Category:

Another Merchant Transmission Line Bites The Dust

8/16/2019

Farewell, Hunt Power "Verde" Transmission Project. Don't let the door hit you in the backside on your way out.

On August 2, 2019, the Verde Transmission Project notified the United States Bureau of Land Management and the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs that the Project would not be moving forward and that the Project was officially requesting to withdraw its application for right-of-way approval from these agencies.

This merchant project was staunchly opposed by the local community, who formed Stop Hunt Power Line.

A merchant transmission project is funded by its contracted customers. No customers, no funds, no project! Speculative merchant transmission projects without contracted customers just don't work.

THEY DON'T WORK!

It's classic chicken/egg, and I really hope private investors are done financing these pie-in-the-sky ventures. I wonder how much Hunt's investors dropped into "Verde" before wising up? Was it less than the $200M Clean Line Energy Partners' investors dropped into its speculative merchant projects?

If you propose to build it, they won't come. Utilities hate risk and speculative merchant transmission projects are about as risky as they come.

What's really sad is that, once again, a community had to spend its own hard-earned money defending itself against a speculative merchant transmission venture. When is someone going to hold these clowns accountable and file a civil suit?

But, now it's time to celebrate!

0 Comments

The Path of Least Resistance Doesn't Exist

7/23/2019

0 Comments

Here's another transmission battle that's heating up, this time in Florida.

NextEra wants to build a 176-mile transmission project across seven counties in north-central Florida. Finding out WHY they think they need to build this project is elusive. The only thing certain is that NextEra went sneaking around trying to buy rights of way and build its project before opposition developed. The Tallahassee Democrat nipped that plan in the bud, and opposition blossomed. Lots of opposition.

Local governments have been hard on NextEra, and rightly so.

Jefferson County Commission Chair Betsy Barfield was sharper in her opposition to the project.

“This is not an ask. This is ‘we’re tired of messing with you and this is what you need to do,’” she said in an interview. “The utilities, they really are the big gorilla and they’re the ones that think they can run roughshod over everybody. NextEra has not been a good community partner at all.”

Jefferson Commissioner Walker was there but said by that time the company was already far along in developing its plan without input from local officials. He’s driven his proposed route with NextEra's Bryant.

“I showed him the exact route but getting information from them is hard to do. I think they want to take the path of least resistance,” Walker said. “They should have communicated with every county along the way and got our input on it.”

But they didn't. NextEra tried to fly under the radar while selling "benefits" to impacted counties.

Property taxes associated with it could top $17 million in both counties over 30 years, with as much as $960,000 accrued in the first year. During the line's construction, 200 local jobs will be created and business to hotels, restaurants and stores could see an uptick.

Gosh, where have we heard these tired claims before? I know! It's part of every lame transmission project everywhere. And what have we discovered? The tax benefit claims are overblown. Utilities are taxed at different rates on a state level and the distribution of benefits often siphons them away from affected localities. Actual benefits are always less than proffered. But let's look at that claim... $17 million divided by two counties = $8.5M each further divided by 30 years = $283,000 per year per county, further diminished by state utility tax policies. Doesn't sound like much, does it, especially when offset by lowered property tax values for properties affected by the project, who can petition to have their assessed value lowered because of the depreciated value of their properties when crossed by a high voltage power line. These counties would be lucky to break even, tax wise. Oh, but wait! Local jobs will be created by the transient workers on location to build the power line who will stay at local hotels, eat at local restaurants, and shop at local stores. But 200 jobs? It's going to take 200 temporary employees to serve a couple hundred line workers for a few weeks or months, before they move on? This is utterly ridiculous, as transmission company claims usually are.

The county governments proposed a re-route, but NextEra lied about its viability.

NextEra has said the Highway 27 route was not viable because it would require co-locating with Duke Energy, a major utility competitor, and working within Florida Department of Transportation easement restrictions. A path completely down I-10 wasn’t workable because of existing development on private property near Tallahassee.
Barfield said after being told by Tim Bryant, NextEra’s senior manager of external affairs and new development, FDOT had denied their request to use Highway 27, she spoke with agency officials.
“They never told NextEra no, that they couldn’t do that,” she said. “Frankly, I don’t like people lying to us. To straight up lie? That’s just unprofessional and unethical."

FDOT spokesman Ian Satter confirmed NextEra has not approached the agency with plans to consider Highway 27.
“Gulf Power has contacted our department to make us aware they will submit permits to cross state roads,” Satter said.

