Northern Pass wants to build a build a 180-mile power line corridor through 44 Granite State Communities from as far North as Pittsburg down to Deerfield.
House Bill 648, “An act relative to eminent domain petitions by public utilities” brought 250 supporters, roughly 170 of which are property owners located on the proposed or alternative route of the project. According to the Bill’s analysis section, the bill seeks to, “Prohibit public utilities from petitioning for permission to take private land or property rights for the construction or operation of a private large scale transmission line.” The bill drew overwhelming support by those who fear their land might be taken from them or rendered worthless.
Such fears are not without precedent. This fight is not a new fight. This very situation played out in Minnesota in the early 1970’s where farmers waged a fight against big power companies taking farmland by eminent domain. The farmers ultimately lost this fight. This account is detailed in the book Powerline: the first battle of America’s energy war, written by the late Senator Paul D. Wellstone and Barry M. Casper (Forward in 2003 by lefty Senator Tom Harkin). Aside from the book being written by a couple of liberal progressives, the book is otherwise instructive in the plight of these farmers against Big Power.
Arguments against the project range from blighting the landscape and disparately affecting the tourism industry to devaluation of land have been leveled. those are all reasonable. But there is one component given very little attention in the discussion here.
Big Power will nearly always make an attractive financial offer to you for a utility easement over your land. But what few really comprehend what happens after such an easement is given by a landowner. Read the account of a Fond-du-Lac Wisconsin Farmer that granted a power company a lease to install a wind turbine on his farm land.
I have invested some time and (renewable) energy arguing against federal subsidies and hand outs to prop up businesses that make environmentalists and their democrat sugar daddies happy. My primary objective with "green" energy projects has not been the business itself or even the goal, but the way in which the state and federal government uses our money to pick winners and losers or to incentivise things.
Democrats continue to insist that they created jobs. To do this they extracted trillions from our economic future in an effort to create jobs that did not yet exist–that perhaps were not needed yet. Looking at similar exercises, cash for clunkers–which moved car sales forward a few months but has since resulted in a collapse in the market; the home mortgage bail outs, supports, credits, and the "home affordable" programs which improved home sales briefly but which have since collapsed (also to historic lows); and then there’s the stimulus, several public sector employee bailouts, bank lending infusions, small business bills, and everything in between including health care reform–many trillions spent, all made with claims that they would create, save, or incentivize job creation.
I haven’t written a post about energy for almost a week so I’ll keep this one short.