Category:

U.S. DOE Wastes Your Money on Another Stupid Idea

6/8/2018

Analysts report that consumers served by utilities on the nation's East and West coasts pay higher costs for their electricity than we do here.

News flash! That's because "here" (the Midwest) doesn't have a network of expensive, gigantic transmission lines to pay for.

Think about it.

DOE obviously hasn't.

DOE is stuck in 2009, when the idea to lower coastal power prices by building a "national grid" was novel. Now that idea can only be called FAILED.

So, the DOE has a big new idea for "the installation of a network of high-voltage, direct-current transmission lines could boost the availability of reliable, affordable power generated by renewable sources at load centers on the East and West coasts."

Hey, Einstein, building your ginormous dream grid costs money. Lots and lots and lots of money. We're talking billions. And your plan expects that electric customers nationwide will finance that investment over decades to come and pay its private investors/owners double-digit interest throughout its lifetime. No thanks, we simply can't afford it.

Don't you think that adding additional costs to move energy thousands of miles will only increase energy prices, both on the coasts and the Midwest? Building new transmission to reduce costs on one part of the system only produces a leveling of costs across the region. If prices go down on the coast, they will increase in the Midwest.

And maybe, just maybe, the people who live in the Midwest don't want to live in an ugly, noisy, industrial power plant that only benefits the politically powerful players on the coasts. And maybe they don't want to live in and work under a network of new high voltage transmission lines. And they will resist, no maybe about it. They will shout and block and delay your dream grid for years and years, and that costs even more money.

Don't do it, DOE. Quit wasting my tax money on stupid things like TransGrid-X 2030. You already tried this idea once, remember? You called it Section 1222 of the Energy Policy Act, and you decided to "partner" on an HVDC transmission line from the Oklahoma panhandle to Memphis. And it failed. It failed spectacularly. It couldn't find any customers to purchase capacity. No income, no project. So what makes you think, DOE, that a new network of HVDC transmission lines from the Midwest to the coasts would be able to find customers? You've already done this experiment once and it failed.

I do note that your "symposium" has participation from companies that would benefit financially from building billions of dollars of new transmission. So you're just acting as a facilitator for private investment here?

Swamp, swampy, swamperson. Get out of the muck! Don't you have enough trouble already with your swampy plan to save coal?

The real cutting edge on transmission is to stop building it and develop a secure system of interconnected local microgrids that can be autonomous self-contained systems that continue working seamlessly whether connected to a larger network or not.

Or maybe you can hold a seance and ask Nikola Tesla what he thinks? That's probably a more productive use of my tax money.

0 Comments

AEP Wind Catcher Support Letters to Oklahoma Corporation Commission Signed by AEP Employees

5/29/2018

3 Comments

What's a company to do when it wants to create a feeling of overwhelming support for regulatory approval of one of its projects, but it lacks overwhelming support?

Create it with home-grown resources!

Shame on you, AEP! Your scam wasn't even that hard to figure out. Which ever one of your "geniuses" came up with passing the tablet in the workplace ought to be fired.

At the very least, the Oklahoma Corporation Commission should be forced to collect and toss any letters of support for the Wind Catcher project that came from AEP/PSO employees and failed to disclose that the author worked for AEP and had a conflict of interest. That should lighten the docket immensely.

A little birdie told me that the OCC Commissioners were looking at huge piles of support letters for the Wind Catcher project on their desks. Perhaps Commissioners were feeling a bit obligated to approve the project's rate scheme because of such overwhelming support. So, I looked at the OCC docket for the case. And I found one of the links to collections of public comment on the project.

Funny that... most of the letters were strikingly similar, in fact so similar that they are obviously form letters. All contain the following closing paragraph:

For the aforementioned reasons, I sincerely support and endorse Wind Catcher Energy Connection and the benefits that it will bring to Oklahoma. Oklahoma cannot afford to miss out on this opportunity to invest in our state and the citizens of Oklahoma. I would like to thank the Oklahoma Corporation Commission for their thoughtful consideration on this matter.

And they are all obviously signed on an electronic tablet because each individual signature has that telltale "drunken illiterate" look so common to finger signatures on electronic tablets, where the signature box is well defined and limited.

So, who was collecting signatures in support of the project? Was it some of the usual suspects like Sierra Club? Well, yes, of course, but an online letter does not create a distinctive tablet signature, and there's no way Sierra Club could draw that many people to a venue in order to sign their tablet. Sierra Club is no longer a member run organization and has lost its base because it is too focused on scoring grant money anymore. Who else is running a "send a support letter to the OCC" campaign for Wind Catcher? Well, Invenergy is. That's sort of like cheating though, since Invenergy stands to profit enormously if AEP gets its project approved and buys Invenergy's wind farm. Shame on you, Invenergy! But even then, how could tablet signatures get generated online? And why doesn't Invenergy's form letter of support include the telltale concluding paragraph?

Where were these "supporters" gathered?

I tested my first theory that all "supporters" from a certain date may all live in one city and may have attended a single public event where the tablet was passed. Since the OCC blocked out the addresses of the "supporters" I had to zero in on unique or unusual names to find out what cities the supporters lived in.

And then I found something really interesting.

Kristine Kurszewski.

She supports Wind Catcher.

She's also an Administrative Assistant at Public Service Company of Oklahoma at Bartlesville.

Wow, what a coincidence, right? Out of all those dozens of support letters docketed at the OCC I just happened to pick one written by an AEP employee.

Except then there was:

Tiney Holyfield, a Project Control Analyst at American Electric Power in Oklahoma City.

Larry Gattenby, an IT Support Technician for AEP.

Levi Grooms, a Project Manager for AEP in Tulsa.

And lots more, but it was starting to get repetitive.

It looks like all Wind Catcher's "support" letters were signed by AEP/PSO employees across Oklahoma. What better place to walk around with a tablet and get employees to give you a finger signature? I wonder if the employees even knew they were signing a support letter to the OCC? Or did they think they were signing some routine workplace form? How voluntary were these signatures, anyhow? Did employees feel pressured to sign the tablet? I think AEP has a lot of explaining to do to the OCC...