Oh, no, NextEra, you didn't! You lied to local governments? Lying about the viability of alternative routes doesn't work. Just ask Transource, whose posturing against using existing transmission rights-of-way has pushed the company into the desperate position of trying to settle with opposition to build on those previously "unworkable" routes in order to avoid having its project denied outright. My Magic Eight Ball tells me NextEra may soon find itself in the same position. Seems like NextEra is simply opposed to sharing its golden egg with Duke Energy. Building new transmission is a profit center for utilities, a golden egg of long term riches, where the utility collects a generous return on its investment over the decades of a project's useful life. It's nothing more than a grandiose mortgage, and electric ratepayers are making the payments.

So, what's a company to do when the opposition tiger has escaped its cage and none of the proposed routes are viable? Go underground. If Tallahassee is looking for transmission that can withstand 130-mph winds, how about transmission that can withstand winds of any velocity? NextEra will say it's too expensive to bury the project and ameliorate the opposition. But how much money will it spend, and how much time will it waste, trying to overcome opposition? Where's the tradeoff, where's the sweet spot when the cost of opposition equals the cost of undergrounding? It's about double the cost of the project. If the project is too expensive to be prudent if buried, then maybe it's just not prudent at all.

Keep fighting, Florida!

0 Comments

Another One Bites The Dust

7/23/2019

0 Comments

Good riddance, Northern Pass transmission project. Last week the New Hampshire Supreme Court denied Eversource's appeal of the state Site Evaluation Committee's rejection of the project. The project is dead.

But that didn't stop Eversource's posturing. Eversource did what every annoying transmission project does... searches for "options" to try again. These guys just don't know how to take "no" for an answer.

Eversource, in a statement, said it was “deeply disappointed” with the decision.
“We will closely review the Supreme Court’s decision and evaluate all potential options for moving forward. It’s clear that the need for new energy sources in New England is greater than ever, and we remain focused on innovative solutions that will lower costs for our customers, improve reliability and advance clean energy.”

Ah... give it a rest, Eversource. Northern Pass was a bad idea that you just kept dumping money into way past the point of prudence.

Eversource spent $249 million on Northern Pass through September 2017, including engineering, property purchases, attorney fees and application fees. Eversource was funding the construction through borrowing and stockholder equity.

Won't Eversource have some fancy explaining to do at its upcoming earnings call? What fun!

Meanwhile, second place finisher Central Maine Power continues to lose support for its New England Clean Energy Connect project. But perhaps that's an understatement. It's an opposition wildfire! And these folks aren't backing down... ever.

Here's the thing... "flyover" merchant transmission is a thing of the past. It's a horrible idea that has been shot down over and over again. Flyover merchant transmission is NOT happening. Anywhere.

Why? Flyover merchant transmission proposes to impose on one state or region with new transmission that serves people in other areas, often places that don't want energy infrastructure in their own backyards. Making choices about your own energy use should never visit your choices on others. It's hubris of the highest order. And it leads to nemesis.

If Massachusetts sets "clean energy" goals, it's up to Massachusetts to bear the cost of them within its own borders. Northern Pass is dead. And NECEC is barking at its heels.

0 Comments

Consumer Organizations Drop a Little Common Sense on FERC Transmission Incentives Inquiry

6/26/2019

2 Comments

Back in 2005, Congress passed sweeping reform to federal energy law that became known as the Energy Policy Act of 2005. A portion of this act was a knee-jerk response to the northeast blackout that occurred in 2003. The blackout was caused by an overloaded transmission line in Ohio owned by FirstEnergy that got so hot it sagged into a tree that shouldn't have been on or near the right-of-way. Compounding this error, FirstEnergy employees had turned off important warning software in its control room, so it was unaware that a fault had occurred on its line. Because of that, it didn't respond by switching loads, and many other lines, and then generators, tripped off line to protect themselves from the surge caused by the fault. And the next thing you know, a large portion of the northeast U.S. and Canada was in the dark for many hours. It was reported that FirstEnergy didn't even know there was a problem until the lights went off in its control room.

One of the fixes Congress designed to prevent this happening again was what became codified as Section 219 of the EPAct. Sec. 219 tasked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission with devising a rule to create financial incentives for transmission development. FERC did so, and began awarding financial incentives to new transmission projects. This increased utility willingness to build transmission by making such investment financially lucrative. Of course, the cost of these incentives got tacked onto electric bills of consumers. FERC wasn't handing out taxpayer money, FERC was handing out YOUR money.

