The Missouri Public Service Commission's evidentiary hearing for the Grain Belt Express Tiger Connector (and other big changes to GBE's permit) begins at 9 a.m. Monday morning. You can either show up at the PSC in person, or watch the festivities online. If you show up in person, be aware that this is a formal court-like proceeding. The audience must use their court room manners (no shouting, clapping, or disruptions of any kind.) Also, there is no opportunity for the audience to participate, they are silent observers. Have all the stare down contests you like, but keep your lips zipped. If you watch online, like I do (either live or on replay), it's a lot less stressful because you can shout the most appropriate insults at the biggest idiots you encounter with absolutely no harm done. If I was more industrious, I'd make a video out of it, similar to those folks who draw huge audiences making videos while they play video games. Who wants to watch a video of me ad libbing insulting tunes at PSC witnesses? Insults are so much nicer when you sing them.
All the parties have filed their position statements. It's a short listing of what the party believes the evidence will show to the Commission, and how the party believes the Commission should decide. Rather than plow through the mountains of filings at this point, this is where you should start.
Missouri Landowners Alliance says the project should be rejected because it is not economically feasible and there is no proven need for it. GBE has not even sold the full 500 MW it first offered in Missouri, so why would it need to increase the capacity to 2500 MW? In its Order approving the project several years ago, the PSC said GBE was economically feasible only because it could sell capacity at a higher price to utilities on the east coast. Now GBE wants permission to build just the Kansas and Missouri portions of the project, with the portion that goes to the east coast coming later, maybe. Also, GBE has filed a complaint against regional grid operator MISO at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission contending that MISO did not include a completed GBE in its future planning scenario, even though the rules say MISO should not. To summarize this problem, GBE is mad that MISO's future transmission plan competes with GBE, therefore GBE seeks to stop MISO from planning and ordering other transmission lines. Being made obsolete is a natural development for a merchant transmission line that stalls for more than 10 years. MISO cannot depend on GBE being built because GBE can always cancel its project at its own initiative, even today. MISO needs to plan a reliable transmission system. It cannot plan around speculative projects. MISO is going to build its new projects anyhow, and all ratepayers will be responsible for the cost of those reliability projects. It's undeniable that GBE has jumped the shark -- other options have become available, and they are not carrying GBE's huge debt baggage that has accumulated over the last decade so they are certainly going to be cheaper. As the MLA said, "If Grain Belt is attempting to eliminate competition from MISO, there is reason to question Grain Belt’s financial viability." The MLA is opposing the separation of GBE into two "phases", where it builds the Kansas-Missouri section independently from the Illinois section. The MLA says, "Several Grain Belt witnesses contend that its proposed phasing plan would expedite the benefits of Phase 1 for Missouri. Yet not one of their witnesses mention that the plan would also expedite the collection of Grain Belt’s profits." BINGO! MLA opposes changes to the landowner compensation for the Tiger Connector. GBE wants to change 110% fair market value (FMV) plus a big payment for each structure on your land to 150% FMV without structure payments. This simply does not work out to higher compensation for every landowner, as GBE contends. It depends on the value of your property and the number of structures. It could mean a decrease for certain large landowners. MLA says landowners should be given their choice of which compensation package is more beneficial to them.
The Missouri Agricultural Associations have a different take on things. Maybe they're still trying to make up for that disasterous eminent domain legislation they negotiated on behalf of landowners last year. That whole thing reminded me of former Gov. Jay Nixon "negotiating" a landowner protocol with GBE on behalf of landowners that he never actually consulted. Personally, I have had enough of unaffected groups negotiating on behalf of disenfranchised landowners. At any rate, the Ag groups say not only should the original permit not have been issued, it should not be amended now. "Relocation from Ralls County and/or constructing the project in two phases will not change the fact that this project will only be viable by selling power at a price that no one is willing to pay." The Ag groups say GBE should comply with the legislation it negotiated with GBE, and it wants to give away something else on behalf of landowners now. I haven't even heard a landowner mention this, and nobody seems to know about it. Came right out of left field, like most of the giveaways in last year's legislation. "The Agricultural Associations would also support modifications that require Grain Belt Express to offer landowners ongoing shares of ownership in Grain Belt Expressand/or Invenergy as an alternative to cash compensation to give landowners an opportunity to share in the profit stream generated from land taken by Grain Belt Express." WHAT??? INSTEAD OF cash compensation? Sorry... no. It should be IN ADDITION TO cash compensation. Why would any landowner give his property away for a share in a company that he hates? This is what happens when you don't consult the people you supposedly "represent."
