How Propaganda Works

Repeat something often enough and it becomes "fact."  That's how propaganda works.  Propaganda is defined as "information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view".  It's information without any factual basis.  It's just a simple phrase, repeated over and over endlessly until the public simply believes it is a fact.

The United States desperately needs new power lines.

Our grid is not inadequate to keep the lights on.  Our grid is a carefully managed machine that is upgraded and rebuilt constantly to maintain reliability.  But our grid is also a fertile money-maker for investor owned utilities and merchant electricity generators.  Utilities make money investing in electric transmission that pays a double-digit return over the project's expected 40-year life.  Our grid also enables for-profit electric generators to connect their product to far-flung customers, often at no cost to themselves.  These are the entities spreading propaganda that our grid is somehow inadequate and needs to be rebuilt and expanded.  They will make money building and upgrading, and electric consumers will pay the bill.

This guy really shouldn't be writing about energy.  He has little practical understanding, and uses fluffy pieces written by biased pontificators.  And, even then, he misquotes them to back up his ignorant theories, such as this statement:

Our transmission standstill has a number of consequences. First of all, it raises consumer prices. As this post at CanaryMedia makes clear, bad transmission hasn’t raised utility bills despite generation being cheaper than ever.

The canary in the coal mine piece shows that while the cost of generating renewables falls, the cost of building transmission to connect them rises.  There's a limit on how much the cost of generation can fall, but there is no limit on how much transmission costs can rise.  Transmission costs are rising at a higher rate than generation costs are falling.  And we really haven't even begun building the amount of transmission utilities, generators, and their governmental and big green cheerleaders are pushing for.  What is "bad transmission"?  What is "transmission standstill"?  I really don't know because neither means anything except in the dim mind of the author.  Right there I realize that this guy knows nothing about transmission.  But that's okay in a propaganda world because most of the people reading his brain farts have even less knowledge.  That's how propaganda works!

Moving onto the next piece of propaganda:

A 2018 report by the nonprofit Americans for a Clean Energy Grid identified 22 shovel-ready projects that had been in existence for a decade or more. To get such projects off the ground, the report’s authors suggested streamlining project siting and permitting, passing a tax credit for transmission projects, and direct investment by the federal government. 

First, Americans for a Clean Energy Grid is a Bill Gates-financed front group promoting new transmission that Bill and his super-rich global elite pals "need" to create a sweet investment honeypot for themselves (see section above about double-digit returns for 40 years).  Second, most of the projects on the "shovel ready" list are not actually shovel ready and have serious regulatory or financial flaws that prevent them from ever being built (hence the government handouts).  At least one of the projects on the "shovel-ready" list has been cancelled by its owner.  Not shovel-ready, no matter how much American tax money gets showered on these private-profit endeavors.

The author sort of chokes on the fact that even though taxpayer subsidies have been requested, the subsidies simply cannot shut down due process for affected landowners.

Despite recent noise from the Biden administration about speeding up the sitting process, the same problems are still knocking off and slowing down transition projects. 

The most recent and notable example is that of the Grain Belt Express. The transmission line, which would span nearly 800 miles across four midwest states, from Kansas to Indiana, connecting into the PJM Interconnection LLC grid, is at risk of being thwarted by House Bill 2005. The bill, brainchild of big ag groups across the region, would give any county in the line’s path the right to block construction. 

Oh, right... "big ag."  It's "big ag" (aka small family farm and ranch interest groups) vs. Chicago billionaire Michael Polsky, who has spent millions lobbying and influencing the Missouri legislature so that he may use eminent domain to take farm property for whatever price he wants to pay, instead of fairly negotiating for the use of other people's land in an open market.  Acquiring land "cheaply" through the use of eminent domain does not save any money on transmission bills -- it just increases the project's profit that flows into Polsky's pockets.

Next they propagandize about the "savings" from GBE:

The project represents a special economic opportunity for the region’s rural communities which have struggled in recent times. The cheap wind power would provide significant savings to the small municipalities. What’s more, emissions would be brought down as well. 

It represents additional agricultural production costs in rural communities as land is removed from production, or impeded in such a way that production becomes more expensive or impossible.  It also spoils future land use.  It is especially hard on small family farms, which constitute the majority of impacted properties.

So where's the opportunity?  A handful of municipalities are relying on a back of the envelope calculation that was done more than 5 years ago based on energy contracts that have since expired.  None of these supposed "savings" are anywhere close to real.  Do the math, based on today's costs and contracts, and then tell me all about it.  However, they refuse to update the calculations.  That can only mean one thing:  the "savings" have fallen or evaporated entirely.  Propaganda not based on fact.

And here's the part that is most egregious:

Cumbersome regulations and NIMBYISM are mostly to blame for the nation’s stagnant transmission system.

The same article includes quotes from advocates of bill 2005: ‘“Grain Belt is currently working towards condemning our land,” Henke said in written testimony. “They have told us they will not negotiate with us and the price they tell us is what we get. This line will take out our shade trees in our pastures and cut through several fences. They are not willing to move the line at all to avoid some of these things that will greatly impact our farm.”’

I don’t want to completely disregard people like Henke’s misgivings, but no decision comes without a cost. At some point, we’re going to have to accept some of the costs associated with big transmission projects to reap the important benefits: Cheaper, cleaner electricity.

Excuse me there, Henry, but WE?  WE???  What are you sacrificing here?  You're not giving up anything at all.  How dare you speak for "we" when you're not part of the "we"?  If Henry was required to sacrifice his shade trees and his fences and the sanctity of his property and his ability to earn a living, along with a big chunk of his investments made to plan for retirement, like he expects the Henckes to sacrifice, I can guarantee you that Henry wouldn't think GBE was such a great idea after all.  Henry only likes GBE because it's not in his back yard. 

This makes Henry the biggest NIMBY of them all.