StopPATH WV
  • News
  • StopPATH WV Blog
  • FAQ
  • Events
  • Fundraisers
  • Make a Donation
  • Landowner Resources
  • About PATH
  • Get Involved
  • Commercials
  • Links
  • About Us
  • Contact

Another Quarter, Another FirstEnergy Management Disaster

5/8/2014

2 Comments

 
Another excuse-filled, poor performance, quarterly earnings call from FirstEnergy on Tuesday.  How much longer can this company continue to flounder and still stay in business?

The basic story goes like this:  Despite a big profit from the cold weather in January & February, company mismanagement frittered it away.  The Plain Dealer provides a good summary of FirstEnergy's disappointing performance.
FirstEnergy lost two large power plants during January's arctic-like weather -- the 2,490-megawatt coal-burning Bruce Mansfield plant in Shippingport, Pennsylvania, and right next door, one of its 900-megawatt nuclear reactors at its Beaver Valley power plant.

And then the company found it could not buy natural gas for its 545-megawatt gas turbine plant in Lorain. The shutdowns and inability to buy gas forced the company to buy power on the regional grid -- just as wholesale market prices soared.

Power purchases during the 10 days of sub-zero January weather knocked down earnings by 13 cents per share, Leila Vespoli, chief legal officer and executive vice president of markets, told financial analysts during a public teleconference Tuesday and now available on the company's website.

She said power purchases over the entire quarter reduced earnings by a total of 23 cents per share.

Then extra charges levied by PJM Interconnection, the manager of the grid in Ohio and 12 other states, nicked another 10 cents per share out of gross profits, she said, though the company is planning on recovering about half of that from commercial and industrial customers.
This is all despite FirstEnergy's desperate attempts to restructure debt and raise cash over the past year through the sale of hydro assets, and the transfer of its unregulated Harrison power station to its WV regulated subsidiaries for a billion dollar payday.  FirstEnergy still has little cash, and a mountain of looming debt.

FirstEnergy's competitive retail business continues to drag it down, despite an effort to reposition all its eggs in the regulated basket.  It wasn't too long ago that FirstEnergy was all giddy over beating AEP on all the consumer "shopping" going on in the state of Ohio.  Tony the Trickster bragged through previous earnings calls over the number of customers signed up.  Yup, that quantity over quality race to the finish was really helpful over the long term.  When FirstEnergy goes under, Tony can tell his investors that at least he beat AEP.

FirstEnergy now brags that it has filed a rate increase in West Virginia.  The company requested an increase of approximately $96 million, or 9.3%, and an allowed ROE of 11%, an increase of .5% over current return.  Never going to happen.  FirstEnergy neglected to mention the looming General Investigation, or any other number of regulatory venues where it finds itself in hot water, and analysts were just too polite to bring up all that nastiness.

FirstEnergy also brags about its new scheme to "invest" in its transmission system, after years of neglect while chasing big, new build projects.  Just like every other shiny object in FirstEnergy history, management's concentration on transmission blinds it to reality.

And Leila still hasn't learned to pronounce the word exacerbate.
Higher prices exasperated the earnings impact of our power purchases.
I don't know about you, but I'm thoroughly exasperated by these uneducated dolts.  Their money-grubbing, desperate and questionable legal maneuvers, such as foisting polar vortex "fees" off onto fixed rate customers, are not cute or prudent over the long run.  The schadenfreude continues to build as FirstEnergy continues to burn bridges with its customers, employees and regulators.
2 Comments

FirstEnergy Files To Raise Potomac Edison and Mon Power Electric Rates

4/30/2014

9 Comments

 
As part of last year's PSC settlement allowing FirstEnergy to "sell" the Harrison Power Station from its competitive generation subsidiary to its regulated West Virginia utilities, the company was required to file a new base rate case with the PSC this month.

A company's base rate covers the utility's fixed costs and earns a return.  FirstEnergy's current West Virginia return (profit) is 10.5%.  Base rate cases are filed infrequently, usually at the initiative of the utility if it thinks it can increase earnings by doing so, or it may be ordered by a regulator as part of another deal.

FirstEnergy has asked for a $96M rate increase.  I haven't read the filing at the PSC yet, but I received several copies of this company-generated rubbish in my email today.  The company doesn't mention its requested return percentage, so I will assume it's the same, or even higher.

