Here are the comments I submitted yesterday.
doe_nietc_comments.pdf |
Keep your eyes here to see if your comment actually shows up.
Thanks to everyone who commented and spoke truth to power. Together we can make a difference!
StopPATH WV |
|
We called for comments on the U.S. Department of Energy's new program to designate National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors. The deadline to submit comments was yesterday, and it looks like a lot of people responded to the call! Here are the comments I submitted yesterday.
This morning, the comment portal shows that 94 comments have been received on the NIETC docket. However, DOE has a real problem with publicly sharing information and documents. Sometimes your comments go into a black hole and you never see them again. Sometimes, DOE relents and allows comments to be publicly available. On this docket, DOE has approved some of the earliest comments to be available for public viewing, but not the ones it received yesterday. Maybe they will... and maybe they won't.
Keep your eyes here to see if your comment actually shows up. Thanks to everyone who commented and spoke truth to power. Together we can make a difference!
0 Comments
There's still time to get your comments in to the U.S. Department of Energy on its plan to let transmission developers request National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (NITECs) that coincide with financially lucrative transmission projects. Once the DOE designates a NIETC at the request of a project developer (merchant or otherwise), the project owner will have FEDERAL EMINENT DOMAIN to take your property against your will. Don't go quietly without a fight! Tell the DOE that you object to its plan to allow greedy transmission developers to decide where, when, and why to build new transmission. The back yard you save may just be your own. New transmission has been juiced by government giveaways of taxpayer cash. DOE says it intends to use designation of NIETCs as a pedestal for its cash giveaways. A transmission project with an NIETC is suddenly eligible for piles of taxpayer cash. Funny how that works, when the enabling statute actually says NIETCs should be designated for the purpose of benefiting electric consumers. Once a developer requests a NIETC for its project and DOE approves, permitting for the transmission project shifts to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. FERC wants to open a separate permitting process for such a project, to run at the same time as your state permitting process. That way, if your state denies a permit, FERC is standing there poised with its rubber stamp to overrule what your state utility experts decide. Don't miss your opportunity to let DOE know what you think online so that you don't have to stand outside FERC's building and sing a song like this some day.
Ready? Go here. Just fill out the form. You can even check a box to remain anonymous. You don't have to give your name (although, personally, I always prefer to own my words). The deadline for comments is just a week away on July 31! Don't know what to say? If the information in this blog isn't enough for you to compose a comment, then you may find inspiration reading some of the comments that have already been submitted. They cover a wide range from obsequious greedy transmission developers, to other government agencies, to citizens just like you. Get your comments in now before time runs out!!! After watching the spectacle of all the environmental groups aligned with renewable energy company Invenergy taking up space and advocating for Grain Belt Express at the Missouri Public Service Commission a couple weeks ago, it's hard to imagine these groups are "protecting" landowner rights. But that's just what they are currently purporting to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. FERC has opened a Rulemaking proceeding in order to update its rules for permitting interstate transmission projects. Although this ability was originally granted in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, several court decisions nullified it for more than a decade. However, the Investment and Jobs Act (aka Bipartisan Energy Bill) nullified the court decisions and reinvigorated FERC's authority by directing FERC to permit transmission lines that are denied by state regulatory commissions. The time to oppose this provision has passed. It's been signed into law. Now we have to deal with reality. And reality is in shaping the existing rules to make a federal permitting (and eminent domain) process as fair as possible for landowners. A group of transmission opposition group leaders from across the country submitted initial comments to FERC last month. We recommended several steps FERC could take, and things it could add to its review, in order to level the playing field for landowners who find themselves involved in pitched battles to save their property through no fault of their own. Nobody asks to have a transmission line sited on their property. It just happens. And then these unfortunate landowners suddenly find themselves having to hire lawyers and get involved in energy permitting. Nothing at all fair about that. FERC should not be making participation harder for landowners. But a bunch of other groups also filed comments at FERC, including a whole bunch of environmental, policy and partisan political groups who think we should build a whole bunch of new transmission in a big ol' hurry. When we wrote our comments, we didn't dwell on environmental policy and environmental requirements for FERC's new rules. That's not in our wheelhouse. We are not the experts at environmental policy. We left that to the environmental groups to file comments advising FERC how it should write its environmental rules. However, those environmental groups did not give landowners the same courtesy. After telling FERC how they love new transmission "for renewables" and demanding that FERC enable a quick and expensive transmission building renaissance, these environmental policy and political groups proceeded to weigh in on creating fair rules for landowners and local community opposition groups. What do these groups know about transmission opposition and landowner concerns? Turns out nothing at all. What do these groups know about transmission permitting cases? Turns out nothing at all. These groups don't know diddly about landowner concerns because it is not in their wheelhouse. They are not groups whose mission is protecting landowners from electric transmission companies. In fact, their missions are to "help" the environment by building more wind + solar + transmission. Isn't that the fox watching the hen house? You betcha! This week, the Impacted Landowners group filed reply comments telling FERC that it should ignore the claims of environmental policy and political groups that they represent the interests of landowners. The landowners asked FERC to hold a listening session exclusively for landowners so they could hear our concerns without us being drowned out by a bunch of know-nothings who have their own interests at heart, not ours.