It also needs to fess up to jamming the docket with fake letters of support from its employees. Once all those fake form letters are gone, the letters of opposition will rise and shine. They're in there, but buried among the AEP employee form letters so only a very patient person would be able to locate them.

If the OCC Commissioners have piles of support letters on their desks, they need to weed out any written by AEP employees, whose employment may or may not be tied to their willingness to sign AEP's tablet. Such "support" cannot be seriously considered as reason for approving such a bad project.

Shame on you, AEP! SHAME ON YOU!!!

3 Comments

Franklin Co. Sends Transource Packing

5/24/2018

0 Comments

It was both inspiring and heart wrenching listening to Franklin County residents testify in opposition to the Transource Independence Energy Connection during four PUC public hearings this week. More than 100 people showed up at the first hearing on Tuesday afternoon, and many of them testified under oath.

Resident after resident stepped up to the microphone to tell the judges how this project would affect them. We heard about how this project would burden farmland, oftentimes land that has been in the family since the 1800's. Farmland sometimes serves as a farmer's retirement plan and much of a farmer's wealth is tied up in his land. A new transmission line across it not only devalues it, but can make it worthless for future uses. How many people in No. Va., D.C., and Baltimore do you suppose are offering up a part of their retirement savings in order to make power a few cents cheaper each month? But yet they ask these hardworking farmers to take that kind of hit.

We also heard from a developer who owns a master planned community in Franklin whose beautiful views, property value, and economic well-being will be forever marred by the presence of this transmission line through the valley.

One of my favorites was a professor of economics from a local university who couldn't find any economic benefit for Franklin County, and quoted some absolutely hysterical lines from Paul McGlynn's testimony that made absolutely no sense.

Katie Hess from South Mountain Partnership approached with maps, studies, and other publicly published exhibits and testified at length about how the project would impact farmland, economics of the region, and the environment. She also shared that she approached Transource early on in the process in an attempt to develop a partnership of sorts to help site the line to have the least impacts. Transource dismissed and rebuffed her efforts. I guess they're now reaping what they sowed. At the end, Transource's attorney objected to her exhibits as "heresay." Overruled!

The president of the Franklin County Area Development Corporation testified that Transource's claimed economic benefits to Franklin County were biased and perhaps exaggerated. Based on his many years of experience developing the economy of Franklin County, he said Transource has failed to quantify the benefits and articulate the need for this project. He also had an amusing Transource story to tell... that the company assumed he would automatically support the project and sing its praises. However, he is adamantly opposed. He is the first local economic development professional I have seen to reject a transmission proposal. I greatly admire his honesty and professionalism on behalf of the people of Franklin County!

And, of course, a union shill showed up. Funny that... the first person signed up to speak was Bernie Kephart. Except he wasn't there. How did his name get on the list? Did he sign up remotely? Or did someone else sign his name, hoping he would show up? Bad form, Transource. Extremely bad form. Don't junk up speaker lists with names of people who aren't even present. And the one union guy who did speak told everyone they wouldn't even notice the power line after it was built. He got a roar of laughter so powerful even he was laughing as he slunk away from the microphone. Pretty ridiculous!

Attendance was also high at the three subsequent hearings, with about 100 speakers voicing opposition to the project, and many more filling the venue to support the opposition. The only ones voicing support for the project were a few union plants and a farmer/transmission construction company owner from another part of the state who says he does $30M of business yearly. Ya know, Transource, you did a lousy job drumming up fake advocacy for your project.

But who needs advocacy when you have liars like Todd Burns schmoozing up the media? He actually said PJM "identified a deficiency in the grid." No, it didn't. It identified a price differential between the cost of electricity in Pennsylvania and the cost of electricity in Washington, DC. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the grid. It is not "deficient." We don't need to "reinforce the grid." Liar, liar, pants on fire!

It's time for Transource to pack up all its lies, its exaggerations, its fake claims of benefit, its totally false pretense of "working with the community," its injunctions and abusive, lying land agents and take the whole kit and kaboodle back to Columbus, Ohio. That's not the way the good people of Franklin County live their lives. You're not fooling anyone, Transource. Nobody at all.

I'm pretty sure the PUC administrative law judges left Franklin County with plenty of truth, however. The citizens came out strong and spoke from their hearts. That's a big win in the regulatory world!

0 Comments

Your Renewable Energy Goals Are Not My Problem

5/2/2018

0 Comments

It's politically correct for everyone to have renewable energy goals these days. From corporations to governments, everyone wants to look like they're doing their part to make energy cleaner. But what about when you're not really doing your part and instead trying to force other people to do your part for you? It's all well and good to take personal responsibility for your environmental footprint, but not so much when your efforts include making your environmental footprint someone else's problem. If you demand that the power you consume must be greener, shouldn't you be willing to sacrifice to get there?

The politically correct and politically connected are increasingly demanding that their environmental goals must be met through the sacrifice of others. Maybe we shouldn't blame them for their selfishness. Perhaps they earned it honestly over the years because the sacrifice of others to provide the energy that powers their bastions of urban utopia was never questioned or opposed.

"West Virginia? Oh, those poor folks like coal and pollution because it provides jobs. Put all the power plants, transmission lines and other undesirable infrastructure there. They don't mind."

But now maybe they do mind. So now you think, "Let's clean up our environment and stop buying dirty stuff from there! Let's buy clean energy from somewhere else!"

How about you make your own energy... for once? How about you build a power generator in your own neighborhood? But that's too costly, you say, there's not enough space for new power generators, and besides, you don't want energy infrastructure in our own back yards!

Exactly. So what makes you think others do? Especially when the others won't receive any benefit from your infrastructure? Oh sure, the renewable energy enthusiasts and the companies who make money hand over fist meeting their needs try to pretend areas hosting new energy infrastructure will "benefit" from new projects. But that's all they present -- trumped up benefits with absolutely no mention of all the local detriments that come with this infrastructure. Payments to local governments or environmental groups are nothing more than dirty hush money. That money will run out soon, but the detriments will be permanent.

