The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has given the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) until May 27 to respond to a lawsuit filed to halt the recent implementation of a new "capacity zone" throughout much of New York's Hudson River Valley. The capacity zone results in a five- to 15-percent increase in electric rates for homeowners and businesses, with the windfall -- more than $200 million annually -- filling the coffers of big energy companies.
Intended to provide incentives for energy producers to increase power generation near users in the New York Metropolitan Area, the capacity zone -- proposed by the New York Independent System Operator (NYISO), the agency that oversees transmission lines throughout the state and dispatches wholesale power from generators to meet customer demand -- is on a collision course with Gov. Andrew Cuomo's Energy Highway initiative, which also seeks to increase electricity supplied to New York City. The governor's plan would open up "bottlenecks" in the transport of electricity from upstate and western New York power plants to downstate users by building new transmission lines through the Hudson Valley, one of the country's first Congressionally designated National Heritage Areas.
These competing energy strategies come at a time when electricity demand nationwide has flattened out, meaning utilities are scrambling to find new sources of return for their shareholders' investments. Ironically, the NYISO's board is largely composed of utility insiders, including a chairman whose career includes two decades at New Orleans-based Entergy. Even more curious, Entergy -- whose outdated Indian Point nuclear plant on the Hudson River is targeted for closure by the governor and many environmental groups -- will be a prime beneficiary of the NYISO-sponsored rate hike.
Under the Energy Highway initiative, the state Public Service Commission (PSC) solicited proposals for the construction of high-voltage transmission lines capable of carrying 1,000 megawatts of electricity. Three energy developers submitted proposals to create new utility corridors. Featuring towers as high as 165 feet, their lines would pass through 25 Hudson Valley towns. (A fourth proposal would upgrade existing lines and underground any new ones deemed necessary.)
The utility corridors would directly impact many farms and orchards that provide fresh, healthy produce to valley residents and New York City's greenmarkets, restaurants and soup kitchens. Homeowners along the corridors -- both Manhattan-based weekenders and local residents -- have seen real estate values slashed and transactions scuttled by the potential threat of new towers and fear their land will be taken by eminent domain. The lines also endanger historic sites and scenic vistas essential for sustaining the region's $4.75-billion tourism economy, as well as critical wildlife habitats.
The capacity zone and transmission lines have one thing in common -- they've attracted plenty of opposition. The lawsuit against the FERC was filed by the regional electric utility Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation, Dutchess County and the PSC. U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, Scenic Hudson and other officials also have called on the FERC to reverse its order allowing the May 1 rate hike.
At the same time, Scenic Hudson, municipal officials, farmers, grassroots community groups and local land conservation organizations have formed the Hudson Valley Smart Energy Coalition to formally intervene in the PSC proceeding relating to the new transmission lines and advocate for alternatives that would strengthen the state's energy system without damaging property values and community character. The coalition also has raised questions about the underlying premise that 1,000 megawatts of new capacity will be needed after the implementation of previously approved transmission projects, downstate conservation initiatives and a separate PSC proceeding aimed at developing a new vision for the state's energy system.
In January Gov. Cuomo called on the PSC to expedite transmission projects that stay wholly within existing utility corridors in height, width and length. While this new approach doesn't apply to the pending Hudson Valley proposals, the PSC has encouraged those developers to submit new plans that would strive to stay within current rights-of-way. So far, one developer, National Grid, has indicated its redesign will eliminate the need for acquiring land by eminent domain. But under its $1.3-billion proposal, new towers still will be 40 feet higher than existing structures. The two other developers have yet to withdraw their plans to construct new utility corridors, so a dark cloud continues to hang over properties and communities along all of the proposed routes.
Does meeting New York City's demand for electricity have to come at the expense of the Hudson Valley? Not if the following happens:
The PSC should explicitly require any new transmission lines deemed necessary to stay within the footprint and height of existing utility structures, require undergrounding of new and current lines wherever feasible, and immediately reject all proposals that fail to meet these requirements.
The FERC should indefinitely suspend implementation of the new capacity zone.
Lawmakers and policy leaders should look more carefully at the NYISO, whose policies and pronouncements are shaping the entire energy market -- without apparent accountability.
