the process because the current procedure requires the company to invest in a whole bunch of paperwork before being guaranteed a permit. All risk means all risk, including any presented by an existing regulatory process.
Lastly, Beth shares that her family's holiday activities included driving by substations and discussing how "neighborly" it is to be a doormat. Someone needs an Elf on her Shelf, I'm thinking.
Next, Clean Line engineered an AP story about wind energy transmission by supplying a "pro" landowner, who recruited his "con" neighbor to act as the opposition (although there is organized opposition with experienced spokespeople). Clean Line trots Wilcox out for the press whenever it needs to pretend that landowners support its project. He's got a lot of miles on him. At any rate, Clean Line's effort failed when the reporter's rather unenlightened review of energy policy concluded, "I think (wind energy) is fine," he said. But "it doesn't make sense to me to have to transport it halfway across the United States. We're smarter than that."
And, finally, there was another episode of the Loren Flaugh show published in the Cherokee Chronicle Times. This "freelance reporter" continually inserts his opinion into the "stories" he writes in order to libel Clean Line's opposition. In this version, he accuses Preservation of Rural Iowa Alliance's Carolyn Sheridan of "reveal[ing] an apparent lack of understanding for how eminent domain works." Nothing could be farther from the truth, and it appears that Flaugh is the one who doesn't understand exactly what an easement means, in legal terms. The editor of this paper owes Sheridan (and PRIA member Jerry Crews, who got libeled in a similar fashion in Flaugh's last story) a retraction and an apology. Real "news" doesn't attempt to inexpertly analyze facts to come to conclusions that someone doesn't know what they're talking about. It simply reports the facts. Analysis and conclusion are the domain of opinion pieces, where Flaugh's fluff rightly belongs. At any rate, I'm eagerly looking forward to Part II of Flaugh's "reporting," where he claims he will "examine the legal reasoning for filing the petition [to bifurcate the IUB process by Clean Line]." It's like the expectation to be entertained I have when I buy tickets to a comedy show. A promised giggle fest, and we all know laughter is the best medicine.
And on that note, thanks for the holiday entertainment, Clean Line! We were privately laughing at you while we were spending the holidays with our family and friends.
Beth prattles on about Clean Line's "market leading compensation package." What market? There is no eminent domain condemnation "market." Eminent domain avoids any free market principles by taking land from its owners instead of negotiating a price both parties agree upon. The proof is in the pudding, Clean Line's compensation package has attracted only 11% of the landowners crossed. It must not be such a good deal after all. Duh, Beth.
She tries to sell bifurcation as "without any cost to Iowa ratepayers." However, bifurcation is also without cost to Clean Line's investors. Although Clean Line pledged to accept ALL RISK of its merchant project to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and Clean Line was well aware of Iowa's regulatory process before planning its project through the state, Clean Line now wants to change the process because the current procedure requires the company to invest in a whole bunch of paperwork before being guaranteed a permit. All risk means all risk, including any presented by an existing regulatory process.
Lastly, Beth shares that her family's holiday activities included driving by substations and discussing how "neighborly" it is to be a doormat. Someone needs an Elf on her Shelf, I'm thinking.
Next, Clean Line engineered an AP story about wind energy transmission by supplying a "pro" landowner, who recruited his "con" neighbor to act as the opposition (although there is organized opposition with experienced spokespeople). Clean Line trots Wilcox out for the press whenever it needs to pretend that landowners support its project. He's got a lot of miles on him. At any rate, Clean Line's effort failed when the reporter's rather unenlightened review of energy policy concluded, "I think (wind energy) is fine," he said. But "it doesn't make sense to me to have to transport it halfway across the United States. We're smarter than that."
And, finally, there was another episode of the Loren Flaugh show published in the Cherokee Chronicle Times. This "freelance reporter" continually inserts his opinion into the "stories" he writes in order to libel Clean Line's opposition. In this version, he accuses Preservation of Rural Iowa Alliance's Carolyn Sheridan of "reveal[ing] an apparent lack of understanding for how eminent domain works." Nothing could be farther from the truth, and it appears that Flaugh is the one who doesn't understand exactly what an easement means, in legal terms. The editor of this paper owes Sheridan (and PRIA member Jerry Crews, who got libeled in a similar fashion in Flaugh's last story) a retraction and an apology. Real "news" doesn't attempt to inexpertly analyze facts to come to conclusions that someone doesn't know what they're talking about. It simply reports the facts. Analysis and conclusion are the domain of opinion pieces, where Flaugh's fluff rightly belongs. At any rate, I'm eagerly looking forward to Part II of Flaugh's "reporting," where he claims he will "examine the legal reasoning for filing the petition [to bifurcate the IUB process by Clean Line]." It's like the expectation to be entertained I have when I buy tickets to a comedy show. A promised giggle fest, and we all know laughter is the best medicine.
And on that note, thanks for the holiday entertainment, Clean Line! We were privately laughing at you while we were spending the holidays with our family and friends.
RSS Feed