Click here to view La Crosse Area Weather
Home > News > Story
 Advertisement 

Published - Sunday, September 07, 2008

POST COMMENT | READ COMMENTS (21 comment(s))

Proposed power line has generated lots of heated opposition


.
Supporters and opponents of a proposed upgrade to the region’s high-voltage transmission lines are debating the plan’s merits in Minnesota.

And Wisconsin is next.
Transmission lines like the high-voltage, 345-kilovolt line on the left side of this tower, are the big highways carrying electricity into and around Wisconsin, and American Transmission Co. is proposing to build several of them in Dane County. On the right side of this tower, pictured near Columbus along Highway 151, is a smaller 138-kilovolt transmission line.

The proposed 345-kilovolt lines, on towers as high as 150 feet placed every 1,000 feet, would run from the Twin Cities to Rochester, Minn., and then to substations in La Crosse or Holmen.

The CapX2020 project, estimated to cost $1.7 billion in 2007 dollars, is comprised of four power lines, including one that would cross the Mississippi River at one of three cities — Alma, Wis.; Winona, Minn.; or La Crescent, Minn.

Two additional 345-kilovolt lines — one from Fargo, N.D., to the Twin Cities and one from Brookings, S.D., to Monticello, Minn., as well as a 230-kilovolt line from Bemidji, Minn., to Grand Rapids, Minn. — are included in the project, proposed by 11 utilities. Xcel Energy and Great River Energy are applying for approval to regulatory agencies on behalf of the 11.

But critics question the need for the massive lines and say the public hasn’t been properly informed about the proposal.

The Tribune today looks at the components of the project, which could be in operation by 2013 or 2014, and talked both to proponents and opponents.

Growing demand

Tim Carlsgaard, who works for the 11 utilities as communications and public affairs manager for CapX2020, said energy use across the region continues to grow, prompting the push to deliver reliable, affordable energy. In Minnesota alone, he said, energy use has doubled since 1980.

The upgraded lines would meet future needs, he said, and revamp a transmission system that hasn’t had a major overhaul since the 1970s.

Carlsgaard said the utilities aren’t going to build more lines than necessary.

“I think we have a very strong case,” Carlsgaard said.

On the other side

Paula Maccabee, a St. Paul, Minn., attorney representing the Citizen’s Energy Task Force in the Public Utilities Commission hearings in Minnesota, said the utilities have overstated the demand for the line coming to La Crosse.

“The utilities have been stacking the deck to make it look like this project is needed,” Maccabee said, “but once you get behind the data, you see how it’s not true.”

If the Twin Cities-Rochester-La Crosse line were not built, she said, power company officials have testified that enhancements to the current transmission lines would not be needed until 2026 or 2028 in Rochester.

“And that’s without studying the conservation aspects,” Maccabee said. “The benefits are not clear and certainly have been exaggerated, and the harms are unavoidable.”

Not so, said Carlsgaard. “We’re not going to scare people and say, ‘(Do this) by 2010 or 2015 or your lights are going to go off,’” he said. “That’s irresponsible. We’ve proven in everything we’ve put forward there’s a need for these lines.”

Another solution?

“If we go to more renewables, we don’t need this expensive high-voltage system,” Minnesota state Rep. Ken Tschumper, DFL-La Crescent, said during a forum he organized July 31 at La Crescent’s American Legion for those concerned with CapX2020.

“Renewable systems can feed into the grid as well,” he said.

It’s also the law, Tschumper said, as Minnesota passed a renewable energy standard in 2007 mandating 25 percent of all electricity used in the state be generated from renewable energy sources by 2025.

Renewables are a very important part of meeting future resource needs, Xcel spokesman Brian Elwood said, but the company still needs sufficient transmission lines in order to get the resources to the customers.

Eleven percent of Xcel’s electricity now is generated from renewable sources, Elwood said, and by 2025 Xcel expects 25 percent to 30 percent of its electricity will come from wind energy, along with other renewable resources such as biomass, hydropower, and burning garbage and wastewood.

The risks

Patrick Caffrey, president of Friends of Trempealeau Refuge, said he’s not debating the need for the project, just the location.

“We’re encouraging the utilities to choose routes that minimize the length of lines in the river valley,” Caffrey said.

