Susquehanna-Roseland transmission defiling New Jersey
September 5th, 2013
Photo by Bruce A. Scruton/New Jersey Herald
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but this has to be reported. There will be more bad news about transmission on the NoCapX 2020 site about that big web of transmission lines in Minnesota. Here, now, it’s about the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission through Pennsylvania and New Jersey.
People in the Midwest do not have a clue how beautiful New Jersey is. We think of Newark (actually, I liked Newark, spent time there for the hearing before Board of Public Utilities), we think of Elizabeth, Bayonne, we think of concrete, boarded up buildings, extreme poverty, desloation, and maybe Atlantic City which has problems of its own, and while that’s all a part of New Jersey, we need to be aware of not just Newark but of Newton… of Sparta, of Stillwater, New Jersey, which is quite similar to Stillwater, Minnesota. Get acquainted with the rolling hills, farm fields, the pines and granite of northwestern New Jersey.
Special thanks to Dave Slaperud of Stop the Lines and Scott Olson and his Route B Info list for keeping the world informed.
What’s the Susquehanna-Roseland line? Once more with feeling, that sinking feeling…
This post by Bill Wolfe has some beautiful and disturbing photos, the beautiful New Jersey countryside they’re tearing up as we speak:
Lisa Chammings, of Stillwater, New Jersey, has a hayfield that they’re ripping up, despite promises that she could mow the hay underneath. It’s been raining, everything’s wet, no way to get hay, and, well, see that NJ Herald photo above? That’s her hay field that they’re in!
The transmission towers will be about twice as high, it’s going to be a TRI-BUNDLED 500 kV transmission line. WOW.
The Delaware Water Gap is under siege right now, and will no longer look like this:
Here’s what they’re doing there, running a line between Pennsylvania and New Jersey:
National Park Service sold us all out for $60 million, and is allowing the transmission line to go through. Thanks. Let’s hear it for the public interest.
The Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line is one that President Obama ordered fast-tracked, as if it wasn’t moving along fast enough:
Obama “fast tracks” transmission?!?!?!
Obama’s Transmission BS in the News
What does Obama’s Xmsn push mean?
ROAD TIME!! Not-So-Great Northern Xmsn
August 31st, 2013
Click for a larger view!
Notices were sent of “open house” meetings for the Not-So-Great Northern Transmission Line but guess who didn’t get one! And I’ve spent some time looking at their site, and I can’t find a meeting schedule anywhere. But thanks to two little birdies, we’re in luck!
HEY NOT-SO-GREAT TRANSMISSION:
PUBLISH YOUR OPEN HOUSE SCHEDULE ON YOUR SITE!
I know, what people care about is the map, but it’s hard to see the map, and that’s all we’ve got.
The application has not yet been filed, but it’s working its way toward the Public Utilities Commission. There’s a docket, so you can check to see what all has been filed. Go HERE TO SEARCH DOCKETS and then search for docket number 12-1163.
Now is the time to get involved, at the Certificate of Need stage, because NOW is when they determine “IF” a line is needed, and if it’s deemed “needed,” then it WILL go somewhere and it’s a very difficult struggle. The Certificate of Need stage is a bit more esoteric but it’s where the action is, and in this line in particular, they don’t have much to show as a “need.” It’s a want (as are most, if not all, transmission lines).
Meetings are the second and third week in September. Check out one near you and come on down for coffee and treats to settle your stomach while they explain their plans.
Obama promoting transmission again…
August 12th, 2013
On a bit of a transmission meander lately…
Based on the Fahey/AP articles on transmission lately, I mean really, how often is there anything about transmission in the STrib, I’ve felt something approaching. Perhaps it was the MISO Board of Directors meeting next week in St. Paul (HEY, check this out, you can watch it online, WebEx Information WebEx Password: Sr789456, or even head over to the shindig in St. Paul Hotel!