What logic is there to FERC ignoring the concerns of landowners who might participate in FERC permitting cases, while shaping them to give advantage to big green political groups? We are being marginalized by a bunch of blowhards who claim to be representing our needs but in actuality are doing nothing more than helping themselves by mowing us down. If FERC wants to fairly issue transmission permits that are not bogged down by landowner opposition and appeals, then it must listen to landowners, not clueless policy groups who have never been involved with transmission permitting or even spoken with a rural landowner targeted by transmission.
MYOB, big green groups. We don't want or need your "help." So begins another round of permit wack-a-mole for Grain Belt Express... Last week, the Concerned Citizens and Property Owners, along with four other parties to the Illinois Grain Belt Express permitting case, filed appeals of the approval of the Illinois Commerce Commission. You may read one of the essentially identical appeals here. At this stage, it's a simple notice of appeal. The case for granting it will be made in a series of briefs that will be filed as this case progresses. For now, the notice sets out what the appellants are seeking. The appellants... ...request that the Appellate Court for the Fifth Judicial District REVERSE the above referenced orders of the Commission in their entirety, and declare Section 8-406(b-5) of the Public Utilities Act unconstitutional as Special Legislation, as violative of the Equal Protection Clause, and as violative of the Separation of Powers Clause. The appeal asks the Court to nullify the ICC's permit for Grain Belt Express and nullify the special Grain Belt Express legislation that was passed at the legislature last year and signed by the Governor. If granted, it would put GBE back to square one in Illinois.
It stands a very good chance of succeeding. While the arguments in briefs have yet to be filed, I expect the arguments to be very similar to the ones these parties made before the ICC. Those arguments were rejected by the ICC, which is just as well because it is an issue for the courts. The ICC cannot declare legislation unconstitutional and refuse to follow it, that's a court's job. For now, we must wait to see the briefs. Stay tuned... Did you submit your comments on the U.S. Department of Energy's draft National Transmission Needs Study yet? Today is the deadline. You have until midnight. See this for more information and instructions for sending your comments. It's really easy -- you simply send them an email. Why is this important? Because this "study" (and I use the term lightly, very, very lightly) will determine where new transmission is "needed" in the U.S. DOE's study says it is "needed" everywhere, aka maybe at your house? Once DOE says it's "needed" in the final study, then greedy transmission developers will ask DOE to designate a transmission corridor for every unneeded, money-making project they can dream up. Once DOE designates a corridor for every transmission project that anyone wants to build anywhere, that activates federal eminent domain and permitting by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. That's right, this "study" is ground zero for having your land taken using federal eminent domain. It's all downhill from here once DOE issues its final study this summer. This is your last chance to let them know what you think. Want to know what I think? Of course you do, or you wouldn't be here! I just sent in my comments. They start off like this... The Law of the Instrument is a cognitive bias that is often expressed with the phrase, "If Click here to read the rest of it.
Speaking truth to power can be fun! Don't miss out!