In addition to the more than a billion dollar cost of "buying" Harrison, the rate increase also includes:
...recovery of costs associated with storm repairs from the 2012 Derecho and Hurricane Sandy, along with operating costs at power stations, including new environmental control equipment. In addition, the rate request includes hiring 50 new company employees to help enhance service reliability.
So, how much is this going to cost you?
Currently, the monthly bill for a typical residential customer using 1,000 kilowatt-hours is about $92.62. If the proposed rate increase, including the cost of the new tree trimming program, is granted, the monthly bill would be about $106.79.
But, wait!  FirstEnergy wants you to know about all the value you're going to be getting!
Mon Power and Potomac Edison have not filed for an increase in base rates for nearly five years. The companies’ last major rate changes were a decrease in fuel-related rates of 5 percent on Jan. 1, 2013, and a rate reduction of 1.5 percent in October 2013 due to the Harrison acquisition.
Even with the full proposed increase and tree trimming surcharge, Mon Power and Potomac Edison residential rates would be 10 percent lower than the national average residential rates.
But, that's of little actual value when the company doesn't bother to read your electric meter for months on end and then sends you a gigantic bill for your accumulated usage once a year.  Don't worry though...
To help customers manage their bills, Mon Power and Potomac Edison offer an average payment plan, special payment plans, and access to energy assistance programs.
Just hop on the ol' FirstEnergy debt treadmill and run for your life!

Oh, and let's not forget... that extra $96M out of your pockets will now guarantee you better service!
“The filing will help ensure continued safe and reliable electric generation for our customers,” said Holly Kauffman, president of FirstEnergy’s West Virginia Operations. “On the utility side of our operations, the new employees will include linemen, engineers, supervisors and other personnel to help make the service we provide our customers even better and meet anticipated business growth in our state.”
Twit.
9 Comments

FirstEnergy Charged With Labor Violations by National Labor Relations Board

4/30/2014

0 Comments

 
Ut-oh!  FirstEnergy's in trouble again!
The National Labor Relations Board has charged Akron-based FirstEnergy Corp. and its utility companies with unfair labor practices associated with the closing of two power plants in southwestern Pennsylvania.

Acting on complaints from the Utility Workers Union of America Local 102, which represents 850 FirstEnergy employees across three states, the NLRB is alleging that FirstEnergy refused to talk about job placement, severance and other benefits for workers at Mitchell and Hatfield’s Ferry power plants unless the entire union signed a new contract that included concessions in benefits and other changes. The two coal-fired power plants closed in October.

“They held all them folks hostage to try to get a contract that effected everyone in our bargaining unit unfairly,” said Bob Whalen, president of Local 102.
Why does FirstEnergy put so little value on the employees that keep its money vault full?  Qualified workers seem to be disposable at FirstEnergy.

Of course, our hero Toad Meyers pulls his usual "nuh-uh" act and threatens that FirstEnergy will tie this up in litigation endlessly.  That seems to be a FirstEnergy trademark -- because the company's mounting legal bills just get passed to its customers in their monthly electric bills.  Maybe if the company's shareholders had to start funding these pointless, never-ending legal shenanigans, management arrogance might come to a screeching halt?
0 Comments

Landowner Says Clean Line is Armed Robbery

4/29/2014

1 Comment

 
Here we go again with the Clean Line news articles full of misinformation.  This time, the lies are about the company's Plains & Eastern Clean Line project in Oklahoma, Arkansas and Tennessee.

Hiding amid the lies and half-truths is one nugget of news, however.  Clean Line is now purporting that it will build a $100M HVDC converter station in Arkansas in an attempt to provide some "benefit" for the state.  In 2011, the Arkansas PSC denied Clean Line's application to become a public utility in the state so that it could use eminent domain to take land for its project against the owners' will.  The APSC based its denial on the lack of benefits to the state from the transmission line, that Clean Line proposed would begin and end in other states like a highway with no on or off ramps for local use.

Claims that the company will build a converter station for local use seem to be sprouting like weeds.  But, what guarantee does any state have that Clean Line would actually build one?  If it receives a permit, Clean Line could once again change its plans, taking the local converter station off the table, laughing all the way to the bank.

The midpoint converter stations are very expensive and only plan to make available a miniscule portion of the project's capacity.  For the 3500 MW Grain Belt Express, the converter station is being touted as making "up to" 500 MW available.  For the Plains & Eastern project, this article says the converter station will make available "up to" 250 MW of the project's 3500 MW capacity.  The rest of the capacity is slated to be made available to eastern states where electricity commands a higher price.  And that's how Clean Line intends to make its money -- selling electricity in richer markets that have certain minimal renewable energy purchase requirements.  These "public policy" renewable portfolio standards require load serving entities in eastern states to generate or purchase a certain percentage of renewable energy, no matter the cost.  This is the market Clean Line is desperately trying to reach. 

So, let's think about that.  Clean Line is pretending it will "make available" miniscule amounts of its capacity in pass-through states in exchange for the ability to take private property from the state's citizens.  "Make available" means exactly that -- make available for purchase by load serving entities in states like Arkansas or Missouri.  However, if local LSEs can purchase lower cost power, they must do so.  Clean Line is priced for the east coast, not Missouri or Arkansas.  While the wind power generated in the Midwest may be "cheap" by east coast standards, building a "Clean" Line to transport it more than doubles the delivered price of the electricity.  Chances are no local load serving entities will contract to purchase ANY of this power, obviating the need for any mid-point converter stations after permits are granted.  Don't be fooled!

