FYI: Northern Pass High Voltage Transmission Project

Jazzbo said:

I stand corrected. I had no source except an educated guess that 1000 MW HVDC line is major power line and would have some environmental impact. I've since done online research and learned most of same things you've learned. ABB seems to be the dominant cable supplier and source of info on the subject. I can see HVDC is one piece of new and upcoming trend in so-called Smart Grid. ABB HVDC Light is technology of choice for new projects to move bulk power all over the world.

Click to expand...

DC does have advantages for long-distance lines and interconnections between separate grids.

Since it is only 3' underground would be highly susceptible to sabotage by our enemies.

Click to expand...

Above-ground lines would be even more susceptible to sabotage. Many such attacks have already occurred...

Doug

http://nhpr.org/post/northern-pass-official-full-burial-line-would-make-project-uneconomical

The public hearings aren't going well for Eversource, many of the more strident opponents are now in areas of proposed burial of the line, they haven't gone away. Eversource has a significant creditability issue in that previously they said they couldn't bury the line and then came back with the current proposal with some burial in high visibility areas. Barring some significant political back room maneuvering, it looks like bury it or give up.

I ran into this link that has a lot of good info and photos on how a similar transmission line would be installed

https://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/Files/20041026155240-Donahue, TransÉnergy.pdf

Next Tuesday Sep 15 9 AM in Concord:

SITE EVALUATION COMMITTEE – RULEMAKING UPDATE

NHWindWatch and Wind Action Group have continued to participate in the SEC Rulemaking. We submitted this letter in advance of last week’s SEC Committee deliberation meeting. The Rulemaking effort is extremely important since these will be the Rules (laws) that must be followed to site any large scale energy project in NH.

The Site Evaluation Committee will hold the final PUBLIC HEARING on Tuesday, September 15th at 9AM at the Public Utilities Commission to allow the ‘Public’ an opportunity to provide feedback on the recently published draft Rules (attached). We need to continue to stand our ground and be very well represented, knowing the wind lawyers and their lobbyists will be there in force to protect their interests.

The SEC Committee has made substantive progress although there is still work to be done before finalizing the Rules. Please contact me if you can be available to attend and/or participate in this very important Public Hearing on September 15th.

As provided in a prior communication, SEC Rulemaking Comments submitted by NHWindWatch and Windaction.org can be viewed by clicking this link If you would like to see the full list of comments submitted, they are available on the SEC Website at this link: http://www.nhsec.nh.gov/projects/2014-04/index.htm

The SEC Committee has a deadline of October 1st to file the new Rules with the Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules (JLCAR) for their review and public hearing/comment period. Once finalized by JLCAR (by November 1st), these will become the new SEC Rules pursuant to the SEC Statute (RSA 162-H).

Latest move by the major groups opposing the project. This is the first time I have seen AMC step up substantially since the proposed changes to the preferred route. I am glad that they didn't elect to back down when they got the burial in the Whites (maybe they actually remembered that Northern NH actually continues on North of Route 2).

http://www.unionleader.com/Dept._of_Energy_asked_to_re-open_Northern_Pass_environmental_review__

I think its a valid effort as many folks don't realize how comments are received by federal agencies are handled. "I don't like or want Northern Pass" comments are basically ignored. Even "I like alternative XX" are not really processed. What really makes a difference are germane comments that are specific, "I object to the alignment XX as it impacts the following specific resources" or I feel that the EIS did not address XX concerns about particular items ". Now that the base alignment has changed substantially with the tower type and the burial option on the table, it is difficult to make specific objections to the EIS to address what is now a blend of several alternatives.

A major example is ,should the burial be routed along the Franconia Parkway versus the state roads to the west of Kinsman ridge with an eventual crossing via the high way through Kinsman Notch? I expect that the parkway corridor where it necks down to 2 lanes near Lafayette place is inadequate for burial and therefore the road right of way may need to be widened. Given the years of highway planning and compromises made to build the parkway, I expect that widening the shoulder is going to be a difficult task and will substantially impact traffic through this area. On the other hand as Jazzbo and others pointed out, adding shoulders to rural highways in Easton to contain the buried cable will impact the views along these roads substantially and could directly impact some structures that are built close to the sidelines of roads (typically in village sections). Therefore I could see people wanting significant expansion of the potential impacts of each option being discussed in the revised EIS

I expect at the least, this is another point where the groups opposing have a potential opening for litigation to delay the project.

