Name-Calling: "Giving an idea a bad label and therefore rejecting and condemning it without examining the evidence." This is the use of negative words or labels to create prejudice against some person, group or idea. If you fall for this you have been driven to reach a conclusion without examining the evidence.

There’s a growing concern within the wind industry that in communities considering hosting wind farms, the loud minority of opponents is increasingly trumping the silent majority of supporters who want the jobs and revenue that come with projects.

At best, Nimby pushback is raising costs through delays. At worse, half-a-billion-dollar wind farms are dying because 50 people shouted at their county commissioners during a public meeting.

Facebook is “the new town square” in rural areas, according to Avangrid Renewables’ director of communications, Paul Copleman, as it’s eclipsed traditional local newspapers, many of which are dying.

Nimby groups organise online, then they show up in the room. The wind IPPs have ceded the digital ground to such an extent that “the opposition is eating our lunch”, according to Matt Wagner, manager of renewable energy development at Detroit-based DTE.

Projects are being built in communities that see undeveloped land as something to be conserved, rather than a resource to be used.

Nimbys are being helped with outside organisers and money, much of it from incumbent energy sources.

The good news? Among the IPP staff on the front lines of community engagement, there is a growing consensus that the industry must up its digital game by more proactively meeting community members where they are — online, not just across the table at the diner.
In a series of interviews with IPP staff, we found widespread agreement on the advantages of increased digital engagement, as well as basic best practices.
They shared nearly a dozen benefits the industry is missing due to digital constraints, including insulating persuadable community members against the predictable arguments of critics; profiling and amplifying supporters’ stories, and creating a credible alternative information source to Nimby Facebook groups.
Interviewees also collectively produced a list of digital best practices for their executive teams to consider, which included starting communicating early, before opposition groups form and gain momentum — it’s a race to define; showing wind farm benefits through supporters’ stories, captured on camera; and showing people the experience of those currently living near existing wind farms.
As Apex Clean Energy vice-president for public affairs, Dahvi Wilson said: “Opponents of one company’s projects can encourage and strengthen opponents to another company’s projects. Like it or not, we’re in the digital boat together. We need more companies to increase their investment in digital community engagement.”
At the staff level, the consensus for upping the industry’s digital game is solid and growing because, as Adam Renz, manager of business development for Pattern Energy, said: “Social media can de-risk projects.”

Please note that the future cash flows from these assets are supported by long-term power purchase agreements (“PPAs”) and in the case of the Santa Rita East Wind Project, virtual power purchase agreements (“VPPAs”), better enabling these assets to pad American Electric Power’s future net operating cash flows. One of the driving forces behind those PPAs and VPPAs is a growing corporate need to appear to be “green” and that involves acquiring the rights to the electricity produced from renewable power plants (even if those corporate entities aren’t directly consuming the electricity produced). Another reason involves the ever-growing demand from utilities all across America to source a growing percentage of their electricity (meaning total electricity sold to end consumers) from renewable sources (whether for long-term corporate planning purposes or for regulatory reasons).

Dear Liberal Media Climate Change Gods, hear my confession and absolve me of my sins.  Although I preach to others in order to shame them about their carbon footprint, I don't want an electric cable buried under MY beach. Can't we find some downtrodden serfs in a red state and force them to host renewable energy infrastructure to power our waterfront McMansions?  Pass the bacon, but do it quietly.  In wind energy's name I pray, Amen.

The electrical industry continues to be the largest user of SF6 because of its superior properties as a gaseous dielectric insulating medium to prevent high voltage electrical breakdown and electrical explosion hazards. Advantages resulting from its high dielectric strength, compared to air, nitrogen, oil and fluorinated ketones, include size reduction of electrical equipment, superior arc-quenching protection in circuit breakers, self-healing of arcing products, large current interruption, noise-free operation, minimal moisture problems, lower fire risk, absence of carbon deposition, and low maintenance cost.
Currently, electrical utilities and equipment are responsible for consuming 80% of the 10 000 tons of SF6produced every year, an amount which is growing with the increasing global production and demand for renewable forms of energy, such as wind and solar. As a result, there has been an increase in the number of connections to the electricity grid compared with the traditional fossil power stations, with the consequential rise in the use of switchgear to deal with arcing and to stop short circuits.

I only love green energy because it increases my company's dividend and ultimately my bonus.  I'm sitting here with a beer (not that cheap, weak, wind-powered Budweiser yellow beer, but a full-bodied, expertly crafted Arrogant Bastard Ale) and I've got chicken wing sauce all over my face.  What time's the game?