Don't be fooled by the article's misinformation either.  Here's where the reporter (or the president of Clean Line) got the information wrong:
The project, called the Plains & Eastern Clean Line, won’t break ground until 2016, but the company behind it — Clean Line Energy Partners — announced this month that it would build a $100 million convertor station along the line’s route, somewhere in central Arkansas.

But as initially planned, the project would have had little effect on Arkansans beyond creating some jobs through the construction period. The line traveled from Oklahoma east through Arkansas, but Clean Line’s electricity wouldn’t have stopped in Arkansas along the way.

This was the basis of the Arkansas Public Service Commission’s 2011 denial of Clean Line’s attempt to be recognized as a utility in the state. Becoming a utility would have meant the company could have used eminent domain in creating the route for its new lines.


However, that changed when Skelly announced the convertor station at this month’s Little Rock Sustainability Summit at the Clinton Presidential Library.
This project won't "break ground" until it is fully permitted, and obtaining permits is still highly speculative.  Just because Clean Line has tried to create a smokescreen of "benefit" for Arkansas does not automatically buy them a permit.
A spokesman for the company said the station “was a significant change in the scope of the project” that was “not initially intended” for it, noting that it was expressly requested by the PSC and by landowners.
WTF, Clean Line?  No landowner ever requested a converter station in Arkansas.  The few landowners who knew about your project rejected it in totality.
Clean Line is a private transmission company in Houston. It develops projects that connect renewable generation points between states.

The Plains & Eastern project is one of five Clean Line transmission projects underway in the country, and the only one that passes through Arkansas.

The new line would mean many new customers for the company.
Clean Line only exists on paper.  This start-up has never built anything and probably never will.  It has no customers... at all.  The company has signed an agreement to allow its biggest investor, European transmission giant National Grid, to purchase the entire collection of projects in the pre-construction phase.  If Clean Line can spin enough lies to get a handful of permits, it absconds with a bundle of cash and a new company takes over ownership of any projects.  Research on Clean Line's principals reveals a history of exactly this kind of behavior.  Many of Clean Line's management, who have personally invested in the company, have a history of building wind energy companies and then flipping them for huge profit.  They probably should have stayed in their own area of expertise because they're in way over their heads playing transmission company.
It has been in the works for the past half-decade and will build two lines intended to connect the Midwest’s wind resources to surrounding areas with less potential to generate wind, such as Missouri and southern Indiana. About 7,000 megawatts of power in Oklahoma would become available to surrounding states.
Actually, that 7,000 MW plan for two lines got scrapped several years ago as overly ambitious.  Or, did it?
“Because this is an interstate project, it has to go through the federal permitting process,” Skelly said. “We’re in the middle of that [process]. What it basically does is look at a series of routes, and we take all that information which our different stakeholders use to come up with a route.”
There is no requirement for federal permitting just because a project is "interstate."  Transmission permitting is state jurisdictional.  A project must receive a permit from every state through which it passes.  Except when a state denies a permit... then a transmission owner can attempt to preempt local authority to take advantage of a couple of arcane loopholes in the 2005 Energy Policy Act.  It is only then that federal permitting becomes necessary.  And still, the federal authority Clean Line is attempting to acquire only gives it the power of eminent domain.  It does not anoint Clean Line with state utility status to build a project.  We'll just assume that the U.S. Department of Energy is going to take on the role of transmission builder for this project and then re-sell it back to Clean Line after it's constructed, right?
A lot of the job, he said, is getting the word out about the job to county officials, state agencies and environmental groups to determine the route of the line.

“Because this is an interstate project, it has to go through the federal permitting process,” Skelly said. “We’re in the middle of that [process]. What it basically does is look at a series of routes, and we take all that information which our different stakeholders use to come up with a route.”

Currently, the U.S. Department of Energy is working with states and local agencies to gather input on the line’s proposed route.

The permitting process overall, Skelly said, is expected to conclude in spring 2015.

“We hope to break ground in a year after that — at some point in 2016,” he said. “This is like any large infrastructure project. It takes a long time to work through the issues and come up with a proper design and take into account the stakeholders’ interests. These things take a long time. As things go, we’re moving at a reasonable pace.”
So, when is Clean Line planning to consult the landowners about the route of its line?  Because landowners, in Clean Line's world, aren't stakeholders.  They're just the folks who have to sacrifice their properties for Clean Line's profit.