In 2011, FERC issued a Notice of Inquiry to review its transmission incentives policy. Hundreds of comments were filed by utilities, trade organizations, regulators, investors, environmental groups, and others, including a small group of organizations opposed to the PATH transmission project. What came out of that review was a new policy statement from FERC in 2012 that maybe slowed things down a little, but not enough. As time passes, this train speeds up when nobody is paying attention.

In March of this year, FERC issued another inquiry to review its transmission incentives policy. Initial comments are due today.

This time, an even bigger group of consumer organizations (18 signatories from 14 different states) filed initial comments on FERC's inquiry.

You may read the comments here.

Consumer organizations use Sec. 219 as their touchstone in the comments. If an idea for an incentive is not in the statute, out it goes. Some of the ideas proposed by FERC are new incentives for big, new, interregional transmission projects, incentives for big, new, transmission that "unlocks constrained resources", incentives for public utilities that participate in non-public utility transmission projects, automatic award of incentives without regulatory review, and other bad ideas that will cost consumers a lot of money with little reward. FERC will also be looking at changing its current policy restricting incentives to new transmission to make incentives available for the upgrade of existing transmission. Some good ideas may come out of this review yet.

In addition, the Consumer Organizations review FERC's current buffet of incentives and make recommendations for beneficial change.

The consumer organizations also let FERC know what it's really like to have new transmission and energy projects imposed on communities. It's a view they can't see from their DC office building. We've all been through the trenches of battling unneeded transmission. Some of the organizations have been successful, and projects have been withdrawn, cancelled, or altered. Some are still fighting. When we come together to speak with a common voice we leverage our successes and prepare for the battles ahead. While many voices will be heard at FERC, ours will be the only one from actual consumers who pay for transmission incentives. Without our participation, it's just a bunch of self-interested entities claiming they speak for us. Now they don't have to (and if they do, nobody will believe them). Without our voice, FERC is likely to expand its incentives in order to encourage even more transmission!

Why does this matter? Because what FERC does after reviewing comments can either encourage more unneeded transmission for profit purposes, or put the brakes on bad policy that gives away our money in exchange for transmission ideas of little value to consumers. FERC has jurisdiction over interstate transmission planning and rates. It does not have jurisdiction over transmission siting and permitting. Only states have that authority. So while FERC may make transmission highly profitable with incentives, it lacks the jurisdiction to get it built. FERC can only spend our money, not permit or site new projects. Giving away our money is not a substitute for the jurisdiction FERC lacks.

And just like last time, everybody who stands to profit from transmission incentives has an opinion that protects or furthers their own financial interests. You can read other comments on the docket here. Enter PL19-3 in the Docket Number field, and then click "submit" at the bottom. This will bring up a long list of all comments filed. Click on any one of them to read it. And while you're reading, here's a little mood music...

2 Comments

GBE Opponents Rise From the Ashes

5/18/2019

1 Comment

Although important legislation to prevent the use of eminent domain for overhead merchant transmission projects was defeated at the Missouri legislature, landowners are not defeated.

This one small battle in the larger war re-framed the issue in a big way that will have repercussions nationwide.

Democrats, such as Reps. Tracy McCreery and Peter Merideth, both of St. Louis, have argued that projects like the Grain Belt would bring in tax revenue and encourage the use of green energy.

Tax revenue? We should use eminent domain to take private property in order to increase tax revenue? Wasn't that the problem in Kelo v. City of New London? Should out-of-state private companies wield eminent domain for their own profits based on inflated promises of increased tax revenue? If that's the case, no one's property is safe. This is bigger than one merchant transmission project.

And then there's that "green energy" thing. Should private property be confiscated in order to pretend the electricity we waste is "greener?" The right of eminent domain was granted to public utilities in the last century as a way to electrify the country. In more recent times, this purpose has been lost as we slipped down the slope of using eminent domain for less compelling reasons, such as generation choices and electric rate issues. The first tenet of eminent domain use for electric projects should always be absolute necessity. Will the lights go off if the transmission project isn't built? If the answer is no, then eminent domain should be prohibited. End of story.

These are the issues that will be discussed in the wake of HB 1062, and advocates will enter the next battle in this war better prepared.

This legislative battle saw the rise of a crew of property rights heroes who deserve our recognition and thanks.

