Money Changes Everything

I should be writing about everything that’s happened over the last few weeks: the Missouri Public Service Commission turning down Grain Belt Express , the end of the Section 1222 comment period, the introduction of the APPROVAL Act in the House (Big hugs to the delegation), Amazon choosing to go with locally generated, on-shore wind in North Carolina , and the spokesman and CEO of an energy advocacy group, counting Clean Line among its members, who swallowed his entire foot with what might be one of the most insensitive statements ever: 

“There’s no production in Arkansas, so people there just see it as a power line coming through their property,” he said.“It’s understandable, but let’s remember we all see hundreds of power lines every day,” Foltz added. “What’s one more?”

(Holy gag, Batman...)

There was also the announcement of another solar farm in Arkansas, a conference call I’m still totally geeking out over, the final draft of the TVA’s IRP which makes it pretty clear that HVDC wind is either the cheapest or vastly most expensive source of wind they could purchase… because utilities just love that kind of uncertainty. Here's an illustrative graphic Dave sent me:

 And, of course, there was the Attorney General of Oklahoma coming thisclose to accusing Clean Line of lying about state regulatory approvals to other states and, well, the feds. From their 1222 comment:

“As demonstrated in comment 2 above, Clean Line has not been consistent in the statements it has made to DOE, FERC or state regulatory agencies. There are numerous material and substantial incorrect, misleading and/or inconsistent statements and omissions in Clean Line's Application materials. DOE should reject Clean Line's proposal based on these conflicting, misleading, incorrect and incomplete statements. In the alternative, DOE should at a minimum perform an independent review and comparison of all statements made by Clean Line to DOE, FERC, the Oklahoma Corporation Commission, the Arkansas Public Service Commission, the U.S. EPA, SPP, MISO, and all other state and federal agencies, transmission organizations and other entities to whom Clean Line submitted statements and information related to the Plains and Eastern Clean Line Project.”

Sirs, consider yourselves hugged.

There were a host of awesome and substantial comments turned in:

Downwind, LLC

Colorado River Energy Distributors Association (The equivalent to SPRA for the Western Area Power Association)

Southwest Power Resources Association
Center for Rural Affairs (Recommending we reconsider the way we assemble corridors and the use of eminent domain)

If you get the chance, check them out. Either we’re not the only “busload of crazies” out there, or we’re just actually not so crazy. Incidentally, this is our comment, which we wrote with our lawyer Carol Overland, who went above and beyond in working with us. 

I should talk about all that, but I don’t want to. I want to talk about Cyndi Lauper instead.

When I was a little girl I loved Cyndi Lauper. I didn’t just love her, I wanted to be her. I was her actually, for Halloween in second grade. Her voice was so honest and raw… Her songs, too. When I was eight, “Time After Time” was my favorite, but the one that’s resonating with me lately is “Money Changes Everything”. It kind of got lost at the time because money was so huge in the eighties, right? Material girls everywhere, but “Money Changes Everything” isn’t just about the cash, it’s about the damage we’re willing to inflict on each other to get and keep it.

And that’s the bottom line about this situation. Clean Line has poured unspeakable money into these projects. For us, the landowners, we continue busting our knuckles against a brick wall, but the best that we can hope for is to be left alone. 

Clean Line is in this for either a twenty-year return or a quick, profitable sale. We fight and fight, without vast legal or financial resources, and our "preferred outcome" is simply to maintain control of what we have worked to build. We lose no matter what. No matter how "by the rules" we've lived our lives, because we'll never see a "pay day" for what we've been through or the work we've done. 

What's worse is that we're always at risk. Grain Belt Express should be over (by the way, what about the rocks on someone who feels comfortable telling the public service commission that just tossed their project after intense scrutiny that they are “confused” about the benefits? Lol, that’s either total madness or brilliance), but Clean Line can always appeal decisions, as long as they can pay to do so. There are no real consequences for what they put people through (other than failure of one or some of their LLCs).

Which is why it is so incredibly important we have good processes to examine "need", and so intensely infuriating when people (generally with no knowledge of the situation other than what they've been fed by Clean Line or their supporters) feel comfortable shaming landowners for being upset about eminent domain. Especially, I'm going there, when those people are supposed to be "progressive". I have been shocked by some of the ridiculous justifications and knee-jerk judgements and assumptions I've seen come out of the left through this whole process. I thought we were better than that. To argue that eminent domain is appropriate because we've used it before? Please...

Lawlor had likened the conflict to the 1930s, when electric power came to rural America and many farmers didn’t want the intrusion.

“We will always have opposition,” Lawlor said before Wednesday’s vote. “But people opposed to this now turned on their lights this morning and that power came across somebody‬’s land.”

0.o

So in almost ninety years we can't make progress? That makes sense. Because I know people still like to do things the way people did ninety years ago: smoking and drinking through pregnancy, overt legal segregation, compulsory sterilization... Social security was new... and totally suspect.

Sorry, pontificating... again. The bottom line is that Clean Line had an idea that was out of the box. Really out of the box. They just didn't bother to take it all the way out of the box. Because, at it's heart, this idea isn't about saving the world (although that may be part of it) or being truly fair. It's about making money. So it makes sense to minimize landowners. To shove us on "the crazy bus". To make us grasping or greedy, even though this whole situation wasn't of our making. It's easier to hurt people when you can dismiss them as irrational... whether or not that's true.

Just like Principal Vernon, "You see us as you want to see us—in the simplest terms, in the most convenient definitions."