No matter.  The landowners aren't waiting to be invited.  As my friend Joel says in the article's comments:
"Clean" Line is intent upon getting eminent domain authority. That's why their plan has changed to include the central Arkansas converter station. The company wants to force Arkansas landowners and homeowners to allow huge transmission towers on their property. This is a private venture, backed by a few out-of-state billionaires. They refuse to acknowledge that these towers will lower the property value of the landowners and homeowners. Anyone with an ounce of common sense would know that property values will plummet where a 200' steel lattice tower is constructed. So the out-of-state billionaires make huge profits while Arkansas landowners and homeowners lose real estate equity. It can't happen without state or federal eminent domain authority. I think of it like armed robbery, but in this case the robbers don't have to hold the guns. They will have state or federal law enforcement holding the gun to the heads of Arkansas landowners and homeowners.
1 Comment

More FirstEnergy Sucking

4/25/2014

0 Comments

 
FirstEnergy's been doing a whole lotta sucking lately while I was otherwise engaged in super-sucky-secret FirstEnergy sucking shenanigans that I can't talk about.  But, the work week is over and now it's time for some FirstEnergy sucking fun.

Even Wall Street thinks FirstEnergy sucks.  Today, Citigroup reaffirmed its sell recommendation on FirstEnergy's sucky stock... because it sucks!
FirstEnergy Corp.‘s stock had its “sell” rating reiterated by stock analysts at Citigroup Inc. in a report issued on Thursday...

We're about due for another fun-packed FirstEnergy earnings call, where Tony the Trickster and his sucky band of merry thieves parade their suck-i-tude before the investment community.  Don't miss it!

In other sucky news,
FirstEnergy is still trying to bust its union workers, including desperately needed meter readers in West Virginia's eastern panhandle.
Local 102 represents about 690 of FirstEnergy’s linemen, substation workers, meter readers and technicians in the big electric utility’s Potomac Edison and West Penn Power territories.
About 125 of Local 102’s members work at Potomac Edison service centers in Williamsport; Frederick, Mount Airy and Thurmont, Md.; Martinsburg and Berkeley Springs, W.Va.; and Waynesboro and McConnellsburg, Pa.
Potomac Edison serves about 250,000 Maryland customers in an area stretching from Garrett County east to parts of Montgomery and Carroll counties, and about 132,000 customers in West Virginia’s Eastern Panhandle.
West Penn Power, whose territory includes Pennsylvania’s Franklin and Fulton counties, serves about 720,000 customers.
In March 2013, FirstEnergy began negotiations with Local 102 for a labor contract to replace the three-year pact that was to expire April 30, 2013.
What happened next is in dispute.
The company said the contract expired and the union members have continued working under the terms of the previous contract. The union, on the other hand, said the contract was extended for one year until May 1, 2014 — 10 days from today.

Asked last week whether that means a deadline is looming, FirstEnergy spokesman Toad Meyers said, “We’re not facing a deadline from the company’s standpoint. The plans are to continue to negotiate.”
Meyers, who is the utility’s spokesman for comment on negotiations with Local 102, didn’t mention the talks in Detroit.
He said “at least seven more negotiations” are scheduled with Local 102 leaders before April ends. He said he has “no idea” where those talks are taking place.
Asked Thursday what happens if an agreement isn’t reached by May 1, Whalen said there’s a “variety of things that could happen.
“First of all, we continue to work day by day,” Whalen said. “Or, the union could agree to sign an extension to work under the (last contract’s) terms for ‘x’ number of days.
“Or, depending on what (FirstEnergy is) thinking, they certainly have the ability to lock us out when they want,” the legality of which would “depend on where it’s at in the negotiations,” Whalen said.
“And then, the last thing, if we don’t have an extension, we have the right to strike,” Whalen said.
If a strike or a lockout were to come, Whalen said neither could happen until at least May 1, when the “no-strike, no-lockout provision” expires with what the union said is still the contract.
When is FirstEnergy going to stop treating its employees like trash?  And how much longer will the company's stockholders quietly suffer company mismanagement all the way to suckville?  I found the 5-year old Tony insults here to be quite creative, such as this one:
Tell Uncle Tony to take a cut in pay, put a pair of di electric boots up his a$$ filled with concrete and take a plunge in the Delaware. Italian my a$$ he is a embarrassment to the nationality and the human race. Some would call him "Yellow" not Uncle Tony or possibly numb-nuts. Yell "Mafia" and I bet he pees his pants.
These are FirstEnergy's faithful employees, the folks who actually keep your lights on.  Just how badly does FirstEnergy suck, anyhow?  The customers hate them, the employees hate them, the investment community hates them.  Something's wrong here...

And in other FirstEnergy sucking news.... check out the exchange going on in the Potomac Edison/Mon Power General Investigation case at the WV PSC, where FirstEnergy turned customer service into performance art.

The Coalition for Reliable Power filed this letter after noticing a new uptick in complaints about high bills and missed meter readings.  In response, FirstEnergy's lawyer called me (because, yes, I do wear another hat that comes with business cards) to request the names of all the customers who had complained so he could "help" them.  Like I'm going to give out a list of names, email addresses and phone numbers of people that have contacted the Coalition when they couldn't get any help from the company?  People just aren't comfortable with that, and neither am I.  Instead, I relayed FirstEnergy's customer service offer to everyone and let them volunteer.