Representative James Hansen showed true leadership and dedication to his constituents by sponsoring this legislation and working tirelessly to shepherd it through the legislature. Be sure to thank him for taking a stand for property rights.

Ralls County Commissioner Wiley Hibbard worked enthusiastically throughout to support this legislation on behalf of his constituents. There were times he was in Jefferson City throughout the night. There can be no better public servant than Wiley Hibbard, and he deserves a wealth of thanks for his efforts.

Marilyn O'Bannon, Eastern Missouri Landowners' representative never stopped her efforts to get this legislation passed, even when an accident left her with only one good arm in the middle of the battle. Marilyn's work ethic and grace under pressure should be lauded by all GBE opponents.

Paul Agathan, the best lawyer landowners have ever had contributed greatly to the effort, even though he was bogged down with PSC briefs for the GBE sales case AND appeal for the CCN case at the same time. He's amazing and landowners can't thank him enough for his work on their behalf.

Landowners Phil and Doris Brown put huge effort into this battle, providing advice and material and taking the initiative on many things to keep the issues clear and truthful.

Russ Pisciotta, Block GBE representative, continued to dedicate his time on this issue and was a fierce advocate for the legislation.

Please take the time to thank these individuals for the countless hours spent on this initiative.

And now let's recognize all the landowners and supporters who not only made the trek to Jefferson City for the rally in April during a very busy time of year, but blanketed legislators with calls and emails of support for this legislation. Thank you, each one of you!

So, what's next? Continuing this war as it was before the legislative session. GBE's CCN has been appealed. A decision has not yet been made on the GBE/Invenergy sales case by the PSC. Briefs have been filed.

GBE/Invenergy need numerous county assents in Missouri before they can construct anything. That battle is looming on the horizon and it's not going to be quick or easy for GBE/Invenergy.

If we believe Invenergy, a permit would be needed from the Illinois Commerce Commission that is years away. It hasn't even been applied for, and even if it is granted several years down the road, appeals look promising thanks to the precedent set by Illinois Landowners Alliance several years ago.

If we don't believe Invenergy, major changes are coming to GBE before the end of the year that will require new state regulatory approvals.

Delay, delay, delay. And as we all know, delay is our friend. And I'll share something here... I truly believe GBE will never be built. Have faith! You are going to win this battle!

No sense crying over spilled milk when there are so many battles left to fight. Every effort to defeat GBE builds strength for the opposition. Keep fighting!

1 Comment

PJM Interconnection Gets Gored on Social Media by Mama Bear

4/29/2019

1 Comment

This is an aerial view of Amanda Elisaon-Scott's property, where she recently constructed her "dream home" in Harford County, Maryland. It's just a few feet from the new right of way for Transource's proposed Independence Energy Connection. Her house is about 300 feet from the tree line, and Transource plans to put its right of way in between her house and the tree line. This puts the transmission line less than 200 feet from her house, and even less than that from the backyard swing set where her three small children play. Moreover, because the right of way is just off her back property line, she will receive absolutely no compensation for what could be taken from her. She worries about her children and her family living within the shadow of giant electric transmission lines. And she's not going to stand for it. She's a self-admitted "Mama Bear," and everyone knows what happens when you get between a mama bear and her cubs.

Amanda took it home to its source at PJM Interconnection, in the wake of Saturday's Maryland Public Service Commission Public Hearing. Amanda went to PJM's Facebook page, where she saw many posts about PJM's community involvement and a recent "take your child to work day." But there was no place for her to make a post. PJM has shut off that feature, preferring a "one-way street" for its social media presence, where only PJM may disseminate information. The only place for the public to interact with PJM on social media is by posting a comment on one of PJM's posts. And even then, those comments are "hidden" and not viewable by anyone other than their author and that person's Facebook friends. This is what Amanda posted:

PJM Interconnection why do you filter the comments on your page, why do you not allow the public to share comments or post concerns??? Don't appreciate it when the public calls you out on your lies??? After our community hearing with the Maryland Public Service Commission I am back into full fledged pissed off mama bear mode, and I have ZERO plans of backing down. The entire project is unfounded, unjust, unnecessary and provides no benefit to anyone but YOU and your own financial gain. It will be a cold day in hell before I willingly allow you to destroy my community, our homes, property or my childrens back yard.
*EDITED*, I never expected all the shares, so I wanted to write a bit more of an explanation for those who aren't aware of that's going on.
PLEASE SHARE AND TAG TO SPREAD MORE AWARENESS!!!!!
I'm reaching out to everyone single person I can and through every single avenue there is. Crazy long story short for those who have no idea what's going on. A huge multi million dollar electric company PJM Interconnection has plans to build a new high tension powerline in northern Harford county MD, Washington county MD and Franklin county PA. This is a powerline that serves no purpose, and does nothing to benefit the general public, only the big power companies will reap the benefits. To make matters worse, there are existing underutilized towers that could solve the problem, without having to build a new transmission line. Currently they have plans to enforce eminent domain (steal our land) to build this line, and plan to disrupt homes, farms, orchards and small businesses. They have intentionally chosen farms in agricultural preserve because the land is "cheaper", and hold "less value", so therefore more cost efficient for them to steal. Unfortunately if the state allows this to happen, it will set a precedent that huge money hungry corporations can steal land from whomever they chose for their own financial gain. Does this directly impact you now ?? Maybe not, but I certainly never thought I'd be facing this issue, but here I am. Please Help spread the word. Share share share and share again!! They currently plan to go directly through my husbands great grandparents farm that we were blessed to have been able to build our dream home on, the land that we thought would allow our 3 small sons to safely grow, learn, play and explore. This project, if approved is going to ruin those hopes and dreams. So please, help make this issue known, and spread the word.

PJM exists to serve electric ratepayers in its 13-state region. All PJM's money comes from ratepayers. Each one of the 66 million ratepayers in the PJM region pays a portion of PJM's budget (and it's huge!) And, in return, what do they get?

Can't even make a public comment on PJM's Facebook page. PJM thinks the ratepayers who pay its bills should have no voice.

Here's what PJM thinks it does:

Does that say "understand customer needs"? How could PJM understand customer needs when it shuts itself off from communication with those very customers? PJM is out of touch with its customers and has no idea what they need. However, it is very in tune with its "members," like Transource, whose "needs" trump customer needs every time. It's the epitome of "cartel."

So, like Amanda asked, share. It's time for every one of those 66 million PJM customers to let their "needs" be known.

To learn more about Amanda's story, watch this video.

1 Comment

Take a Drive, PJM!

4/28/2019

0 Comments

Stop Transource filled the house yesterday at the Maryland Public Service Commission public hearing on the Transource project. It is estimated that around 200 people gave up their Saturday to come out and show their staunch opposition to this project.

Transource opponent Patti Hankins asked PJM to take a drive...

Welcome to our Mason-Dixon Community. A Community at risk due to a broken PJM process.

PJM holds the view, that agricultural land is “undeveloped land” ready and waiting for their transmission projects. PJM fails to consider or care about the negative impacts their transmission projects have on our local economy, local agricultural businesses, rural pastoral viewsheds or the rural Community in general. PJM fails to recognize that agriculture is an intended land use designation. Harford County retains approximately 75,000 acres, or 27%, of the County’s land area dedicated to farming. Agricultural land is in decline and both MD & PA have made preserving agricultural land a priority. We can’t make more farmland.

On November 6, 2017 members of this Mason-Dixon Community, along with elected and appointed officials from both MD & PA met with PJM staff, Paul McGlynn (PJM System Planning), Matthew LaRocque (Manager Regulatory Affairs for MD, VA & NC), and Darlene Phillips (PJM State and Member Services) as a result of a written request to PJM’s Board Chairman. The purpose of this meeting was to resolve the need for any new “greenfield” transmission projects in our Community.

What was and is still disturbing is the failure of PJM and their staff to acknowledge that, as citizens, we know what is best for our Mason-Dixon Community. On November 6, 2017, those PJM staff chose to ignore the invitation by Councilman Chad Shrodes to take a five-minute drive to see the underutilized transmission line, the Otter Creek-Conastone line near Shaw’s Orchard in Norrisville. In fact, the Otter Creek-Conastone line parallels and is located within sight of the proposed Transource IEC-East line almost the entire proposed pathway. To validate this one only has to take a drive.

In addition, we were told that “some states have requirements” to utilize existing brownfields vs. building new greenfield transmission. And that “we are all working with the states to work within and respect the state’s regulations”. And that (the project) “was submitted based on state policy”. If those statements were true, PJM wouldn’t have approved Transource to build an unnecessary, redundant IEC-East transmission line in a Community already beset with existing underutilized transmission lines. Something that is very clear to the members of our Community. All one has to do is take a drive.