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/government-politics/article26031445.html#storylink=cpy

When the Words Speak for Themselves

Yesterday, Senator Lamar Alexander sent this letter to the Department of Energy:

Dear Secretary Moniz,

I write to express my serious concern with the Plains and Eastern Clean Line Transmission Project.

The Plains and Eastern Clean Line Transmission Project proposes to build a single 700 mile direct current transmission line from Oklahoma, through Arkansas, to deliver wind power to Tennessee and other southeastern states. The proposed project raises several concerns that must be carefully evaluated by the Department of Energy.

First, according to the Tennessee Valley Authority’s (TVA) Draft Integrated Resource Plan, TVA would not have a need for this wind power until the 2030s, at the earliest. In other words, the project proposes to fill a need that is not present at this time and could force a comparatively expensive source of energy on Southeastern utilities that don’t need the additional generation.

Second, the Department needs to take the true cost of wind power into account. Wind only has an average capacity factor of about 35%. Therefore, when considering the costs of wind power, the Department should also take into consideration the cost of all of the backup generation needed to support the grid during the 65% of the time wind isn’t producing electricity. Additionally, wind is not effective at meeting the peak demands of the grid, because the wind blows when demand is low (at night) and does not blow when demand is high (during the day). Therefore, the true cost of wind must include the energy storage and dispatch infrastructure that wind energy requires to support a stable grid. 

Third, the wasteful wind production tax credit has provided billions in subsidies to the wind industry over the past 22 years. The tax credit has been in place for 22 years and has been extended 9 different times. The subsidy costs the tax payers more than $6 billion over ten years each year it is extended.

The subsidy to Big Wind is so generous that in some markets, wind producers can literally give their electricity away and still make a profit. This phenomenon is called “negative pricing,” and it has the effect of making baseload power plants, like nuclear plants, less competitive and more likely to close.

The Department should take into account the impacts of the wind production tax credit when evaluating this proposed project.

Fourth, the Department should take into account the potential problems with relying on a single transmission line from Oklahoma to Tennessee. According to the National Climate Data Center at the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration, from 1991 to 2010, Oklahoma and Arkansas averaged over 100 tornados per year. Over the same time, the states averaged nearly six major tornados each year. A single tornado could take down part of transmission line, cutting off the wind farms from TVA. The proposed path of the project makes an inherently unreliable source of energy even more unreliable.

Finally, while the states of Tennessee and Oklahoma have approved the project, Arkansas continues to oppose the project. The use of Federal eminent domain authority would strip Arkansas of their traditional property rights.  The Department should carefully consider Arkansas’ concerns and resist efforts to undermine states’ rights.

I appreciate the Department’s consideration of my comments, and I urge the Department to take my concerns into consideration as you evaluate the proposed Plains and Eastern Clean Line Transmission Project.

Sincerely,

_____________________________                                     

Lamar Alexander                                                                   

United States Senator

I know I should just stop there and let his words speak for themselves, but I just want to throw a couple thoughts out there:

1) If your first thought in reading this letter is that this man is just a shill for nuclear, or to blame the Koch brothers, you haven't really been paying attention. The world would be easier if things were so black and white, but they're not. There's a lot going on here and this is whole situation is a fat ball of tangled up strings. Again, not to beat a dead horse or anything, but that's coming from a Bernie-o-phile. 

2) Read this article from the Times Free Press because, again, there's a lot going on here, too. Not the least of which is this quote from Mario Hutado:

 "We spend a lot of time talking with people in Tennessee and other states and what they tell us is that having more renewable energy options at an affordable cost is a good thing," he said.

I'm glad that Clean Line spends a lot of time talking with people in Tennessee. I wish they'd spent more time talking to Arkansans, landowners in particular, much earlier in this process. And I think more affordable renewable energy is important, too. But Plains and Eastern isn't the way to get there because the "affordable" in this equation comes partially from the fact that Clean Line wants access to a massive development discount: eminent domain. I know I say this all the time, but the people who pay for that discount aren't wealthy investors. It's the affected landowners. It's their neighbors. Clean Line claims they don't want to use it, but they do. Eminent domain isn't just for the hold outs. It's for everyone. It's the shadow lurking in the background that sends chills up your spine, that feeling that something is chasing you when you're alone in the woods. It's the ultimate backstopping authority and everyone knows it. So while Senator Alexander and I may disagree on much, I'm gonna go call him to say thanks. Thanks for standing up for us. 

No Need. No Gain. No Eminent Domain.

In the TVA's recently released Draft Integrated Resource Plan, the soonest they expect that they might potentially be interested in purchasing power from Clean Line is 2025. That scenario also represents the riskiest and most expensive of their available options:

This is where venture capitalism and speculation meet the reality of an entity required by mandate to act in the best interest of the public it serves:

Which brings us to: How long are landowners on the proposed and alternate routes expected to put their lives on hold for this project? Is it even feasible for Clean Line to complete Plains and Eastern should the TVA choose to wait 10 to 20 years to decide if they want to purchase this electricity? That sounds more like a prison sentence for landowners than progress. Twenty years ago we were still rockin' pagers and dial-up connections. Eminent domain is absolutely inappropriate for a "maybe someday" situation.

For more information:

http://www.utilitydive.com/news/tvas-plan-for-future-less-coal-more-gas-and-efficiency/373580/
http://www.chattanoogan.com/2015/3/9/295632/TVA-Releases-Draft-Integrated-Resources.aspx

Secretary Moniz: How many more reasons do you need? It is TIME!

(Psst... Bert's on our side)