Yes, it’s that time of year again, and today’s the deadline for Comments for the Power Plant Siting Act Annual Hearing:

PPSA_Overland Comment FINAL

And there ya have it.  Until next year…

From Alison Milsaps and Dave Ulery, Block Plains and Eastern Clean Line:

To recap the events of recent weeks: Plains & Eastern, Clean Line’s regulatory crown jewel and the only of its projects to be fully (if questionably) permitted, is DEAD in Arkansas. Hallelujah. Don’t take our word for it, though. Let’s look at a little evidence:

Hubris: Clean Line’s Michael Skelly and the End of the Plains and Eastern Project…

You know, I love it when this happens.

Under the agreement, Clean Line Energy retains project assets east of Oklahoma, and NextEra Energy Resources owns only the project assets in Oklahoma.

Clean Line Energy added that the transaction will continue the project’s forward momentum and install a new sponsor to a transmission solution to the burgeoning wind sector in Oklahoma and the Southwest Power Pool.

A Clean Line Energy spokesperson on Dec. 22 told TransmissionHub of the deal, “We cannot disclose financial information.”

Clean Line Energy Partners, a Houston-based developer of five major transmission lines for wind-generated electricity, has dropped its interconnection agreement with TVA for one of its most promising projects after the federal utility declined to buy what Clean Line officials said would be cheaper and cleaner power for TVA…

But after years of study, TVA said the Clean Line project didn’t make economic sense for the nation’s biggest government-owned utility, since TVA already has enough power-generating capacity and is on path to get more than half of its power from carbon-free sources. TVA President Bill Johnson said the intermittent nature of wind power would require TVA to build other backup power generators, including natural gas plants, that would offset the promised savings from the wind-generated power sources alone.

“We’re looking at a power demand in the future that is flat, or declining slightly, so we don’t anticipate needing major additions to power generation for a decade or more,” Johnson said.

“We all are wondering at this point” what is going on, said Julie Morton, of Van Buren. “We are disconnected on the western end now. The TVA was going to take 3,500 of the 4,000 megawatts it was going to generate, but now it is disconnected on that end.

“We are stuck in the middle, unplugged at both ends, and the only way out for us is if Clean Line completely implodes, which I think is happening, and the Department of Energy withdraws from the project.”

and now…

Using powers contained in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the department moved the project forward over the objections of Arkansas leaders.

Among other things, the law would enable the use of eminent domain to obtain property from unwilling sellers.

But the participation agreement allows the department to back out of the deal if “the Commencement Date has not occurred by December 31, 2018.”

In the letter, delegation members urged Perry to “pause the Project to either study or terminate its participation before the deadline.”

Since it was unveiled, the power line project has generated controversy.

Arkansas lawmakers ask DOE to block Clean Line transmission project

Don’t know what more we could possibly need to show that this project is O. V. E. R.  I do wonder if the appellate case was dismissed so there would be no precedent, and then, immediately after it was dismissed, all this happens.  Then, if they or someone else wants to try a Section 1222 project, the door remains open????

Look who’s in the news!

January 5th, 2018

Sustainable: Planners charting Minnesota’s energy future

Yes, we all know that Mike Bull wrote most of the energy law now in place!  But there’s no mention of those many years of work at House Regulated Industries Committee though…

And we all know that there are some big holes and problems with the wind siting statutes, rules, and standards.  What will it take to get some of the problems worked through, like some respectful wind siting standards?  We’re just starting to see, at long last, after years and years of complaints, some Public Utilities Commission action on wind noise issues.

Bent Tree_Noise Monitoring and Monitoring Report_20179-135856-01

Siting will have to be addressed, because despite sound modeling that says “no problem,” there are indeed problems.  Despite shadow flicker modeling that says “no problem,” there are indeed problems.