Apex Clean Energy Vice President of Public Affairs Dahvi Wilson said it’s no longer simply a matter of getting landowners to sign off on projects. Now, Wilson said, utilities need to secure public support.
“We’re increasingly before state [and] local governments, and we’re facing opponents that are very sincerely concerned about what’s coming to their communities but also misguided,” Wilson said.
Utilities are increasingly facing the deliberate spread of misinformation online about proposed projects, she said. “We’re in a lot of debate right now over what’s true.”
Wilson said regulators must now ascertain whether data are scientifically rigorous or simply pulled from a questionable webpage.

North Dakota Indian Affairs Commissioner Scott Davis, a member of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, led negotiations with the Dakota Access Pipeline over a two-year period. He described how he was constantly afraid of a protester’s death and listening to helicopters conducting crowd control near his home.
“Don’t underestimate the power of my people. You can tell them not to do it, and they’re going to do it,” Davis said. “Quite honestly, government hasn’t treated us very well in the decades of our existence.”
Davis said “old-fashioned” face-to-face discussions with tribal or community leaders is the best approach to introducing projects with communities, native or not. Davis also warned that treaties protect tribal land.

“[For] a lot of you that have tribes in your states, treaties are the law of the land. They’re in the Constitution. … Understanding tribes, where they’re coming from, is so important,” Davis said. “I think in this world of progress, progress, progress, what drives us — what pushes the gas pedal of progress — is trust. If you’re just rubber-stamping [energy infrastructure projects], you will have an issue.”

Wilson said the wind industry, which previously tended to submit projects quietly, hoping for little public notice, is now more transparent. She also agreed that it’s imperative for utilities to spend face-to-face time in a community.
“If the people that are fighting our projects are much more liked in the community, the community is going to believe them over us,” Wilson advised.
However, she said, it’s still a “hard sell” to convince many utilities to spend money to embed company representatives in a community to foster trust.

Environmental Law & Policy Center Senior Attorney Brad Klein said it’s generally good practice for a utility to perform a full environmental impact analysis early in the process and thoroughly investigate alternatives to a large energy infrastructure project.

“I don’t think alternatives are appropriate in all cases, but they should be fully considered up front,” Klein said. Decisions should be made based on “full and fair information,” he said, which should contemplate new technologies, battery storage and collections of distributed resources.

Klein also acknowledged that there will be environmental trade-offs with any large infrastructure project. But utilities and regulators shouldn’t insult groups of concerned citizens, he said.
“Don’t dismiss local communities as NIMBYs [‘not in my backyard’]. That’s insulting,” Klein said. “When we lose the public’s trust, you lose the larger fight.”

What you want
Baby, I got it
What you need
Do you know I got it?

Invenergy’s investment will support three of the organization’s central programs:

• The Blue Jacket Program, which Invenergy will donate 125 signature jackets annually.
  
• Career and Leadership Development Events.
  
• Building out the FFA national alumni network.
  

More than half of Invenergy’s U.S.-based renewable energy projects are located in the same zip code as an active FFA chapter.

“FFA is important to the communities where Invenergy projects operate..." said Mick Baird, SVP of Renewable Development at Invenergy.

The Court of Federal Claims held that none of the developer fees were includible in the applicants’ qualified grant basis because the fees had not been substantiated to the satisfaction of the court. The court applied as its legal basis for this disallowance, the so-called “sham” transaction doctrine applied under the tax law.

The development agreement was a three-page document, according to the Court of Federal Claims, wherein Bishop Hill agreed to pay IWNA a $60 million development fee. The government’s requested findings suggest that the development agreement disclosed that this amount was intended to compensate IWNA for development services that it had already performed for Bishop Hill. The development agreement was signed by two officers of Invenergy Wind and was terminable by construction lenders if the exercise of their remedies resulted in Bishop Hill being no longer controlled by IWNA. According to the government, another single member disregarded entity of Invenergy Wind, Invenergy Wind Development North America LLC (IWDNA), transferred $60 million to Bishop Hill’s construction account in July 5, 2012. On the same day, the $60 million amount was transferred to IWNA’s operating account. And, on the same day, the $60 million amount was transferred back to the same IWDNA account from which the amount originated. According to the government: “Thus, on July 5, 2012, $60 million travelled through three bank accounts and in each account, the debit and credit of $60 million cancelled each other out.”

The transmission line also creates several economic benefits, including added grid interconnection and future interconnection options, landowner easement payments, and county property tax payments.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

“There’s a huge supply chain of service folks that really know how to do these things, and that will help us to be more flexible,” Skelly said. “There’s a bunch of states now that want 100% renewable energy. I think we’re on a great path, and for the younger folks just getting started in the industry, it’s going to be interesting.”

“We thought transmission was going to be the linchpin of expanding wind energy,” Skelly said.