According to the Union Leader, the entire NH congressional delegation has now come out in support of delaying the planned DOE meetings next month to allow for review of the new "preferred route" as requested by AMC and others:


The Appalachian Mountain Club, Audubon Society of New Hampshire, Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests, Responsible Energy Action and the Nature Conservancy of New Hampshire submitted their request to the DOE on Sept. 15. They want the DOE to postpone four public hearings set for October and lift the deadline for submitting comment on the draft environmental impact statement to allow time for additional study. U.S. Sen. Kelly Ayotte informally endorsed that idea immediately, and on Friday the state’s other senator and two representatives in Congress joined in the appeal. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, along with Reps. Ann McLane Kuster and Frank Guinta, joined Ayotte in formally calling on the DOE to add a supplement to the draft environmental impact statement analyzing the newest “preferred route.” More: http://www.unionleader.com/NH_delegation_asks_for_review_of_Northern_Pass_path_

Eversource of course wants no delay. On other forums some are stating a delay for Eversource is very bad b/c if the Champlain route is built first, support from Hydro Quebec and investors may diminish. I am unsure if that is really true.

Hydro Quebec has been lobbying behind the scenes and in public to get the state of Massachusetts to reclassifiy their ponded storage hydro as "green" renewable power. Previously it did not count as renewable due to the environmental degradation associated with the project in the project area. This effort appears to have been successful as the governor is actively lobbying for the reclassification. If that occurs, the state of Connecticut most likely will also jump on the bandwagon and the capacity from both transmission projects will probably be in demand. I expect what it really comes down to is the Eversource management have staked their reputation on building a low cost project quickly to their management and a buried project will be neither. Of course had they originally proposed a buried project they would probably be digging this year. Given the price difference, Eversource can afford to write a lot of checks for TV ads but what really hurts them is delay of the project.

The Champlain Express project used a different approach, they designed the project to minimize local and state objections and offered up a lot of cash to the state up front. They have committed 500 million to Lake Champlain environmental projects administered by a third party. Eversource eventually offered 200 million of somewhat nebulous funding for projects to be identified at a later date and administered by political cronies of Eversource.

Another delay for NP. It will be interesting that Eversource still plans to apply the state SEC committee for a permit prior to the resolution of the DOE Permit.

http://nhpr.org/post/feds-cancel-northern-pass-hearings-say-more-study-now-needed

Here is the full statement from DOE. No formal announcement from Eversource yet that I can see--although they must have expected this coming after the congressional delegation requested it.
Edited to add: Eversource must be hating NH right now since the PUC also just recommended that sale of the company's generation assets be delayed 5 years...going against the company's, governor's and legislature's wishes.

Sept. 24, 2015

Supplement to Draft EIS, Extension of Public Comment Period, and Postponement of Public Hearings

On August 31, 2015, the DOE received an amendment to the July 31, 2013, Presidential permit application for the Northern Pass Transmission Line Project proposed by Northern Pass, LLC which made changes to the proposed project.

The application amendment changed the proposed route by three miles, added two new connection pads of approximately one acre each and increased the amount of proposed buried transmission line from eight miles to sixty.

The Supplement to the Draft EIS will present an analysis of this new “Applicants Preferred Alternative.” This analysis will compare the new proposed route and configuration (above ground/underground) against the alternatives currently presented in the Draft EIS.

DOE invites public and agency comment on the Supplement to the Draft EIS and the Draft EIS. The Draft EIS is available in the “Project Library” section of this website (http://www.northernpasseis.us/library/draft-eis/). The Supplement to the Draft EIS will be posted on this website and distributed to the mailing list when completed.

The current public comment period to receive comments on the Draft EIS is extended to close December 31, 2015.

The public hearings scheduled for Tuesday October 6 in Concord, Wednesday October 7 in Whitefield and Thursday October 8 in Holderness are cancelled.

Public hearings to receive oral comments on the Draft EIS and the Supplement to the Draft EIS will be held prior to the close of the public comment period. Dates, times and locations of the public hearings will be announced.

Some other recent events is that two north country groups that had been the recipients of donations from the Eversource economic development funds voted to return the checks.