I received my first response 12 minutes after sending out the notice.  It said:
Mon Power is an a$$-hole company. The WV PSC allows them to screw over consumers of electric.
Oh, this experiment isn't going to go well, is it?

It seemed to go swimmingly in FirstEnergy's fantasy world, however.

Here's the response of volunteer customer service experiment subject Kery Fries.  Doesn't sound like he agrees with Gary Jack's version, does it?

Finally, here's the Coalition for Reliable Power's response to Jack's letter.

When is this company's grand sucking failure going to finally be over?
0 Comments

FirstEnergy's Sucking Vortex

4/25/2014

0 Comments

 
FirstEnergy got sucked into its own vortex of, well, sucking today.  The company announced that it was capitulating on its intention to charge two million residential customers a one-time $5 - $15 fee as a "polar vortex" surcharge.  FirstEnergy says that the company will still charge a fee to its commercial and industrial customers that amounts to 1 to 3 percent of their annual electric costs, though.

You don't think that FirstEnergy actually intends to absorb this foregone cost, do you?  Of course not.  The sucky thieves at FirstEnergy will just find other, sneakier, ways to cheat its customers... a penny here, a nickel there... and before you know it FirstEnergy has managed to SUCK the money out of you anyhow without any of that nasty, messy bad publicity that came with being up front about how much the company sucks.

Or so they think.

After FirstEnergy made its sucky announcement last month, state public utility commissions and consumer advocates in affected states scurried toward opening investigations into the company's practice of adding the additional fees to what consumers thought were fixed rate contracts.  Just a little taste of FirstEnergy's sucky legal buggery, which everyone is getting mighty sick of about now. 

Does FirstEnergy think it's all better now?  The damage has already been done!  Everyone hates FirstEnergy!  The few who didn't before, do now, and they're going to get as far away from this mismanaged, money-grubbing, charlie foxtrot corporation as possible.  As Columbus Business First notes:
And the company still thinks is has the ability to charge extra fees to its customers, even if they have fixed-rate contracts, based on comments from FirstEnergy Solutions President Donald R. Schneider.
“It was a very difficult winter, particularly for residential customers, and hopefully waiving the surcharge will make it somewhat easier,” he said in a release. “Even though our contracts allow us to pass through surcharges, we have decided we won’t seek reimbursement from residential customers for the added costs.”
Run, little FirstEnergy Solutions customers, RUNNNN!!!

But, wait, maybe FirstEnergy can still keep a few customers by taking advantage of the Donny in a greasy ball cap and Simpsons t-shirt idea that they didn't use last time they created a confused and ridiculous advertising campaign.  We'll be here thinking up some nifty new ideas for FirstEnergy ads over a few beers, because all FirstEnergy's own ideas just seem to SUCK!
0 Comments

Rock Island Clean Line Could Lock Chicago Area Residents into Paying More for Dirty Energy

4/21/2014

4 Comments

 
That's the headline the Chicago Sun Times should have used on its recent article about Clean Line's Rock Island project.  Instead, the Sun Times reporter took the lazy way out by printing the unverified and grandiose claims of RICL developer Hans Detweiler as if they were facts.

The correct information was right there for the reporter's perusal on the Illinois Commerce Commission docket, or she could have looked at some of the testimony quotes on BlockRICL's website.  BlockRICL doesn't have to rely on spurious sound bites to spin the media, only the truth of the testimony at the ICC.

So, let's take a look at where the Sun Times reporter resorted to lazy "journalism":
Within three years, some Chicago area residents could be saving money on their electric bills, thanks to power generated 500 miles away.

Adding wind energy to the grid should push wholesale electricity prices down, Detweiler said. He thinks Illinois consumers could save about $320 million after the line’s first year.

“Wind is stranded because of a lack of transmission lines,” said David Kolata, executive director of the Citizens Utility Board, which represents the interests of utility customers in Illinois.

The Clean Line, he added, “has the potential to bring in a lot of low-cost power.”

The savings suggested by Detweiler are an estimate, but “there’s no question that it would reduce prices in Illinois,” Kolata said.
Rock Island Clean Line has no generators and no contracts.  There's absolutely nothing to back up all these statements about "low-cost power."  None of the people quoted have any idea how much the electricity RICL proposes to import to Chicago will cost.  The only thing that's certain is that the power will have the cost of building the transmission line added to its price.  RICL has estimated that its line will add $25 MWh to the delivered generation cost at its proposed injection point south of Chicago.  Additional transmission charges will be added from that point to ultimate end users.  RICL doesn't care if its delivered price is higher than other available sources in the Chicago market because that market isn't RICL's real target.  RICL is aiming to be competitive in east coast electricity markets, where electricity is much more expensive than in either Illinois or Iowa.

