Read the Virginia State Corporation Commission’s January 27, 2010 order dismissing the PATH case due to PATH’s admission that, “There’s no need for PATH in 2014.”
See the U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, U.S. Total Electricity Consumption graph showing falling demand for 2008 and 2009.
Read the 2009 Testimony of Professor Martin Blank, Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, which was filed in the Virginia State Corporation Commission PATH case. Professor Blank explains how EMF damages cells and DNA and how that relates to additional risk for childhood leukemia, breast cancer, Alzheimers and brain tumors.
Read about the State of California Environmental Health Investigations Branch’s 2002 EMF Risk Evaluation report. In this report, three scientists with the California Department of Health Services were asked to review the studies about possible health problems from EMF. They concluded that EMF exposure could cause increased risk of childhood leukemia, brain cancer, Lou Gehrig’s disease and miscarriage.
Read PATH’s own expert testimony submitted with their application to the West Virginia Public Service Commission (page 7, line 15). Real estate appraiser Jay Goldman directly quotes “Power Lines and Property Values Revisited,” published in the Fall 2007 edition of The Appraisal Journal as follows: “When negative impacts are evident, studies report an average discount of between 1% and 10% of property value.” And “Value diminution attributable to tower line proximity is temporary and usually decreases over time, disappearing entirely in 4 to 10 years.”
Read more about the effects of power lines on property values at the Citizens for Safe Powerlines website
Read the 2007 comments of Robert Driscoll, CEO of Mirant Mid-Atlantic, LLC to PJM Interconnection regarding PATH (referred to as the Amos – Kemptown, or A-K Project). Driscoll goes on record stating that PATH “…will impose unreasonable costs on PJM transmission customers without resultant savings in generation costs.”
Read Who Pays for PATH? on The Power Line for an accurate analysis of how responsibility for the $1.8 billion construction costs, plus the 14.3% profit, will be split among customers in the PJM region. The Power Line also points out that in addition to PATH, customers will also be paying for other transmission projects in the PJM region (plus their profit margins), even though they may not receive any benefit.