Would You Trust This Guy?

James V. Fakult needs to work on his communication skills.

I get lots of notices about new transmission proposals, but this one was so poorly done, it made me laugh out loud.  According to this article, liespotting is an art.  Watch out for number 6 when reading the quotes from Fakult.

Liars overemphasize their truthfulness. “To tell you the truth…” “Honestly…” “I swear to you…” Oh, if only it were so! When people use these bolstering statements to emphasize their honesty, there’s a good chance they are hiding something. Learning to baseline someone’s normal behavior is important in situations such as this:  You want to listen for normal or harmless use of such phrases. There’s no need to add them if you really are telling the truth, so be on guard.

Now listen to Fakult:

"The growth has been in some fits and starts, but we're at a point now where this is an essential project to continue to provide, really, the type of service, the level of service, that our customers expect from us," Fakult told the Asbury Park Press. "It reinforces the system in that area. It allows us to, again, provide better, more reliable, resilient service."

Really, James?  Really?  What was the purpose of sticking that word into your statement, except to bolster your statement that the people really need your project.  And you repeated yourself there at the end, hoping it would give more credibility to your proposition.  Clearly, he doesn't even believe it himself.  Maybe if he repeats it a couple dozen more times it will become true?

"The time is now," Fakult said. "It just needs to be done now."

Perhaps Fakult is attempting to tread carefully, since a substantially similar project was attempted many years ago but failed due to public opposition.

Nearly 16 years ago, the utility scrapped plans for a 6.5-mile transmission line, to be run on 60-foot high steel poles, along the railroad tracks from Matawan to Middletown, after intense community opposition. Residents and some town officials, fearing a reduction in property values and worried about health risks, fought the project for a decade.

"To me, it is nothing but a resurrection of precisely the same plan that we fought and stopped," said state Assemblywoman Amy Handlin, R-Monmouth, a vocal opponent years ago. "It's the phoenix rising from the ashes, it's the ghost of battles past. It's not different."

I don't think the people have forgotten.  Looks like opposition will be swift and fierce.  So, what's changed this time?

This time, the utility proposes to run the wires atop slender single poles that average 140 feet tall rather than bulky towers used in the past, spokesman Ron Morano said.

Who says the public likes monopoles any better than they like lattice towers?  Did AEP tell you that?

AEP isn't the public.  Truly aesthetic transmission is underground.  You should have started there, James.  Since everyone (214,000 ratepayers, according to the article) is going to benefit from the project, everyone should pay the increased cost of undergrounding it so it doesn't become a hazard or a burden to adjacent landowners.  You're always going to have opposition when you propose that a few should sacrifice themselves for the many.  Beneficiary pays.

The use of the NJ Transit corridor, which is already designated for public use and has existing electric infrastructure, as well as the slimmer monopoles, will help to minimize the disruption on the community, Fakult said.

Transmission lines are NOT like Lay's potato chips.  Just because someone lives near invasive infrastructure does NOT mean they want or deserve more of it.  Look at it this way -- those folks living in close proximity to existing infrastructure have already paid their dues to society.  Isn't it someone else's turn?

Morano, the JCP&L spokesman, said the utility follows all safety and heath guidelines and will have an electromagnetic fields expert available at open house sessions. "We are successfully building transmission lines in other (areas) without any issues," she said.

EMF health-related issues are entirely perceptual.  Your "experts" and selected 30 year old studies don't convince anyone.  How about putting your money where your expert's mouth is, FirstEnergy?  How about offering the landowner a written guarantee to cover the health care costs of any individual who can prove their illness was related to living in close proximity to your transmission line?  Your wallet clearly doesn't believe your "science."

So, next FirstEnergy plays its trump card to claim that PJM has determined the project to be necessary.

PJM Interconnection, the organization that oversees the electric grid in 13 states and Washington D.C., has identified the Monmouth County Reliability Project as a necessary project to reduce the length and frequency of outages in Monmouth County, the utility said.

If not built, "over the long term, you start to see issues emerge," Fakult said. "When you start to see peaking conditions, you just don't have the contingencies that you need to run the system reliably."

PJM?  The organization that "answers to no one?"  But your press release said YOU were proposing it, FirstEnergy.  Which is it?  Who first "identified" this project as a necessity?  Was it PJM, or was it FirstEnergy, looking to "energize" its profits by building transmission it believes necessary to meet future demand:

As noted in the fact sheet, Energizing the Future is a transmission initiative through 2017 that involves upgrading and strengthening the grid to meet the future demands of customers and communities. Key factors driving that investment include enhancing system reliability by replacing existing equipment with advanced technologies; meeting projected load growth; and reinforcing the system in light of power plant deactivations, the fact sheet added.

Fakult thinks he can do things differently this time:

The company plans to hold three open house events in neighborhoods near the proposed project to share information with the public and gather feedback. The company also is setting up a website at www.monmouthreliability.com.

You're going to hold three events guaranteed to thoroughly piss off the communities and give the opposition an opportunity to meet and greet and build mass, FirstEnergy?  You've really learned nothing at all over the years, have you?

Your talk about "need" really isn't convincing.  Did the utility "need" this transmission project the first time it was proposed, 16 years ago?  Obviously not, since it never happened and the lights still come on in those communities when people flip the switch.  Adding words like "really" this time isn't going to help you.

Once again, FirstEnergy puts its cart before its horse by presenting a community with a transmission project as a fait accompli.  Presuming the project is "needed" and it's only a matter of how to build it and where to put it will never be accepted at face value by a community.  First, you have to convince them that a need for something exists, and then you consult with the community to determine an acceptable solution.

That's true "community consultation."  Really.