In one case a few weeks ago a local development group didn't want to give the impression that they supported NP. The other more recent occurrence was Ride The Wilds returning a check. The founder and chief supporter of Ride the Wilds had been negotiating a very large behind the scenes initial and ongoing donation from Eversource of cash land and buildings (left over from Eversource's land acquisition binge). The details of this behind the scenes negotiation was publicized and several land owners who allow RTW to cross their property informed RTW that that access would be withdraw, effectively fragmenting the RTW trail system. the large donation was effectively stopped in its tracks when it came to light to the clubs that are actually maintaining the system. A recent new release stated that the leadership of Ride the Wilds has been reorganized and one of their first decisions was to return a subsequent grant from Eversource to the club.

It will be interesting to see how much the supplement will impact the project.

Do note that the proposed NP partial burial route still has significant legal issues with respect to being able to use a ROW in Northern NH that is protected by conservation easement. Unless the state allows the utility to gain eminent domain, at a minimum the litigation over this section could drag the schedule out further. There are both regional and national groups that participated in the easement so any litigation will probably be high visibility. There is alternative route using I89 and I93 that doesn't have this issue.

Divide and conquer continues

http://www.newhampshirelakesandmoun...operty-tax-valuation-floor-to-selectmen-.html

Eversource management have recently stated at various public meetings that the revised partial burial scope and economic benefits "are all there is" , any additional costs over and above the current proposal would alter the economics making the project unfeasible. Of course this is from the same group that stated the project wouldn't fly if any of it had to be buried so the credibility is questionable.

It all comes down to brinkmanship, The proposed location in Dummer is predominately in industrial forestland already chopped up by the Millsfield windfarm infrastructure. The population is clustered along the Androscoggin river to the east and there is a intervening ridgeline so the visual impact is low to non existent to the majority of the town. The population and tax base is low so the potential tax revenue is significant, thus Eversource has to raise cancelation as a way of getting Dummer on the bandwagon. Its easy to be against a project when there are no direct benefits gained or lost but when the decision can lead to a long term drop in yearly taxes with minimal impact its a lot harder. Like the prior "land wars" some local folks cashed out and some stuck to their principles and I expect that divide is going to be remembered for years. Like what has happened around wind turbine projects, the town that gets the taxes overwhelmingly supports the project while the towns with the impacted viewsheds get nothing.

Eversource is still telling Wall Street that the project will occur and ultimately the decision will be made at high level in the company, every stretch of overhead line in theory drops the ultimate cost of the project, although due to SPNHFs actions in combination with existing conservation lands, the current route in Coos country far less than the shortest distance between two points and arguably using existing road right of ways would substantially reduce the length. One point that many have missed is that Eversource has applied for a permit to potentially build a converter substation in Dummer to allow power to be supplied to the new NP line. This in theory would support a very large wind farm proposed a few years ago north of RT 26. This farm was larger than the current Millsfield wind farm.

The other major driver is potential carbon legislation and related renewable power mandates in southern New England. The governor in Mass has indicated he wants clean Canadian Hydro and the governor of CT also has stated that he wants it also to compete with far higher priced local renewable generation. If those states elect to accept HQ power as green, one 1000 MW transmission line will not have enough capacity to meet the overall demand and I expect both the VT project and NP are going to be needed. Northeast Utilities knows this and that factors into their ultimate decision.

peakbagger said:

One point that many have missed is that Eversource has applied for a permit to potentially build a converter substation in Dummer to allow power to be supplied to the new NP line. This in theory would support a very large wind farm proposed a few years ago north of RT 26. This farm was larger than the current Millsfield wind farm. .

Click to expand...

I'm wondering if this information exists within the current filing somewhere or was just mentioned as a possibility at the Dummer meeting or some other forum? I don't think people realize that for the Dixville and Dartmouth College Grant region, the impact of this wind installation will DWARF the Northern Pass footprint.

Based on the placement of the test towers, the turbines would be built on or immediately adjacent to the 3K peaks of Blue Ridge, Crystal, and Tucker and also highly visible from Rice and Cave. For those who enjoy ATV activities, it would substantially change the feel of Wild the Wilds with much of the current trail in the Swift Diamond drainage (major portions of the Metallak and Umbagog ATV trails) impacted by roads or towers.

I'm surprised this hasn't seen more press.

The only reference I had seen to this proposed substation was in a second ISO New England Filing for the lower wattage line required if they buried NP . I haven't looked at the ISO queue lately to see if it has been amended.