When there is a glut of power in a constrained market, prices remain low because generators must compete with each other to serve a smaller load.  However, when new pipelines are opened from the cheap, constrained market for power to flow to higher priced markets, it has the effect of levelizing prices between the two markets.  While the recipients of RICL's load on the east coast could see a reduction (and even that is doubtful), the markets on the source side of the transmission lines will see their energy prices go up as local load must now compete with the higher priced markets to the east.  RICL will absolutely increase electricity prices that would exist in Iowa without the project, and since Chicago is not RICL's intended market, but only a pit stop to inject power into the PJM grid, RICL will also raise prices in Illinois.

Note also that the Citizens Utility Board guy isn't even a party to the RICL case at the ICC.  His "unquestionable" claims about prices aren't based on evidence.  The actual ICC evidence shredded Detweiler's cost savings claims.
The $2 billion Rock Island Clean Line would take 3,500 megawatts of power created by thousands of wind turbines in Iowa and deliver it to Illinois. The project could be completed by 2017.

“As a nation [we] are moving toward renewable energy resources. We need a grid that reflects where those energy sources are found,” said Hans Detweiler, director of development for the project.

Wind-generated electricity could help Illinois meet renewable energy standards. By law, one-fourth of the energy used in Illinois must come from renewable sources by 2025.

And there is demand for renewable energy sources. Some Chicago suburbs seek out green energy through a process called “aggregation,” in which the suburb buys green energy in bulk for the community and passes along the savings, if any.

In Evanston, aggregation saved the average household $264 in its first year, said Jonathan Nieuwsma, vice president of Citizens for Greener Evanston.
There is no guarantee that RICL will deliver even one electron of renewable power.  Under federal open access transmission rules, RICL must offer capacity on its transmission line to all generators.  RICL is assuming that wind generation will be built in the resource area, and in such quantities that wind generation can supply a constant 3500 MW of energy.  RICL plans to sell capacity on its line to wind generators, who may only use a fraction of their purchased capacity due to the variable output of wind generators.  This will create a secondary market for transmission capacity that may be purchased by steadier, base load fossil fuel-generated electricity, even if RICL sells all available capacity to these as yet unbuilt wind farms.  Will these wind farms actually get built?  Without government subsidies, who knows?  Every time the PTC expires, so does the desire to build a wind farm.

Clean Line's claims that its project will deliver renewable electricity are just as spurious as their claims that the project will lower prices.  In fact, Clean Line's renewable power fan dance is under protest at FERC.

The reporter did no analysis on whether or not RICL is needed to meet Illinois renewable portfolio standards, nor whether it is the cheapest renewable resource available.  In fact, Clean Line is looking hungrily at RPS in east coast states
, where it believes its product may be cost competitive.  While Clean Line may have played with the numbers to make it look like this was true several years ago, the reality is that more renewables are coming online in the east, and renewable prices are falling.  And what happens if RICL is no longer economic when it comes time to sign power purchase agreements?  The company won't build it.  But yet, the company is asking Illinois regulators to ORDER it to build the project so that it may take land from the people of Illinois at cheap prices.  The cheaper RICL's land purchases, the lower its delivered price will be.  RICL is asking the state to take from its citizens in order to make a private investment company profitable.  That's not the intent of eminent domain authority for utilities.

Aggregation is just a fancy word for deregulated electricity markets, where political subdivisions can use their collective buying power to negotiate lower prices from competitive suppliers.
  Aggregation may have saved consumers money overall, but more expensive renewable energy had nothing to do with that.

The Sun Times article also contrasts the opinions of two landowners who will be affected by the project... without ever using the words "eminent domain."  And that's the biggest sticking point of this proposed project.  It intends to keep its development cost low by taking land through eminent domain at ultra-low prices.  One landowner "thinks" he will be treated fairly, but he hasn't seen "the numbers" yet.  While visions of dollar bills dance in that landowner's head, hundreds of others have instead become educated and have fully participated in opposing the project at the ICC, such as landowner Paul Marshall. 

Marshall and the Illinois Landowners Alliance have chosen to make their case in the proper legal venue, while RICL seems to prefer to try its case in the court of public opinion, hoping against hope that its misinformation will be enough to fool the ICC into approving its project.  The Sun Times ought to be embarrassed at how they were used by fast-talking wind lobbyists.
4 Comments

Clean Line Media Tour Fails in Missouri

4/17/2014

1 Comment

 
A "media tour" is a public relations tactic used to control the way the media frames a certain story so that only one point of view is presented, and differing viewpoints are not mentioned.  A media tour can take many forms, but one involves schlepping an executive or "expert" around to different reporters in a city or region for face-to-face meetings with news reporters/editors.  The idea is that a reporter will connect with the executive, and more sympathetic press will be created.

