Yes, more good news.  Yesterday, the TANC Board met, and were heard on the public conference call to vote, one by one, to put an end to this project that no one wants:

Special Op-ed: TANC’s Implosion: Lessons of Failure


July 16, 2009

By Nora Shimoda

Fizzle, crackling and popping noises came to the minds of many as they heard news of a short-circuit in a controversial plan to build a multi-billion dollar high-voltage transmissions line that would span 600 miles from Lassen County to serve Sacramento and Bay Area utility customers.

Following months of agitated protests from community groups organized across Northern California, including Round Mountain, Glenn and Shasta Counties, Capay, Clarksburg, Winters and Davis in Yolo County, Stanislaus and San Joaquin Counties, tribal groups of Native Americans, and environmentalists, the Transmission Agency of Northern California (TANC) terminated the project.

The burden of negative impacts, such as health concerns, blight and loss of property value, affected thousands of people in many communities, yet these communities would not benefit from energy of the line. Inadequate notification to property owners, cities, and counties forced the agency to extend the scoping comment deadline several times.

TANC is a joint powers agency, a consortium of 15 municipal utilities, but only five were participating in the transmission line project (Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD), Modesto Irrigation District (MID), Turlock Irrigation District (TID), Silicon Valley Power (City of Santa Clara) and Redding Electric). State mandates to meet renewable energy goals of 20 percent by 2012, and an anticipated boost to 30 percent by 2020, is the primary justification for the project, according to TANC officials. The scheduled completion was 2014.

Questions of fiscal responsibility arose when a study by the California Energy Commission, called the Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative (RETI), evaluated 30 potential sites for renewable energy and the Lassen County source was ranked virtually at the bottom of the list. The RETI report also stated it was one of the most costly to build and having the most impact on the environment. Despite the evidence, TANC steadfastly moved forward with its plans as a frustrated public perceived its comments falling on deaf ears.

Citing uncertainty of plans by the federal government to construct transmission lines, SMUD, with the largest stake in the project at 37 percent, withdrew its support on July 1. The TID and MID followed suit two weeks later on July 14th. With financial support severed by three significant partners, the entire project collapsed the following day as TANC general manager Jim Beck announced termination of the project, including engineering and EIR/EIS reports.

And that marked the demise of what many critics called, “The Power Line to Nowhere.”

Reasons Why the TANC project Imploded:

1. TANC was not fair and not accepting responsibilities or negative impacts. It is bad public policy to place lines in communities where there is no access to the energy provided and making these communities bear all of the negative burdens, while the cities that benefit suffer no impacts. There are existing rights of way, possibilites of co-location and as much non-densely populated areas in Sacramento where lines could have been placed. If they truly were alternate routes, why do all 3 run through Yolo County and none through Sacramento? All of the lines are generally in the same area. It is a lose-lose situation for many communities, and win-win for many cities that would receive the power and no burden of negative impacts.

2. No notification to local governments, or very vague notification, of lines going over city and county owned properties. No notification to school districts (the proposed central 2 line was directly across the street from Harper Jr. High in Davis). TANC should have worked with the public and city and county governments to developed route criteria before issuing proposed routes.

3. Lack of integrity with public image of TANC and the TANC/Navigant relationship. TANC consistently called itself a not-for-profit agency. But it has just one employee, general manager, James Beck, and his desk is in the Navigant offices. The Navigant web site indicates that it is a worldwide consulting conglomerate that is a publicly traded company on the New York Stock Exchange. It states on its web site, something to the effect that its foremost goal is “maximizing shareholder interests,” which certainly sounds like a profit-making agenda. Perhaps there is nothing wrong with this relationship but the public perception is that of mistrust. If in fact, the tangled relationship turned out to be private, then a private company would not and should not have rights of eminent domain.

4. Lack of transparency despite many requests from the public to have access to engineering and environmental studies, maps of existing transmission lines, and cost/benefit analyses (such as rate increases), TANC did not provide information requested. There was also a failure to provide evidence of congestion and reliability of the current transmission system.

5. Mismanaged planning, as there were no contracts signed for renewable power supply. CEQA regulations require jointly, plans/contracts for power supply and transmission lines.

6. No state regulation of publicly-owned utility agencies. The controversial TANC plan brought to the attention of lawmakers this egregious oversight. State Senator Lois Wolk (D-Davis) introduced legislation (SB 460) to close a loophole in existing state law that exempts publicly-owned utilities from state oversight in planning and location of high voltage transmission lines. Senator Wolk states, “While this project is no longer moving forward, the root problem is still there,” she said. “The TANC project was a cautionary tale of what can happen when local public utilities aren’t held to the same state oversight and coordination as their investor-owned counterparts. The planning process for local public utility projects remains horribly flawed.”