Propaganda rag Bloomberg article about four long-stalled transmission projects, including Grain Belt Express, that the reporters claim are "inching ahead." Ahead of what? These projects have been bumping around for more than a decade without success. Only one is actually being built, and that's the one buried on existing rights of way and underwater. Coincidence? I think not. But that's not the stinkiest part. The propaganda oozing from this article claims: The fact these long-in-the-works projects are reaching similar milestones appears to be coincidence; no single policy is moving them forward. They are, however, advancing at a time of increasing understanding by local communities and even traditional opponents — including some conservation groups — of the need to move clean energy from rural outposts and to build more durable electric systems after a series of weather and climatic events have felled grids in recent years. Who are these "communities" and "traditional opponents"? Doesn't say, but it also "includes conservation groups" so perhaps we have our culprit right there. Conservation groups are pretending they speak for landowners. Conservation groups like Sierra Club and all those other big green organizations that like to intervene in state siting and permitting proceedings to support the destruction of your community and property. They speak for you about as much as former Missouri Governor Jay Nixon did when he negotiated "landowner protections" on your behalf without consulting you. Now you've got posturing, sanctimonious swamp creatures claiming that you "understand" how you must sacrifice your home to the Gods of Climate Change that they worship.
Nobody affected by new above-ground transmission rights-of-way taken under threat of eminent domain "understands" this idiocy. That's a bold-faced LIE designed to make the hoi polloi believe that you don't mind being thrown under the wheels of the "clean energy" bus that they're driving so that they can all cheer about how they have saved the planet (that was never in any actual danger). This is gas lighting. This is mainstream media propaganda. These reporters also doesn't realize that what has "felled grids" in recent years is the retirement of baseload coal and gas electric generators and a failing attempt to replace them with intermittent industrial wind and solar generators. It's not the weather. It's the generation sources. See how they did that? "Not enough power? Build more wind and solar and transmission lines!" When their agenda causes a problem, they pretend you need to continue with their agenda to solve the problem that's being created. They are doubling-down on the cause of the problem instead of finding a solution. What is it going to take to stop this craziness? Do we have to wait for these low-information fools to crash the grid? Tell the reporters they are quite mistaken in their unsupported presumption. We do care and we will continue to resist. When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail! The U.S. Department of Energy released a draft of its new "National Transmission Planning Study" last week and, surprise, surprise, surprise, every last place in the continental U.S. needs a whole bunch of new transmission lines. As our pals at PJM Interconnection stated in a comment to the DOE about this study: PJM cautions against approaching this analysis based on a ‘top down’ analysis based on what appears to be an attempt at optimizing the deployment of renewables across the nation. That's right, DOE has stepped outside its statutory playpen and tried to make a study of transmission congestion and constraints about building a new transmission system to support an unbelievable and unachievable number of industrial wind and solar installations, mainly in the Midwest and Plains. New transmission advances clean energy goals by enabling greater access to clean energy resources, which can be in remote areas, far from load and the existing transmission system. And, of course, all those "remote" clean energy resources planned for your back yard need new transmission to get the electric harvest to those that "need" it in the big cities that don't want to look at ugly energy infrastructure in their own neighborhoods. Transmission projects also frequently face public opposition or “not-in-my-backyard” concerns for various reasons. These challenges can lead to increased costs, schedule delays, or even project cancellations. Damn straight, Skippy! But what's the goal here? This biased study created from other studies paid for by "clean energy" special interests and "clean energy" special people who now all seem to work for the DOE for some weird reason, is a precursor to DOE designation of National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors, or NIETCs. Once an NIETC is designated by DOE, then permitting authority for transmission projects proposed within the corridor passes to FERC. DOE proposes that NIETCs be generated for very narrow corridors requested by transmission developers on a project-by-project basis. And FERC proposes that it shall begin its permitting work right away, even before state utility regulators have a chance to approve or deny the project. This is a whole of government effort to flatten you and take your property in the name of "clean energy." There's plenty wrong with DOE's study, both from a technical and a legal perspective. I'd like to buy a drink for the commenter from Reliability First (one of the NERC reliability organizations) who pointed out every incorrect presumption and crazy unicorn dream in the study. Obviously it goes without saying... if the independent professionals who make sure the lights come on when we flip the switch is skeptical of this "study" then perhaps we should also question it. The study suggests that we need to build huge transfer facilities between regions to enable "sharing" of resources. However, such a scheme could also create kings and serfs -- where certain regions do not build enough generation to meet their own needs, even on low use days, and then develop increasing reliance on other regions to keep pumping out more power for the King's use. There's nothing in here that is even remotely useful. DOE's findings of "congestion" aren't even real, as demonstrated by their finding of "congestion" between Pennsylvania and DC/Northern Va. in the PJM region. PJM says: A significant portion of the higher congestion noted in the Report is associated with multiple transmission outages in support of approved upgrades. As a result, the congestion listed should not necessarily be considered a persistent level of congestion in the Mid-Atlantic. Great job, DOE! Your study as about as useful as a couple puddles of cat puke.... kinda looks like that, too. Here's a news article that is a lot easier to read than the actual report, although it may gush just a little too hard. Media bias is a real problem these days. The article tells us how very much Invenergy loves this "study" as it relates to its "Green Belt Express" project. The study was warmly welcomed by Chicago-based Invenergy LLC, developer of the proposed $7 billion Green Belt Express line that could help carry up to 5,000 MW of Great Plains wind power to Great Lakes and mid-Atlantic population centers. Sure, right... as if Grain Belt Express has anything at all to do with electricity markets and isn't just going to sell its project off to be used as a private tie line to proposed generation.