The Staff of the PSC is another party with a position. Although the Staff is part of the Commission, it is the professional part. It is the engineering and legal staff that evaluate applications that are filed and make recommendations for the appointed Commissioners. The Staff are the people with actual education and experience regulating utilities. The appointed Commissioners often don't have any experience at all with utilities and often are nothing more than political creatures rewarded with a cushy job and high salary. It's not what you know, it's who you know. Commissioners are not obligated to listen to the wisdom of their professional staff, who try diligently to keep the Commissioners from making huge mistakes. But the call of politics often overwhelms common sense and the Staff is batted aside as an inconvenience. What a thankless job they have! The Staff's main position is that the phasing of the project should be denied. It's either the whole project from Kansas to Indiana, or no project at all. Staff also wants GBE to either follow the Eminent Domain legislation negotiated by the Ag Associations last year, or not. GBE cannot pick and choose whether to follow it or not based on what's beneficial to GBE.
Grain Belt Express wants everything... it wants Tiger Connector approved so it can take land from new landowners in Audrain and Callaway Counties. It wants to build only part of the project before committing fully to the whole thing. It wants to pick and choose how it treats landowners to be most beneficial to GBE.
The Missouri Energy Commission (formerly MJMEUC, and not to be confused with the Public Service Commission) believes GBE's permit modifications should be approved. It mentions that in it's sweet deal for "up to" 200 MW of transmission service on GBE and a separate contract with a wind farm in Kansas for actual energy, that it has managed to re-sell 136 MW of service to Missouri cities. It forgets to mention that that 136 MW number has not changed since 2015/16. Even though MEC can resell another 64 MW of GBE service, there have been no takers in 6-8 years. I'm pretty sure there are no other takers. Contemplate, PSC, contemplate.
The position of the "Clean Grid Alliance" (formerly American Wind Energy Association but then they got chummy with big solar so they created a big alliance for all their big subsidies) sort of gives away the secret we've been wondering about for a while. CGA says Tiger should be approved because, "The requested amendments and potential for more solar resources using the project provide more benefits to Missouri; increasing the Certificated Project’s public interest benefits." Wait... more solar using the project because of Tiger Connector? I don't remember that being anywhere in GBE's testimony. So, Tiger Connector is being built for the express purpose of exporting new solar generation from Callaway County to the east coast? Tiger is not for the purpose of importing energy from Kansas? Or Tiger is for importing renewable energy from Kansas while simultaneously exporting renewable energy generated right there in Callaway? Wouldn't it be a lot cheaper for Callaway (and Missouri as a whole) to actually use what they produce, instead of paying a bunch of transmission fees to supposedly move the energy around? Isn't that what is actually going to happen? If GBE injects 2500 MW of electricity in Callaway and withdraws 2500 MW of electricity in Callaway, who's to say any energy actually went anywhere? Plenty of dollar bills will go in Invenergy's pocket, but the electricity is a complete wash. Electrons are all the same. You can't tell one from another. There aren't any tiny license plates that say "Kansas" or "Missouri" on the back of them. P.T. Barnum would be so proud!
Sierra Club's and Renew Missouri's positions are nothing more than boring cheerleading and unsubstantiated claims that GBE is the second coming of their clean energy god. What is annoying though is where they may take a position that GBE's landowner compensation is reasonable. Stay in your lane, bloviating turbine huggers. Your opinion about landowner compensation means absolutely NOTHING.
Same could be said for Associated Industries of Missouri (aka the unions). The unions took the same position on each separate issue. "The evidence supports each of the amendments to the CCN currently held by Grain Belt Express and such amendments are in the best interest of the public and necessary and convenient for the public service. The Commission should approve the amendments." What do the unions know about any of this? Nothing. They just support the project because they think it will provide jobs for their members. But, is that speculation or actuality? I don't remember a project labor agreement being announced. What guarantee is there that Missouri union members would be given jobs building GBE? And, even if they were, is a temporary job for a union member a good reason to take private property from another citizen? The unions even attempt the same position on GBE's landowner compensation package. Again... stay in your lane, union workers!
So, what happens now? A judge will preside over a court-like proceeding where opening statements will be made, witnesses will be cross examined, evidence will be introduced, and briefs will be written. The judge will make a recommendation to the appointed Commissioners.
Then the Commissioners do whatever they want and pay back their own political favors. Although supposedly "independent" after being sworn in, they still owe a debt to the one who appointed them and who may reappoint them after their term is up.