Media tours rely on the card stacking propaganda technique whereby only one side of an issue is presented to the audience.  Opposing viewpoints, or facts that don't support the proponent's argument, are omitted from the discussion.  Because the media tour provides a one-sided rendition of fact, the stories produced can often take the form of "puff pieces."  A puff piece is a distorted story that only presents a glowing review of the proponent's product.  In contrast, a balanced article examines both sides of an issue and the reporter talks with leaders on both sides to present their views.

Because it was getting absolutely pummeled in the Missouri media by a fresh-faced amateur, Clean Line's Grain Belt Express project has concocted a new media plan.  The first item appears to be a media tour starring Clean Line president Michael Skelly.  This guy rarely shows up in the localities affected by his planned projects, and when he does he's always described as incredibly arrogant and out-of-touch with local sentiment, priorities and values.  Therefore, to drag him through a media tour in Mayberry, Missouri, informs that Clean Line is in real trouble in the all-so-important court of public opinion.

So, how did it go?  I think this reporter was wise to him.
Mr. Skelly’s visit comes amid an upsurge in opposition to the project.
And the true nature of that opposition is reported:
Opponents recently have banded together in a bid to thwart Grain Belt Express, with some sessions held in Buchanan and Clinton counties. They contend landowners are being coerced into signing easement agreements.
So Skelly starts telling some unbelievable whoppers:
However, Clean Line believes it is gaining more supporters rather than detractors and say the process in Kansas already has erased doubts.

“We’re having those conversations in Missouri,” Mr. Skelly said. “We’re out there having negotiations with landowners ... We find out that people get more comfortable with it.”
Check out the comment from an actual Kansas landowner at the bottom of the article:
I can tell you how negotiations with landowners in eastern Kansas is going. They're telling Skelly where he can put his power line, to put it mildly. The vast majority of landowners in eastern Kansas have resolved to not even negotiate with Clean Line until they get regulatory approval in Missouri and Illinois. The routing approval handed down by the KCC last fall was contingent upon them gaining regulatory approval in these two states. Why would anyone want to sign an easement agreement with a company that will more than likely sell the easement pre-construction to a foreign interest like National Grid, and not even be around when and if construction ever begins.
Erasing doubts.  Right, Mikey. 

But Mikey's media tour to "defend his project" got completely upstaged by the opposition when the Missouri Farm Bureau put out a release about its intention to intervene in the Grain Belt Express case at the Missouri PSC at the same time.  The Farm Bureau opposes the use of eminent domain for this project.

In addition, the university that Clean Line schmoozed with promises of pizza parties in exchange for signatures on a petition supporting the project has taken the initiative to exercise their journalistic muscles with some balanced reporting.

And another opposition op-ed got published.

What was that you said, Mikey?  I can't hear youuuuuuu... and neither can anyone else you were trying to convince with that lame media tour.

I guess he will just have to concentrate on the other tactic Clean Line has recently re-deployed, the "community roundtable" and "governmental and environmental organization" private meetings that attempt to inspire advocacy in unaffected and uninterested populations.

But, don't worry, citizens of Missouri, there are some public meetings where your participation and opinion are valued.


Meanwhile, another Grain Belt Express spokesman recently buggered things up further by cluelessly insulting Missouri lawmakers by stating that they are merely "dabbling
in legislation" that affects his project and he's "paying attention" to their interference with his plans in their state. What an idiot!!!

It's not going to work.  Give up, Clean Line.  You've been bested in Missouri and there is no recovery from public knowledge of your true intentions.

1 Comment

The People Have Had Enough

4/15/2014

1 Comment

 
Eminent domain.  Two ugly little words.

Here's two more:  Clean Line.

Mary Mauch of BlockRICL was on the radio this afternoon talking about Clean Line's proposals to take 3,000 miles of new transmission line right of way through eminent domain in numerous states across the Midwest.
Historically, we haven't spent too much time worrying about the right of public utilities to take private property using eminent domain.  It was a necessary evil to bringing electric service to every citizen in the last century.

But, let's take a look at where we are now in order to understand that transmission line eminent domain has reached the tipping point, where revolution is imminent.

It's no longer about bringing electricity to Mr. Smith's remote farmstead so he can read seed catalogs after the sun sets.  It's about trading electricity as a commodity, as new transmission lines get bigger and costlier.  It's no longer about providing a necessary service, it's about supporting markets and investor profits.

Transmission lines "ordered" by regional grid planners for reliability, economic or environmental reasons are bad enough, but one could argue that they are still ostensibly serving a "public" purpose by stabilizing the grid, the market, or saving the planet.  These projects are paid for by all users  of the electric grid, therefore there is some justification for the use of eminent domain in order to keep ratepayer cost in check.