Finally, federal and state agencies must work together on a comprehensive energy plan that doesn't pit one region of the state against another, that incorporates the latest data on both supply and demand, and incorporates rooftop solar, energy conservation and other technologies that represent the next generation, much as cellphones have replaced rotary-dial telephones in the communications sector.
In April Gov. Cuomo announced his intention to create a "21st century power grid" that will enable New Yorkers to "better manage and reduce their energy costs while protecting and preserving the environment." That's the right goal, but the new capacity zone and current transmission initiative don't put us on a path to achieve it. Both should be scrapped until all key stakeholders can agree upon a plan that will.
With Power Comes Ambivalence
By PENELOPE GREEN
May 14, 2014
LIVINGSTON, N.Y. — It took Andrea Tranchita and her husband, Paul, a few decades to fully build out their pine-and-spruce-planked handmade house here. For the first six months, the couple and their two young daughters lived in a tent on the 10 acres of farmland that Ms. Tranchita’s parents gave them as a wedding present in 1970. But now Ms. Tranchita, 63, a third-generation farmer who grows lavender and herbs and raises sheep, alpaca, llamas and Angora rabbits on this patch of land, is worried about her ability to continue to maintain it.
One recent drizzly morning, the sheep, newly shorn and wearing smart canvas coats, bumped a visitor and gummed her notebook, searching for the second-cutting hay that Ms. Tranchita had brought them as a treat. At the back of the paddock, two transmission towers straddled the tiny farm like giant steel sentries. Glancing up at the lines, Ms. Tranchita said that when the power comes through, “The hair on your arms stands on end. If you stand right here, and hold a fluorescent light bulb in your hand, it will light. If they triple the voltage, as they said they would, there’s no way I can keep animals underneath. And if the poles widen, I’ll lose the field and we’ll go out of business.”
There are more than 11,000 miles of transmission lines in New York State, running from east to west and north to south upon a latticework of steel transmission towers like those on Ms. Tranchita’s farm. Whether you consider them a blight or a boon, or a bit of both, they represent a system that’s been in place, in many areas, since the early part of the 20th century. Now, as part of a mandate from Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo to improve the grid by modernizing the ways in which power is delivered and generated, a 153-mile swath of transmission lines is targeted to be upgraded. The aim is to reduce energy costs, relieve congestion and shore up the aging energy infrastructure.
John Maserjian, a spokesman for Transco, a public-private partnership of power companies in the area, said that congestion costs New Yorkers more than $600 million a year. “Since these original transmission lines were first put into service, electricity use has grown, while generators in lower New York have recently begun to retire or are in need of replacement,” he said. “Resolving these transmission constraints by strategically adding transmission capacity will enable power to flow more freely throughout the state, lower costs, increase use of renewable sources located upstate and improve the efficiency and reliability of the electric system.”
Still, this is a corridor that runs right through the Hudson River Valley, which, with its strong agricultural base and scenic beauty, is one of richest areas — visually and environmentally — in the state. And modernizing a grid isn’t that simple; it’s not like swapping out incandescent bulbs for LEDs.
To accomplish the upgrade, the state’s Public Service Commission has asked four companies, including National Grid, to submit proposals, and this process, which is embedded with all sorts of checks and balances, including public hearings, has thrown the region into disarray. More than 80 municipalities in 18 counties may be affected, including 24 in the Hudson River Valley. Real estate brokers say that some would-be buyers are walking away from deals, frightened off by the bright yellow “No Monster Power Lines” signs that dot the country roads, and by the uncertainty about how the plans will unfold, and where and in what form the upgrades will occur.
Town supervisors like William Gallagher, in Milan, worry about plummeting land values, and how that will affect the tax base. Some property owners, like Ms. Tranchita, worry about the health risks of higher-voltage lines (although the E.P.A. has said the science on those risks is still inconclusive). Businesses like the Omega Institute, an educational retreat in Rhinebeck, have canceled plans for expansion until the details are clear. And in Greenport, the view shed of historic Olana, home of Frederic Edwin Church, the Hudson River School painter, is threatened.