Anyhow... the article also plays up the fact that the public can comment on the "study." And you're all invited to ASK QUESTIONS at DOE's "study" webinar tomorrow afternoon! Sign up now and don't miss all the fun! Be sure not to lose sight of the fact that all of this complete and utter nonsense is costing you millions that can only be paid for by higher taxes. Time is drawing short for the public (that's you!) to let the U.S. Department of Energy know what it should study in its upcoming Environmental Impact Statement for the Grain Belt Express. After a decade of not being able to find customers for its merchant transmission project, Grain Belt Express has turned to the federal government to provide a loan guarantee for up to 80% of the cost of its transmission line project across Kansas, Missouri and Illinois. A loan guarantee is just like co-signing on someone else's lease or car loan... you are responsible for payment if the primary borrower defaults. So whether the federal government actually loans GBE the money, or simply co-signs on a bank loan, the U.S. taxpayers are going to be holding all the risk that GBE won't be able to find enough customers to repay the money it cost to build the project. It's no risk and all reward for GBE owner Invenergy, meanwhile the project is poised to cause enormous environmental and social destruction across three states. In this phase, known as "Scoping", the public should let DOE know what it should study and why. If you think there is an impact GBE will cause, let them know. This is your only opportunity to help mold the study parameters. You can't decide later that GBE will destroy an historic site on its route and demand it be studied. The next phase will be a draft study where you may comment on the conclusions reached on the study parameters. At that point it's not about what should be studied, but how it was studied. Here's where you should submit your comments. There are numerous ways to do so, from emailing a copy of written comments, to calling up and leaving a verbal comment. Yesterday, I submitted my written comments. I hope you will send in yours before the deadline on Feb. 28.
There's still time to let your government know that even $760M of your hard earned dollars cannot buy a speedy path for new transmission rights of way across your property. You can submit your comments by following the instructions here. The baboons in Congress heard a lobbyist whisper that throwing money at a problem could solve it, and that the reason why transmission wasn't getting built is because state regulatory processes were slowing things down. The lobbyists also told their pet apes that landowners affected by new transmission who form opposition that slows down and cancels transmission proposals can be bought off with "economic development" projects that compensate someone else without any skin in the game. Of course, the primates didn't bother to actually consult with state regulators or transmission opponents to see if any of this was remotely true. Congress simply appropriated a stunning $760M to throw at this problem in the inaptly named "Inflation Reduction Act." Does spending more money on useless ideas actually reduce inflation? Hasn't happened yet. Now the U.S. Department of Energy wants to know our thoughts on how they should give away all this money as "grants" to "siting authorities" to make transmission permitting happen faster and easier. I told them what I think.
Let me sum it up for you: Those who are actually affected by a covered transmission project will not stop opposing and delaying that project because the federal government bought fake support from unaffected groups or individuals. Purchased fake support does not fool regulators. It doesn’t fool anyone in the community, either. It will only fool the fools in D.C. who purchase it. What an incredible waste of our money!