Most opponents of the TANC project have a history of conservation and support the need for renewable energy, but this plan was fatally flawed.

Although it is lights out for TANC, many skeptics now keep a watchful eye on the federal government’s stimulus plan which includes high-voltage transmission projects for renewable energy.

Written by Nora Shimoda, Journalist, Media Strategist, Davis/Yolo County Ad Hoc Coalition opposing TANC.

TANC pulls plug

TANC project ended

TANC power plan plug pulled

TANC tanks as the public gets involved

TANC Powerline project goes dark

NorCal power agency abandons power line project

From “Silicon Valley Mercury News” (ummm, whatever happend to San Jose Mercury News?):

Controversial power line project canceled

By Jeanine Benca,

Bay Area News Group

Posted: 07/15/2009 07:00:00 PM PDT

Updated: 07/15/2009 09:05:35 PM PDT

The plug has been pulled on a controversial 600-mile power line project that would have delivered renewable energy to the city of Santa Clara and other parts of Northern California, officials from the Transmission Agency of Northern California said Wednesday.

The announcement to terminate the $1.5 billion project, made after a special meeting of the 15 public power providers who make up TANC, was spurred by the withdrawal of utility districts in Modesto, Turlock and Sacramento, said TANC spokesman Brendan Wonnacott.

The agency had hoped by 2014 to connect power lines from yet-to-be-developed wind and solar farms in northeastern California to power-thirsty urban areas elsewhere in Northern California. The lines would have wound through parts of the Central Valley and Bay Area, cutting through more than 50 agricultural and viticultural tracts in Livermore and Pleasanton, to bring energy to the city of Santa Clara and other TANC members.

The Sacramento Municipal Utility District abruptly backed out of the project earlier this month, citing financial and regulatory concerns. The district also voiced doubts over whether northeastern Lassen County — the proposed starting point for the transmission line system — was the best site for renewable energy.

On Monday, the Modesto and Turlock Irrigation Districts followed suit.

Read the rest of this entry »

Working on tanking the TANC line — proposed by TANC, WAPA, et al — unbelievable what they’re trying to do here.  The short version is at StopTANC and on this map:

tancmap

More later, in the meantime, here are some photos from the scene of the crime:

dsc00259

dsc00266

dsc00256

dsc00258

We had a hoot yesterday, bouncing around in the mountains on 4 wheel trails looking at transmission, chauffered by a “fellow” truckdriver, and in the jump seat, another transmission fighter with a German Shepherd Dog!  Yes, we are having fun.

tancmap

The NYRI line in New York was turned down, PJM has eliminated the Indian River, DE to Salem, NJ segment of MAPP, and TANC is imploding before us!  YEAAAAA!

This week, SMUD pulled out of TANC.  What does that mean?  It means SMUD is paying attention to demand and financing, YEAAAAA, and it means that over 1/3 of the project’s $$$ is MIA, YEAAAA!!!!

From the Modesto Bee:

Power project gasping for cash

Partners don’t see survival without a $525M transfusion

By Ed Fletcher
efletcher@sacbee.com

One of the largest public works projects in the West, a 600-mile high-voltage power line from Lassen County to Turlock and the Bay Area, is on life support after its biggest player abruptly pulled the plug.

A magnet for opposition from landowners whose properties would be crossed by the power lines and environmental activists, the transmission line project was promoted as vital to the region’s clean energy future.

A consortium of municipal power providers said the power lines were needed to bring renewable solar, wind and geothermal energy from the northeast corner of the state to power-thirsty urban areas.

On Wednesday, the Sacramento Municipal Utility District said it was pulling out of the $1.5 billion project, leaving a gaping hole in the budget. SMUD was expected to shoulder 35 percent of the project’s costs.

The Transmission Agency of Northern California, the project’s sponsor, has 15 members. But just five had agreed to fund the project’s environmental impact studies and, if ultimately approved, finance the project.

The remaining participants are the city of Santa Clara, Redding Electric Utility, and the Modesto and Turlock irrigation districts.

The Western Area Power Authority is a federal partner.

On Thursday, those partners grappled with questions about the project’s vitality.

Keeping the project alive means one or more of the remaining players would have to absorb SMUD’s $525 million share, or find a new partner to salvage the project, or even pieces of it, officials said.

Most of the staff and board members of the participating utilities contacted Thursday said they doubted the project will survive, despite the need for additional transmission capacity.