We expressed concern to PJM staff that the Benefit/Cost analysis only included costs of siting, costs of ROW’s, substation and equipment costs – transaction and infrastructure costs only, costs specific to building the project. A member of the York County Planning Commission told PJM staff, “those are transaction and infrastructure costs only, project costs specifically related to building the project. You are not looking at the farm economy for local farms. Where is the B/C for the Community? We need to come up with this impact.” There was just silence from the PJM staff present. Matter of fact, our Community still has yet to receive an answer from PJM. So, PJM what is the negative impact to our Community? Are you ever going to answer?

Our Mason-Dixon Community urges the Commission to provide that answer to PJM. Tell PJM that their project, the Transource IEC Project is denied. Tell PJM that existing underutilized transmission infrastructure is the best solution for “Market Efficiency” and/or “emerging reliability issues”. Tell PJM that the next time they propose a problem and search for solutions that they need to just take a drive.

Too bad PJM officials couldn't be bothered to give up their Saturday to listen to citizens concerned about the impact of a project PJM supports. You drive me crazy, PJM!

0 Comments

Maryland PSC Public Hearings! This is Your Moment, Folks!

4/24/2019

0 Comments

Starting this Saturday, the Maryland Public Service Commission will begin public hearings on the Transource Independence Energy Connection project. The public -- that's you! It's time for you to be heard!

It's a rare moment indeed when a government commission volunteers to work on a Saturday in order to provide the widest opportunity for working folks to participate in the very important public hearing process. In fact, I've never heard of one like this before. Don't let this important process go by without your comments!

When: Saturday, April 27. Hearing begins at 11:00 a.m., but please come early in order to sign up to speak and find a good seat.

Where: North Harford High School, 211 Pylesville Rd., Pylesville, MD

What: The Maryland PSC, who will make a decision whether or not to permit this project to happen, wants to hear from the public in order to inform their decision. If you want to address the Commission briefly (3 minute limit), sign up with the PSC personnel in the lobby before the meeting. If you think you can't speak, or the idea of doing so simply gives you the willies, you may submit written comments to the PSC staff at the sign-up table. If you're undecided, come prepared for either action. However beware that a certain magic happens at these hearings. The feeling of camaraderie and community you will experience listening to the heartfelt comments of your friends and neighbors has been known to inspire even the most squeamish to trek back out to the lobby to add their name to the speakers' list. And if you think you don't have a comment to make, please come and listen. You may find that you want to participate after the hearing gets going, and that's okay. Many in your community have been working hard, contributing both time and money to preserve your community and stop this expensive and unnecessary project and they would welcome your support during this important hearing.

Who: YOU! You don't have to be a Maryland resident to participate. You don't have to be an affected property owner. You're probably an affected ratepayer who will end up paying for this project through increased electric bills for the next 40 years. Even if you spoke at the Pennsylvania public hearings last year, you may speak again. This is a whole new commission, making a completely different decision. Make sure they make the right one!

If you miss this hearing, or it's too far away, you'll have another opportunity on May 18 at Smithsburg High School in Smithsburg, MD, also beginning at 11 a.m. If no one shows up for this hearing, what message does that send to the PSC Commissioners? Please make time to attend the hearing closest to you!

Why are public hearings so important? Public hearings let the commissions know what the affected public thinks about the project and help to drive the opinion they will issue. A project nobody seems to care about is taken as acquiescence. But a hotly opposed project causes the commission to take notice that the public who would supposedly "benefit" from the project doesn't want it.

Has public hearing participation made a difference in other states, on other projects? Absolutely! Decked out, verbal and prolific public participants have rocked public hearing venues in other states so hard that the project has eventually been denied by the state commission.

It's time to stand up and stand out against Transource. I guarantee you'll leave the hearing with a full heart, energized and inspired to do the best for your community. Don't miss this important event! You'll remember it proudly for a long, long time!

0 Comments

Landowner Express Steams Into Missouri Capitol

4/17/2019

3 Comments

Hundreds of landowners rallied at the Missouri State Capitol yesterday to support HB 1062, according to this article. Grain Belt Express, meet Landowner Express! Following the rally, the bill was perfected by the House, with an amendment, and passed in a preliminary vote. It will go for a final vote on Thursday before passing to the state Senate.