And then we have the merchant transmission projects, like Clean Line.  This company is proposing transmission that has not been vetted or approved by regional grid planners.  They simply want to build a transmission line because it would be profitable.  Merchant projects are paid for entirely by their owners.  The merchant recovers its costs by selling capacity on the line to generators or load serving utilities (who then pass it on to the users of the project).  The merchant enterprise depends on the cost of building the line being less than the amount of profit to be derived from selling capacity.  If the cost of the line is greater than the profits, then it isn't an economic endeavor and it won't be built.

A merchant transmission developer has an interest in keeping its costs low to increase profit and make the project economic.  But a merchant transmission project isn't a public necessity.  It's a profit center, plain and simple.  That a successful merchant project would transmit electric power for purchase by utilities if the price is right does not a "public purpose" make. 

Clean Line proposes that state regulators anoint it with public utility status and its attendant power of eminent domain so that it may take whatever property it needs for its project at a low price.  This would keep the costs low for Clean Line, so that it could increase the amount of profit it may derive from operation of its line.

This is where the disconnect starts.  A merchant project that depends purely on economics for its purpose should be required to operate completely on an economic basis.  If Landowner A requires 150% market value for property, then that is the cost of the transmission line.  An economic project absolutely cannot rely on the power of the state to make itself profitable.

Landowners across Iowa, Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, Indiana, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Tennessee have taken a stand.  No eminent domain for privately financed economic projects.  The landowners are becoming highly educated about electric transmission, property rights and civic engagement.  And it's spreading like wildfire.

As a result, we are reaching the tipping point where absolutely NO transmission is going to be built, even that which may be needed.

The urban decision-makers with their quarter acre plots maintained by hired landscapers and gardeners simply cannot understand a farmer's or rancher's connection to his land.  Or why they are prepared to fight for their livelihood.
1 Comment

Push the PJM Money Button

4/11/2014

0 Comments

 
A new round of press has developed about Powhatan Energy Fund's assertive and very public defense of an on-going FERC market manipulation investigation.  This one is particularly entertaining:
Two things that you can say about the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, as a market regulator, are:

It produces the most incomprehensible prose of any market regulator, and

Its markets have an unusual tendency to be gamed in embarrassing ways.

I suspect these facts are related. I posit that almost nobody, including at the FERC or its various regional power markets, can actually figure out how those markets' rules work. So they work badly. And while you have to be very smart to figure them out -- say, at the level of Blythe Masters, or electrical engineering Ph.D. Alan Chen -- once you have figured them out, they become comically easy to game. FERC builds markets with so many bells and whistles and buttons and valves that some of the buttons end up having no function but to dispense money. If you can find those buttons, what you do is just keep pressing them until the FERC notices and gets mad at you and starts scolding you incomprehensibly.
My friend Scott in Mayberry refers to FERC's secret language as "FERCenese."  It's possible that a secret decoder ring can only be earned by selling your soul.  Or something.
0 Comments
<<Previous
Forward>>

    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
    StopPATH Blog

    StopPATH Blog began as a forum for information and opinion about the PATH transmission project.  The PATH project was abandoned in 2012, however, this blog was not.

    StopPATH Blog continues to bring you energy policy news and opinion from a consumer's point of view.  If it's sometimes snarky and oftentimes irreverent, just remember that the truth isn't pretty.  People come here because they want the truth, instead of the usual dreadful lies this industry continues to tell itself.  If you keep reading, I'll keep writing.


    Need help opposing unneeded transmission?
    Email me


    Search This Site

    Got something to say?  Submit your own opinion for publication.

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    June 2025
    May 2025
    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    October 2024
    September 2024
    August 2024
    July 2024
    June 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010

    Categories

    All
    $$$$$$
    2023 PJM Transmission
    Aep Vs Firstenergy
    Arkansas
    Best Practices
    Best Practices
    Big Winds Big Lie
    Can Of Worms
    Carolinas
    Citizen Action
    Colorado
    Corporate Propaganda
    Data Centers
    Democracy Failures
    DOE Failure
    Emf
    Eminent Domain
    Events
    Ferc Action
    FERC Incentives Part Deux
    Ferc Transmission Noi
    Firstenergy Failure
    Good Ideas
    Illinois
    Iowa
    Kansas
    Land Agents
    Legislative Action
    Marketing To Mayberry
    MARL
    Missouri
    Mtstorm Doubs Rebuild
    Mtstormdoubs Rebuild
    New Jersey
    New Mexico
    Newslinks
    NIETC
    Opinion
    Path Alternatives
    Path Failures
    Path Intimidation Attempts
    Pay To Play
    Potomac Edison Investigation
    Power Company Propaganda
    Psc Failure
    Rates
    Regulatory Capture
    Skelly Fail
    The Pjm Cartel
    Top Ten Clean Line Mistakes
    Transource
    Valley Link Transmission
    Washington
    West Virginia
    Wind Catcher
    Wisconsin

Copyright 2010 StopPATH WV, Inc.