As you probably know, Grain Belt Express has applied for a $4.9B loan of taxpayer funds from the DOE. As part of DOE's evaluation of GBE's loan application, the DOE must perform an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to inform the public about the environmental impacts of granting this loan to build the project. However, before the required EIS was completed, DOE granted GBE a "conditional" approval in the waning days of the Biden administration. We're just going through the motions now!
In early 2023, the DOE opened the EIS process by engaging the public in what's known as Scoping. The task was to get public input on what should be studied. As part of this task, DOE was required to notify the public and impacted communities about the study and gather their input. DOE did some public relations and sent out mailers to impacted individuals. After the comment period closed, DOE put those comments together in a report.
And then DOE ignored that report and prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Grain Belt Express that was announced on January 17, 2025, just days before Trump took office. The DOE set a very short 45-day comment period for the public to submit their comments and/or corrections on that 400+ page report. And then they didn't bother do to any public relations with the media or notify the interested persons who had commented in the scoping phase. It would have been real easy to send a press release to local media outlets and/or mail a notification to all the people who commented the first time. DOE already had their names and addresses. But DOE chose not to do that. It is only through grassroots connections that word of GBE's DEIS spread to impacted communities.
DOE has tried to check the "public engagement" box by holding limited meetings across the project area, along with two online webinars. Disaster!
There were only 4 in person meetings scheduled across the project area, 2 in Kansas and 2 in Missouri. Any impacted person would have had to travel up to 2 hours in the dead of winter, battling bad weather the whole way, to attend. Only a handful of people braved Mother Nature to attend.
The 2 online meetings were held last week, and what a clown show they were!
Many people had trouble accessing the Microsoft Teams platform on which the meetings were conducted. Who did DOE think it was dealing with here? Teenage computer geniuses? The actual audience was composed of older citizens, including many farmers, who have trouble with computers in general on a good day. Those who managed to connect (I counted 50 something in the meeting I attended, and probably half of those were DOE and GBE employees) were further flummoxed by bad internet connections and technical issues, which made participation impossible.... including me. I must be ready for the retirement home, or maybe DOE's platform wasn't compatible with Macs.
The meeting began with an explanation that if you had a question, you should submit it using the Q&A feature on the tool panel. Problem! I did not have that feature!
In early 2023, the DOE opened the EIS process by engaging the public in what's known as Scoping. The task was to get public input on what should be studied. As part of this task, DOE was required to notify the public and impacted communities about the study and gather their input. DOE did some public relations and sent out mailers to impacted individuals. After the comment period closed, DOE put those comments together in a report.
And then DOE ignored that report and prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Grain Belt Express that was announced on January 17, 2025, just days before Trump took office. The DOE set a very short 45-day comment period for the public to submit their comments and/or corrections on that 400+ page report. And then they didn't bother do to any public relations with the media or notify the interested persons who had commented in the scoping phase. It would have been real easy to send a press release to local media outlets and/or mail a notification to all the people who commented the first time. DOE already had their names and addresses. But DOE chose not to do that. It is only through grassroots connections that word of GBE's DEIS spread to impacted communities.
DOE has tried to check the "public engagement" box by holding limited meetings across the project area, along with two online webinars. Disaster!
There were only 4 in person meetings scheduled across the project area, 2 in Kansas and 2 in Missouri. Any impacted person would have had to travel up to 2 hours in the dead of winter, battling bad weather the whole way, to attend. Only a handful of people braved Mother Nature to attend.
The 2 online meetings were held last week, and what a clown show they were!
Many people had trouble accessing the Microsoft Teams platform on which the meetings were conducted. Who did DOE think it was dealing with here? Teenage computer geniuses? The actual audience was composed of older citizens, including many farmers, who have trouble with computers in general on a good day. Those who managed to connect (I counted 50 something in the meeting I attended, and probably half of those were DOE and GBE employees) were further flummoxed by bad internet connections and technical issues, which made participation impossible.... including me. I must be ready for the retirement home, or maybe DOE's platform wasn't compatible with Macs.
The meeting began with an explanation that if you had a question, you should submit it using the Q&A feature on the tool panel. Problem! I did not have that feature!
We were told that if we wanted to make a public comment, we should raise our virtual hand. Got that, at least!
Next DOE made us sit through a pre-recorded video presentation that probably ran about 20 minutes. Then they opened the meeting to public comment. Wait! I'm still wanting to submit a question! So, I raised my hand. When called on, I explained I did not have the Q&A tool but wanted to ask some questions. They allowed me to proceed... well at least until I asked a question they did not want to answer.
First, I asked if DOE had determined how many contracts (dollar amount) GBE must have in place to guarantee repayment of the loan. No, they have not. But then there was some blather that such consideration was not part of the EIS. I informed them that the EIS talked about "offtake and interconnection" agreements in several places, but they still refused to answer. Next, I asked them if it was DOE's finding in this report that GBE avoids or reduces or sequesters air pollutants and greenhouse gases, and if so, please explain how GBE, which is, by itself, nothing more than a giant extension cord not connected to anything, accomplishes this goal. The loan is based on GBE accomplishing this.