HB 1062 would prohibit the use of eminent domain by a private entity to construct above-ground HVDC merchant electric transmission lines without substations at least every 50-miles. As amended, a private entity is defined as "a utility company that does not provide service to end-use customers or provide retail service in Missouri, regardless of whether it has received a certificate of convenience and necessity from the public service commission under section 393.170." HB 1062 has been enthusiastically endorsed by landowners and property rights supporters, and yesterday was further demonstration of the popularity of this bill.

The legislation is attracting a lot of attention in the media, with many stories framing it as the death knell for Grain Belt Express. Does this mean that Grain Belt Express does not really want to fairly negotiate easements with landowners in a genuinely free market? The company has been saying that it would negotiate fair prices for new easements, but when the coercion of eminent domain to reach agreements comes off the table, GBE doesn't want to play anymore. It wants to grab its ball and go home. I'm sure no one will miss them.

The proposed legislation helps GBE build a better project, one that does not unjustly enrich itself through the loss of others who receive no benefit from the project. GBE could put its project underground. It is possible. It could also route its project on existing public easements. The only thing the legislation prevents GBE from doing is sacrificing private property for its own financial benefit.

GBE is not a public utility deserving of the state's eminent domain authority to take private property for a public use. It's a privately held company that plans to make a huge profit exporting pretend "clean" energy through Missouri to the highest bidders other states. The less the company spends acquiring land in Missouri, the greater its profits. Pretending to deliver energy to its supporters in Missouri (while simultaneously exporting an equal amount of energy from Missouri) doesn't make it a public utility. There's no need for the project except for the profit motives of its owner. Saying there is a need is purely a political move.

The Missouri PSC's decision to find a "need" for the project was purely political, an attempt to favor certain kinds of energy. The PSC's order was full of political ideals, such as...

There can be no debate that our energy future will require more diversity in energy resources, particularly renewable resources. We are witnessing a worldwide, long-term and comprehensive movement towards renewable energy in general and wind energy specifically. Wind energy provides great promise as a source for affordable, reliable, safe and environmentally-friendly energy. The Grain Belt Project will facilitate this movement in Missouri, will thereby benefit Missouri citizens, and is, therefore, in the public interest.”

That's politics. And if the MO PSC, ostensibly an impartial regulator, wants to play politics, the Missouri Legislature can play that game better. In fact, politics is their job. So, for all those whiners who think the legislature is out of line weighing in on this matter, it's a simple matter of just desserts. Tit for tat.

The dominant argument in favor of blocking eminent domain is that the right to private property shouldn’t be infringed upon by a private company.

“This is just another attempt by private companies under a government commission to limit our personal liberties,” bill sponsor Rep. Jim Hansen, R-Frankford, said as he introduced his bill.

There were also concerns about how the power line could negatively affect property value and how it could damage farming land. The lawmakers also questioned why an out-of-state company should have this power.

Why, indeed. Is it because it offered below cost service to some Missouri municipalities? There ain't no such thing as a free lunch, fellas! Your free lunch causes sacrifice for your neighbors, who receive nothing in return. And they're not going to stand for it.

“We’ve been told that these people will be well-compensated and it’s going to do so much for the economy and so these poor counties — I come from a poor part of the state — and those things matter, but there ends up being more important overarching values,” Rep. Jeff Shawan, R-Poplar Bluff, said.

Because it is a very slippery slope.

It's been quite amusing watching the arguments of the opponents of HB 1062 shift day-to-day. Obviously they're not good arguments if they fall on deaf ears and are subsequently replaced with others. The latest is that the legislation is "an attack on green energy." When are the "dark money" claims going to start? Comparing an electric transmission line to an oil pipeline is a losing game. How many strawmen can they pile on the blaze?

And then there's this comment:

“For an awful long time, we’ve subsidized oil, and we don’t seem to have a problem with that,” Rep. Deb Lavender, D-Kirkwood, said. “So why do we suddenly have a problem with subsidizing wind?”

So, allowing GBE to use eminent domain is "subsidizing wind", is it? And who would be doing the subsidizing? The landowners who lose property, that's who! Thanks for that reason for passing HB 1062!

The siren call of mad calliope music draws attention to the antics of angry, dark money finger pointer James Owen, who popped up to make some ridiculous comments in this article.

James Owen, executive director of Renew Missouri, dismissed the eminent domain legislation as a tactic that will only “add to the litigation that’s been attempting to halt this job-creating project for five years.”