You might be interested to find out just how hard Invenergy is lobbying for transmission at the federal level. It had a hand in both the "Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill" and the "Inflation Reduction Act" that have usurped state authority to permit transmission and supercharged federal authority over transmission. There's probably a Missouri Elections Commission counterpart that shows how much Invenergy has been spreading around to Missouri politicians. All that money will be working hard for Invenergy next week in Missouri. Another lesson in sausage making!
All the parties have filed their position statements. It's a short listing of what the party believes the evidence will show to the Commission, and how the party believes the Commission should decide. Rather than plow through the mountains of filings at this point, this is where you should start.
Missouri Landowners Alliance says the project should be rejected because it is not economically feasible and there is no proven need for it. GBE has not even sold the full 500 MW it first offered in Missouri, so why would it need to increase the capacity to 2500 MW? In its Order approving the project several years ago, the PSC said GBE was economically feasible only because it could sell capacity at a higher price to utilities on the east coast. Now GBE wants permission to build just the Kansas and Missouri portions of the project, with the portion that goes to the east coast coming later, maybe. Also, GBE has filed a complaint against regional grid operator MISO at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission contending that MISO did not include a completed GBE in its future planning scenario, even though the rules say MISO should not. To summarize this problem, GBE is mad that MISO's future transmission plan competes with GBE, therefore GBE seeks to stop MISO from planning and ordering other transmission lines. Being made obsolete is a natural development for a merchant transmission line that stalls for more than 10 years. MISO cannot depend on GBE being built because GBE can always cancel its project at its own initiative, even today. MISO needs to plan a reliable transmission system. It cannot plan around speculative projects. MISO is going to build its new projects anyhow, and all ratepayers will be responsible for the cost of those reliability projects. It's undeniable that GBE has jumped the shark -- other options have become available, and they are not carrying GBE's huge debt baggage that has accumulated over the last decade so they are certainly going to be cheaper. As the MLA said, "If Grain Belt is attempting to eliminate competition from MISO, there is reason to question Grain Belt’s financial viability." The MLA is opposing the separation of GBE into two "phases", where it builds the Kansas-Missouri section independently from the Illinois section. The MLA says, "Several Grain Belt witnesses contend that its proposed phasing plan would expedite the benefits of Phase 1 for Missouri. Yet not one of their witnesses mention that the plan would also expedite the collection of Grain Belt’s profits." BINGO! MLA opposes changes to the landowner compensation for the Tiger Connector. GBE wants to change 110% fair market value (FMV) plus a big payment for each structure on your land to 150% FMV without structure payments. This simply does not work out to higher compensation for every landowner, as GBE contends. It depends on the value of your property and the number of structures. It could mean a decrease for certain large landowners. MLA says landowners should be given their choice of which compensation package is more beneficial to them.
The Missouri Agricultural Associations have a different take on things. Maybe they're still trying to make up for that disasterous eminent domain legislation they negotiated on behalf of landowners last year. That whole thing reminded me of former Gov. Jay Nixon "negotiating" a landowner protocol with GBE on behalf of landowners that he never actually consulted. Personally, I have had enough of unaffected groups negotiating on behalf of disenfranchised landowners. At any rate, the Ag groups say not only should the original permit not have been issued, it should not be amended now. "Relocation from Ralls County and/or constructing the project in two phases will not change the fact that this project will only be viable by selling power at a price that no one is willing to pay." The Ag groups say GBE should comply with the legislation it negotiated with GBE, and it wants to give away something else on behalf of landowners now. I haven't even heard a landowner mention this, and nobody seems to know about it. Came right out of left field, like most of the giveaways in last year's legislation. "The Agricultural Associations would also support modifications that require Grain Belt Express to offer landowners ongoing shares of ownership in Grain Belt Expressand/or Invenergy as an alternative to cash compensation to give landowners an opportunity to share in the profit stream generated from land taken by Grain Belt Express." WHAT??? INSTEAD OF cash compensation? Sorry... no. It should be IN ADDITION TO cash compensation. Why would any landowner give his property away for a share in a company that he hates? This is what happens when you don't consult the people you supposedly "represent."