That's when they pulled the plug and told me that since other people were reporting that they were able to see and use the Q&A function (who are these people? DOE and GBE employees?) that they wouldn't answer my question. I was instructed to email my questions. And then they turned off my microphone. I did try to email them after the meeting, but have received no response.
Public engagement failure #1.
Next, a gentleman from the Missouri Attorney General's office made a fabulous comment regarding GBE's actions in Missouri and chastising DOE for the way it has carried out this process. He was the only one I heard who successfully used DOE's platform to participate.
Next, GBE called on someone named Karen, who had raised her hand. Except they couldn't hear her. She could not connect to make her comment. Then DOE moved on to the next raised hand, someone with the screen name "Me." Me also could not make the platform work to make his comment. DOE spent an uncomfortable 10 minutes or more toggling between Karen and Me trying to get some audio to work. Send in the clowns!!! Finally one of the two was able to connect and asked a question about the project's route in Callaway County. He admitted he had meanwhile submitted the question to the Q&A, so they skipped over him and called for more comments. Crickets. After a few more minutes of awkwardness, DOE thought it might re-run the 20 minute video presentation "for anyone just now joining us." Way to fill the second hour of your unsuccessful virtual meeting, DOE!
By this time, my patience had long since absconded, so I checked out. I have no idea if anyone ever managed to answer any questions I couldn't see, or connect to make a verbal public comment.
DOE promised to post a recording of these webinars online, but I haven't seen them yet. When (if) they show up, they are evidence of DOE's complete and utter failure at public engagement.
Why is the DOE still being allowed to operate under its secretive, partisan, public engagement sham developed under the Biden administration? Hello? Elon? Chainsaw needed here!
And here's something odd... check out the "transcript" of the February virtual meetings. Go all the way to the end for the comments of Jigar Shah, who introduces himself as the Director of the Loan Programs Office, and then proceeds to cheerlead for government backed loans for experimental projects for a couple minutes. Sorry, Jigar, but you've been FIRED! I don't remember his comments from the video, so it looks like he got cut and not replaced with comments from the current Director. Speaks volumes, doesn't it?
Comments on GBE's EIS are still due March 3. Get writing! See instructions under How To Provide Comments tab at the top.
Next DOE made us sit through a pre-recorded video presentation that probably ran about 20 minutes. Then they opened the meeting to public comment. Wait! I'm still wanting to submit a question! So, I raised my hand. When called on, I explained I did not have the Q&A tool but wanted to ask some questions. They allowed me to proceed... well at least until I asked a question they did not want to answer.
First, I asked if DOE had determined how many contracts (dollar amount) GBE must have in place to guarantee repayment of the loan. No, they have not. But then there was some blather that such consideration was not part of the EIS. I informed them that the EIS talked about "offtake and interconnection" agreements in several places, but they still refused to answer. Next, I asked them if it was DOE's finding in this report that GBE avoids or reduces or sequesters air pollutants and greenhouse gases, and if so, please explain how GBE, which is, by itself, nothing more than a giant extension cord not connected to anything, accomplishes this goal. The loan is based on GBE accomplishing this.
That's when they pulled the plug and told me that since other people were reporting that they were able to see and use the Q&A function (who are these people? DOE and GBE employees?) that they wouldn't answer my question. I was instructed to email my questions. And then they turned off my microphone. I did try to email them after the meeting, but have received no response.
Public engagement failure #1.
Next, a gentleman from the Missouri Attorney General's office made a fabulous comment regarding GBE's actions in Missouri and chastising DOE for the way it has carried out this process. He was the only one I heard who successfully used DOE's platform to participate.
Next, GBE called on someone named Karen, who had raised her hand. Except they couldn't hear her. She could not connect to make her comment. Then DOE moved on to the next raised hand, someone with the screen name "Me." Me also could not make the platform work to make his comment. DOE spent an uncomfortable 10 minutes or more toggling between Karen and Me trying to get some audio to work. Send in the clowns!!! Finally one of the two was able to connect and asked a question about the project's route in Callaway County. He admitted he had meanwhile submitted the question to the Q&A, so they skipped over him and called for more comments. Crickets. After a few more minutes of awkwardness, DOE thought it might re-run the 20 minute video presentation "for anyone just now joining us." Way to fill the second hour of your unsuccessful virtual meeting, DOE!
By this time, my patience had long since absconded, so I checked out. I have no idea if anyone ever managed to answer any questions I couldn't see, or connect to make a verbal public comment.
DOE promised to post a recording of these webinars online, but I haven't seen them yet. When (if) they show up, they are evidence of DOE's complete and utter failure at public engagement.
Why is the DOE still being allowed to operate under its secretive, partisan, public engagement sham developed under the Biden administration? Hello? Elon? Chainsaw needed here!
And here's something odd... check out the "transcript" of the February virtual meetings. Go all the way to the end for the comments of Jigar Shah, who introduces himself as the Director of the Loan Programs Office, and then proceeds to cheerlead for government backed loans for experimental projects for a couple minutes. Sorry, Jigar, but you've been FIRED! I don't remember his comments from the video, so it looks like he got cut and not replaced with comments from the current Director. Speaks volumes, doesn't it?
Comments on GBE's EIS are still due March 3. Get writing! See instructions under How To Provide Comments tab at the top.
RSS Feed