Misinformation Won't Help Grain Belt Express

The Silly Old Man's Club of Kirkwood must have had a Halloween meeting where this blog was dreamed up: "Tiger Connector" Planned:  Kirkwood Electric Gets A Bit Of Good News On Energy Front. 

It did scare the bejeezus out of me, but only because it is so completely misinformed and contains a number of outright falsehoods.  I will have to say that this blog is appropriately named:  Environmental Echo.  Just an echo chamber for all the crazy enviro-whacko claims being made that don't have any basis in truth. 

Let's start with this lie: 

“We’re well on our way because the project has obtained an overwhelming majority of the easements, now has Public Service Commission approval, and now has a legislative framework,” said Petty.

The "Tiger Connector" does NOT have PSC approval.  In fact, without approval of the specific "Tiger Connector" addition, the "approved" Grain Belt Express project does not have any place to connect to the Missouri electric grid.  When the project was initially approved in 2019, it was planned to make a 500 MW connection in Ralls County.  At some point new project owner Invenergy decided that interconnection was not viable and applied with regional grid operators to move its interconnection point to Callaway County and increase its size five-fold.  This interconnection of 2500 MW is still not fully approved by the regional grid operator.  Who knows where or when (or IF) GBE will ever connect.  In addition, the Missouri PSC is now evaluating the project anew and may not approve the changes.

As far as the easements go, let's clear that up, shall we?  Many easements have been obtained through coercion and threats of condemnation using eminent domain authority.  It's not like all landowners who have signed easements under duress "do understand it and are on board."  In addition, Invenergy is pursuing easement acquisition through the courts for a growing number of properties.  These landowners didn't knuckle under and sign an easement out of fear but are determined to fight Invenergy tooth and nail all the way to the end.

Lastly, what is this "legislative framework"?  Just because some agricultural organizations took it upon themselves to negotiate meaningless "protections" for landowners in a sneaky fashion that did not include the landowners themselves does not mean that landowners are "on board" with the way they were stabbed in the back during the last legislative session.  All that aside, the SOMC of Kirkwood should be aware that Invenergy made sure to file its application for the "Tiger Connector" just days before this new "legislative framework" took effect.  It will not apply to Grain Belt Express therefore, even if it was useful, it will not come into play.

And what kind of a "reporter" takes this kind of statement at face value and does not bother to verify it?

“Invenergy has always been more than generous to the farmers with their compensation for access to their property. Its supported the generous compensation spelled out in a legislative compromise that was reached in 2021,” said Petty of Kirkwood Electric.

“While a few farmers still remain skeptical about Invenergy’s intention to make this a win-win situation for all, over 70% of the landowners and a majority of folks do understand it and are on board,” Petty added.

Spoken like a true NIMBY who won't find Grain Belt Express in his own back yard.  Petty has NO contact with "farmers" and does not speak for them.  He has NO IDEA what they want and what they think.  Pretty brassy to tell those farmers how great GBE will be for them, don't you think?  Maybe you should contact him and let him know the truth so he can stop spreading misinformation.

Speaking of misinformation, what could this mean?

... Grain Belt Express, which has scored some recent successes.

Recent successes?  Where?  How?  WHAT?  There have been no "recent successes."  It's just a platitude that means nothing.

And then there's this:

...Chicago-based Invenergy, which has now navigated objections to the line from rural legislators and groups like the Missouri Farm Bureau.

State legislators with ties to the fossil fuel industry have opposed the wind energy project. Farm groups also have fought the project for years over opposition to the use of eminent domain for siting of transmission towers.

Some rural landowners and farmers supported legislation meant to derail the project, including one proposal that would have given county commissions veto power over transmission projects. Farmers wanted more money for land acquisition, and resulting legislation could have killed the project.

So much misinformation in this short blurb it's hard to know where to begin.  First of all, the opposition to this project has always come from affected landowners who object, not to clean energy, but to the use of eminent domain to take new easements across their working farmland.  It places an impediment on the productivity of the entire parcel and costs farmers additional money and time and results in lower yields.  Farm Bureau and other agricultural groups took it upon themselves to defend their members through lobbying at the legislature.  But the Ag groups got a little too carried away last year and forgot about the landowners they were supposed to be working for.  This doesn't mean landowners are "on board" with any of last year's meaningless legislation.  Invenergy is probably still snickering at how easily the Ag groups fell for their bait and switch.  And now the Ag groups are ticked off because they've been made to look foolish.

Legislators have been responsive to their constituents' opposition to Grain Belt Express.  Their legislative agenda is driven by their constituents, not by any "ties to the fossil fuel industry."  That's a disgustingly common Sierra Club talking point that is no longer true.  People don't like ANY energy infrastructure in their community, and certainly not on their land, especially when they derive no benefit from it.  Quit whining about the "fossil fuel" devils.  The only devils buying legislators these days are "clean energy" companies.  Clean or dirty, it's all about corporate profit.  Don't lose sight of that.

Where's the proof that "farmers wanted more money for land acquisition"?  This statement is concocted out of speculation and ignorance.  Farmers actually say that their land is not for sale at any price!  And can we talk some truth about price here for a hot minute?  Eminent domain for utilities insures that the utility can acquire the land it needs to serve customers at "fair market value" instead of actual market value.  The money the utility saves on land acquisition flows back to their customers in the form of lower rates.  This is what's known as "cost of service" rates.  The customers are charged what it costs the utility to serve them, plus reasonable return.  In the case of Grain Belt Express, however, their project does not use "cost of service" rates.  Instead it's what's known as a "merchant" transmission project that negotiates with voluntary customers to agree on a market based rate for service.  The price GBE can charge depends on how much the voluntary customers will pay in a free and fair market.  It is completely divorced from GBE's "cost of service."  In GBE's case, the difference between it's cost of service and the market based rates it negotiates represents the company's profit.  The cheaper the project is to build, the bigger Invenergy's profit.  The market sets its rates, not its cost of serving customers.

Then there's this misinformation:

According to Petty, Missouri cities like Hannibal, Springfield and Kirkwood have supported the energy project for years. He said everyone is “jumping on the bandwagon now” and the cleaner, cheaper energy for Missouri will save money for homeowners and businesses.

Who's jumping on the bandwagon?  Nobody, that's who.  Invenergy has not revealed any new customers for its project since the Missouri cities got a below-cost deal handed to them back in 2016 in order to score PSC approval.   GBE has had authority to negotiate voluntary customer "negotiated rate" contracts since 2014.  In all the time since, Invenergy has only managed to announce one customer for less than 10% of its proposed Missouri capacity.  Only the Missouri municipalities thought GBE was a good deal.  Other potential customers have avoided it like the plague.  Does the cities' contract represent a fantastic opportunity that everyone else is missing out on?  It's more likely that the cities signed on to something that everyone else doesn't want.  It's not like the Missouri cities are really smart about buying power.  They bought a healthy share of the Prairie State coal-fired generation complex AFTER Missouri voted for clean energy in 2008.  Doesn't sound very smart to me.

And here's your completely clueless ending:

“While a few farmers still remain skeptical about Invenergy’s intention to make this a win-win situation for all, over 70% of the landowners and a majority of folks do understand it and are on board,” Petty added.

According to Petty, it’s just a matter a time before everyone will be on the same page with the Grain Belt project.

By that token, has Petty considered that 90% of Grain Belt's potential Missouri Customers, and 100% of its potential PJM customers, are NOT on board with it?  If 70% of needed easements equals landowner support, then 95% of customer avoidance equals utility opposition. 

It's just a matter of time until Grain Belt Express collapses in a heap and the SOMC of Kirkwood gets left with drool on its collective chin.