“Ultimately, it won’t stop it for many reasons, but leaders think this frivolous legislation will score points with some noisy constituents,” Owen told The Missouri Times. “So it’s another hurdle to creating jobs and bringing low-cost energy to Missouri. Disappointing, but misguided.”

Frivolous? Ineffective? Dear, dear, James.... similar legislation was passed in Iowa several years ago to protect landowners there from eminent domain takings by a different "Clean" Line project. The law is still on the books, Clean Line is gone, and a better project that doesn't require the use of eminent domain has been proposed. It intends to create jobs and bring low-cost energy without the use of eminent domain! And all the "noisy constituents" in Iowa are pleased and thankful to be released from the threat of Clean Line. And, really, James, who do you think the legislature serves if not for "noisy constituents?" The profit goals of out-of-state corporations? The legislature is elected by and serves its constituents, noisy or otherwise. If, as you say, the legislation does nothing, why are you so angry? Your furious insults are quite unseemly. You catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar!

Like this:

“We have tremendous outpouring of leadership in the House and the Senate,” Gary Marshall, CEO of the Missouri Corn Growers Association, said. “We just felt it was important to be here to show them how much this legislation means to us.”

Onward, constituents and legislators! You're awesome!

3 Comments

Rally in Missouri Tomorrow!

4/15/2019

0 Comments

A rally to support Missouri HB 1062 will take place at 2:00 tomorrow at the Capitol Rotunda in Jefferson City. I hope everyone who can make the trip will attend. I hear there's even going to be free pie and ice cream for participants who arrive between 12 and 2. Free pie? Sounds like a delicious idea!

HB 1062 would prohibit the use of eminent domain by private entities to build an overhead merchant HVDC electric transmission lines which does not provide for the erection of electric substations at intervals of less than fifty miles. It's just that specific. It won't interfere with AC transmission, buried transmission of any kind, or any other kind of linear infrastructure. The bill has received wide support and sailed through committee hearings. It is supported by Speaker of the House Elijah Haahr, who penned this op ed last week.

That's not to say the bill has no opposition, however it is weak and based on exaggeration and misinformation, such as the exaggerated claims of "tax benefits" from Grain Belt Express. Exaggerated promises of future tax revenues rarely come true. Any revenues realized are usually much less than figures touted during the approval process, and must be balanced against tax revenue losses experienced by the counties. Lowered property values caused by new transmission produce a drop in assessments and property tax collected. In addition, new transmission affects farm yields and profits, lowering taxes paid by local business. This impact also spreads to agricultural support businesses. During construction, the transmission line would produce costs for the counties, such as traffic control, security, and road maintenance/repair. Another thing to consider is the very nature of utility taxes, which are controlled by the state. The state may skim off a portion of the taxes to pay for state programs or to distribute to other counties. The actual amount received by individual counties will be much less, and when lowered taxes and additional costs are factored in, may produce very little revenue for affected counties, or result in a net loss. The arguments against HB 1062 are increasingly facile and shallow.

The supposed "significant" savings on electricity prices could, at most, produce a 3% or 4% savings. How much would that really be on your electric bill, if you take service from one of the municipalities who decided to support Grain Belt Express and throw their rural neighbors under the bus for their own financial benefit? Just a couple bucks... not enough to truly make any difference in a consumer's financial situation.

Granting eminent domain authority to a private entity so that it may take private property cheaply in order to increase its own profits is the start of a very slippery slope. How soon we've forgotten the lessons of Kelo v. City of New London, which sparked national attention on the issue of eminent domain for corporate gain. Show me, Missouri, that you support private property rights by attending tomorrow's rally!

0 Comments

<<Previous

Forward>>

Another Merchant Transmission Line Bites The Dust

The Path of Least Resistance Doesn't Exist

Another One Bites The Dust

Consumer Organizations Drop a Little Common Sense on FERC Transmission Incentives Inquiry

GBE Opponents Rise From the Ashes

PJM Interconnection Gets Gored on Social Media by Mama Bear

Take a Drive, PJM!

Maryland PSC Public Hearings! This is Your Moment, Folks!

Landowner Express Steams Into Missouri Capitol

Rally in Missouri Tomorrow!

About the Author

About
StopPATH Blog

Need help opposing unneeded transmission?
Email me

Archives

Categories

About the Author

AboutStopPATH Blog

Archives

Categories

About
StopPATH Blog