Will Yandik, 36, runs his family’s farm in Livingston with his brother and mother, selling fresh produce, pies and jams to tourists and locals who flock to his farm stand on Route 82. He , said he was poised to restore the 1850s farmhouse that sags atmospherically nearby, but he doesn’t want to risk the investment until he knows exactly what is going to happen to the 1930s-era transmission lines that run through his property. How the landscape looks, he said, “is one of the ways we monetize it. We’re in the tourist business as much as anything.”
In an initial round of proposals, each company that was invited to bid by the Public Service Commission, or P.S.C., submitted different routes for new transmission lines: while one was within the existing corridor, the rest were all over the place, raising the threat of eminent domain. In the wake of public outrage, and nodding to the sentiment expressed in a promise by Mr. Cuomo in his State of the State address in January that future transmission projects (though not this one) would be expedited if they stayed within existing easements, the P.S.C. has encouraged its bidders to revise their proposals to stay within the right of way the current lines now traverse.
But while the course correction is heartening, said Ned Sullivan, president of Scenic Hudson, “until the Public Service Commission definitively requires any new transmission lines to stay within the footprint of existing utility structures and underground power lines wherever feasible, a dark cloud and real economic harm will continue to hang over the Hudson Valley.”
Scenic Hudson is one of many groups, including the Olana Foundation, the Preservation League of New York State and a slew of new grass-roots organizations, that have formed a coalition in response to the plans. They note the good intentions behind the governor’s initiative to relieve congestion between upstate power plants and wind generation and downstate customers, and his vow to close Indian Point, the nuclear plant in Buchanan, N.Y. But some question the need for the upgrade altogether and express concern that the upgrade benefits only “downstaters.” And they are challenging the P.S.C. to find innovative ways to deliver power, including burying the power lines.
Recently, Mr. Sullivan and others met with representatives from National Grid, who gave them a preview of the company’s reworked proposal. “The good news is they stayed within the corridor, and eminent domain is off the table,” Mr. Sullivan said. “But they were still looking at towers that were going to be 40 feet higher than the existing ones.”
At 130 feet, that’s 50 feet taller than the tallest tree, said Greg Quinn, a horticulturist and author with a 145-acre black currant farm in Clinton, N.Y. Many of the towers, he said, “will have flashing lights and be alongside the ones that are there. Wires on a pole is what they did 75 years ago. We need to investigate new technologies, including underground.”
The governor’s office declined to comment, but Patrick Stella, a spokesman for National Grid, acknowledged that the process to date has been atypical, as usually only one company is invited to apply for an energy project. But “what you’re seeing is a transparent process,” he said. “We are addressing issues as best we can as they are brought to our attention. Now we are looking at structural heights of the transmission lines. We are looking to reduce those as we move forward in the process, and we’re hopeful that we can do so. This is a long process designed to gain input from stakeholders, the customers.”
As James Denn, public affairs officer at the P.S.C., said, “The commission is keenly interested in receiving public comment and input.”
But buried power lines are more expensive, and the problems that occur on them are harder to find, said Daniel Esty, a professor of law and environmental policy at Yale, who encountered many of the same difficult trade-offs in his role as the former commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. But he also pointed out that buried lines may be more resilient during severe storms. He described a project in Fairfield, Conn., and plans for another in northern New Hampshire where “a compromise has been struck where some transmission has been underground at the most aesthetically sensitive places,” he said.
“Let’s be very clear,” he said. “The grid needs to be upgraded and you need that north-south route to do some very important things, such as bringing in wind power from upstate. Also, over time there is the likelihood of bringing hydropower from Canada, which is cleaner than burning fossil fuels. And Indian Point needs to close. But it has to be done in a way that’s sensitive to the interests of the communities it impacts, notably the tourism, agriculture and aesthetics of the Hudson River Valley. If the process doesn’t bend to those, you could end up with a bad outcome.”
When Pamela Kline and her husband, Tom, bought their 18th-century Dutch farmhouse 25 years ago, it had no heat, plumbing or electricity. But Mr. Kline was intent on saving it, Ms. Kline said, although as she told him at the time, “It would be cheaper if you had an affair.”