Or maybe we should call this "Solyndra 2.0"? A week ago, the U.S. Department of Energy published a notice in the Federal Register entitled, "Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Grain Belt Express Transmission Line Project." You can read the whole thing here, or see the less technical version on GBE's brand new website. To summarize, GBE has applied for a federal loan guarantee to build "Phase 1" of its project. This taxpayer-funded gravy train is administered by the DOE, and because it now involves the federal government in the GBE project, the government is required to conduct an Environmental Impact Study under federal law (National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA). Title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct) established a federal loan guarantee program for certain projects that employ innovative technologies. EPAct authorizes the Secretary of Energy to make loan guarantees available for those projects. Grain Belt Express, LLC (Applicant), has applied for a loan guarantee pursuant to the DOE Renewable Energy Project and Efficient Energy Projects Solicitation (Solicitation Number: DE-SOL-0007154) under Title XVII, Innovative Energy Loan Guarantee Program, authorized by the EPAct. The primary goal of the program is to finance projects and facilities in the United States that employ innovative and renewable or efficient energy technologies that avoid, reduce, or sequester anthropogenic emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs). When did this happen, you may wonder? Nobody knows. DOE conducts its guaranteed loans of taxpayer dollars in complete secrecy. You don't get to comment about that, but they do have to let you comment about the environmental effects of GBE because of NEPA. But I'm much more concerned about the federal government "loaning" GBE billions of dollars to construct a project that doesn't have an adequate revenue stream to pay back the loan. What kind of a government geek thought this would be a good idea? What kind of due diligence have they performed? Doesn't sound like it was much... and that's how Solyndra happened. The government loaned taxpayer funds to a company it didn't really investigate and the company went belly-up before repaying the loan. That means that the taxpayers were never repaid. But Solyndra lived high on the hog on taxpayer funds before the bill came due. All that money... gone with the wind simply because some government functionary was lazy or under political pressure to approve a loan that any rational banker would run away from. And here's another worry... what if GBE also has applied for a taxpayer-funded "capacity contract" from the DOE? In that instance, DOE would pay GBE for its project (although it wouldn't actually USE it) for a period of 40 years. So, what if GBE repays the taxpayer loan with taxpayer capacity contract funds? Does that mean that we would repay the loan we made to GBE? This is the epitome of bloated government waste. Just throw around a bunch of taxpayer funds and "clean energy" will magically happen! Or maybe a bunch of well-connected rich guys will simply fill their pockets and zoom off into the sunset. That's probably more like it! Meanwhile, the DOE must evaluate the environmental effects of GBE, and it wants to do it in record time. The first step of this process is what they call "scoping." The scoping process collects public comment and uses that to set the parameters of what will be studied. They want to hear your thoughts on Potential impacts on resources include, but are not limited to, impacts (whether beneficial or adverse; short term or long term) on air quality and GHG emissions; soils and paleontological resources; water resources, including surface and groundwater and floodplains; vegetation, wildlife, and special-status species; land use and recreation; socioeconomics and environmental justice; public health and safety; cultural resources and Native American traditional values; transportation; visual resources; and noise. And DOE plans to gather your comments before the end of February, 2023. You may comment: LPO will hold six public scoping meetings for the project, four in-person and two virtual meetings, at the following dates and times (Central Time). Registration for the virtual public meetings may be completed at the following web links: DOE will gather this information and then present a number of "alternatives" that they will study. There are currently only two alternatives -- to build the project as proposed, or to not build the project at all. There is no middle ground, such as building the project buried on existing highway or rail rights of way so that it doesn't affect the environment at all, certainly to a much lesser degree. However, the DOE is also asking for your thoughts on possible alternatives that they have not yet thought of (such as burial on existing ROWs).
Once DOE has its alternatives and study parameters, it will study how each alternative effects the environment, and publish a draft study (estimated to be September 2023). The public will once again be asked to comment on the draft study to tell DOE what they got wrong, or what they excluded. DOE will take those comments and revise its study to produce a final Environmental Impact Study (estimated to be July 2024). Once DOE has the final study, it will make a decision on which alternative to pursue no sooner than 30 days after publication. Seems kind of quick, doesn't it? Especially the scoping period, which begins just one short month after announcing the process on December 16. As if you don't already have enough to do with the holidays and participating in your own state's public utility commission hearings on GBE. Now you just got a whole bunch more work dumped on you. If you can't keep up, then DOE doesn't have to consider your comments and will just give GBE what it wants -- billions of your tax dollars. I'm not going to go into a long narrative of what you should do here. Please check in with your group leadership to see what the plan is. Ho Ho Ho from greedy GBE, who doesn't seem to have enough customers to pay for its project and now wants YOU to pay for it. Santa is putting coal in GBE's stocking this year. |
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
|