Big wind is destroying rural middle America, turning it into an industrial wasteland and fomenting bitter animosity that destroys formerly peaceful communities. And what for? So they can export the idea of wind power to urban communities, and make a bundle of tax dollars in the process. When the handouts stop, so will the push for Midwest wind, but by that time, what will be left?

Eastern states with renewable energy goals are calling for more "clean" power, and the companies who build transmission are only too happy to offer it to them. Instead of building clean generators in their own communities, certain states want to import it from some far off golden renewable land where they don't have to make any sacrifice to produce it. I'm talking about you, Massachusetts.

First it was Northern Pass, which promised to bring "renewable" hydro power from Canada. Massachusetts doesn't connect with Canada, therefore Northern Pass suggested stomping through New Hampshire on its way south, like Godzilla on his way to Tokyo. Except New Hamphire refused to be the sacrificial lamb for Massachusetts needs. So now it's "New England Clean Energy Connect," another aerial transmission project that uses Maine as the sacrificial lamb. Central Maine Power says Maine doesn't mind, and in fact many towns and business groups have "endorsed" the project. Everything's good, right? Maine loves making a sacrifice to its own environment and economic prospects in order to meet Massachusetts renewable energy goals. Well, maybe not. It's not so easy...

But Maine regulators must find that NECEC will benefit Maine residents, even though none of its electricity will be sold in Maine. Additionally, the project’s direct-current design restricts instate generators — such as wind or solar farms — from hooking up to the line.

It's deja vu all over again. One state is being asked to sacrifice for the needs of another. And we're not just talking about bringing in power to keep the lights on in that other state, we're talking about bringing in "cleaner" power so that the other state can continue to use as much as it wants without harming their delicate environmental conscience. And just like the last project, there is opposition.

And some of this opposition has a different character.

But opponents, which include national energy companies that own competing power plants, say the project could force their plants offline, costing jobs, tax revenue and the ability to build new wind and solar projects in Maine.

And national energy companies have a lot of resources to refute the murky claims of benefit being offered by project owner, Central Maine Power. Such as:

• Maine power plants, including Wyman Station in Yarmouth, could close, and hundreds of jobs and more than $5 million in property tax revenue would be lost.
• Several Maine wind and solar projects could be canceled, too, because the line would be designed like an interstate highway from Canada with no on-ramps in Maine for other generated power.
• Despite being labeled a clean project, the line wouldn’t really lower carbon emissions that accelerate climate change because no new hydropower facilities would be built, meaning fossil-fuel power plants outside New England would be called on to backfill demand in New York state and elsewhere created by the diversion of power to Massachusetts.

And those claims that construction of the project will lower electric costs throughout the region, including Maine, are also being challenged.

Asked Tuesday to clarify the $40 million savings to Maine ratepayers, John Carroll, an Avangrid spokesman, said an analysis done for the company attempts to quantify the “downward pressure” on energy prices in the wholesale markets. The effect, he said, is similar to using less of a higher-cost fuel to meet electric demand; it produces lower prices for consumers.
In the testimony, opponents acknowledge that the project could “suppress” wholesale electric rates at first. But Tanya Bodell, executive director at Energyzt Advisors LLC in Boston, said that falling prices associated with other planned renewable generation projects would soon negate the impact of the new transmission line.

Let's be real here, shall we? This project doesn't benefit Maine, it benefits Massachusetts. And when this proposal also fails, will Massachusetts move on to the next? Or will they finally take responsibility for meeting their own ambitious goals?

Transmission projects that visit the "needs" of one state or geographic region on the beauty and economic prosperity of another are doomed to failure. We're not all a bunch of short-sighted bumpkins who will swoon over a pile of shiny beads. That only happens in history books.

The only kind of transmission project that stands a chance anymore is one like this. Completely buried along public rights of way or underwater. Why hasn't Massachusetts selected one like that? Because supplying Massachusetts with renewable energy is cost competitive, and doing the right thing costs too much. When you set your renewable energy goals, Massachusetts, did you think it would be cheap? Did you think it was going to be easy to visit your needs on other states? It's not. You set your goals, you need to meet them at your own expense. Your goals = your problem.

0 Comments

When's The Sale Going To Happen, Clean Line?

4/4/2018

5 Comments

How many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootsie pop, Mr. Kottler?

He obviously didn't get to the center of whatever it was that he was smacking on before the end of his radio interview. The world may never know.

Clean Line and its grandstanding "attorney" have made an absolute media circus out of what was supposed to be a respectful, serious, court proceeding. And you know what happens when the circus comes to town... there will be clowns.

Like these two clowns. I'm not sure which one is funnier... the wide-eyed, breathless twit of a reporter, or the condescending anchorwoman. Neither one of these clowns has the first clue what their story is really about, or even who the characters in their story actually are.

Or maybe this clown, who "...said the company could purchase something like a transmission line or substation in Illinois and reapply for approval."

Do they have those for sale on e-bay? Where do they sell "something like" a transmission line or a substation? Here ya go, Waldo... think this will work?

Don't waste your time on the clowns, but check out what Mr. Smacky Smackerson had to say on "Houston Matters" (and you don't). I'm really sorry that you'll have to listen to the whole thing to get to the good parts. Like where he says that if Clean Line gets a "favorable outcome" in Missouri that they will build the project from Kansas to Missouri and potentially on into Illinois and Indiana. Or potentially there's a way for Kansas to benefit from the project if they only build in Kansas.

So, wait a tick, you're trying to get an HVDC project from Kansas to Indiana approved, but then you're going to build something else entirely? And you think that would automatically be approved? Where are the customers, Clean Line? You're not going to be building anything without any customers!

Or maybe you're just trying to sell the Kansas portion of GBE to some silly rube like NextEra? Got a buyer in mind? Is this why there's a media circus? Or is it just required to stroke Nixon's ego? Or both? Whatever you're up to, what you're actually saying makes no sense and can never happen. You're never going to build Grain Belt Express, so I will assume you're hoping for a buyer who wants to use it for something else, and is fooled by your media circus.