Caffrey, former director of public works for the city of La Crosse, attended CapX2020’s open house in May at the Centerville Community Center.

The Mississippi River is a major flyway for migrating birds and bats, he said, and he’s concerned how wildlife will be affected by the lines spanning the waterway.

The proposed crossing also could jeopardize the area’s scenic corridor and harm tourism, he said.

“If they cross at Alma and follow it along the river valley to La Crosse or Holmen, that would be the worst option,” he said.

“When these lines are built, we go above and beyond how we protect the environment during the construction process,” Elwood said.

That includes working with the Department of Natural Resources in both states, as well as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which oversees the refuge.

Public health

“It’s clear that a power line causes harm,” Maccabee said. “What the World Health Organization says is they’re considering electromagnetic fields as a possible carcinogen. There’s a consistent association with EMFs and childhood leukemia.”

There isn’t enough laboratory evidence to classify EMFs as a definite carcinogen, she said, but research such as the BioInitiative Report shows reason for concern.

“There is substantial evidence, and at the very least it should cause people to be cautious,” she said.

But Carlsgaard, communications and public affairs manager for CapX2020, counters that the lines will be far enough removed from the public. Towers 150 feet high carrying 345-kilovolt lines are built with a 150-foot right of way, Carlsgaard said.

By law, they must use an existing crossing, and CapX2020 aims to keep them away from residential areas, he said.

“We have people working on health issues, following the debates and looking at the studies,” Carlsgaard said. “We’re very involved.”

Added Chuck Thompson, manager of siting and regulatory affairs at Dairyland Power Cooperative: “There has been a significant amount of research done over the last 25 years, and today there hasn’t been a correlation between electromagnetic fields and cancer.”

Skeptical of the skeptics

“If we’re going to meet the Wisconsin target of renewables, we’re going to need this line,” said Wisconsin Assembly Speaker Mike Huebsch, R-West Salem. “We need the wind power that Minnesota has to offer.”

The Wisconsin target is 25 percent renewable energy by 2015, Huebsch said. That makes transmission lines — such as the one proposed for the La Crosse area — necessary, he said.

“It’s a key component to our reaching our renewable energy portfolio and targets in the years to come,” he said.

Pat Morrison, who moved to La Crescent in 2005 after living outside Sacramento, Calif., for more than 20 years, said she’s lived through “phenomenal” expansion on the coast.

“With that growth, they needed more water, they needed more electricity — all of that,” Morrison said.

Morrison experienced power brownouts, blackouts and mandated times for doing things such as washing clothes, she said.

She doesn’t oppose the project at all, she said, and doesn’t see the reason for all the uproar.

“I think it will be done very carefully. They have to in this day and age,” she said.

Approval process in Minnesota

Establishing such large transmissions lines in Minnesota is a two-step process, Thompson said.

“One is to go through a hearing process on the need,” he said. “The second, if they approve the project, then we come back and we’re talking just about routes.”

Notices went out in July 2007 to 72,000 Minnesota landowners and local officials, said Carlsgaard. In August 2007, 2,050 Wisconsin landowners were notified about the proposal.

The Minnesota Department of Commerce then held 10 public meetings in December 2007, he said.

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission convened an evidentiary hearing in July that will conclude this month.

In addition, more than 100 informational meetings were conducted in 2006 and 2007 for the media and public officials in South Dakota, North Dakota, Minnesota and Wisconsin.

By May 2008, 60 open houses and 36 routing work group meetings had been open to the public to attend, at Minnesota sites such as Winona, Wabasha, Alexandria, Marshall, Lakeville, Fergus Falls, Red Wing, Rochester and Cannon Falls, as well as La Crosse and Centerville in Wisconsin, Carlsgaard said.

“None of this is required by the Minnesota regulatory process,” Carlsgaard said. “And, we still have to go through the whole Wisconsin regulatory process.”

But opponents of the project still argue that not all the residents in areas along the corridor were properly informed.

Once the evidentiary hearing is through and public comments no longer are accepted, further meetings in Minnesota will focus on determining the route rather than determining need, opponents say.

Both sides of the debate strongly encourage Minnesota residents to submit written comments to Minnesota Administrative Law Judge Beverly Heydinger.