Now meticulously restored, it sits across Route 82 from Mr. Yandik’s Green Acres Farm on 70 acres of what used to be apple country. One transmission line proposal would take the driveway, the old orchard and part of the woods. And so a broker has told Ms. Kline, 67, who has lived mostly alone here since her husband’s death seven years ago, that she would likely be unable to sell her property. (Last year, Conor Murphy, a restoration carpenter and Ms. Kline’s son-in-law, bunked with her while he worked on an exquisite round Shaker cow barn for Abby Rockefeller’s Livingston farm; it, too, is bisected by power lines and threatened by the expansion.)
Ms. Kline, a textile designer and the founder of Traditions, a fine-linen bedding company, also founded Farmers and Families for Livingston, one of the local groups opposing the upgrade plans. Preternaturally organized, she was galvanized by a letter she received in October from National Grid, alerting her, “as an abutting neighbor,” to the transmission project. When she called Mr. Yandik, who is a member of Livingston’s town council, he and his colleagues said they had no idea what the project was about.
“Three hundred and fifty people showed up at our first meeting, which we held in the town garage among the snow plows because the town hall was too small,” Ms. Kline said. “Including legislators, local TV stations and the P.S.C. It’s been like a rocket ever since.”
Livingston and its neighbor, Claverack, as well as other towns, passed resolutions opposing the plans, as did the Columbia County board of supervisors.
It appears there is nothing like a power project to unite a community.
Ms. Kline’s group has applied for a grant from the Preservation League of New York for a historic resource survey to identify historic properties in Livingston, which may keep them from being affected. Jim Joseph, a Manhattan architect, who has spent 10 years restoring an elegant Greek Revival house here with his partner, Scott Frankel, a composer, has cataloged nine Livingston properties already on the National Historic Register within a three-mile radius of the existing lines; three miles is what the State Historic Preservation Office has designated as a buffer zone. Many other properties, including Ms. Kline’s, are “on a pending list for nomination,” she said. (Mr. Joseph has recorded 16 more in and around the City of Hudson, she added.)
As the process moves forward, said Mr. Maserjian, the Transco spokesman, the proposals “will include much more detail as to what the proposed projects would entail, including agricultural studies, environmental impacts and a study of the historic sites along the route. Following the Part B submission, there will be many additional opportunities for formal public participation. We are still at the very beginning stages.”
There is some great coverage in local press and on WAMC today about our meeting. Here are the links:
For Immediate Release
January 23, 2014
Contact: Ian Solomon
CLAVERACK, NEW YORK
State and federal legislators show support for power line meeting
State Senator Kathleen Marchione and Assemblywoman Didi Barrett will be among those to speak at a community meeting this coming Saturday in Churchtown NY. US Congressman Chris Gibson will also be sending a representative to read a letter of support for those involved in the effort. The meeting concerns the taking of homes and farmland by eminent domain as utility companies propose alternating current upgrades to existing high voltage power lines running through Columbia and Dutchess Counties. It will be held on Saturday, January 25 at 11am in the main meeting room at the Churchtown Firehouse in Churchtown NY.
Farmers and Families for Claverack is a group of citizens opposed to the taking of homes and farmland by eminent domain as utility companies propose alternating current upgrades to existing high voltage power lines running through Claverack. The group's leader, Ian Solomon, stated, "we have potentially a long fight ahead of us, but we’re encouraged to know we have the support of our political leaders from the local all the way up to the federal level. We have seen citizens’ groups and public officials banding together up and down the Hudson Valley, across party lines, to help with this important property rights and environmental issue, and it is already starting to bear fruit. We will continue to educate the public and keep up the fight until we feel our communities’ concerns have been fully addressed."
In addition to Marchione and Barrett, and Gibson’s spokesperson, other speakers will include Claverack Supervisor Clifford Weigelt, Milan NY Town Board member Marion Mathison, Livingston Town Board member Will Yandik, environmental advocacy attorney Hayley Carlock, as well as Solomon and several Claverack residents. There will be a Q&A session at the conclusion of the meeting and attendees will have a chance to submit comments to the Public Service Commission. For more information, contact Ian Solomon at 518-209-6572.