I gotta ask, was it crowded in the studio with that elephant in there with you? When you said you were "a developer at heart" and that you would find a way to make it work I thought that elephant was going to crush you. But when you said Clean Line would find ways to make sure all communities that host the project would get benefits, I surely felt the rumble of an impending elephant stampede.

Why are you even at the Missouri Supreme Court, Clean Line? Is it because the counties wouldn't give you assent to cross their roadways under Sec. 229.100? That is the ONLY reason you're at the Missouri Supreme Court! Wouldn't it have been faster (and a hell of a lot cheaper) to actually make sure the communities hosting your project felt they were receiving some benefit before assenting? Why did you take this long, winding, expensive, risky road through the courts instead of trying to work things out with the counties? After all, with county assent the PSC would have approved your project. You would have no reason to be in court. You would not have any reason to try to slice and dice Missouri law and split hairs. So, when you said Clean Line will do whatever it takes to make their project something the communities feel benefits them, I guess you weren't talking about Missouri counties? Why don't the communities deserve benefits? You don't walk your talk.

So, what makes Clean Line think that even if it prevails at the Supreme Court, that the counties will suddenly change their minds, recognize benefits, and provide their assent? They're not, of course. The counties are standing firm and there's nothing you can do about Section 229.100. That's not even part of your court case.

There's no reason for the media circus, unless it's simply to produce choking clouds of smoke that may blind a potential buyer.

When's the sale of Grain Belt Express going to happen?

5 Comments

Transource Economic Impact Study Flops

3/30/2018

4 Comments

What do you call an "economic impact study" for a transmission line that doesn't impress anyone?

FAILURE!

Worse yet, Transource wasted OUR money on this biased trash.

Who was this study supposed to impress? Local economic development folks, county government, maybe the state regulators?

Transource spokeswoman Abby Foster said "...the study was requested by Transource to provide the community answers for the benefit related to the company’s role in this project. If the study is requested by the PUC, Transource will provide it."

The community wasn't impressed with Transource's "answers" to a question that hasn't been asked.

Nobody's been asking about these trumped up "benefits." Instead they want to know about the electric bill savings Transource insists they're going to get. With more than 80% of the economic benefits going to the Washington, D.C. and Baltimore areas, there's not much left to go around "the community." How much exactly will each individual landowner in Franklin or York county receive in electric bill savings to balance out the huge sacrifice Transource proposes they make with their land, their heritage, their productivity, their financial security, their peace of mind?

Transource's economic impact study is not balanced. While it makes grandiose claims of jobs, tax payments, and economic riches, it recognizes absolutely no detriments that will come with the project. Land devalued by the transmission project will result in a decreased tax burden for the landowner (because, hey, landowners, Transource only wants an easement across your land, you still pay all the taxes for the land Transource uses!). Where is the lowered tax revenue produced by lower assessed values added into Transource's economic study to balance against the unsubstantiated claims of increased tax revenue? It's not! Soil compaction and construction work can impact crops for years to come. Less revenue from crops, less money the farmer has to spread around hiring help, purchasing new equipment, and spending in his own community. Where is this decreased local spending and fewer jobs added to the study to balance against Transource's claims of new jobs and local spending? It's not. Transource's economic impact study is a one-sided picture of how things could be if the detrimental economic impacts of the transmission line on the community were not considered. It's complete and utter crap.

Transource's press release said...

An independent economic impact analysis projects the Pennsylvania and Maryland counties involved in the Transource Independence Energy Connection (IEC) project will benefit from construction of the estimated $230 million project.

Independent? Hahaha ha ha. Surely you jest, Transource. There's nothing "independent" in a "study" you bought and paid for (with my money, I might add). You hired a company to produce a study that only included economic "benefits" without any of the known and substantial economic detriments. You're absurd!

If you can find the actual study, you can be informed that Brattle created it using IMPLAN software. What's IMPLAN?

NOW ANYONE CAN CALCULATE ECONOMIC IMPACTS

Oh, I get it now. Even a monkey could plug some numbers into your software and it would calculate some pre-programmed amount of "benefits." Like Brattle says, "The model estimates the direct, indirect and induced economic stimulus benefits associated with the planned transmission lines." Benefits, only benefits. This is garbage.

Since it has completely failed to convince the communities of anything, I guess Transource plans to use it on regulators. Except the regulators are looking for an actual need to construct the project. I mean a real need, not some made up "benefits" that the community doesn't "need." Do we build transmission because a community needs a certain number of jobs or a certain amount of tax revenue? No, we only build transmission when there is an electrical NEED for the project. Jobs and tax revenue don't create NEED for a transmission project.

Maybe there really wasn't a NEED for this economic impact study. But how else was Transource going to create a set-up to trot out the union guys? The union guys show up on every transmission project. They are a transmission company's "go to" to create false advocacy for a project. What occurred behind the scenes that suddenly inspired union guys to make videos shilling for this transmission project? Was there a project labor agreement? Did the union guys get some contract perk in exchange for their support? If not, they should. Other union guys have gotten these things in the past in exchange for their advocacy for a transmission project. Don't sell yourself short, union guys. You can make AEP pay dearly for your support.

Not that it does much good either. Because a short-term job for a union guy also isn't a need to build a transmission project. Are we supposed to build things we don't need just to create jobs? I admire people who work hard for a decent living, and I support union workers who band together to demand better working conditions from giant corporations. But this -- selling yourself out to support a giant corporation intent on destroying your neighbors and your community? Doesn't that go against everything you fight for on a daily basis?

And the sad part is that Transource will use one of a handful of specialized transmission construction contractors in the U.S. These construction companies have their own workers who will be imported to your community to fill the jobs that are created. Now maybe these workers are union, but does it provide local union guys with a job? Nope.

And one final word about all the "tax revenue" this project will supposedly create. Not that I believe your numbers at all, Transource, but who ultimately pays your taxes for you? I do. Every electric ratepayer who will get a bill for the cost of this project pays a share of any local "taxes" you pay. So it's not like you're actually paying the counties anything, you're merely proposing to redistribute the wealth of others.