Public comments in Minnesota will be accepted until Sept. 26.

Wisconsin timeline

“The need and the routing are addressed in one process in Wisconsin,” said Xcel Energy project leader Tom Hillstrom, “and that’s called the certificate of public convenience and necessity.”

Hillstrom said CapX2020 likely will file an application for the certificate in early 2009. He expects the Wisconsin regulatory process of public meetings and hearings on the state certificate to take one to two years before the Public Service Commission rules on the application.

The Minnesota portion of the project would end either in the Winona or La Crescent areas. Crossing the Mississippi at Alma, Wis., or Winona, Minn., would mean continuing the lines to an expanded substation in Holmen or a new substation north of Holmen, Hillstrom said. A La Crescent crossing would lead to a substation in La Crosse.

“The earliest that a route could be approved by the two states is 2010,” Carlsgaard said.

What next?

Discussions already are under way between Xcel and American Transmission Co. for a 345-kilovolt line to run east to southeast out of La Crosse, Carlsgaard said.

That line would address energy needs in the 2023 to 2025 time frame, he said.

“There’s going to be more transmission lines. We’ve said that before,” Carlsgaard said. “These are not going to be the last of what we’re going to have to propose.”

La Crescent, Minn., resident Jeremy Chipps, a Citizen’s Energy Task Force member who has vocally questioned the need for new high-voltage lines, successfully brought about a resolution from the La Crescent City Council opposing the lines coming through the city.

“My initial thought when I first came upon this was, ‘Where would the line be going after it comes to La Crosse?’ ” Chipps asked.

The consumer cost

Xcel concedes that with a $1.7 billion price tag for all four lines, the CapX2020 project will affect Xcel customers’ rates. Just what those rates will be has not been made clear, said Paula Maccabee, attorney for the Citizens’ Energy Task Force.

“People have a right to have at least a ballpark estimate on how much this is going to cost,” Maccabee said.

Once the certificate of need has been approved, Xcel can start charging customers, said Tim Carlsgaard, communications and public affairs manager for CapX2020. The costs escalate as the project reaches what he called “the height of construction,” he said, “when we’re spending the most money.”

By 2013 to 2015, customers likely will pay an additional $2.25 per bill for the project, Carlsgaard said. He estimated the cost of the 345-kilovolt, double-circuit line from the Twin Cities to La Crosse at $389 million to $432 million in 2007 dollars.

The request Xcel made to the Wisconsin Public Service Commission in August for an overall 8.6 percent rate increase is separate from what would be needed for the CapX2020 project.

“It (the recent rate increase) includes costs associated with the King to Arpin (power) line from Stillwater, Minn., the main 345-kilovolt line stretching across Minnesota to Wisconsin,” Xcel spokesman Brian Elwood explained.

The power grid: It’s everywhere

According to the chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, about 200,000 miles of transmission lines now are woven across the United States, said Tim Carlsgaard, communications and public affairs manager for CapX2020.

The regional grid that serves the four proposed CapX2020 power lines is about 95,000 miles and includes 15 states, as well as Manitoba, Canada, he said.

The certificate of need filed by Xcel Energy and Great River Energy estimates the Twin Cities to La Crosse line would extend about 150 miles.

It likely would be a single-pole, double-circuit, 345-kilovolt line, said Carlsgaard.

While project critic Carol Overland claimed the lines will pave the way for construction of new coal plants, Xcel spokesman Brian Elwood said the opposite is true. No new coal plants are scheduled to be built, he said, because of this project.

“This is the first time this approach has been taken in building transmission lines. It’s truly unique,” Elwood said.

Overland sees the motive as a simple one: The utilities want wholesale power moving across the massive grid because, unlike retail power, it’s not regulated.

“They want these (power lines) ... so they can get the money,” Overland said.

That’s not true, said Jim Alders, Xcel’s director of regulatory administration. In fact, he said, there are two layers of regulations for wholesale transactions between utilities, and retail transactions between utilities and their customers.

“All power transactions are regulated,” said Alders. “Some are regulated by the federal government and some are regulated by the state.”

Those same state regulators control when a power plant is constructed, and where and what it will be manufacturing.