“Transmission is super hard. We’re not really in the mood right now to do these giant projects in the United States,” Skelly said. “These things change. We’ll look back in 100 years. There’ll be times we didn’t do a lot of infrastructure; there are times we did a lot of infrastructure. Hopefully, the country will be in a better mood and ready to do these big-bone transmission projects.”

Coincidentally, Pattern Energy CEO Michael Garland sat at the other end of the panel. Pattern last year bought Clean Line’s interests in the Mesa Canyons Wind Farm and Western Spirit Clean Line projects in New Mexico. It has already reached a $285 million agreement with PNM Resources to sell Western Spirit once it’s completed in 2021.

“They’ve pushed forward with development,” Skelly said of Pattern. “Clearly it’s a new model, and that’s exciting.”

New technology and new businesses hold out hope. Twitter bots exist for good and evil. Just as there are Russian bots spreading fake news, there are bots which respond with carefully selected and edited reality. It’s possible to build social media responses with mixtures of professionals and automation now, and to respond without rancor to disinformation campaigns. There are social-media savvy firms which know how to mobilize effective pro-development efforts on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram.

The MLA respectfully contends that the type of “need” created by Grain Belt in inducing MJMEUC to buy its product is not a true “need” for the service in the sense envisioned in the Tartan case. By analogy, it seems safe to say that not every family in Jefferson City truly “needs” to own a Cadillac. But if a dealer were for some reason to offer a Cadillac to everyone in the City for say $5.00, would the fact that virtually every family in the City was now driving a Cadillac suddenly prove there really was a “need” for those cars after all?

To the contrary, the MLA submits that actual “need” for any product cannot be artificially created by practically giving it away, as Grain Belt has done here. “Need” is not the same as “Want”.

To begin with, the only meaningful means to determine what MJMEUC might have saved by using the Grain Belt line is to compare MJMEUC’s total cost of power from that line to MJMEUC’s next best alternative at the time it signed the contract with Grain Belt. The problem is, before MJMEUC signed the TSA with Grain Belt, it did not bother to solicit bids from any other party to replace the expiring Illinois coal contract. Therefore, neither MJMEUC nor anyone else will ever know what the best alternative would have been to signing the TSA with Grain Belt.

For the above reasons, the MLA respectfully submits that Grain Belt failed to prove that the need for the line in Missouri is anything but an illusion of its own making.

In short, all of the cases cited by Grain Belt on this issue merely support the reliance on the resources of Clean Line, and not those of a third party with no ownership in the Applicant.  Thus based on Grain Belt’s own analysis, it is asking the Commission to take a position here for which there apparently is no precedent.

A more fundamental problem with Grain Belt’s argument on this point is that it is once again taking for granted that future decisions of the Commission will be made in Grain Belt’s favor. Specifically, before the sale of Grain Belt to Invenergy may close, those parties need not only the CCN in this proceeding, but also the permission of the Commission for the sale of the Grain Belt project to Invenergy in a case which has yet to be filed. If that sale is not approved, then of course Grain Belt never gains access to the resources of Invenergy. Thus in asking the Commission to decide the two Tartan criteria on the basis of Invenergy’s expertise and stronger financial status, they are necessarily asking the Commission to assume that it will later approve the sale of Grain Belt to Invenergy. And this request is being made by Grain Belt before the Commission has even seen or heard a word of evidence in the case which will decide that issue.

This is particularly presumptuous on Grain Belt’s part, in that they have stated unequivocally that the Commission does not even have the authority to approve the proposed sale which they now take for granted will be approved.

Even if Grain Belt successfully manages to disavow its earlier position, which seems unlikely, it is totally inappropriate for Grain Belt to even suggest to the Commission that it should assume it will approve the sale of Grain Belt to Invenergy before that case is even filed.

Despite the prognoses of what the Commission will do in some unfiled case, as matters now stand there is no basis for granting a CCN to the Applicant on the basis of speculation about its possible access to Invenergy’s resources.

Grain Belt supports its position on this issue primarily with broad generalizations about the market for wind generation. And while it contends that “the economic feasibility of the Project continues to be strong”, it does not even attempt to make a case for the economic feasibility of the Missouri segment of the line, without access to the PJM market.

As the MLA and Show Me discussed in their initial brief on remand, there is a definite possibility that the line will ultimately terminate in Missouri, thereby precluding access to the very markets which could make the project economically feasible.

As the NRDC and Sierra Club suggest, Missouri might be a “loss leader” for Grain Belt. But as they then note, according to the concurring opinion the project relies for its economic viability on the higher prices in the PJM market. But of course if the project cannot reach the PJM market, it is left only with the loss leader segment of the line in Missouri.