Maybe this kind of idiocy works on other communities, but it doesn't work on the Transource Independence Energy Connection.

Quit wasting my money, Transource!

4 Comments

How Do You Go Slower Than Dead Stop?

3/26/2018

2 Comments

Your statements to the media about the dead Plains & Eastern project have me questioning your sanity, Clean Line. There's no way to go slower than dead stop. Your project is over (and I believe your company is over as a whole) and denying reality isn't going to bring it back.

Clean Line spokeswoman Sarah Bray isn't even a Clean Line employee any longer. It looks like she's got her own consulting company now. That's an inventive way to cut company overhead... get rid of people and then hire them back as "consultants" so you don't have to give them benefits and can just pay them for assorted projects now and then. Such as telling the media stuff like this:

“The project is not dead, but is on a much slower track,” Clean Line Energy spokeswoman Sarah Bray said in an email.

You mean the side track to the dump? That slower track? Because this project just doesn't exist anymore. Let's examine...

The Plains & Eastern Clean Line was supposed to be a 700+ mile transmission project for the purpose of connecting not-yet-built wind generators in western Oklahoma to the TVA system in Memphis, Tennessee. Last year, Clean Line sold all its Oklahoma assets to NextEra. That would include any regulatory permits, project engineering, and right of way option agreements with landowners. So everything in Oklahoma is gone. No longer under Clean Line's control and not for its use. The generators Clean Line was going to connect to were all in Oklahoma. There's nothing to transmit, unless Clean Line customers buy power from some other entity and take delivery in Arkansas.

What does Clean Line still own? The Arkansas and Tennessee assets. There is no regulatory approval in Arkansas. The only thing Clean Line owns in that state is any project engineering and a handful of right of way option agreements with landowners. In Tennessee, Clean Line owns a regulatory approval from the state based on its former project, including the Oklahoma assets. It also owns a handful of right of way agreements with landowners and any project engineering.

Clean Line also owns negotiated rate authority granted by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, again based on its former project that included the Oklahoma assets.

What can Clean Line do with the assets it owns? Pretty much nothing. They're not worth anything. Clean Line no longer has queue positions to connect a transmission line in Arkansas or Tennessee. It owns a plan for a transmission line that no longer exists. Is Clean Line going to build a transmission line that doesn't connect with any generators in Arkansas and then not connect it with any customers in Tennessee? And customers are supposed to voluntarily step up and sign contracts for transmission capacity on this power line to nowhere?

Of course not! Clean Line couldn't even attract any customers when it actually owned the entire project plan. Now it doesn't even own a complete plan. And without the U.S. DOE trying to assert its authority in Arkansas, Clean Line no longer has any regulatory assets in the state. Could Clean Line apply for a permit to build a transmission across the state that doesn't connect with anything? Sure, they can apply. But they're not likely to get anywhere since Arkansas enacted Act 842 in 2015.

(b) The commission shall not issue a certificate of public convenience and necessity to any person or corporation that:
(1) Is not a public utility; (2) Primarily transmits electricity; and
(3) Has not been directed or designated to construct an electric transmission facility from a regional transmission organization.

Only someone not connected with reality would attempt to apply for a merchant transmission permit in Arkansas. Maybe someone whose sanity might be slipping.

Perhaps telling the media that the project is not dead and merely on a "slower track" fooled a few reporters who don't know what's going on. But even Utility Dive (often not the brightest bulb in the transmission reporting string) smells something disingenuous in Clean Line's claims.

Is Clean Line Energy still developing the Plains & Eastern Clean Line transmission project? The company says yes, despite the fact that selling the Oklahoma assets and ending its plan to build in Arkansas means the Tennessee portion of the line appears to be all that remains on the drawing board.

The Plains & Eastern Clean Line had been under development in Oklahoma for eight years when Clean Line sold it to NextEra. The company said the project has gone through an environmental review with "substantial stakeholder input" and received the regulatory approvals and major environmental permits necessary for construction, but it's unclear how it will move forward without the DOE support.

That environmental review and "substantial stakeholder input" as well as the "major environmental permits necessary for construction" were all part and parcel of the DOE's participation in the project. Those things went through the shredder on Friday. They no longer exist.

Clean Line's choo-choo

Where are you Michael Skelly? Why are you hiding from the media? And where's Mario Harturdo, the Plains & Eastern huckster? Looks like he's now "self-employed" as well. The circus is over. Get outta town.

2 Comments

Shame On You, Transource!

1/13/2018

4 Comments

Transource is a new joint venture of utility giant American Electric Power and Great Plains Energy. So far, it seems that Transource's Independence Energy Connection is being managed by AEP employees. AEP has more than 100 years of experience building utility infrastructure and interacting with consumers. So how did they screw this up so badly? Why has an elected representative demanded that Transource cease and desist aggressive and illegal land acquisition practices and issue an apology to all the landowners it threatened?

You've gone too far, Transource. Shame on you!

Transource thinks that perhaps they're dealing with a bunch of rubes who are easily threatened into submission. After all, the eastern portion of the project is only 10 miles of line in a rural community bisected by a state border... but it's a sophisticated and well connected community. Transource, your strong arm tactics and lies don't work here!

During the past week, Transource poured the gas on their fruitless efforts to get landowners to sign legal documents giving the company permission to "survey." Landowners are never required to sign survey permission forms. While Pennsylvania law allows a public utility to access private property, there's a lot more to it that Transource presumes landowners don't know.

Furthermore, the Transource letter sent to landowners dated January 5, 2018 is inaccurate and misrepresentative of the proper procedures set in place under the Eminent Domain Code and public codes of the Commonwealth. In the letter, your company stated it has obtained utility status by Pennsylvania. While the Public Utility Commission (PUC) approved Transource's application for utility status on December 21, 2017, your company has yet to obtain the appropriate certificate and orders from the PUC to operate as a public utility and conduct land surveys/assessments. Moreover, even after obtaining the appropriate approvals, Transource must follow the Eminent Domain Code and issue a 10-day notice to all landowners before accessing private property. As of today, Transource cannot send such a notice until the proper certificate and approvals from the PUC.

And Transource is going to pretend, with all its lawyers and legal support staff, that it didn't know these things? I don't believe you! And even if Transource was completely unaware of Pennsylvania law, there's absolutely no excuse for threatening to have landowners arrested on their own property. You went too far, Transource.

Even if Transource has the legal right to enter onto property, a landowner never has to sign a permission form. If the company exercises its right to access property without the owner's permission it cannot expect that the landowner would release the company from liability for its use of the property. You need never sign a permission to access form.

Numerous landowners on the eastern portion of the project reported a rash of strong arm tactics by Transource land agent Western Land Services last week. Landowners received threatening phone calls demanding that they sign the survey permission form or the sheriff would come and arrest them.

I have received numerous complaints from constituents in my legislative district who experienced threatening behavior from your contracted land services agent, Western Land Services. In communication with landowners, agents from Westem Land Services threatened to call the sheriff's office and arrest residents who did not sign letters granting access to their properties. This type of coercive behavior and harassment by your contracted agent is unacceptable and illegal at best. I am requesting punitive actions be taken to ensure this type of disrespectful behavior does not happen again during the remainder of the project.

The sheriff isn't going to arrest these landowners for failing to sign a permission form. At best, if Transource receives all its permits from the PUC the most it can do is issue a notification that it will be access the property in 10 days. Such notice would need proof of delivery. Only if Transource had accomplished all the necessary legal steps and had some sort of legal order to present to the sheriff, and the landowner physically threatened or interfered with property access, would the sheriff even be interested in wasting his time on this issue. Your sheriff works for you, not some company in Columbus, Ohio.

Whose idea was this, and why did they think it would work to intimidate this community? That person needs to be fired, first for breaking the law, second for having no morals, and third for being stupid, I mean just a complete idiot.

It really wasn't that long ago that another company got in big, big trouble in the Pennsylvania court and regulatory system by deploying threatening and coercive land acquisition tactics just like these. And TrAILCo's application to build transmission in Pennsylvania was denied by the administrative law judge who heard he case. Did TrAILCo's abysmal behavior play a part in its ultimate denial? Absolutely! Let's look at all the abusive land acquisition tactics that Transource has in common with TrAILCo... so far.

All communications with property owners and occupants must be factually correct and made in good faith.

Do not make false or misleading statements.

Do not misrepresent any fact.

Until the Company has been authorized by the state utility commission, do not suggest that the Project is a "done deal" or is "99 percent sure" or make similar statements suggesting that the state utility commission has authorized construction of the project.

All Communications and interactions with property owners and occupants of property must be respectful and reflect fair dealing.

Do not engage in behavior that may be considered harassing, coercive, manipulative, intimidating or causing undue pressure.

All communications by a property owner, whether in person, by telephone or in writing, in which the property owner indicates that he or she does not want to negotiate or does not want to give permission for surveying or other work on his or her property, must be respected and politely accepted without argument.

Do not represent that a relative, neighbor and/or friend have signed a document or reached an agreement with the company.

Do not represent that a relative, neighbor and/or friend supports or opposes the Project.

Do not threaten to call law enforcement officers or obtain court orders.

Do not threaten the use of eminent domain.

We've hardly just begun, Transource, and already you've violated accepted conduct for land agents working on your behalf. I know you're going to blame Western Land Services for going rogue behind your back, or a few "bad" agents who don't understand their job. But I know that's just not true. Land acquisition companies behave badly with the full knowledge of the company who is paying them. So maybe it's time to fire this company. And Transource needs to get all the money it paid Western refunded to the ratepayers so it won't cost the ratepayers anything extra to hire a reputable company with some moral and ethical standards.

Does PJM Interconnection know how badly you've screwed up this transmission project they "ordered" you to build? If I was PJM, I'd cancel your contract and find a reputable company to build it instead.

Meanwhile, Representative Hill wants you to apologize to the landowners you harassed. Try to be a big boy and take responsibility for your actions and don't blame them on rogue land agents or a fly-by-night company. You all know what's going on and chose to try to strong arm this community willingly. It blew up in your face.

Shame on you!

4 Comments

Clean Line Blames TVA For Its Failure

1/7/2018

8 Comments

The Chattanooga Times Free Press has accused the Tennessee Valley Authority of cancelling Clean Line's interconnection request because it hates clean energy.

But after running out the clock with years of study, TVA President Bill Johnson said the utility would back out of the plan — leaving the Clean Line project twisting in the wind.

This editor has confused TVA's interconnection study process with TVA's memorandum of understanding to separately study whether TVA should purchase transmission capacity to serve its customers. These are two separate and distinct processes. In their haste to demonize the TVA, the editors have allowed their lack of knowledge to turn them into liars.

Late last month, TVA decided not to buy the wind energy it had been window shopping for nearly six years.

Did this supposed "decision" ever happen? An official decision would have been made public, and reported when it happened. Except that never happened. Instead, it is only after the Plains & Eastern project collapsed that the less than true accusations against the TVA started. More likely the TVA simply continued its failure to make a decision, and it was Clean Line that decided to "kill" its own project by selling a portion of it to NextEra and withdrawing its interconnection position. Then Clean Line and the armchair engineers at the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy start lobbing political revenge bombs at the TVA.

The much touted "Memorandum of Understanding" between Clean Line and the TVA only required the TVA to consider purchasing transmission capacity and wind from Oklahoma to serve its load. There was no obligation for TVA to purchase anything.

This article in RTO Insider gives the MOU authority it never had.

The deal was sealed after it became apparent to Clean Line that TVA had little appetite to complete a six-year-old memorandum of understanding to purchase the project’s wind power.

The MOU never required a purchase. It obligated TVA to think about purchasing, which is something they could have done without the MOU. The MOU was legally and commercially useless, but it sounded good for Clean Line to tell the media it had a MOU with the TVA. And the media bought it, and now they can't seem to let this fake news die. Clean Line sold a portion of its project because the company couldn't get it built. It was only after the sale that the TVA got trotted to slaughter.

