"This energy bill will help ensure that consumers receive electricity over dependable modern infrastructure. To keep local disputes from causing national problems, the bill gives federal officials the authority to select sites for new power lines. We have a modern interstate grid for our phone line and our highways. With this bill, America can start building a modern 21st century electricity grid, as well." - President George W. Bush, signing the Energy Policy Act, August 8, 2005.
"I haven't slept in five weeks over this. I just don't know what is going to happen. If they put those wires here, they will destroy this property". - Francine Schmitt, Richland Township resident, 2007.
Do you remember the blackout in August, 2003? It was the largest such outage in history, affecting 50 million people in the U.S. and Canada. Financial losses were estimated at $6 billion. And the inability of any power company, or government agency, to control it highlighted the lack of standards, and incompatibility, of our vast network of electrical grids. Two years later, almost to the day, the Electricity Reliability Act became law as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
The Energy Policy Act (EPAct) was a massive, sweeping revision of virtually every facet of our energy production and use: 1700 pages, providing tax breaks and federal subsidies (mostly for fossil fuels), appliance efficiency standards, and de-/re-regulation for a range of technologies. It has been praised as a major step toward making electricity more available and reliable, and criticized as a $14.5 billion dollar giveaway to large utilities and Texas oil companies. And despite addressing a spectrum of specific needs, it does not attempt to coordinate them into a long-needed national energy policy. It does not even pretend to reduce our oil consumption, and significant environmental benefits were stripped in committee.
For most of us, the best-known provision is the extension of daylight savings time. But for Francine Schmitt, and her neighbors on Cherry Road, the non-descript words "Title 12B - Transmission Infrastructure Modernization" are a personal horror story. That section of the bill gives the federal government authority to condemn land for the placement of transmission lines in "national interest electric transmission corridors" designated by the Department of Energy, effectively overruling local and state control. These aren't "corridors" like in school hallways. Think half of a state.
To make matters worse, it greatly restricts the ability of those affected to challenge projects through lawsuits. Utility companies looking to build power lines in areas targeted by the Feds, like eastern Pennsylvania, need only apply to the DOE for the proper designation. Once granted, the companies can then condemn the land they need without regard to local or state laws. This authority has been used by Uncle Sam for gas pipelines for over 50 years, but is now available for electric transmission as well.
Township supervisors, county commissioners, even state senators will be powerless. Schmitt, who owns 19 acres of wildlife-filled woods, is fearful because PPL Corp. plans to take two-and-a-half acres to construct an 85-foot steel tower that will carry a 138,000-volt power line through her backyard, and across the adjacent five-acre lake. While the project has not (yet) been designated for federal condemnation, it could happen if the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission issues a ruling that PPL doesn't like.
A federal study identified the eastern Pennsylvania power grid as one of the most risky and congested, and projected that it could begin overloading in a decade without major improvements. These start with the construction of giant interstate transmission lines to "balance" the system, allowing cheaper power from rural areas to be quickly and safely diverted to population areas like Philadelphia and New York.
Of course, this would mean cutting wide swaths through hundreds of miles of forests, wetlands - and backyards. And while the utility companies will hopefully be mindful of environmental concerns, and sympathetic to landowners' feelings, the fact is that the 2005 law makes PPL, and its brethren, the proverbial 400-pound gorillas. States have only one year in which to act on any proposed electric transmission line. When necessary, the Feds can condemn land virtually unchallenged. And delay-tactic lawsuits are severely limited.
Companies like PPL may toy with residents, but they know that in the end they will get what they want. Even if Schmitt, and Richland, are somehow successful in convincing PPL to spare her wildlife preserve by changing part of the planned six-mile route (as has happened once already), someone - lots of someones - will be affected. There are alternatives, such as along the railroad tracks or Route 309, but they are far more expensive, and come with their own safety issues.
Richland supervisors have taken up Schmitt's cause, authorizing the township solicitor to examine any possible action, but the chances of a local municipality successfully intervening are slim-to-none under the EPAct. Schmitt's best hope is down in Washington, D.C., where a subcommittee of the House Oversight and Reform Committee held hearings on the land condemnation issue in April.
The parade of politicians outraged by the potential gestapo-like powers in the legislation showed that the Bush Administration-backed provision has few friends in the new Democrat-controlled Congress. "This isn't about blackouts," said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif. "It's about ensuring adequate protection for cultural, historic and environmental values and making sure private property rights are protected against needless abuse."
There are proposed bills that would repeal the controversial law, but they may come too late for Francine Schmitt, and the wildlife in her backyard. And the fact remains that we do need the upgraded power grid, and new transmission lines, to better insure our self-imposed total dependence on 24/7 electricity. No matter how we wave the environmental banner, or give lip service to the plight of those in the path of the bulldozer, few among us are willing to accept even the inconvenience, let alone the possible dire consequences, of another 2003 blackout.