The Staff of the PSC is another party with a position. Although the Staff is part of the Commission, it is the professional part. It is the engineering and legal staff that evaluate applications that are filed and make recommendations for the appointed Commissioners. The Staff are the people with actual education and experience regulating utilities. The appointed Commissioners often don't have any experience at all with utilities and often are nothing more than political creatures rewarded with a cushy job and high salary. It's not what you know, it's who you know. Commissioners are not obligated to listen to the wisdom of their professional staff, who try diligently to keep the Commissioners from making huge mistakes. But the call of politics often overwhelms common sense and the Staff is batted aside as an inconvenience. What a thankless job they have! The Staff's main position is that the phasing of the project should be denied. It's either the whole project from Kansas to Indiana, or no project at all. Staff also wants GBE to either follow the Eminent Domain legislation negotiated by the Ag Associations last year, or not. GBE cannot pick and choose whether to follow it or not based on what's beneficial to GBE.
Grain Belt Express wants everything... it wants Tiger Connector approved so it can take land from new landowners in Audrain and Callaway Counties. It wants to build only part of the project before committing fully to the whole thing. It wants to pick and choose how it treats landowners to be most beneficial to GBE.
The Missouri Energy Commission (formerly MJMEUC, and not to be confused with the Public Service Commission) believes GBE's permit modifications should be approved. It mentions that in it's sweet deal for "up to" 200 MW of transmission service on GBE and a separate contract with a wind farm in Kansas for actual energy, that it has managed to re-sell 136 MW of service to Missouri cities. It forgets to mention that that 136 MW number has not changed since 2015/16. Even though MEC can resell another 64 MW of GBE service, there have been no takers in 6-8 years. I'm pretty sure there are no other takers. Contemplate, PSC, contemplate.
The position of the "Clean Grid Alliance" (formerly American Wind Energy Association but then they got chummy with big solar so they created a big alliance for all their big subsidies) sort of gives away the secret we've been wondering about for a while. CGA says Tiger should be approved because, "The requested amendments and potential for more solar resources using the project provide more benefits to Missouri; increasing the Certificated Project’s public interest benefits." Wait... more solar using the project because of Tiger Connector? I don't remember that being anywhere in GBE's testimony. So, Tiger Connector is being built for the express purpose of exporting new solar generation from Callaway County to the east coast? Tiger is not for the purpose of importing energy from Kansas? Or Tiger is for importing renewable energy from Kansas while simultaneously exporting renewable energy generated right there in Callaway? Wouldn't it be a lot cheaper for Callaway (and Missouri as a whole) to actually use what they produce, instead of paying a bunch of transmission fees to supposedly move the energy around? Isn't that what is actually going to happen? If GBE injects 2500 MW of electricity in Callaway and withdraws 2500 MW of electricity in Callaway, who's to say any energy actually went anywhere? Plenty of dollar bills will go in Invenergy's pocket, but the electricity is a complete wash. Electrons are all the same. You can't tell one from another. There aren't any tiny license plates that say "Kansas" or "Missouri" on the back of them. P.T. Barnum would be so proud!
Sierra Club's and Renew Missouri's positions are nothing more than boring cheerleading and unsubstantiated claims that GBE is the second coming of their clean energy god. What is annoying though is where they may take a position that GBE's landowner compensation is reasonable. Stay in your lane, bloviating turbine huggers. Your opinion about landowner compensation means absolutely NOTHING.
Same could be said for Associated Industries of Missouri (aka the unions). The unions took the same position on each separate issue. "The evidence supports each of the amendments to the CCN currently held by Grain Belt Express and such amendments are in the best interest of the public and necessary and convenient for the public service. The Commission should approve the amendments." What do the unions know about any of this? Nothing. They just support the project because they think it will provide jobs for their members. But, is that speculation or actuality? I don't remember a project labor agreement being announced. What guarantee is there that Missouri union members would be given jobs building GBE? And, even if they were, is a temporary job for a union member a good reason to take private property from another citizen? The unions even attempt the same position on GBE's landowner compensation package. Again... stay in your lane, union workers!
So, what happens now? A judge will preside over a court-like proceeding where opening statements will be made, witnesses will be cross examined, evidence will be introduced, and briefs will be written. The judge will make a recommendation to the appointed Commissioners.
Then the Commissioners do whatever they want and pay back their own political favors. Although supposedly "independent" after being sworn in, they still owe a debt to the one who appointed them and who may reappoint them after their term is up.
You might be interested to find out just how hard Invenergy is lobbying for transmission at the federal level. It had a hand in both the "Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill" and the "Inflation Reduction Act" that have usurped state authority to permit transmission and supercharged federal authority over transmission. There's probably a Missouri Elections Commission counterpart that shows how much Invenergy has been spreading around to Missouri politicians. All that money will be working hard for Invenergy next week in Missouri. Another lesson in sausage making!
RSS Feed