The MOU was never about the separate interconnection process. In order to connect a new power source (because a large transmission line is a power source) to an existing transmission system, the system operator must study how the injection of power will affect the stability of the existing system. This is a fluid process, as the electric grid is constantly changing. Any additions or upgrades necessary to keep the system stable are the financial responsibility of the entity who has requested interconnection. A transmission operator can't just up and decide a project can't connect because the operator doesn't want to buy power to serve its customers. That's a mingling of responsibilities that isn't supposed to happen. Transmission is non-discriminatory open access.

Clean Line's removal from the TVA interconnection queue was voluntarily elected by Clean Line, whether they actively withdrew or whether they simply stopped paying for the interconnection process. When the interconnection process ends, the queue position is surrendered.

What other lies has the media made up to soften Clean Line's failure?

In the meantime, Clean Line founder and president Mike Skelly told RTO Insider, the company will focus on its four other long-haul HVDC projects.
“We’re adapting to the headwinds,” Skelly said. “You have to adapt.”

Adapt? If Clean Line had adapted to reality, it probably could have saved its investors $100M or more. Any sane utility without a method to recover its sunk costs would have quit many tens of millions ago. Also, a sane utility with 5 new and different transmission projects probably would have concentrated on just one project to see if the idea was viable before trying to get 5 of them off the ground at once. The "headwinds" smacked Skelly upside the head. Really hard. I guess he wasn't using his head. *cymbal crash*

What is Skelly focusing on? The Rock Island Clean Line is dead. Plain & Eastern is dead. The Grain Belt Express has been denied and is facing years of appeals in a legal quagmire from which it cannot escape. I have no idea what's going on with the two western projects, but its probably more of the same. There's nothing to focus on here. Michael Skelly's transmission projects are not viable.

But RTO Insider isn't the only one being strung along by Clean Line.

In response to several queries from Talk Business & Politics, Clean Line on Wednesday (Jan. 3) issued a statement saying a recent decision by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) to drop its six-year-old interconnection agreement with the Texas partnership has put the project on hiatus.

So Clean Line really IS issuing the well-padded "statements" that are misinforming the media?

“The need for low-cost renewable energy in Arkansas remains and the benefits the Plains & Eastern Clean Line will deliver to the state have not changed. Clean Line Energy is retaining all permits and acquired rights-of-way in Arkansas while we continue to evaluate energy markets and will respond accordingly,” said Clean Line Founder & President Michael Skelly. “Unfortunately, TVA’s reluctance to enter into an agreement with Clean Line … at this time has delayed our ability to deliver low-cost, renewable energy to the Southeast U.S. and jobs and investment to Arkansas.”

What the HELL, Michael Skelly? How do you expect the assets you still "own" to deliver anything, ever? You no longer have a generation source at the end of your right of way assets. You sold the portion of the line that was supposed to connect with new wind generation to another company you no longer control. NextEra will do whatever it wants with that portion of your project. You voluntarily withdrew from the TVA interconnection queue, so you have no end point to deliver energy either. Clean Line has an empty extension cord without any plugs on either end. It's useless and could never be built. It is now truly a "bridge to nowhere" that cannot connect with any existing or new roadway.

This "bridge to nowhere" is not the same project Clean Line got approved by the Tennessee Regulatory Authority (TRA), or the U.S. DOE. It's no longer approved. And I doubt Skelly has the financial means to continue to make scheduled payments to landowners for optioned rights of way. Option? Yes. Landowners have reported that Clean Line's "purchase" of right of way in Arkansas is technically only an option to purchase because Clean Line only made down payments, with additional payments to continue the option to purchase due at a later date. Skelly doesn't own anything yet, he hasn't completed paying for it.

No terms of the deal were disclosed, but regulatory and court filings show that Clean Line appraised the value of its Oklahoma assets north of $1 billion.

Oh hell no. What's a piece of a broken dream worth? If NextEra paid anything close to a billion dollars for the OK portion of the project, I'll tap-dance on their front steps while singing Don't Be Stupid. I'm going to guess it was less than $25M, much, much less.

But it was exactly two years ago Clean Line cleared its biggest regulatory hurdle in Tennessee when the TVA board unanimously voted to approve the Texas partnerships’ application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to operate as a wholesale transmission-only public utility in Tennessee. At the time, TVA said there was a need to connect the supply of thousands of megawatts of new wind energy in the Oklahoma Panhandle with the increasing demand of utilities in the Mid-South and Southeast.

TRA, not TVA. Tennessee Regulatory Authority is the state entity who issues a CPCN. The Tennessee Valley Authority is a federal power marketer who has nothing to do with regulatory authority in Tennessee. There is a HUGE difference! And speaking of huge differences, the project TRA approved no longer exists. I'm betting if challenged, the TRA won't support the CPCN any longer.

Clean Line has often touted TVA’s “letter of interest” stating that the project presented a valuable option for affordable energy for the Tennessee utility conglomerate, whose largest customer is the city of Memphis.

Right. See above. Clean Line spun its MOU to pretend it obligated TVA to purchase capacity. Obviously it did not.

So, let's review:

Clean Line may no longer connect with the TVA transmission system.
Clean Line no longer connects with any known generation source or resource area.
Clean Line has no customers.
Because of these factors, Clean Line's project no longer resembles the one reviewed by regulatory and "participatory" agencies.

The Plains & Eastern Clean Line is dead.

Dead.

Dead.

Michael Skelly needs to give his ego a rest and just admit he's done with transmission. Continuing to pretend Clean Line's transmission idea is viable doesn't even make sense.

8 Comments

Plains & Eastern Clean Line Killed

1/1/2018

16 Comments

...but the bullshit never stops!

Hi Gullible One-Sided Story Journalist, Attached is some bullshit that you can use for your story. We have also provided someone else to blame for Michael Skelly's failure. If you need anything else to craft your biased, fantasy story, please let me know!

The Tennessee Valley Authority is getting blamed for "killing" the Plains & Eastern Clean Line.