Preventative siting is long overdue and needs to start NOW!  And what about those already  affected?  “Buy the Farm” for wind?  It’s overdue.  Action after the fact is not the best of options, prevention is always the key, but for those now attempting to live in untenable circumstances, foisted on them by the nuisance moving into their community, and permitted by the Commission, what are the options?

Wind project in southern Minnesota gets pushback

Hey Mikey, how ’bout helping get to some solutions???

On Tuesday, Commerce is having a wind project transmission scoping meeting (MPUC Docket 17-322):

6 p.m. on December 19, 2017

Room 124

 Riverland Community College

Albert Lea, MN

The Albert Lea Tribune printed my Letter to the Editor about the Freeborn Wind Farm transmission scoping meeting:

Letter: Meeting on new wind farm is planned next week

At 6 p.m. Dec. 19 in Room 124 at Riverland Community College, the Minnesota Department of Commerce is holding a public comment and scoping meeting for the transmission line designed to serve the Freeborn Wind project. This is the opportunity for you to raise any questions and concerns about what issues should be investigated and reviewed in the Department of Commerce’s environmental review. This includes all of the things you know about the area, and any alternatives that should be in the mix.

Minnesota has a policy of non-proliferation of transmission corridors, which means that as a matter of law, transmission should be routed using existing corridors, such as transmission lines already in place or road right of way.  This line, instead, is proposed to traverse cross country.  That’s not non-proliferation.

Another problem is that Freeborn Wind developers claim they have land rights to all land needed for this transmission line, and then state that they’ll use eminent domain if they don’t. Well, which is it? And it’s troubling, because only public service corporations have the power of eminent domain, but Freeborn is a LLC, not a public service corporation. To make things more complicated, need has not been demonstrated, and there is no certificate of need. Need is a requirement for use of eminent domain. What’s their basis for saying they can use eminent domain?

This is yet another overreach by the developers — more infrastructure, which would forever change the landscape of this community.  Dec. 19 at Riverland College — now is the time to speak up!

Carol A. Overland

Attorney for Association of Freeborn County Landowners

FAKE NEWS again from CAE

December 15th, 2017

They’re recycling, and not in a good way.  Why is the STrib facilitating this?  Remember this from October?

Center of the American Experiment – Conflatulence!!

Here we go again, this time in the STrib:

The high cost of our failing wind policies

The two primary false arguments:

1) Wind is driving up ratepayer cost (it’s not, it’s the return on capital expenditures).

2) Clean Power Plan and renewable mandates aren’t lowering CO2 and are driving up rates (CPP and mandates only increase “renewables” and don’t cut CO2 production, it’s a percentage change, and using least cost generation.  Only reduction in burning will lower production of CO2).

3) High cost of electricity in Minnesota is connected to wind policies (When compared historically higher cost states like Illinois, yes, Minnesota’s rates are high, but it isn’t related to wind costs, wind is a least cost resource.  It IS related to the shift of electricity from serving a franchise area to a market based system, and the market has spoken. When electricity can be sold for more, and where utilities have transmission build-out from any Point A to any Point B, they will sell to highest bidder.  Higher priced markets will line up to buy our lower cost electricity and utilities will line up to sell it elsewhere rather than sell it for less to us, and we will have to pay the higher price to get electricity here.  That’s how a market works, Econ 1001. With wholesale market deregulated, and transmission lines built, we’ve got defacto deregulation.).

And a minor but very obvious false statement:

And the shortfall in summer wind production is being backstopped primarily by coal-fired electricity.

Coal runs constantly, as does nuclear, well almost, capacity factor of 80+.  But it’s natural gas, with its near-immediate ramping up that backs up wind, if generation is needed.  DOH!  Coal can’t get it up on command.

Why is the STrib printing this crap that is so patently false?

Here’s a good wallpaper to keep running, the MISO LMP map.

Check MISO’s real time LMP prices HERE!

See how Chicago area is cut out? That’s because it’s in PJM.

Check PJM’s real time LMP prices HERE!