“State regulators are going to pick the fuel type,” Alders said. “Regardless of what type they pick, we need the transmission network.”

Carl Dombek, spokesman for the Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator — a nonprofit organization controlling transmission on the high-voltage grid — said many companies are taking a “wait-and-see” approach to proposing new coal plants.

With a significant potential for federal climate-change legislation in the near term, utilities are waiting for possible new restrictions.

Dombek, who said there’s definitely a need for more transmission based on more energy being consumed, said the CapX2020 lines are being proposed in such a way as to facilitate the use of renewables within the grid.
.




 Advertisement 
 Tell us what you think...

 Comments »

just the facts wrote on Sep 8, 2008 5:26 PM:

" Real World, what the hell are you taking my turn to task for. Boy, if thats rude to you , change your name. Those em facts buddy, and if you want more facts about how Meyer got his job, it aint pretty . He should be in jail. "

just the facts wrote on Sep 8, 2008 5:15 PM:

" Get on line and keep bringing the corrider closer.You will see that the lines from LaCrescent, cross the river, go over several houses on both french island and north Lax. There is a footnote that Lang drive may likely be expanded.IF current lines and towers are used, the power will affect a large amount of marshland, as well as lost marsh to an expanded Lang Drive. This is what the trib should be informing us about.Do your job, damn it! "

just the facts wrote on Sep 8, 2008 5:02 PM:

" The LAX Trib is late to this party, and suspect they wouldnt have covered at all except for upset readers. So much for striving to keep us informed. Pat Caffrey and others are right. What environmental damage will occur? You know the static which drowns out your A.M. radio when you pull up to stoplites, or drive in the country , where the lines are close to the road! What is this new stray high voltage doing to our habitat and us? "

The Real World wrote on Sep 7, 2008 8:59 PM:

" Ignorance is bliss,

Dude, you should get rid of your computer, it is sinful! "

Ignorance is bliss wrote on Sep 7, 2008 8:12 PM:

" Well? Duhhh, I don't know, but it seems to me that if all the morons in this country would use less electricity instead of more the demand would go down and the need would not be there, nor would the argument of the need. Our grid is so outdated, it's ridiculous. If everyone keeps building huge (un-necessary) homes, downsize to one TV, instead of 3,4 or 5 we all seem to have to have. Get rid of all the electronic thermometers, vcrs, dvds, clocks, cordless telephones, electric garage door openers, and most other luxeries that this way too fat country is too lazy to do without, and maybe we wouldn't need the extra power and we could slim back down. The only way this will happen is if no one can afford services. Oh yeah, air up your tires too. "

The Real World wrote on Sep 7, 2008 8:09 PM:

" Myturn..

Meyer was successfully bribed by Doyle, vote with me against a bill he was co author and I will get you a great job with twice the salary.

But you stepped way over the line on your rude comments. You should apologize. This is the first time I have found you to be wrong. "

tax justice wrote on Sep 7, 2008 6:50 PM:

" In June of 2007, Xcel asked for an ELECTRIC RATE INCREASE OF 14.2%. The electric rate increase was to raise $67.4 milion in revenue and $10 million of THAT was for continued upgrades for existing transmission lines. That 67.4 million was a MONTHLY INCREASE OF $10.25. The cost of the new transmission line is projected at $432 million. This is almost 6.4 times the cost and the cost per ratepayer is predicted to be $8 per month less. So where are the additional rate ratepayers? Especially since Xcel represents the great majority of ratepayers. And this is all in 2007 dollars, before steel went up, before gas went up, before labor went up. And folks we just got another request from Xcel in August for another 7.9% or $6.47 per month. None of that is towards this project. And you think gas is the only worry you have? "

tax justice wrote on Sep 7, 2008 5:46 PM:

" Americans are being asked to bail out Fannie Mae and Sallie Mae, we were forced to bail out Chrysler, the Savings and Loans Institutions, and yes even on nuclear and coal waste. Why? Because Americans/the Government were stupid enough to deregulate andor approve these decisions and not demand accountability. Xcel and Dairyland will not commit in a law of court because they do not know the cost. Consider for a moment that steel prices have increased 90% this year alone. How much is one 200ft steel girder going to cost? How much will the linet that connects the girder going to cost? This year? Next year? in 15 years? And who is being asked to pay for this incredible shot in the dark? Ratepayers. Need some examples, look at the next posting. "

tax justice wrote on Sep 7, 2008 5:25 PM:

" If those who "support" this project can tell us why these lines will be connected to Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky and not being lobbied for to create a profit, then they simply do not understand the bottom line of utilities, a profit. The very fact that Xcel and company cannot tell you how much this line is going to cost ratepayers, but wants State approval is the very criticism they level at government. While Xcel says that ratepayers are likely to pay $2.25 ()per month) they have not entered this into the official administrative hearings in St. Paul. Why not? Let's do the math. See next posting. "

Phil O'Bates wrote on Sep 7, 2008 3:52 PM:

" A few observations.

-Why is it assumed to be evil for a power company, or oil company for that matter, to make a profit?

-Dairyland Power Company is a Cooperative, so I believe they don't make a profit, but distribute excess money back to their members.

-According to some scientists, the Earth has gone through a couple of major extinctions from astroids, and yet recovered quite nicely. So when people say that putting up power lines or coal plants is destroying the Earth, it's doesn't ring very true.

-I agree with Random Annoying Bozo when he points out that people want their electricity and will whine when the wind and solar don't keep their fridges running. "

Mack wrote on Sep 7, 2008 3:44 PM:

" Nuclear power has too many negatives. It takes ten years to have a net gain to cover the cost of construction and mining. We still do not know what to do with the waste. Vernon county doesn't even want fly ash. Who will take the nuclear waste? We'll force it on somebody, no doubt. Every county in the nation has been profiled for by population, income and education and if you come up short in these categories, you'll get the waste. "

RanDomino wrote on Sep 7, 2008 3:37 PM:

" I'd like to see Huebsch explain how a 3 MW wind turbine is supposed to plug into a 345 kV line without wasting as much electricity as it produces.

Energy conservation using existing technology would save so much power that we could even decommission some coal plants, but you won't see Xcel or other electricity corporations seriously talking about that: They make their money from selling MORE electricity, not less!

And shame on those of who who have no problem destroying the planet as long as it means you're not inconvenienced. "

Myturn wrote on Sep 7, 2008 2:29 PM:

" Remember, our last two Madison senator/representatives retiring public servants from Lacrosse (Myer/Rude) now work in the electric utilities business. Myer on the WI PSC, and Rude directly for Dairlyland power. What a coincidence? "

neiowaarcher wrote on Sep 7, 2008 9:40 AM:

" Yep, RAB and IIB could not have said it better.

Cry enviromently outrage, and then complian about high prices and poor service. What a JOKE. Wake up people. If you want power, you had better start looking deeper that a couple of wind mills.

I say if they don't want lines to cross the landscape, well then plant a "NUKE" along the river somewhere close. Then well have close power and less power lines. "

Ignorance is bliss wrote on Sep 7, 2008 9:21 AM:

" I get such a kick out of the liberal, green, do nothing crybabies in our area. I'll put 10 - 1 odds that these same crybabies are the ones that have the most power consuming homes, ((You know, the big mansions with two - four people living in them) Three living rooms, 6 power hogging flat screens running, All that wasted space needing heated and cooled)). Yet they don't want anything ugly in their area. No wind! No incinerators! No coal! No nuke! No drill! Just gimme gimme gimme. If we would have started drilling when G.W.B. wanted to, we could be seeing the benifits already. Now we here it won't do no good for 10 years, so just keep doing nothing, except add air to your tires! What a joke we are to empower these idiots! Time to wake up! "

The Real World wrote on Sep 7, 2008 9:11 AM:

" random annoying bozo,

I'm glad there is someone out there who gets the big picture and uses facts rather than emotion. "

random annoying bozo wrote on Sep 7, 2008 8:34 AM:

" hmm, why not go with a truly 'green' energy source. nuclear. if we truly want plentiful, clean, and reliable electricity, its the only way to go. and to all the NIMBYs, BANANAs and NOPEs out there, don't come crying when there is no juice to power your flat screen, charge you cell phone or do any of the other things your 'green' lifestlye demands. we have the capacity to make all the electrical energy we will ever need in the country, but it's no good if there are no power lines to get it where's it's to be used. "

CarolOverland wrote on Sep 7, 2008 8:06 AM:

" Discover the purpose of CapX in Midwest ISO's "market benefits" study. For years, they've been organizing a spot market for electricity. CapX 2020 will facilitate that market through regional bulk power transfers. A primary goal is to displace natural gas with cheap coal. New coal plants waiting in the wings, like Big Stone II, need CapX 2020 transmission to deliver. Here's MISO's study, read Intro and Conclusions: www.nocapx2020.info/?p=312 CapX is the backbone of the plan, with three phases, total cost of $3 billion plus. Wisconsin's ATC is going forward with MISO market planning - it's all connected: www.atc10yearplan.com/A8.shtml Who benefits? Utilities -- it's about increased profit. Who pays? We will, ratepayers and landowners, to facilitate profits from transmission of coal generated electricity to points east of Minnesota. NoCapX 2020! "

amuller wrote on Sep 7, 2008 7:54 AM:

" I've been to a number of the meetings and hearings on this, and I think more attention should be given to the point Ms. Overland is making: These proposals seem to be driven by the applicant's desires to make money transmitting "bulk" coal power from the Dakotas eastward.

Also, with so many projects packed into one application, it is hard for any of them to get the full scrutiny they deserve. "

Mack wrote on Sep 7, 2008 7:46 AM:

" Huebsch is wrong. The line is designed to deliver coal generated power from the west from concentrated sources. A grid designed to deliver distributed wind generated electricty would look entirely different. Even worse than the line is the dirty coal plants to our west and the prevailing westerly winds that deposit the mercury and other heavy metals in our rivers and lakes. When is Mike Huebsch going to represent the people instead of his special interests? "

The Real World wrote on Sep 7, 2008 7:42 AM:

" It is just fine to be sure that this gets installed in the proper place. But if we are going to get our green power to an area where it is to be consumed we need this. It makes wind power not so green. "


PLEASE NOTE: Comments on stories that frequently update through the day disappear with each update.
The comments above are from readers. In no way do they represent the views of the La Crosse Tribune.

Click here to report offensive or inappropriate comments. Please identify the comment you're concerned about, the story to which the comment was attached, the date of the comment and the person who made the post.

 Post a comment (150 word limit) »

Log In - If you have already signed up with The LaCrosse Tribune, please sign in now!
Member ID:
*Password:
  Forgot Your Password?
 
Sign Up - To encourage intelligent and meaningful conversation, The LaCrosse Tribune requires all commenters to register before posting comments. It's quick, it's easy, and it's free! Just fill in the information below to get started!

**Your Member ID and password will be required to log in. Your comments will appear under your user name.

Do not use usernames or passwords from your financial accounts!

Note: Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required!

Create a Member ID:
*Choose a password:
*Re-enter password:
E-mail Address:
Year of Birth:
 

(children under 13 cannot register)

First Name:
Last Name:
Company:
Home Phone:
Business Phone:
Address:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
 

NEWSPAPER ADS

LACROSSE JOBS

TOP HOMES

HomeSeller
Top Homes



 
 
Dailies
La Crosse Tribune
Winona Daily News

Weeklies
Coulee News
Courier Life News
The Chronicle
Houston County News
Tomah Journal
Vernon Broadcaster
Westby Times

Regional
Inside Preps
My LIVE! Entertainment
Best of River Valley
Business Report
Healthy Living Today
Strictly Golf
River Valley Bike Trails
River Valley Blogs
River Valley Outdoors

Shoppers
Tri-County Foxxy

Marketplace
Newspaper Ads
Local Website Directory
7 Rivers Rentals
HomeSeller
Wheels Website
Outdoor Motors
Work For You

Portals
La Crosse NET
Winona NET

Classifieds
River Valley Classifieds

Links
Lee Enterprises

About Us | Classifieds | Contact Us | Terms of Use | F.A.Q. | Privacy Policy | Requests | Search | RSS | Videos | Advertiser Directory | Add to My Yahoo!
Copyright © 1997 - 2008 The La Crosse Tribune. All rights reserved.
Material from this site may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed. A Lee Enterprises subsidiary.