Transmission Bill from Hell on MPR
May 18th, 2005
Here’s the beginning, the very tip of the iceberg, on the Transmission
Omnibus Bill from Hell, HF1344 and SF 1368, from reporter Stephanie Hemphill, of MPR:
Power Struggle
There could very well be more soon on Arrowhead Transmission Line docket at the PUC where Minnesota Power is wanting approval for ATC to take over for MP in Minnesota — and the ATC/TRANSLink tie.
Stay tuned…
May 19th, 2005 at 8:00 am
Rhetorical question (sort of). Should new developments like those in Northfield and Dundas be required to provide their own power plants rather than just expecting NSP to be there for them?
If so, then we never need these sort of power lines, but you will have to expect some cities to select inefficient small coal-fired plants and others to select wind power that leaves them without power at times. (Actually the latter means that those cities would STILL be dependending on cross-country power lines as backup, so the environment friendly approach is also the pro-power line approach. “Department of Irony, party of none, your table is ready.”)
May 19th, 2005 at 2:46 pm
You seem to presume that all of us will understand the issues contained in this legislation or we’ll know why it is so terrible.
Give us some reasons for the damnation
May 20th, 2005 at 8:15 am
Betsy and others of the same opinion –
You’re right, transmission IS awfully complicated. I can’t give Transmission 1001 with each post precisely because it is so complicated. I presume that the curious can check the archives, which contain the full reasoning with citations galore, filed under Transmission. Look over there on the righthand side. The very first post on this blog contains the basics about transmission and this awful Omnibus bill specifically.