The Plains & Eastern Clean Line is dead? Sweet!

Time to celebrate, Mayberry Munchkins! Do you really care who gets blamed for "killing" it? In my opinion, the TVA is a hero who refused to bow to greenwashing political pressure and in so doing saved its customers from higher rates and landowners outside its service territory from financial and economic harm for benefit of super-rich foreign investors.

Bravo, TVA! Well done!

Except it really wasn't TVA's fault. It's Michael Skelly's fault. Clean Line had no customers. No customers, no revenue, no financing, no construction, no transmission line. It's just that simple. Skelly might as well blame Duke Energy, Southern Co., Entergy, Florida Power & Light, or any other utility, for not buying his transmission capacity. Skelly was proposing a merchant project where all risk is shouldered by investors, not consumers. Skelly was granted negotiated rate authority by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to negotiate rates for his transmission service with willing customers. Nothing in Skelly's transmission plan obligated the TVA, or any other utility, to become customers. If Frito-Lay goes out of business next week, will it be YOUR fault for keeping your New Year's resolution to lay off the over-processed, salty, junk food? Of course not! You choose what to buy and who to buy it from. The same is true of merchant transmission projects like Clean Line. The whining of the "environmentalists" makes me laugh! Once again, the environmentalists completely fail at trying to plan and run the TVA from their home offices. These "environmentalists" have no idea what it takes to run the TVA so they need to shut their pie holes and let the professionals do their jobs.

So, how dead is Plains & Eastern?

The nation's biggest wind generator, NextEra Energy Resources, has bought the Oklahoma portion of the proposed 700-mile-long Plains and Eastern Line to serve Oklahoma and Midwest customers. But for now, plans to bring wind energy from the windy areas of Oklahoma and Texas into the less-windy Tennessee Valley and Southeastern part of the United States are stalled and unlikely to be resurrected for years.

"Unfortunately, this represents a significant delay in our ability to deliver this energy in the Southeast," Skelly said of the decision not to actively pursue the project at this time. "TVA's lack of interest has certainly not been helpful."

Skelly said other utilities want to buy wind-generated power, and Clean Line is now focusing on its four other transmission projects in the Midwest and the Western part of the United States. NextEra will use the Oklahoma part of the Plains and Eastern line to begin serving parts of Oklahoma, Kansas with wind-generated power that NextEra plans to develop.

"We are hanging onto our permits and rights of way in Arkansas in the event TVA in the future says it might like this power somewhere down the line, " Skelly said. "But at this point it would take considerably more effort to get this project moving for TVA again."

"TVA obviously has to make its own decisions about its future power supply, and we understand that," Skelly said. "But for now, we've stopped the process [of pursuing an interconnection agreement with TVA] because TVA required a whole lot of money to continue in this process but they have not wanted to make any commitments to buy the energy off of this line."

Oh, puh-leeze, Michael Skelly. Do you actually believe your own lies? TVA required a whole lot of money to continue the interconnection process because continuing to study your project for interconnection (which is completely separated from the study of whether or not to buy capacity on the line) costs the TVA money! The TVA isn't paying dividends to investors with all the money it was charging Clean Line to remain in the interconnection queue. Where do you think the TVA gets its money, Michael Skelly? It gets all its money from its customers -- regular people who pay an electric bill. Why should those people pay extra for TVA staff to continue to study the Plains & Eastern Clean Line to determine whether it may interconnect to the TVA transmission system without causing reliability problems? Does Skelly think that he should get a free ride on the backs of hard-working Mayberrians?

So, if TVA's "whole lot of money" was too rich for Clean Line's bank account, where is Skelly going to get the money to "hang onto our permits and rights of way in Arkansas"? That costs money, too, and for an undetermined "maybe" period of time? I don't think so.

Skelly tries really hard to pretend that the part of his project that he didn't sell to another company is still commercially viable.

But Skelly said other utilities have found that their projections about the costs of using a variable source of power like wind have often proven more than expected "and as battery and other storage methods become better, wind will prove even more attractive."

"We think we gave TVA a very good offer, but apparently they did not," he said. "We're still getting a lot of interest from other utilities that want to increase their renewable energy and see wind as a good way to achieve that at a reasonable cost."

Skelly said Duke Power and other Southeastern utilities have expressed interest in buying more wind-generated power, but TVA was needed to buy and/or readily transmit the 3,500 megawatts the line was designed to deliver to Memphis.

Well, goll-lee, Mr. Skelly, if these other utilities want to buy your transmission capacity then you don't need TVA at all, right? Why would you need TVA to buy something that another company wants to buy? If you have customers, then go ahead and build your project.

Instead, Plains & Eastern is dead. It's dead because it failed to attract any paying customers. It failed to attract any paying customers because it was a bad idea that failed.

Skelly said he and his partners have been working on the Clean Line transmission project for more than eight years and have had to battle local landowners who didn't want to sell their land and regulators in Arkansas who balked at permitting the transmission line rights of way to a developer from another state.
"We've been able to overcome those obstacles, but we always knew when we started it wouldn't necessarily be easy or quick," he said. "But we do think it is the right choice in the long run."

The right choice? Eight years of misery and more than $200M dumped into a bad idea? Maybe it was only "the right choice" because that $200M and the land along the right of way belonged to other people and not Michael Skelly.

I think Michael Skelly should stop trying to blame everyone else for his own failure.

But there's this: The Plains & Eastern Clean Line is dead, according to the Chattanooga Times Free Press!

16 Comments

<<Previous

Forward>>

U.S. DOE Wastes Your Money on Another Stupid Idea

AEP Wind Catcher Support Letters to Oklahoma Corporation Commission Signed by AEP Employees

Franklin Co. Sends Transource Packing

Your Renewable Energy Goals Are Not My Problem

When's The Sale Going To Happen, Clean Line?

Transource Economic Impact Study Flops

How Do You Go Slower Than Dead Stop?

Shame On You, Transource!

Clean Line Blames TVA For Its Failure

Plains & Eastern Clean Line Killed

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