Read the rest of this entry »

PSE&G’s PR machine

July 2nd, 2009

Here’s their PR machine:

Here’s the poop:


New Poll Finds Strong Public Support for PSE&G’s Transmission Line Upgrade

Jul 1, 2009 12:38 AM
Public Service Enterprise Group Inc.

A recent poll finds that the majority of people in Morris and Sussex counties in New Jersey favors PSE&G’s plan to upgrade the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line to ensure reliability of the electric grid.

The poll, conducted by the firm of Luntz, Maslansky Strategic Research, showed approximately 3-to-1 support for the project, with 60 percent of those surveyed saying they “strongly support” or “somewhat support” it, compared to 22 percent who “strongly oppose” or “somewhat oppose” the line. Support for the line was equally strong regardless of the respondent’s proximity to the line.

“It is evident that most people understand that the existing line, which went into service in 1931, can’t be expected to handle today’s demand for safe, reliable electric service without an upgrade,” said Ralph LaRossa, president and COO of PSE&G.

“If we don’t act, Morris and Sussex counties, as well as all of northern New Jersey, could experience widespread brownouts and blackouts by the summer of 2012,” LaRossa said. “That’s not our judgment at PSE&G. It’s the verdict of the independent experts empowered by the federal government to manage the electrical grid. It’s a warning we take very seriously.”

The poll showed that 81 percent of the people in these counties see America’s energy situation as either a “crisis” or “major problem.” LaRossa added, “Most people who live in this area clearly understand the need to do what is required to maintain and ensure reliability.”

PSE&G, which funded the poll, is seeking permission to invest $750 million on the upgrade, adding a 500-kilovolt line to the existing 230-kilovolt line, within an existing transmission right-of-way. The project would create the equivalent of nearly 4,000 jobs lasting one year each, according to a recent report by senior economists at Rutgers University. And by relieving some of the congestion that drives up electric rates in New Jersey, it would help contain electricity costs for homes and businesses in the region.

The Board of Public Utilities is considering PSE&G’s petition to upgrade the line and is expected to make a decision by the end of the year. Public hearings were held on June 11 and 18 in Sussex County; a third hearing will be held June 30 in Morris County. In addition, the New Jersey Highlands Council is expected to vote on PSE&G’s request for an exemption for the project at its June 25 meeting.

The Luntz, Maslansky survey was conducted by telephone with 525 utility ratepayers across Morris and Sussex counties. The survey captured a statistically significant population of each county. To make sure the survey elicited the opinions of those ratepayers most likely to be affected by the project, the survey included an oversample of 100 respondents self-selected as living near the current transmission line, as well as an oversample of 100 respondents who lived in towns known to be near the existing transmission line. All respondents were registered voters. The survey was in the field June 4-11 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.3 percent at the 95 percent confidence level.

tancmodestobee

It’s time to tank the TANC project.  I love the irony of beautiful shots of transmission lines, particularly where the media is finally getting it right:

“To be sure, it will be ugly.”

Yeah!  That’s a direct quote, see the article below…

This 600 mile long and $1.3 billion (somebody better put a new battery in that calculator, that estimate is WAY off) project has wrapped up every ugly aspect of transmission all in one (like almost every other project I’ve seen these days!).  Let’s see, yes, it will visually be butt ugly.  Landowners didn’t get reasonable notice.  It will have massive impact on environment, economics, and public health.  Oh, and need we mention, like the others, it’s not needed.  Look where it starts and guess how far it is from the nearest coal plants, online or on the drawing board.

tancmap

Now notice all the back and forths, this isn’t just one line, each segment has at least two, if not three lines (their type gets in the way of ID’ing what’s planned.  CLICK HERE FOR THEIR MAP PAGE.

Heard enough?  Ready to do something about it?

PRE-MEETING RALLY

HOLIDAY INN — REDDING, CA

Wednesday, July 8, 2009 at 2:00 PM

then

PUBLIC MEETING WITH TANC:

CASCADE THEATRE – MARKET STREET

REDDING, CA

Wednesday, July 8, 2009 at 6:00 PM

ALL LANDOWNERS  ATTEND

Need more information:

Here’s the TANC site

Here’s WAPA’s TANC site

Here’s the STOP TANC site

*******************************************

From the Modesto Bee:

Big power line controversy

last updated: June 20, 2009 09:43:13 PM

The word “huge” aptly describes just about everything about the proposed electrical transmission line that would run from northeast California down the Central Valley into the Modesto and Turlock irrigation districts and over to the Bay Area.

The 500-kilovolt line would stretch more than 600 miles, through more than a dozen counties and across thousands of privately-owned properties. The towers would stand up to 150 feet high. And the estimated cost starts at $1.3 billion, but likely will far exceed that.

Read the rest of this entry »