Having the possibility of a way to use NP to export NH wind power was a "red herring" in my estimation, possibly to get NP a way of getting eminent domain rights back? Every bit of wind power on the line cuts back on HQs capacity to sell power so I don't think they would be very interested in having a competitor to their conduit to southern New England. Eversource had proposed an undefined 200 million dollar upgrade to the Coos grid to increase its export capability as part of the revised proposal. Another red herring IMHO in that this upgrade is needed no matter what happens as the current generation in the area exceeds the capacity of the current loop.

ATV folks seem to tolerate windmills and roads a bit more then hikers as ATVs need the right of ways. I agree that that proposed windfarm north of Rt 26 would really scar up a lot more of ridgeline and in general be far more impact to the area than NP.

Regarding the interconnect for a potential wind power install north of RT 26, I always assumed that this interconnect (and/or the Coos Loop upgrade) were a quid pro quo for Wagner/Bayroot leasing the land in Dix's and Dixville to NP.
I am not knowledgeable enough to know how much capacity might need to be reserved on the line for this wind install, but could imagine a situation where the wind power developer can afford to pay HQ a premium to use the line. Certainly they probably don't need to reserve the full 100MW of the proposed wind install...just look at how often the Phillips Brook turbines are sitting idle due to lack of capacity on the Coos Loop. Oh wait, we can't see how much power Phillips Brook is contributing b/c that information is proprietary.

The people of NH should be asking for much more disclosure on the related implications of NP. As pointed out above, if they want to take the ($200 million) bribe, they should at least understand all that comes with it--and as pointed out above, should realize other states are getting a lot more cash for participating in similar projects.

Another interesting development this morning:

Sierra Club asks landowners for easement documents in bid to block Northern Pass

By DAVE SOLOMON
New Hampshire Union Leader

CONCORD — The New Hampshire chapter of the Sierra Club has issued an appeal for all property owners along the Northern Pass route who have granted easements to PSNH (or inherited easements when they bought their property), asking them to share their easement documents with the environmental group’s attorneys.

They are preparing a case that the easements were granted for the exclusive use of PSNH transmission and distribution lines, and are not transferable to a transmission line that will service Hydro-Quebec, as proposed by Northern Pass developers.

“Ratepayers paid for these easements, and we would dispute the assumption from Eversource that they can rent off those easements to Hydro-Quebec for a profit,” said Catherine Corkery, director of the New Hampshire chapter.

More: http://www.unionleader.com/Sierra-C...ement-documents-in-bid-to-block-Northern-Pass

And now the second front begins before the SEC

http://www.unionleader.com/Northern-Pass-files-for-approval-with-state-regulators

The SEC in the past has been regarded as a rubber stamp for developers. Although some private individuals try to be intervenors , the process is set up by and for lawyers. SPNHF and other organizers have been building up war chests though donations to intervene but for whatever they bring to the table, Eversource has effectively unlimited resources. A lot less expensive to spend a lot of money on lawyers instead of ended up with an increased project budget due to forced changes (I.E. more burial).

In some ways this article left me with more questions than answers. I clearly don't understand all the inside baseball going on. I'd be interested in others' thoughts, especially whether the law really allows the SEC to conduct a technical evaluation (presumably at great expense to the taxpayers of NH) when the application is incomplete.

State officials: Northern Pass has not documented needed property rights --Union Leader November 17, 2105
CONCORD — State environmental officials say the application filed by Northern Pass with the state Site Evaluation Committee is incomplete because the developers can’t prove they have the necessary property rights for the project.

http://www.unionleader.com/State-officials-Northern-Pass-has-not-documented-needed-property-rights

Interesting news on Northern Pass SEC application

http://www.unionleader.com/State-officials-Northern-Pass-has-not-documented-needed-property-rights

Unless Eversource gets eminent domain rights, the lack of property rights will delay the project for quite awhile as I expect both sides will appeal as far as they can go. I looks like the opposition may be shifting from a compromise of allowing the project completely buried to going to get it canceled. I expect that even if the Lake Champlain line through VT gets built, recent moves in mass to get Quebec to supply power to replace the Pilgram and Vermont Yankee nuclear plants will mean that NP will still be needed.

Preemptive strike by SPNHF

http://www.colebrookchronicle.com/Nov202015.pdf