Then, I was reading the transcript for the PEPCO 2Q Earnings Call (pretty stimulating stuff), where they were talking about the undergrounding in DC:
Seeking Alpha – PEPCO 2Q Earnings Transcript
And here’s a news report and video about it, dig the price, $1.90 – $3.25 a month — that’s reasonable in my cheapskate book:
PEPCO, DC Officials Discuss $1 Billion Underground Wires Plan
That’s exactly what we should be doing. Complaints about “reliability” are distribution line issues, and look at how those utilities out there that are deregulated have cut maintenance to ZERO, think Aug. 13, 2003 (NERC Blackout Report HERE). And as I finish that, I see yet another Fahey/AP article published today, this time about Obama stumping for transmission AGAIN:
As cost of weather related outages rises, White House says grid should be made tougher
So off to the White House, where the PR is about “Protecting the Electric Grid From Increasingly Severe Weather Due to Climate Change” and what’s the real theme? Hey, it’s all about economics!
Economic Benefits of Increasing Grid Resilience to Weather Outages
This builds on his Memorandum earlier this summer:
Which of course builds on his Executive Order promoting transmission and naming projects for “fast tracking,” two of which I was working on at the time, Susquehanna-Roseland and CapX 2020 Hampton-La Crosse. That was:
and the Interagency Rapid Response Team for Transmission
For a list and map of the transmission line pilot projects please visit:
www.doe-etrans.us
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!
Benefits of TRANSMISSION?
August 12th, 2013
DOH! This is NOT rocket science. This came out last month, posted on the CapX 2020 site, and around the same time, there was a PR push about the tax payments, “benefits,” that local governments were receiving for the CapX 2020 transmission lines. This report is all about the “benefits” and not about the costs, let’s be clear on that:
Now I’ll take a look at this…
What it looks like is advance work for the 765kV overlay, for which there is no logical “need” claim. They want to turn “planning” on its head, and put “benefits” at the top, the first item on the check list, in “planning.” I’ll be using a lot of “quotes” here because I’m not buying it.
What they advise, what they’re trying to sell, is that transmission planning should:
1) Identify potential transmission projects that could supplement or replace baseline reliability projects and to develop a comprehensive list of their likely benefits.
2) Estimate the value of as many of the identified benefits as practical.
3) Determine whether the proposed transmission investments would be beneficial overall by comparing the magnitude of estimated economy-wide benefits with estimates of the total costs of the projects.
4) Address cost allocation.
They say that “planners must plan for the highest value first…”
Citing my favorite Posner decision, they quote, “To the extent that a utility benefits from the costs of new facilities, it may be said to have “caused” a part of those costs to be incurred, as without the expectation of its contributions the facilities might not have been built, or might have been delayed.
Benefits should be weighed at the outset when assessing need, in essence benefits supplanting need as reason for a transmission project. Yeah, OK, what’s new???
(still reading)
JCSP Big Picture – who pays? WE DO!
July 2nd, 2013
Transmission — it’s all connected. In looking at the Minnesota rulemaking, and the existing and proposed rules that utilize the word “regional,” I’m thinking about big picture stuff, the big proposals in the wings, and that Joint Coordinated System Plan (JCSP) map sure presents a big picture. For some reason, I’ve not been able to find the full JCSP report until recently:
Who cares about JCSP? Well, WE’D better care, because look who’s paying for the transmission build-out (p. 68 of Vol. 1):
Look at the numbers for Midwest ISO, a $-10,293, or for MAPP, a $12,292, that’s a COST, not a savings. MISO and MAPP get nominal production cost savings and massive load COSTS. This is not news, but is worth repeating as we discuss “regional.” And another take with the same take-away of big costs for MISO and MAPP customers, used by our good friends at AWEA to promote this transmission buildout in their flyer called “Green Power Transmission and Consumer Savings” (flyer below):
Read the whole thing:
What a deal, eh?
Look what AWEA has been advocating to make this happen:
