Power Price is Not Market-Based: Joe Anglin

Joe Anglin (Wildrose candidate in Rimbey-Rocky Mountain House-Sundre and a former transmission engineer) had an excellent letter in today’s Sherwood Park News about the problems with Alberta’s electricity market. Here is it:

 

“How’s that electric bill working for you now?

It’s difficult for most Albertans to decipher the complexities of Alberta’s deregulated electricity system, but it is not difficult to conclude that our so-called market-based electricity system is not working. One only needs to read the bottom line of last month’s electricity bill for confirmation.

Over the last couple of weeks, industry representatives provided testimony to Premier Alison Redford’s Transmission Review Committee hearings. The Alberta Electric Systems Operator (AESO) and other industry representatives praised our market-based system as a shining example of the success of deregulation. I have a question for these representatives: “What market-based system?”

The AESO prices electricity approximately every two hours for Alberta’s wholesale electricity market. Every two hours generators offer to sell their electricity based on market demand. This is how the price is set, and it is called the stacking order. The stacking order is a simple creation of the AESO, and it favours the generators and transmission line companies at the expense of the average consumer.

For example, when the AESO requires 8,000 megawatts (MW) to supply the market for the next two hours, hydroelectric power might offer to provide 4,000 MW of electricity to Alberta’s market for free. Coal generators might offer to sell 3,800 MW for $45 dollars a megawatt. The remaining 200 MW might be provided (bid) to the market by other suppliers for $450 a megawatt. This completes the total 8,000 MW required by the AESO to meet the expected demand.

AESO accepts hydro’s offer first, and then accepts coal’s offer and so on. This is called stacking.

How is this price passed along to the consumer? All the generation suppliers get paid the top rate of $450 a megawatt — regardless of what price they were willing to sell to the market. In this example, as long as demand remains close to the 8,000 MW level for the next two hours, consumers pay the full price.

If this wasn’t bad enough, when hydro and co-generated electricity in Alberta drive the wholesale price of electricity to $0MW (fee), the AESO interferes and resets the bidding.

Alberta’s electricity system is not a market-based system. It is a scam that guarantees the maximum price for the lowest cost electricity.”

RETA Executive Director Responds to Sherwood Park Independent

The Sherwood Park Independent ran an editorial last week criticizing RETA for hiring Garnett Genuis as our Executive Director. The editorial said that this amounted to a ‘marriage’ between RETA and Wildrose and was a ‘conflict of interest’ because RETA is a ‘lobbyist’. Because the Independent is not available online, we can’t post the original piece here. This week, the Independent published a response from our Executive Director:

 

“I always enjoy reading Jim’s views on different issues, but I do want to correct the record on some of the issues he addressed in last week’s editorial about me. Jim suggested that it was inappropriate for me, as the Wildrose Party candidate, to also work for RETA, an organization which opposes the Heartland Transmission Project.

Unless they are independently wealthy, most candidates seeking public office need to also be employed. Since my background is in politics and public affairs, it is quite natural that I would work for an advocacy organization like RETA at this stage before the election has even begun. If I am successful and become the MLA, I will obviously stop working for RETA at that point. I agree with Jim that an MLA must be the MLA for everyone, but there is nothing wrong with a candidate being employed with an advocacy organization before they have the power that comes with holding elected office.

I’ll also note that there is a big difference between public advocacy and lobbying. (I know because I use to work for the federal industry minister and was periodically contacted by lobbyists). RETA is a public advocacy organization that speaks on behalf of citizens and seeks to raise public awareness. There is no requirement for me to register as a lobbyist because I am not a lobbyist and never have been.

What’s actually going on here is that, as a resident of Sherwood Park, I feel passionately about the need to stop the overhead Heartland Line from going through. That is one of the key reasons why I decided to run for Wildrose in this election. When given the opportunity to join RETA’s team, I had another opportunity to advocate for the people of Sherwood Park on an issue that I feel passionately about. There is nothing inappropriate or unsavoury about advocating for the interests of members of this community whose concerns have been ignored by the government.”

 

One additional comment about the Sherwood Park Independent is worth making. Its publisher (Jim Ford) is a long time PC activist – this week’s edition of the paper also touts his extensive involved with the PC party. (“I have performed several decades of federal and provincial Progressive Conservative involvement”). Jim is a nice fellow, but he should acknowledge that his involvement with the PC party may be part of the reason why he opposes the work that RETA is doing.

Is More Democracy the Answer?

We’ve written before about the Northern Pass project debate in New Hampshire. Plans are in the works there to build transmission lines connecting Quebec and southern New Hampshire. The proposed lines would be about 180 miles long. Citizens in New Hampshire have raised many of the same concerns that we in Alberta have and have called for the lines to be buried.

We’ve noted in the past that Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has endorsed the idea of burying the line. Yesterday, the New Hampshire Senate voted 23-1 in favour of putting significant restrictions on the project. (The one vote against was from a Senator who thought that the guarantees provided by the New Hampshire constitution covered the issues in the legislation – he was not opposed to the proposals on merit.) The bill included protection of the rights of private property owners and the creation of a commission to develop policies for burying power lines. (This bill still needs to be passed in New Hampshire’s lower house and approved by the governor, although with margins that wide the legislature could easily overrule a veto by the governor).

This begs the question – why is the government in New Hampshire listening and the government in Alberta not listening? There are a lot of possible reasons, but it probably has a lot to do with the fact that the government in Alberta has not had to listen to the people for a very long time. We’ve had the same government for 40 years and no effective opposition until now. MLAs in the governing party are not able to represent their constituents if what those constituents want is different from what the government wants. Citizens are not able to recall their MLAs or initiate referenda. Because the democratic environment is much more dynamic in New Hampshire (relatively independent legislators listen to their constituents and are able to speak and vote based on those concerns), the Northern Pass Project is going to be affected by what the people want, in a way that the Heartland Transmission Line has not been up until now.

Perhaps one of the most important things we need to do in Alberta in the next election is demand real democracy. If Alberta had a political system where MLAs had to represent their constituents, the Heartland Transmission Line would never have made it this far.

How Do We Fix Electricity Transmission in Alberta?

RETA is not and never has been an anti-development organization – we want a stronger province with a stronger economy and with growing industrial development. We believe that the best way to encourage growth and development is to ensure businesses have ready access to AFFORDABLE electricity and that communities are able to grow without worrying about coming too close to transmission lines. With that in mind, we think the following steps would help address the issues raised by the Heartland Transmission Line and ensure a strong and affordable power distribution system for all Albertans.

1) Revise the Mandate of AESO – The Alberta Electrical System Operator (AESO) is the organization that is charged with making initial recommendations about building new transmission lines. However, AESO is set up in a way that gives it a bias towards over-building. (Current energy minister Ted Morton said that when he was running for the leadership of the PC party). In our view, the mandate of AESO should be to identity cases where transmission lines are required to ensure further development, but also to take into consideration the affect that an increase in transmission costs will have on potential development and try to find ways of minimizing that cost.

2) Make the AUC Truly Independent – The Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) is a quasi-judicial body which reviews proposed transmission developments. Currently, members of the AUC can be appointed and removed by the government at will. This significantly reduces the likelihood that the AUC would ever refuse an application which the government was in favour of. The AUC needs to be made entirely independent. Members of the AUC should be like judges – appointed for extended terms and able to operate without fear of being removed in the middle of their term.

3) Repeal Bill 50 – This legislation allows the government to skip the normal needs-assessment process for transmission lines. In our view, if a power line is needed, then the normal needs-assessment process should bare out that conclusion. If a power line is not needed, then it should not be built.

4) Develop a Natural Gas Strategy – Natural gas is cheap, and a lot cleaner than many of the alternatives. Natural gas power plants can be built near the places where power is needed, often at a much lower cost than transmission lines. Therefore, a provincial natural gas strategy to encourage the use of natural gas to produce power close to the places where it is needed would reduce the need for big transmission lines and save Albertans a lot of money on their power bills.

5) Give Albertans an Opportunity to Sell Electricity They Generate Back to the Grid – The best way to encourage power generation close to where it is needed and minimize the need for transmission lines is to allow every consumer of power to also be a producer of power. For example, if a citizen wants to invest in solar panels for their roof, then they should be able to sell the power they generate back to the grid. This concept has been called ‘net metering’ – at the end of each month, consumers would pay the difference between the cost of the power they produced and the cost of the power they used. (Or they would receive the difference if they produced more than they consumed). Everyone, from individual families to big industrial operations, should be given the opportunity and the incentive to do net metering, provided that the excess power they generated could be used in areas accessible through the existing power grid.

6) Bury Transmission Lines When They are Near People – The previous 5 points will reduce but not eliminate the building of transmission lines. In cases where they are needed, they should be buried when they run near where people live, work, or go to school.

7) Allow Anyone to Bid on Transmission Line Construction – Some companies in other parts of the world have a lot of experience burying transmission lines and can do it at a much lower cost than the costs presented by AltaLink and Epcor during the Heartland hearings. It’s a no-brainer to allow all companies the equal opportunity to bid on transmission infrastructure. This makes it easier and cheaper to minimize the impacts of transmission lines on communities.

These changes would ensure the existence of a strong and affordable transmission system for all Albertans. Unlike the proposed over-build, they would make sure that Albertans can have reliable access to power at the lowest possible cost and with the least possible negative impacts on their quality of life.

4 Candidates Fighting the Heartland Transmission Line

Many candidates for the upcoming Alberta provincial election (expected some time in April) are already out talking to voters, and electricity transmission is expected to be a major issue. Voters in all ridings are concerned about transmission costs, which have become increasingly out of control in the absence of an effective process for assessing what our transmission needs are. In some ridings, the effects on a community of having transmission lines in close proximity to where people live and work are also likely to be an election issue.

The proposed Heartland Transmission Line starts south of Edmonton, and travels north along the east site of the city to the Industrial Heartland. Candidates in the affected ridings, especially in Sherwood Park, Strathcona-Sherwood Park, Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville, and Athabasca-Redwater are already seeking to engage with their constituents on this issue.

“I’m finding the Heartland Transmission Line to be a central issue in a lot of people’s minds,” said Sherwood Park Wildrose candidate Garnett Genuis. “They want the line buried, or better yet not built at all. The almost complete silence of members of other parties on this issue is really setting up a clear choice in voters’ minds. If you oppose the overhead line, then vote for me. If you support the overhead line, then vote for somebody else.”

Travis Olson, Wildrose candidate in Athabasca Redwater, feels particularly strongly about this issue and is a strong supporter of RETA’s work on it. “There is no need for this Heartland Line. Experts at the U of C public policy school, the Fraser Institute, and the Industrial Power Consumers Association of Alberta agree that these lines are completely unnecessary and will scare business out of our province by driving up power bills. I commend RETA for their hard work on this issue – they are working, as I am, to bring greater attention to the economic and community impacts of this unnecessary overbuild.”

Shannon Stubbs, Wildrose candidate in Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville sees the impact of these lines first hand: “I recently talked to a third generation farmer in the area and he explained very clearly to me how the lines will destroy his farm and destroy his business and he won’t get fair, full and timely compensation.  And that’s the truth about these transmission lines- they will disrupt families, businesses, farms, and land and property value, and schools, all along the routes.”

Paul Nemetchek, Wildrose candidate in Strathcona, has spoken out previously about the problems with Bill 50, the importance of RETA’s work, and the need to stop the Heartland Line as soon as possible. PC candidates have yet to be selected in all of these ridings, but the PC government is rushing ahead full steam on the Heartland Line. These four Wildrose candidate are all in ridings which the Wildrose has a strong chance of winning. Unless the government changes direction on this, the PC candidates selected in these four ridings will have a very tough time.

Heartland Line Must be Reviewed

This Letter to the Editor by RETA Board member, John Kristensen, appeared in today’s Edmonton Journal:

“Many Albertans have been following the proceedings of the Critical Transmission Review Committee with great interest. This is the committee established in early December by the Alberta government to review the need for the two north-south transmission lines dubiously called “critical” by the government.

The vast majority of presentations to the committee have been opposed to the building of these lines, calling them unnecessary or significant overbuilds. Business and industry associations have said the absurdly high costs of the lines will drive business and industry out of Alberta because they cannot afford any more increases in our already skyrocketing electricity costs.

Other presentations have charged that the primary reason for all these new lines is to export electricity to the United States, with Alberta ratepayers picking up 100 per cent of the infrastructure costs while transmission companies own the lines and reap guaranteed annual investment returns of nine per cent on the infrastructure value.

Companies such as Enmax say the new lines are not needed because cleaner natural gas-fired electricity in southern Alberta will address any new power requirements there.

Of course a few presentations, such as those from AltaLink and Atco, each proposing a north-south line and hoping to reap millions of dollars in annual profits, suggest these lines are necessary.

Unfortunately, the Heartland power line is not part of this review. If one or more of the north-south lines is not built, the Heartland line will make no sense whatsoever because it was to connect the two. And with oilsands companies deciding it is cheaper to ship raw bitumen through pipelines to the United States and China, the Industrial Heartland will not see the nine upgraders anticipated by the government.

The primary reason for the Heartland line was to provide coal-fired power to all of these upgraders. The upgrading industry says it doesn’t need outside electricity because it can more efficiently co-generate its own cleaner electricity.

This indicates that the Heartland line is the least needed of all the so-called “critical” lines, yet Premier Alison Redford says it’s the most needed line and indeed yanked it out of the Critical Transmission Review Committee process.

And the government wonders why Albertans are upset with the way electricity generation and transmission is run in our province.”

Sherwood Park PC Nomination and Newt Gingrich

Today at the Sherwood Park PC nomination, 6 candidates gave speeches. Helen Calahasen was the only one to mention transmission lines. She declared her support for burying the lines and for assessing whether or not the lines are needed. RETA would like to thank Calahasen for taking this position and standing up for the concerns of the people of Sherwood Park. Unfortunately, none of the other candidates even mentioned transmission issues.

Official results have yet to be released in the nomination, however twitter is abuzz with the rumour that former mayor Cathy Olesen won. As many of you will recall, Cathy was booted from office in the last mayor election because voters wanted a local champion who would fight for a hospital and against the transmission lines. The current mayor Linda Osinchuk was seen as that local champion, while Olesen had failed to advocate strongly for the community. (You can see coverage of that result here: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2010/10/19/edmonton-olesen-mayor-strathcona-county.html). Let’s hope the twitter rumours are false, and that Calahasen has pulled an upset victory.

Meanwhile, south of the border, Newt bury-the-line Gingrich pulled a big upset in the South Carolina Republican primary, beating establishment candidate Mitt Romney by more than 10%. We’ve written previously about Gingrich’s support for undergrounding. His success in South Carolina will give this concept even more momentum.

Pipelines and Power Lines

This Sherwood Park News column hits the nail on the head in looking at the Heartland power line in relation to the Keystone XL Pipeline.

The editor writes, “…yet here we are with a 500kV power line to the Heartland waiting to start and we’re wanting to export unrefined oil” to the U.S. The Heartland power line might make sense if there was going to be substantive refining of bitumen in the Alberta Industrial Heartland, but makes little sense when our raw bitumen is being exported to the U.S. for upgrading.

AltaLink Offers to Cost-Share Burying Heartland line by Colchester School

AltaLink has offered to cost-share burying a portion of the Heartland power line near Colchester Elementary School to alleviate concerns by parents, staff and students about the negative health and safety impacts of an overhead line.

At a meeting January 17, 2012, Elk Island Public Schools Superintendent Bruce Beliveau, Colchester School Principal Bill Suter and Colchester Parents’ Association President Gabe Chemello made it clear to AltaLink and EPCOR that the school would close down if the Heartland line was built above-ground. Parents have been polled several times over the past year and just before the AUC hearing last spring, 95% said they would pull their children out of the school because they were not willing to put their children’s health and safety at risk so close to an overhead double-circuit 500kV power line.

There are hundreds of studies reporting significantly increased risks of childhood leukemia, other cancers, nervous system dysfunctioning, and many other serious health problems in children exposed over a prolonged period to overhead high voltage line EMFs. If the Heartland line was built above ground, Colchester students would be exposed to these hazardous EMFs and toxic corona clouds up to 6 hours a day, 5 days a week, and 10 months a year.

Darin Watson, VP Major Projects for AltaLink and Bruce Brandell, EPCOR (Team Lead – Heartland Transmission Project), listened to these concerns, and Mr. Watson surprised others at the meeting by offering to share the costs with the provincial government to bury part of the Heartland line near the school.  In this news release, the Colchester Parents’ Association indicated it “is very keen to work with AltaLink and the Alberta Government on this new proposal.” However, Chemello noted “that past experience with AltaLink during the hearings makes it difficult to believe that this is a good-faith offer.” (Also see this iNews 880 coverage.)

RETA certainly agrees and hopes this is not another cruel joke by AltaLink, as it has done on previous occasions. For example, AltaLink and EPCOR encouraged thousands of directly and negatively impacted residents by including an underground option in their application to the AUC to build the Heartland line. However, as soon as the AUC hearing started, it became clear the applicants had never been serious about the underground option, and were simply leading residents down the garden path.

We can only hope the Alberta Government is open to this cost-sharing proposal by AltaLink, especially considering the government would have to come up with the minimum $20 million to accommodate the Colchester students in a new school or expanded existing school if the power line is built above ground. Also, it seems only fair that the provincial government should accept this proposal because it has foisted this line on Strathcona County residents in the first place.

All eyes will be on this latest development.

Letters to the Editor Respond to Sherwood Park News Editorial (full version)

A few days ago, we encouraged you to write to the Sherwood Park News in response to an editorial they wrote about the Heartland Transmission Lines. Thank you for rising to the challenge. The following two letters were published today, which clearly indicate why the Heartland Line needs to be an issue in the next provincial election.

Brenda Astle:

“Are you kidding? The only issues worth talking about in the search for a replacement for Sherwood Park MLA Iris Evans are the Heartland Transmission Project and the Strathcona Community Hospital (“Don’t talk to me about power lines, hospital,” Jan. 17 News).

We are in desperate need of an MLA that will represent the constituents of Sherwood Park and speak up for what we want.

Evans remained far too quiet on both issues when it would have counted most. Let’s not make that mistake with her replacement. We must continue to fight against this Heartland Transmission line.

It is far from a dead issue and I want to know what a new MLA will stand for on this issue.”

RETA’s own John Kristensen:

“The Jan. 17 column in the Sherwood Park News (“Don’t talk to me about power lines, hospital”) suggested that the decision on the Heartland Transmission Project has already been made and there’s no point discussing the matter any further, especially during the next few months leading up to a provincial election.

Wow. That’s a defeatist attitude. Yes, maybe the cards have been stacked against us as we have battled this unnecessary line during the past three-and-a-half years, and yes, maybe the public consultation and Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) hearing processes were shams, but we’re certainly not going to give up.

We, the County of Strathcona, and others have appeals before the AUC and the courts. The Critical Transmission Review Committee is reviewing the need for two new north-south high voltage lines, which could have huge implications on the Heartland line. One of the purposes of the Heartland line was to connect the two north-south lines, and if one of these is not built, the Heartland line will make no sense whatsoever.

But perhaps the most important reason we are not giving up, and which presents our biggest opportunity, is the provincial election sometime this spring.

The building of an overhead Heartland line, which will result in the closing of one of our longest-standing and most recognized schools, Colchester Elementary School, and will negatively affect thousands of County residents, is beyond a doubt the biggest issue to hit our community in years.

If that is not an election issue, I don’t know what is.

Every voter in Sherwood Park, Strathcona and the other constituencies to be crossed by the Heartland line should ask all of the candidates in the upcoming election, regardless of political stripe, to convince the Alberta government to either stop the Heartland line, or to bury it when it runs close to residential areas, schools and daycares.

It is the Alberta government that has been pushing for the line to be built in our community; passed Bill 50, which legislated the building of the line; removed the Heartland line from the review of other so-called “critical” lines, and gave the final sign-off for the line to be built in the Sherwood Park Greenbelt.

And that’s why the issue must be raised as the key issue by county residents leading up to and during the provincial election.”

Two New Power Lines Not Needed

So far, almost all presentations to the Critical Transmission Review Committee (CTRC) have indicated that new high voltage power lines planned by the Alberta Government are either not needed or at minimum are significant overbuilds {Calgary Herald, CBC, Edmonton Journal (1) and Edmonton Journal (2)}. Presenters submit that the absurdly high costs of all these new lines will drive business and industry out of Alberta. Some suggest that the primary reason for these lines is to export electricity to the U.S., with Alberta consumers paying 100% of the infrastructure costs while companies like AltaLink and ATCO Electric own the lines and reap 9% guaranteed annual investment returns on the value of the infrastructure.

Some presenters indicated the fact the lights stayed on during recent record cold temperatures showed the transmission system doesn’t require a multibillion dollar upgrade as proposed by the Alberta Government and the Alberta Electric System Operator (Calgary Herald).

The CTRC, established by the Alberta Government in an attempt to show it actually cares what Albertans think about power transmission, is meeting with selected groups and associations, and will submit a report to the government in February. Many are skeptical that this is but one more meaningless process about electricity transmission in our province which is controlled by a few large corporations that have close ties to the P.C. government.

See this earlier RETA blog for details on the CTRC.

Sherwood Park News Editorial Gets it Wrong

In an editorial published in today’s Sherwood Park News, the editor mentions a few issues that he doesn’t want candidates to talk about in the lead up to a spring provincial election. As it happens, these are the issues that are most important to many area residents – the Heartland Transmission Line and the Hospital.

The editorial includes the following:

“We all know about that 500 kV monstrosity that’s looming in the not-too-distant future. In fact, that future is so near that it’s likely to be a moot point by the time a new MLA is elected to replace the retiring Iris Evans. I don’t want to hear any election campaign promises about fighting and/or burying the power line. Those battles have been fought and have largely been lost. The final decision on the project rests with the Alberta Court of Appeals, not the Sherwood Park MLA. No amount of MLA campaigning will positively affect the court’s final decision.”

The defeatist attitude in this editorial completely ignores the facts. While there are ongoing appeals before the AUC and the Court of Appeal, it was a GOVERNMENT decision to pass bill 50 which skipped over the normal needs assessment process for the Heartland line, it was a GOVERNMENT decision to not allow open bidding on this project (which would have allowed proposals by international companies with a long history of burying transmission lines who would not have presented inflated cost estimates), and it was a GOVERNMENT decision to push forward the Heartland Line while putting other Bill 50 transmission lines on hold.

Any MLA could make a real difference by (1) opposing Bill 50, (2) demanding a more open needs assessment and bidding process for transmission infrastructure, and (3) refusing to vote confidence in any government that is unwilling to suspend construction on the Heartland Line immediately.

The Sherwood Park News is dead wrong on this – the Heartland Transmission Project will be a key issue for voters in the next election and voters will demand that their MLA use all the power they have to stop this unneeded and dangerous transmission line from going through.

Please send a letter to the editor reminding the News how important this issue is to Sherwood Park residents and to all Albertans: http://www.sherwoodparknews.com/feedback1/LetterToEditor.aspx.

Spending our Money BEFORE Transmission Lines Approved

We have long worried that the AUC process set up by the government to review the impacts of so-called ‘critical’ transmission infrastructure was merely about adding a veneer of legitimacy to a decision which the government had already made. Those worries were confirmed today by a report in the Calgary Herald, showing that power companies have been authorized to spend hundreds of millions of dollars even though some of the projects in question have still not been approved. These costs will ultimately fall on rate-payers (you and I), even if the lines do not go ahead.

The lines at issue in this particular story are the two planned North-South transmission lines, currently the subject of a ‘review’ in Calgary and Edmonton. (As this story demonstrates, this review is yet another sham-consultation aimed at giving government action the appearance of being above-board). ATCO and AltaLink have revealed that they have already spent $200 million getting ready for these lines. The government has now asked the companies to avoid ‘unnecessary’ further expenditures, but either way these costs will likely be passed on to rate-payers. How absurd that Alberta’s consumers are already facing their sentence before they have even stood trial and had a chance to defend their interests!

The companies in this case spent rate-payers’ money before the approval process was over with the full knowledge and permission of the government. As noted by an Alberta Energy spokesman quoted in the article, companies were authorized to spend money to ‘prepare for the construction of the lines before the completion of the approval process.

When it comes to the Heartland Transmission Line, it has long been apparent that the provincial government and the power companies had decided exactly what was going to happen before we (the funders and those affected by this line) ever had a say. Our money was in fact being spent on an unneeded, unapproved, and un-reviewed line a long time ago. This demonstrates how complete the degeneration of our institutions of democratic consultation has been under this government. A change of leadership in this province is badly needed.

You can read the full story in the Herald here: http://www.calgaryherald.com/200M+already+spent+proposed+transmission+lines+under+review/6006888/story.html

Pipelines or Heartland Power Line – Not Both

What does the Heartland Transmission Project have to do with the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and the TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline? Lots.

Fact #1: The double-circuit 500kV Heartland power line was to have brought coal-fired electricity to at least 9 bitumen upgraders in the Industrial Heartland that the Alberta Government had been promoting for many years as the new economic driver in the oil sands energy sector.

Fact #2: Because of a shift away from doing upgrading in Alberta, only one bitumen upgrader is now being considered for the Industrial Heartland. Therefore, there is no need for the Heartland power line. And besides, any upgraders that might actually get built in the Industrial Heartland will co-generate their own cleaner electricity and therefore won’t require less-clean coal-fired power via the Heartland line.

On the one hand, we have Premier Alison Redford who suggests that exporting unrefined bitumen out of Alberta to the United States and China (via B.C.) through pipelines such as the Northern Gateway Pipeline and Keystone XL Pipeline is good for Alberta’s and Canada’s economies. In fact, she is working hard to convince all of the other Premiers that this is so, in an attempt to develop a national energy strategy.

On the other hand, we have people like former Premier Peter Lougheed who believe more unrefined bitumen should be processed in Alberta and Canada to create more local employment. Or putting it another way, by processing bitumen in Alberta, many more high-paying local jobs would be created over the long term than very short-term jobs created building pipelines to export the longer-term jobs out of Canada. It’s a principle central to almost all industries – the more secondary and tertiary development of raw materials, the more diversified and sustainable the economy. Alberta can continue to be a supplier of raw bitumen to other countries who then process this raw resource while creating thousands of jobs for their respective citizens. Or, Alberta can begin to refine bitumen at home like we do with agricultural and forestry products to create a more balanced, diversified and sustainable economy. We’ll need some pipeline capacity either way, but we need to think carefully about what we use those pipelines for.

There are many arguments for and against the Northern Gateway and Keystone XL pipelines, but one thing is certain. The more Premier Redford ignores the importance of upgrading in Alberta, the more absurd her support for the Heartland power line becomes. She cannot have it both ways – either we encourage upgrading in Alberta or we don’t. Regardless of what side of the pipeline debate you are on, the inconsistent approach taken by the government underlines the fact that the Heartland Transmission Project is not needed.

AltaLink, Model Citizen

Many of you have probably noticed the recent spate of “AltaLink is awesome” ads. But the Globe and Mail just released a startling story which reveals deep links between AltaLink’s parent company SNC-Lavalin and the repressive and violent Gadhafi regime in Libya. Canadian soldiers fought and risked their lives to bring down this monstrous government, while SNC-Lavalin got rich by deepening their cooperation with Libya’s government and military.

You can read the full story here (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/snc-lavalin-developed-close-relationship-with-gadhafi-son-documents/article2302566/page1/). It appears that SNC-Lavalin worked with the Libyan government to develop a joint civilian-military engineering unit and to build a massive prison to house those Libyans who were unwilling to submit to the repeated denial of their basic freedoms. Here are a few highlights (or rather, low-lights) from the story:

-“Documents obtained by The Globe and Mail in Libya reveal that SNC met repeatedly with the North African leader’s notorious third son, Saadi Gadhafi, the two sides discussing a venture that would create a new board and also a logo that would fuse the green of the Libyan flag with the blue of SNC.”

-“For almost three years, from 2008 to 2010, Canada’s leading engineering company played a role developing the Libyan Corps of Engineers, a military and civilian unit that fell under Mr. Gadhafi’s personal supervision. In their discussions with Mr. Gadhafi, the Canadian firm described its services as a defence contractor, documents show, touting the experience of former military officers such as Vice-Admiral Ron Buck, former head of Canada’s navy.”

-“ “The Corps of Engineers must enter all scientific fields, because it’s an important weapon, and such units are considered in other countries of the world as an advanced weapon,” he (Gadhafi’s son Saadi) said, according to a four-page summary of the meeting. Building such an asset would require “the help of the Lavalin company,” he added.”

-“In a Nov. 4, 2008, proposal, Riadh Ben Aissa, an executive vice-president for SNC-Lavalin Group who has been responsible for ventures in countries such as Algeria, Tunisia and Venezuela, wrote a cover letter addressed to Saadi. The first sentence promises “state-of-the-art realization of major projects both of a military and civilian nature in Libya,” and the rest of the document continually emphasizes SNC’s role as a defence contractor: 37 of the 41 pages in the proposal contain the word “military,” as SNC touted its work on a long list of sensitive projects.”

For a company that has supported the military efforts of one of the most murderous governments ever (and one that recently fought a war with Canada), compromising the health of a few Albertans and forcing a school to close probably doesn’t seem like a big deal. Model citizen indeed!

Colchester School Supports RETA AUC Heartland Appeal

The Colchester Parents’ Association has formally supported RETA’s Review and Variance application regarding the AUC’s November 1, 2011 decision to let AltaLink and EPCOR build the Heartland power line above ground right next to Colchester Elementary School.

This letter, sent January 13 to the AUC and cc’ed to all provincial MLAs and Strathcona County Councillors, reiterates the parents’ association concerns that an above-ground Heartland line so close to Colchester School (as approved by the AUC) will close down their school because parents will not jeopardize their children’s health and safety. Hundreds of peer-reviewed health studies report increased risks of cancers, tumors, immune system deficiencies, nervous system disorders, and many other ailments due to prolonged exposure to overhead high voltage power line EMFs and toxic corona clouds. Students and staff would be exposed from 6-8 hours a day, 5 days a week, to harmful EMFs and the corona effect from an overhead line.

Once the overhead power line has forced the closure of Colchester School, it will cost a minimum of $20 million to either build a new school or to expand an existing school over 10km away. Taxpayers – not AltaLink or EPCOR – will have to pay this cost, which in fact should be charged to the cost of building an overhead Heartland line.

The parents’ letter continues that “The AUC did not take into consideration the issues raised by parents such as health concerns, stress, safety risks, financial concerns, and loss of community amenities such as Colchester Elementary School.” They ask the AUC to reconsider its decision and bury the power line near the school “so we can keep our children together as one family”. Underground high voltage lines eliminate all of the negative impacts of overhead lines.

Parents conclude by indicating that AltaLink’s and EPCOR’s latest suggestion of an alternate route by the school gets the line only an additional 10m away and “does nothing to alleviate our concerns”.

Unfortunately, local P.C. MLAs Dave Quest and Iris Evans have not done much to help save the school.

Flashback: Ted Morton Had it Right

Alberta’s Energy Minister Ted Morton is charged with touting the government line on electricity transmission. His past statements suggest that he knows that the transmission overbuild planned by the government will be disastrous for Alberta; however, he has not had the courage to publically oppose Alison Redford on this. There was a time when Ted Morton agreed with RETA about the problems with this transmission overbuild.

During the leadership race, Morton conceded that the government arm which called for building these lines has a bias towards over-building the transmission grid. He said at the time “There’s no question the mandate of the Alberta Electric System Operator tends to give it a bias toward over-building.”

Morton also claimed to be against Bill 50, the legislation which by-passes the normal needs-assessment process for certain transmission infrastructure. As many others have pointed out, it makes much more economic and environmental sense to build power plants closer to the areas where electricity might be needed. (In the case of the Heartland Transmission Line, industrial consumers of electricity wanted a natural gas-fired power plant put directly in the Heartland area – this would be much cheaper than building the Heartland Line). Morton said: “I cannot support bill 50…bill 50 risks massively overbuilding the grid and you are the ones who will have to pay for it. This is at a time when natural gas is clean and cheap. Bill 50 ignores the opportunity to build gas-fired power plants close to the cities. ”

Ted Morton was right then, and it’s high time that he had the courage to stand up for his convictions.

More Wildrose Candidates Support RETA’s Appeal

Strathcona County Wildrose candidates Paul Nemetchek and Shannon Stubbs are speaking out in support of RETA’s appeal. When asked for his thoughts on the appeal, Strathcona-Sherwood Park Wildrose candidate Paul Nemetchek declared, “I endorse RETA’s appeal. I am personally appalled by the PC government’s complete lack of transparency and their aversion to due process. Neither the Premier nor the Cabinet are critical needs experts, nor is it the role of government to act as such. It is truly telling when the public, industry and municipal governments rally in opposition to actions of our provincial government.” Well said Paul.

Shannon Stubbs (Wildrose candidate in Fort Saskatchewan) spoke at our rally at the legislature a few months ago. About this appeal, she said:

“I strongly support this appeal. I spoke at the RETA rally at the legislature on behalf of Wildrose, and have always found there to be a real synergy between what RETA is saying and what the Wildrose Party believes. Both want the repeal of Bill 50. Both believe that above ground lines shouldn’t run near homes, schools, or daycare centers. Without RETA’s great work, it would have been very difficult to bring these issues to light in the way that we have been able to in the legislature. This appeal of the AUC decision is part of a great continuing effort on the part of RETA to oppose the misguiding agenda of this government on transmission lines.”

RETA’s Executive Director and Sherwood Park candidate Garnett Genuis is of course also a strong supporter of RETA’s appeal.

RETA Announces New Executive Director

We at RETA are announcing today that we have hired Garnett Genuis as our new Executive Director (see this news release). Garnett is also the Wildrose candidate in Sherwood Park. He has been working closely with us for a long time to defeat the Heartland Transmission Project, and we are honoured to have him as part of our team.

Garnett has extensive experience in politics and public advocacy. He has held a number of different positions on Parliament Hill, including one in the Prime Minister’s Office. He has also just completed a Masters Degree at the London School of Economics.

We at RETA are preparing to step up our efforts in the weeks ahead to defeat the Heartland Transmission Project once and for all. Garnett will play a key role in those efforts.

More on School Closing Due to Heartland Line

Colchester Elementary School Parents Association President, Gabe Chemello, says that students staying in the school with an overhead Heartland power line so close to the school is simply not an option (iNews 880). Parents are worried about the hundreds of studies that document increased health risks of overhead high voltage power lines, especially to young children whose immune systems are not yet fully developed.

Numerous pipelines with highly flammable contents and subject to significant explosion risks within 30m of an overhead Heartland line, are located close to the school as well. Many interveners at the AUC Heartland hearing last Spring pointed out these health and pipeline risks; unfortunately AltaLink, EPCOR and the AUC chose to ignore them.

The Heartland line is not needed, as pointed out by industrial consumer groups, Alberta landowner groups, Strathcona County Council, Edmonton City Council, Sturgeon County Council, Alberta Industrial Heartland Association, RETA, many other stakeholders, and even AltaLink’s and EPCOR’s own data which show the line will be energized to only 15% of its capacity.

However, if the Alberta Government insists on this line getting built, it must be buried when it runs near schools, homes and hospitals.

Utility Companies Proposed Route Changes are another Smokescreen

Those planning to build the Heartland Transmission Project (AltaLink and Epcor) are now proposing a new route for a section of the Heartland Transmission Line. They seem to be suggesting that this will reduce the impact on Colchester Elementary School. However, the proposed new route does NOT mitigate the impact on Colchester school and it increases the impact on many area residents.

Our calculations indicate that moving the line to the new location will only increase the distance between the line and Colchester school by about 10 meters. (The map sent out to those impacted is full of errors.) This minimal increase in distance will not allay the concerns of parents.

This new proposed route is longer, contains more towers, and runs closer to many homes and sensitive environmental areas such as the Bretona Pond. Because of the increase in length, it will also cost more.

We agree with the apparent tacit admission by those involved that the previous route was unacceptable. However, Albertans will not be fooled by an adjustment, occurring after hearings have been completed, which does not address the underlying problems. Given this admission, the AUC should demand that the lines be buried, and the government should do the right thing and pass legislation requiring that transmission lines near sensitive and populated areas be buried.

Power Line Review Committee Told Lines Not Needed

You may recall that the Alberta Government established a so-called Critical Transmission Review Committee (CTRC) on December 6, 2011 to review the process used by the Alberta Government and the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) in considering north-south high voltage transmission lines (www.ctrc-ab.ca).

Meetings to hear from stakeholders selected by the Alberta Government and the CTRC will take place in Calgary January 10-12 at the Radisson Hotel Calgary Airport; and in Edmonton January 18-20 at the Ramada Conference Centre {see CBC (1), CBC (2), Calgary Herald (1), Calgary Herald (2), CBC (3), Calgary Herald (3) and Calgary Herald (4) for coverage of presentations to the CRTC}.

This Committee was established because of the controversy surrounding the proposed construction of the Western Alberta Transmission Line by AltaLink from Gibbons to Brooks and the Eastern Alberta Transmission Line by ATCO Electric from Genesee to Langdon. Many Albertans, landowner groups, industry associations and other stakeholders have argued that these two lines are not needed, are significant overbuilds, and/or should not be funded by Alberta electricity consumers because they will be used primarily for the export of electricity to the U.S. (as reported by WikiLeaks).

On October 21, 2011, Energy Minister Ted Morton and the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) indicated publicly that 3 lines would be reviewed: Western Alberta Transmission Line, Eastern Alberta Transmission Line and Heartland Transmission Project. A few short hours later, Premier Redford indicated she was surprised by Morton’s letter, stated there had been miscommunication within the government, and quickly overturned Morton’s and the AUC’s announcement by indicating that the Heartland line would not be reviewed but rather should be built. Coverage of this flip-flop by the government is included in several RETA blogs, including this one.

This latest review by the CTRC is yet another example of the Alberta Government’s gross mishandling of the entire electricity file. The Heartland line, approved by the AUC November 1, 2011 was to connect the Western Alberta and Eastern Alberta Transmission Lines. Unless both of these lines are built, the Heartland line makes no sense whatsoever. Even if both of the north-south lines were built, the Heartland line still makes no sense because there is only one rather than 9 tar sands upgraders being built in the Industrial Heartland, and any others that might get built in the future would efficiently co-generate their own power thereby precluding the need for dirty coal-fired power from Wabamun via the Heartland line.

Newt Gingrich Supports Undergrounding in New Hampshire

One of the leading contenders for the Republican nomination in the United States is talking about the importance of putting transmission lines underground. Newt Gingrich, former House of Representatives Speaker and one of the leading contenders to replace President Obama, addressed the issue today in New Hampshire. New Hampshire is a state with pristine natural beauty and where a controversial plan to build massive transmission lines to carry power across the border from Quebec is getting more and more attention. Like many of us here in Alberta, the people of New Hampshire worry that 130 foot transmission towers will be unsightly and will harm those in the surrounding area. Gingrich is now telling New Hampshire voters that “There will be no transmission towers if I’m president.”

Gingrich’s support for undergrounding has important implications for people on both sides of the border. In the United States, it may give Gingrich the boost he needs to beat fellow Republican Mitt Romney in the upcoming New Hampshire primary. Romney is highly favoured in New Hampshire, so an upset there could turn the primary campaign around and make Gingrich the front-runner again. If Gingrich wins the Republican nomination, he will have the opportunity to bring much more attention to the issue of electricity transmission and the opportunities associated with undergrounding.

In Canada, this means that electricity companies who want to export power to the United States will have to start taking undergrounding seriously instead of dismissing it out of hand. A major underground power project between Quebec and New Hampshire would bolster the case of groups like ours who are showing that putting lines underground is a safe and effective alternative to massive overhead towers.

Whether or not you like Gingrich, it is exciting to have such a prominent political leader talking about this important issue. Gingrich is a conservative Republican. Those who review the facts, on the right or on the left, generally agree that generating power closer to the source and burying transmission lines when they are needed is the sensible thing to do. Hopefully some Alberta politicians will be prepared to follow Gingrich’s lead.

Bury Power Line Says U.S. Presidential Candidate

Not only are local and state politicians in the U.S. getting involved in the debate to bury high voltage power lines, but the issue has now reached the U.S. presidential level.

The Washington Times reports Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has pledged that, if elected president, he would not support a Canadian-U.S. hydroelectric project unless the transmission lines go underground.

On January 5, Gingrich said, “The application that I would be willing to consider as president would have to require burials, and it would have to require that the Northern Pass project be an underground project.” He went on to promise that he would insist on a plan that provides for “no visual damage to the natural beauty of northern New Hampshire.”

The proposed Northern Pass high voltage transmission project is extremely controversial, and has upset thousands of residents along its proposed route from Quebec to New Hampshire and other New England states. The joint proposal by the Public Service of New Hampshire, Hydro-Quebec and Northeast Utilities would include 180 miles of high voltage lines from towers as high as 130 feet, and would cost about $1.2 billion. (By comparison, AltaLink and EPCOR are proposing towers up to 253 feet tall for the Heartland Transmission Project.)

Canadian and American residents along the Northern Pass line are concerned about health, property value and visual impacts as well as lost tourism revenue. The line is estimated to reduce the value of land in the immediate area of the line by more than $1 million per lineal mile of line.

No wonder this issue has reached the level of presidential candidates in the U.S., and at least one candidate for the Republicans has now said the line must be buried. Unfortunately, here in Alberta, provincial Progressive Conservative politicians have turned a blind eye to the growing concerns about overhead high voltage power lines in our province, regardless of how many facts are presented to them.

RETA in the News

RETA has received quite a bit of coverage on the appeal we launched about a week ago. CBC carried a story about our appeal the day after it was filed, which noted in particular the debate about the costs of undergrounding. (AltaLink repeated their baseless claim that undergrounding would ‘double’ the cost.) You can read the full story here:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2011/12/31/calgary-heartland-transmission-line-power.html

Articles in the last couple days in the St. Albert Gazette and Sherwood Park News have also brought greater attention to our appeal, and emphasized that RETA is one of many groups of concerned citizens that is actively opposing this transmission line overbuild. Those two stories are accessible at:

http://www.stalbertgazette.com/article/20120104/SAG0801/301049988/-1/sag0801/advocacy-group-seeks-reversal-of-power-line-decision

and

http://www.sherwoodparknews.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3426740

Details about the appeal are available in an earlier post – http://retasite.wordpress.com/2011/12/30/reta-files-appeal-of-auc-decision-on-heartland-transmission-project/

Southern Alberta fire caused by downed power line

A fire in southern Alberta, cause by a downed power line, destroyed three homes on Wednesday. Fortunately, nobody was hurt. This underscores the value of undergrounding as an alternative to putting up massive dangerous overhead lines.

For more details on this story: http://www.globallethbridge.com/southern+alberta+fires+evacuate+homes+close+highway/6442553083/story.html

Australia Moving Towards More Undergrounding

Australia is one of many different places where government are looking at putting existing above-ground transmission lines underground. I’m sure they are wishing now that they’d had the foresight or the opportunity to put the lines underground in the first place. For the Alberta government to not take the undergrounding option seriously, even though so many other places in the world are, is extremely short sighted. Here’s the link to the full story:

http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2011/12/30/3400006.htm

Happy New Year, and Take Heart!

Since the AUC handed down their decision, I’ve talked to some residents in the affected areas who feel disheartened. Despite all the hard work we have put into defeating this misguided transmission project, the government and the AUC have not been at all responsive. It is perhaps a natural response to feel like giving up. But, now is not the time to give up. Time is running out, but the fight is far from over. The first 3 months of this year will be decisive in this fight, and we will need your help more than ever.

As we look back on the year that was, and think about the year ahead, there are 3 important things we need to recognize.

1. The legal route is important, but it is not enough!

We’ve worked very hard to stop the AUC from allowing the government’s planned overhead power line overbuild to go ahead. Our lawyers, witnesses, experts, board members and volunteers have worked countless hours, and we will continue to work on appeals. These appeals may succeed in delaying the construction of these lines, and may even succeed in bringing changes to the current application. However, until the government re-introduces an independent needs-assessment process for power lines and until clear direction comes from the government about the importance of protecting homes, schools, and daycare centers from EMFs, we will continue to have the Heartland Transmission Project hanging over our heads.

2. The Alberta PCs are not our friends!

Last year, we worked very hard to engage PC MLAs and members of the government. This was the right thing to do – we gave the government the benefit of the doubt and tried to work within the governing party to address this issue. However, Alison Redford has continued with the misguided Stelmach policy of pushing through the Heartland Transmission Project and local PC MLAs, while pretending to object in public, have failed to act to stop the project from going ahead. Often times, we’ve found that PC politicians say one thing in public, while working behind the scenes to push overhead power lines ahead as quickly as possible. The strategy of working within government has completely run its course – now it’s time to work to defeat the government.

3. Alberta is still a democracy, and we still have the power!

There is no place for pessimism in democratic politics, because we always have the power to bring about change. In the year ahead, we need to exercise our power. We need to use our resources, our time, our social networks, and our votes to defeat PC politicians and replace them with people who will repeal Bill 50 (the enabling legislation which allows the government to build the Heartland Transmission Project) and with people who will support putting power lines underground in those cases where they are needed. We need to encourage our friends and neighbours to stop voting based on their habits, and to start voting based on their values and their interests.

The election is still a few months away. Now is the time to start reading about party policies and contacting local candidates. Democracy means that you have the power. Soon you will have an opportunity to exercise that power.

RETA files appeal of AUC Decision on Heartland Transmission Project

Today, RETA officially filed an appeal of the AUC’s decision to allow the construction of massive overhead power lines to run in Edmonton, Sherwood Park, Strathcona County and Sturgeon County. (See news release and full appeal). This project, the Heartland Transmission Project, has been consistently opposed by many stakeholders, including Strathcona County, the City of Edmonton, Sturgeon County, groups such as RETA who represent residents in all three communities, and industry groups who say the lines are not needed and will drive up electricity prices. RETA’s appeal objects to the AUC decision on three key grounds:

1. The AUC accepted a chart which was presented by AltaLink which, in RETA’s view, completely misrepresents the levels of Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) which would be experienced by area residents. The estimates measured only one frequency, and ignored the findings of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers that:

“Since most electronic equipment is located at a low voltage level of its associated power distribution system, it is frequently exposed to the effects of voltage notching.  Voltage notches frequently introduce frequencies, both harmonic and nonharmonic, that are much higher than normally exhibited in 5 kV and higher voltage distribution systems.  These frequencies can be in the radio frequency (RF) range, and, as such, can introduce harmful effects associated with spurious RF.”

In other words, the chart used by the AUC to consider EMF levels in the surrounding area significantly underestimated resulting EMF levels.

2. The AUC quickly and arbitrarily dismissed the underground option as ‘high risk’. However, undergrounding is becoming increasingly common throughout the world, and even the power companies involved agreed that undergrounding was feasible.

3. When considering the impact on the public of this project, the AUC didn’t consider the fact that Colchester Elementary School will now have to close and move to a different location. It doesn’t make sense to have the public pay to relocate the school, when putting the line underground would completely eliminate the need to relocate the school. As noted in the appeal, “If the cost analysis between overhead and underground lines included the costs to accommodate the students of Colchester School, this could lead the AUC to materially vary or rescind the Decision.”

We hope that the AUC will reconsider their decision in light of the errors it contained. A variety of other stakeholders have appealed or announced their intention to appeal the AUC’s decision, including Strathcona County and the Alberta Landowners Council.

See news coverage at Sherwood Park News, St. Albert Gazette and CBC News.

Colchester School Supports Review of Heartland Decision

The Colchester School Parents’ Association sent this letter today to the Alberta Utilities Commission and all MLAs, indicating its support of Strathcona County’s appeal of the AUC Heartland decision to build the 500kV line above ground next to 5,200 homes, several schools and daycare centres, a hospital, many businesses and many environmentally sensitive areas.

The parents’ association indicated in the letter that Colchester Elementary School would have to close down if the Heartland line is built above ground because parents would not want to jeopardize their children’s health and safety so close to the line. It would cost a minimum of $20 million to build a new school, if Colchester School was closed down.

The parents clearly stated that, if the line had to be built next to the school, it must be buried.

Burying Power lines supported by US Federal Emergency Management Agency

RETA has repeatedly emphasized that there are many good reasons to support burying the transmission lines that are built. (Although we would ultimately prefer that lines aren’t built at all in cases where they are not needed). While we have primarily argued this on health grounds, the US Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is now funding undergrounding in order to eliminate the disastrous affects of having power lines knocked down during a storm. The importance of undergrounding as a disaster-mitigation strategy will vary depending on the weather in a particular area, but it underscores the viability and the importance of undergrounding technology.

Recognizing the benefits of undergrounding, FEMA provides funding through their Hazard Mitigation Grant program which communities can use to bury power lines. One community that took advantage of this was the city of Bardstown, Kentucky. In one particularly densely wooded subdivision, storms would frequently knocked trees onto power lines. This frequently left residents in the dark, and forced the city to pay for regular repairs. In frustration, they decided to bury the lines. Through a Hazard Mitigation Grant, FEMA paid to have the lines put under ground.

In 2008 a disastrous ice storm struck Kentucky, knocking down forests and destroying power lines throughout the state. However, in this otherwise-vulnerable section of Bardstown, the lights stayed on and nobody had to pay for repairs.

People in other states across the US are calling for undergrounding – every time inclement weather causes line damage and a power outage, these debates are re-ignited. Avoiding potential damage from winter weather is a good reason to put lines underground from the beginning, rather than crossing your fingers and hoping nothing happens. In Kentucky, they realized that burying the line was a better option, even though the lines had already been built above ground. How much better it would have been to put the line underground in the first place.

Of course, it’s different in Alberta, because these lines aren’t supplying electricity to anyone who needs it. We’re building lines to nowhere. The best thing to do would be to cancel the whole project. But, if the government is intent on building these useless transmission lines, then they ought to at least build them in the most responsible way possible.

Sherwood Park PC Candidates Silent on Transmission Lines

We have members from many different parts of Alberta, but Sherwood Park is one of the areas most affected by proposed transmission lines and where we have a large number of members. Sherwood Park MLA Iris Evans announced her retirement earlier this month. We thank her for her service to this province, although it is too bad that she did not actively represent her constituents on the transmission line issue. Unfortunately, ¾ of those vying to take over from her as the PC candidate in the next election have said nothing about power lines since announcing their candidacies. This post reviews the position of each of the four PC nomination candidates on the power line issue.

1. Susan Timanson is the most recent candidate to announce her candidacy. She is not from the Sherwood Park riding. As far as we can find, she’s made absolutely no public comments on the power line issue.

2. Cathy Olesen is a past Mayor of Strathcona County. She was handily defeated by current Mayor Linda Osinchuk in the last municipal election – many residents felt at the time that we needed a stronger advocate for the area instead of someone intent on being a ‘team player’. (For coverage of her defeat, check out this video link: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2010/10/19/edmonton-olesen-mayor-strathcona-county.html). She also lives outside of the Sherwood Park riding. We hope for a Sherwood Park MLA willing to stand up and fight for residents. Like Susan, Cathy has been publicly silent on the power line issue since announcing her intention to seek the nomination.

3. Brian Botterill is a young first term Councillor who lives with his parents in the Sherwood Park riding. He does have a greater connection to this riding than Susan or Cathy. However, like Susan and Cathy, he has stayed completely away from the power line issue since announcing his candidacy.

4. Matthew Bissett may be the best of the four. He does live in the riding. His website does have a dedicated “power lines” section where he discusses the issue (http://www.bissettforpcmla.ca/powerlines/). Bissett’s post implies that he is opposed to this power line overbuild. However, he also shows a poor understanding of the process and he links to the AUC and AltaLink/EPCOR sites without providing any information from the other side.

Unfortunately, it seems that none of these four candidates are willing to stand up for residents on this vital issue. We hope to be proven wrong on this point. Sherwood Park needs an MLA who will consistently fight for an end to the power line overbuild that this government wants to impose on Albertans. We need an MLA who will stand up to Alison Redford and refuse to vote confidence in a government which is set on this misguided course.

At this stage, it probably makes sense to stay out of this ‘say-nothing’ nomination and hope that Albertans elect a new government when that time comes around. We’ve tried in the past to change the PC Party from within, but it just hasn’t worked.

Challenges Mounting Against AUC Power Line Decision

The St. Albert Gazette and Sherwood Park News report on the number of legal and other challenges already underway against the November 1, 2011 decision by the AUC (Alberta Utilities Commission) to let AltaLink and EPCOR build the controversial Heartland power line above ground. Over 15,000 urban and rural residents would be negatively affected.

Last week, the County of Strathcona filed applications with the AUC for a Review and Variance of its decision and Suspension of the decision until their appeal is heard. Strathcona is submitting that there were numerous errors of fact and law that raise a substantial doubt as to the correctness of the Commission’s decision. They submit that the AUC misapprehended the evidence on the merits of the underground option, erred in its determination of what is in the public interest, and erred in its considerations of the Sherwood Park and Edmonton Greenbelt as an appropriate route for the line. The County has also submitted new facts that were not available to the AUC prior to its decision.

Yesterday, rural Sturgeon County landowners filed a legal challenge in the Alberta Court of Appeal on two grounds: the commission erred in law by not conducting a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of the line, and Premier Redford interfered politically and influenced the decision by the quasi-judicial commission.

RETA has announced that it will also be filing appeals of the AUC decision.

Last week the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties (AAMDC) passed a resolution requesting the provincial government to put all projects they consider “critical” (including the Heartland line) on hold until a comprehensive cost-benefit review is completed.

Karen Shaw, a Sturgeon County Councillor,  said the building of all these high voltage power lines that aren’t needed is “going to cripple the economy and it’s going to be bad for all Albertans”. Sturgeon County Mayor Don Rigney said because the Heartland line is supposed to link the East and West Alberta lines, and those two lines have been put on hold, it makes no sense for the Heartland line to proceed. “There’s enough power in the Heartland area for one to two upgraders”, Rigney said, adding that only one is being built. “They’re building a system for market conditions that no longer exist.”

(As well, any tar sands upgraders that actually might get built in the Heartland area will be co-generating their own power, so do not need dirty coal-fired electricity from Wabamun which the Heartland line is meant to transmit.)

RETA Supports Strathcona County Appeal

RETA President Bruce Johnson sent this letter today to all provincial MLAs indicating RETA’s support for Strathcona County’s applications to the AUC (Alberta Utilities Commission) regarding its recent Heartland power line decision. The letter supports both the County’s application for a Review and Variance of the AUC decision, and a Suspension of this decision until the Review and Variance application has been fully dealt with. See front-page Sherwood Park News article for details of Strathcona’s applications.

The letter also supports the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties’ recent request of the Alberta Government to put all critical transmission projects on hold until a comprehensive cost benefit review is completed.

AUC Taken to Court Over Botched Power Line Decision

Rural landowners in Sturgeon County have filed papers asking the Alberta Court of Appeal to hear arguments that the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) botched the job when it recently approved the overhead 500 kilovolt Heartland power line (see Canadian Press, Edmonton Journal and St. Albert Gazette articles; and Global Edmonton (1) and Global Edmonton (2) coverage).

The filed papers indicate the AUC was unduly influenced by Premier Redford when she publicly said she wanted the Heartland line built, and overturned her Energy Minister’s earlier request that the AUC suspend its consideration of the Heartland line.

An affidavit filed by one of the landowners negatively affected by the AUC decision points to the interaction between the Premier and the so-called independent AUC, charging political interference with the quasi-judicial commission.

The More Heartland Decision Appeals, the Better

RETA announced November 28 it will appeal the recent controversial Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) Heartland power line decision, and encouraged others to also appeal. Strathcona County has already announced it will be appealing the decision. See CHED and iNews 880 coverage.

The Heartland Transmission Project is one of the largest overhead 500kV high voltage power lines ever to be built in Alberta. Opponents to the overhead line say the AUC decision will result in over 15,000 residents being directly and adversely affected, at least one school will close down, many businesses will be negatively affected, and many environmentally sensitive areas will be impacted.

Literally hundreds of studies show that above-ground high voltage power lines have serious negative impacts on health, safety, property values, the environment, and overall quality of life. Much of this evidence was filed during the AUC hearing in April and May, 2011. Burying the line would eliminate the negative impacts of an overhead line, but unfortunately the AUC ruled it is not in the public interest to do so, in spite of the overwhelming evidence. See Sherwood Park Independent Weekly article.

RETA to Appeal AUC Heartland Line Decision

News Release

AUC Heartland Power Line Decision to be Appealed

(Sherwood Park) November 28, 2011. The decision released November 1, 2011 by the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) on the proposed Heartland Transmission Project reflects a colossal failure on the part of the Alberta Government and Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) to plan, manage and regulate electricity transmission in Alberta.

RETA will be filing requests to have the AUC decision reviewed. These appeal requests will be made directly to the AUC, and most probably to the Alberta Court of Appeal.

“Now that we have had an opportunity to read the full AUC decision, we are extremely disappointed,” said Bruce Johnson, President of RETA. “The decision to not bury the transmission line was based on the AUC’s perspective that it is not in the public interest.  It is curious how spending nearly $600 million on a line that has no identifiable need is in the public interest but then doing it in a way that doesn’t see thousands of homeowners lose as much as 40% of the value of their homes is not in the public interest.

“And furthermore, the decision was based on phantom costs conjured up by AltaLink and EPCOR rather than on the real costs that would have come out of a competitive bidding process,” continued Johnson. “Basing this decision on a number fabricated by a company that has never built 500kV underground transmission lines before, and whose Montreal-based parent SNC-Lavalin stands to gain substantially from building the towers if the line doesn’t go underground, is frankly a farce.”

The decision by the AUC is the culmination in a series of mistakes and biases by the Alberta Government, AESO, AltaLink and EPCOR.

The first mistake and bias was the AESO’s 2008 electricity transmission plan for the province, where they dubiously portrayed the need for the Heartland line by suggesting that nine bitumen upgraders to be built in the Industrial Heartland needed electricity from coal-fired generation at Wabamun. There is now only one upgrader being built because oilsands companies have found it more economical to ship raw bitumen from Fort McMurray to the United States by pipeline. The real irony is, any upgraders that might actually get built in the Heartland region will co-generate their own electricity and therefore will not need the coal-fired electricity from Wabamun that the Heartland line will transmit.

The Alberta Government has passed numerous new laws and amended numerous existing laws to streamline the process of building new electricity transmission infrastructure at the expense of public consultation, landowners’ rights and environmental oversight.

In 2008, the Alberta Government exempted all new high voltage power lines from requiring formal environmental impact assessments. New high voltage lines now require no scrutiny of potential environmental and health impacts by Alberta Environment and Alberta Health and Wellness.

Inspite of province-wide protests by landowners, the Alberta Government then passed Bill 19, the Land Assembly Project Area Act, in early 2009, which makes it much easier for the government to designate private land for high voltage power lines and in fact sterilize private land for this purpose.

Also in spite of province-wide opposition, the Alberta Government passed Bill 50, the Electric Statutes Amendment Act, 2009, which removed any public, industry and AUC role in reviewing the need for new high voltage power lines. The Alberta Cabinet now decides unilaterally and at its sole discretion, which new lines are needed and approximately where they will be built, leaving only the fine-tuning of precise routing to the AUC. In fact, it appears as if Premier Redford can make this decision all by herself as she illustrated a number of weeks ago when she overturned a decision to review the Heartland line by her Energy Minister.

The MLAs within whose constituencies the Heartland line will be built have let their constituents down by not actively representing the concerns of their residents who will be directly and adversely impacted whether that be health, safety, property values or local environment. These MLAs are Naresh Bhardwaj, Iris Evans, Jeff Johnson, David Quest, Peter Sandhu, Tony Vandermeer and Gene Zwozdesky.

The Alberta Department of Energy and the AESO have been biased from the outset regarding the Heartland line, and have worked closely with the transmission industry, rather than concerning themselves with any input or concerns from the Alberta public, industry and business community. In fact, during the AUC Heartland line hearing, many examples were provided of just how closely the government, AESO and power companies work together, often making it impossible to determine who is actually calling the shots.

AltaLink and EPCOR have been extremely biased from the outset of their public consultation process. They sent out incorrect routing information to residents, did not interview many homeowners who will be directly and adversely impacted, critical information was withheld from landowners, treated rural and urban homeowners differently, intimidated landowners, and changed their power line routing and tower height proposals many times during the public consultation process, during the hearing, and even following the hearing. It got to the point where homeowners did not know where the actual line was being proposed or whether the towers would be 60 metres high or 77 metres high; or whether they would be lattice towers or monopole towers.

The most consistent complaint by interveners throughout the AUC hearing was how poorly the applicants had conducted their public consultation process. One intervener summarized this fact well by stating that the applicants had not been “consulting”, rather they had been “insulting”; and their public consultation process had been a “giant farce”.

As well, the applicants’ expert testimony at the AUC hearing was provided by visual impact, health, property value and other consultants hired by AltaLink and EPCOR, and who are in the business of testifying for transmission companies on a regular basis for very handsome hourly fees. Cross examination of many of these experts by interveners revealed just how biased their testimony was.

Interveners expected the AUC to weigh all of the evidence fairly within the context of developing a decision that was in the best public interest, as they are mandated by law to do. However, the primary interest that appears to have been addressed and satisfied in this decision is that of AltaLink and EPCOR, at the expense of the true “public interest”.

The close to 5,200 homes (over 15,000 residents), several schools and daycares, a hospital, and many businesses that will be directly and adversely impacted by the Heartland line and the AUC’s decision will be hit with a double whammy – they will have to pay 100% of the cost of this line along with other Albertans, plus they will have to suffer the negative health, safety, property value and overall quality of life impacts of the overhead line.

Johnson continued, “The Heartland line will be the largest power line project ever built in Alberta and will have negative impacts on thousands of nearby residents, businesses and schools of such significant magnitude not ever experienced before in our province. These towers will be twice as high as any others in Alberta– 253 feet tall – which is about the height of the EPCOR Building in downtown Edmonton. We presented evidence at the hearing to show that the capital cost of a partially buried Heartland line could be as little as 15% more than an entirely above-ground line and that when capital, maintenance and transmission loss costs are combined over the life of the line, a buried line might actually be cheaper than an overhead line. This information has been ignored.”

“The decision to build the Heartland line above ground reflects badly on Alberta. We have been betrayed by the Alberta Government, AESO, AltaLink and EPCOR. We must appeal the AUC decision”, concluded Johnson.

RETA is a non-profit society with about 9,000 members that encourages responsible electricity transmission in Alberta. Responsible transmission includes determining whether specific new high voltage power lines are necessary, and if they are truly shown to be necessary, burying them whenever they run close to homes, schools, daycares, hospitals and environmentally sensitive areas. And, if new lines are not buried in these situations, then those who are directly and adversely impacted must be fairly compensated on the basis of replacement value (not market value which is reduced as soon as a high voltage line is proposed in the community).

For more information, see April 12 – July 11, 2011 blogs at www.RETA.ca or contact:

Bruce Johnson, President, RETA: 780-902-9511 (cell)

John Kristensen, VP Technical, RETA: 780-467-1432 (home); 780-722-9866 (cell)

Redford Defends Bill 50 on Power Lines

The Calgary Herald reports Premier Redford defending the government’s controversial Bill 50 that removed any public, industry or business input on the need for specific new high voltage power lines. Under the legislation, the Alberta Government Cabinet now determines unilaterally which lines it feels must be built, without any review of the actual need for these lines or without any accounting of the costs. The government simply relies on AltaLink, EPCOR, ATCO and other transmission companies to indicate how much specific new lines will cost, without any competitive bidding to determine the actual cost.

And the good news is, Alberta consumers get to pay 100% of the costs of any new transmission infrastructure, whether it’s needed or not.

In a strange line of reasoning, Redford described Bill 50 as an “unfortunate piece of legislation. It was too bad we had to introduce it.” Now there’s a resounding endorsement for the bill.

Premier Redford and her spokesman disagreed on November 25 about when a panel would be announced to review Alberta’s electricity needs. It appears the Premier has already determined that all of the new high voltage power lines dubiously labeled as “critical transmission infrastructure” in Bill 50 are necessary and leads one to wonder, “Why bother with the review panel?”

Just when you think the Alberta Government can’t possibly make any more glaring mistakes regarding electricity generation and transmission…..they do.

True Costs of Burying Heartland Line Required

As the County of Strathcona continues to mount its attack on the controversial Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) decision to build the double-circuit 500kV Heartland Transmission Project with massive 77-metre-tall (253 ft) towers and lines next to about 5,200 homes, schools, daycares and a hospital, Mayor Linda Osinchuk wants the real costs of burying the line (see Edmonton Journal, Vancouver Sun and iNews 880). Only with the actual costs, based on requests-for-proposal from experts in underground cabling, can anyone honestly compare the costs of burying versus building overhead.

AltaLink and EPCOR had provided outlandish estimates of undergrounding costs to the AUC, in an attempt to suggest that it was just too expensive to even consider this technology. Estimates provided as evidence to the AUC Heartland hearing by credible experts pegged the costs to bury a 20-kilometre section of the Heartland line at only 15% more than building it overhead.

Undergrounding high voltage power lines is now a totally acceptable technology being used world-wide in countries where industry and governments care about health, safety, aesthetic and property value impacts of overhead high voltage lines. In fact, even an AESO-sponsored undergrounding study clearly shows that burying the Heartland line is technically feasible, financially feasible and reliable. Unfortunately, the AESO (Alberta Electric System Operator), AUC, Alberta Government, AltaLink and EPCOR have ignored this report.

Strathcona County Mayor Criticizes Heartland Line

CTV reports that Strathcona County Mayor Linda Osinchuk continues to criticize the Alberta Utilities Commission’s (AUC) recent decision to build the 500kV Heartland power line near so many homes, schools and daycares.

Mayor Osinchuk raised the matter directly with the Alberta Energy Minister at the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties annual convention, renewing her call for the Alberta Government to review electricity needs and costs in Alberta. This comes one day after Mayor Osinchuk sent letters to all MLAs indicating the County’s plans to appeal the controversial AUC Heartland decision. See iNews880 coverage.

Energy Minister Ted Morton had sent a letter to the AUC in October requesting that consideration of the proposed Heartland, Eastern Alberta and Western Alberta transmission lines be suspended until the government could review its approach to these lines. However, a few hours later, Premier Redford overturned this request by interfering with the AUC’s quasi-judicial process, instructing the AUC to go ahead with the Heartland line, but continue to suspend consideration of the Eastern Alberta and Western Alberta lines.

Many, including RETA, have criticized this decision by the Premier because without the Eastern and Western Alberta lines, the Heartland line makes no sense whatsoever.

High Voltage Power Lines Must Be Buried

Subsequent to a recent amendment, the Oshtemo Township, Michigan, utility-control ordinance now requires high voltage power lines within 250 feet of any public road right-of-way to be placed underground, and lines must also be buried in zoning districts that require it.

The township also issued a resolution in relation to high voltage lines, referencing the township’s authority to provide for the public health, safety and welfare of township residents and property. The amendment and resolution are deemed necessary to preserve the township’s rural character, ease strain on roads, enhance traffic safety, maintain the township’s aesthetics, comply with the master land use plan, protect and enhance operation of utilities, enhance residents’ safety, and protect residential dwellings and businesses.

The amendment and resolution follow resident protests over a new 7-mile-long overhead high voltage power line planned through the township by ITC Holdings Inc. See mlive.com coverage.

Successful Battle Against Overhead Power Line

RETA has previously reported on the battle by Chino Hills, California residents to stop an overhead 500 kilovolt power line by Southern California Edison (SCE) from being built through their community. The Hope For The Hills campaign against this power line has so many similarities to our battle against the Heartland Transmission Project – both projects have even planned monstrous monopole rather than lattice towers, in an unsuccessful attempt to appease concerned neighbouring homeowners about the visual impacts of ugly overhead towers and lines.

Well…..recently, the Hope for the Hills campaign has scored a major victory, together with support from local and federal elected representatives. On November 10,  the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) ordered SCE to stop construction work on the monopole towers in Chino Hills. The CPUC also ordered SCE to prepare alternatives to replace the previously-approved design and route through Chino Hills, including details on the feasibility, cost and timing for each alternative.

Although their battle is not over, this most recent CPUC ruling is most certainly a helpful start to Chino Hills residents’ campaign to get this massive line moved or buried. Residents have been fighting this line since 2007 on the basis of health, safety, visual and property devaluation impacts of such a huge project so close to so many homes. To make things worse, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) guidelines prohibit borrowers from qualifying for mortgages and refinancing their homes with FHA loans to residential properties that are located within the Fall Zone of high voltage transmission lines such as those built by SCE. This ruling by the CPUC is particularly meaningful, considering that 15 of the SCE monopole towers have already been built and erected in Chino Hills.

See the following media reports for details: Cal Watchdog, ChinoHills.com (1), Renew Grid, ChinoHills.com (2) and Contra Costa Times.

RETA congratulates the continuing efforts and recent victory of the Hope For The Hills campaign. This is a shining example of the success possible when a community works hard and has a strong commitment to fighting for what is right. Overhead high voltage power lines simply do not belong close to homes, schools and daycare centres.

Pressure Grows to Bury Power Lines

The Swissinfo.ch reports that although most Swiss consumers would be happy to have cheaper electricity, they draw the line at overhead high voltage power lines close to their homes.

Scientists have shown in a large comparative study that even very high voltage power lines can easily be buried. Until recently, it was primarily low- or medium-voltage lines that were buried. Although the capital cost of burying the lines is somewhat higher than construction above ground, the undergrounding costs are sinking rapidly according to German experts due to new technologies and the growing demand for burial. Experts say the placing of lines underground “only has a marginal effect” on costs passed on to consumers. This is particularly the case because long-term maintenance and transmission loss costs are much lower for buried lines.

This marked increase in burying very high-voltage power lines is a result of residents and communities taking energy companies to court because of the negative health effects from overhead lines, and residents don’t want to see the countryside spoiled or the natural environmental negatively affected. For example, the Swiss federal court recently ruled that the energy company Axpo would have to bury its high voltage power lines in the village of Riniken.

Why are other governments around the world responding to their citizens’ concerns about overhead high voltage power lines, but here in Alberta, the provincial government and electricity regulators (AUC) continue to ignore all the facts surrounding negative impacts of overhead high voltage lines?

Heartland Line – Most Contentious Issue in Years

As this letter to the Edmonton Journal states, “The Heartland transmission project is the most contentious issue seen in years. A whole lot of politicians need to give their collective heads a shake.” The letter goes on to suggest that security costs may be significant during construction of the line because so many people are angry about the manner in which the P.C. Government has mishandled the issue. This Sherwood Park News editorial agrees that the Heartland Transmission Project is the biggest controversy over the past year.

This is in follow up to the ludicrous November 1 decision by the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) that it is “in the public interest” to build the most massive overhead high voltage power lines ever seen in Alberta (77 metres tall – 253 feet) next to 5,194 homes, several schools, a hospital, many businesses, and many environmentally sensitive areas.

This Lacombe Globe article questions why the Heartland project was not suspended, as were the Eastern and Western Alberta transmission lines. Based on these types of bewildering decisions by the Alberta Government (including Premier Redford directly), the article goes on to suggest that “there are others eager and more than willing to take her place”, if she continues to falter. Others eager to replace her obviously include the Opposition parties, but also folks within the Alberta Progressive Conservative Party who did not vote for her.

There will undoubtedly be many more articles and letters to newspaper editors written on the Heartland Transmission Project fiasco.

AUC Heartland Power Line Decision – Fallout

The AUC (Alberta Utilities Commission) decision on the Heartland power line is now 2 weeks old. As anyone who has been following the news is aware, the AUC, in all its wisdom, has indicated that it is in the public interest to have the Heartland line built above ground (yes, not buried) through the Edmonton and Sherwood Park Greenbelts next to homes, schools, daycares, a hospital, and many environmentally sensitive areas.

To be a bit more precise, the AUC’s decision will directly and adversely affect 5,194 homes (over 15,000 people) in Edmonton, Sherwood Park, rural Strathcona County and Sturgeon County. For those of you keeping track, that’s 4,852 more homes than would have been impacted along the applicants’ alternate route, but if you can believe it, the AUC’s decision says fewer people are impacted along the Greenbelts (the route selected by the AUC). Will somebody please give the AUC a math lesson? (We point this out because of the AUC’s erroneous math – not because we would have supported an above-ground line close to any of the 342 homes along the alternate route.)

In the future, we will be providing much more information on the AUC’s decision so that you may judge for yourselves just exactly what “public interest” has been served by this ludicrous decision. But for now, we thought you might be interested in some of the hundreds of responses to date from Albertans, as reported by the media. Here’s a short list of some of the more common themes to these responses:

1. The AUC completely ignored the facts on health, safety, property value, environmental and aesthetic impacts presented by interveners opposed to an overhead line, and instead relied on unsubstantiated information presented by the applicants, AltaLink and EPCOR.

2. The AUC agreed on the line being built above ground right next to Colchester Elementary School, which was built in 1958, long before any greenbelts were developed. This well-maintained school currently has an enrollment of close to 200, and will close down if the line is built above ground.

3. Education Minister Thomas Lukaszuk is wrong to suggest that Colchester students might be better served by attending school somewhere else.

4. Many institutions,  groups and individuals will fight the AUC and the Alberta Government on this decision because it is a bad decision, based on a very biased interpretation of the evidence presented to the AUC. This battle might include legal, political and other appropriate remedies and measures.

5. The real irony is, industry, industrial organizations, academics, responsible electricity use groups and most Albertans have made it clear the Heartland line is not even needed. Why is the P.C. Government and the AUC ramming this line down our throats? What kind of back-room deals have been made with AltaLink, SNC-Lavalin and EPCOR?

6. The money it will take to build a new school (to replace Colchester), to build monopole rather than lattice towers, and to compensate homeowners and businesses for devalued properties next to an overhead line would have been more than enough to bury the line.

7. The AUC’s decision is no surprise because the Alberta Government and the AESO made it clear years ago they wanted a new line built in the Edmonton and Sherwood Park Greenbelts, which were set aside in the 1970′s to protect agriculture and the natural environment.

8. The AUC and the P.C. Government care more about satisfying the big power industry than they do about the health, safety and financial security of Albertans and protection of our natural environment.

9. The AUC and Alberta Government are promoting the use of dirty coal-fired power generation (at Wabamun) over more environmentally-friendly generation such as natural gas-fired and co-generated electricity.

10. Both the provincial government and the AUC refuse to recognize the advances made in high voltage line undergrounding technologies, and the many benefits of burying these lines.

11. Many communities in Strathcona County, Sturgeon County and Edmonton will be destroyed as a result of this decision.

12. To what extent did Premier Redford’s interference with the quasi-judicial process and her personal support for the Heartland line influence the AUC’s decision?

13. Bill 50 and other P.C. Government legislation helped lay the groundwork for this poor decision.

14. The entire public consultation and hearing process for the Heartland line was a farce.

Here are a few responses to the decision by RETA, as recorded by the media: CBC, Edmonton Journal, St. Albert Gazette and Sherwood Park News.

Following are just some of the hundreds of responses to the AUC decision from other Albertans and institutions: CTV (1), Calgary Beacon, Edmonton Journal (1), Strathcona County News Release (1), Sherwood Park News (1), Elk Island Public Schools News Release, Calgary Herald (1), iNews 880 (1), Canadian Business, Edmonton Journal (2), Sherwood Park News (2), Calgary Herald (2), CTV (2), Fort Saskatchewan Record, CTV (3), Calgary Herald (3), iNews 880 (2), Edmonton Sun, Sherwood Park News (3), Strathcona County News Release (2), Edmonton Journal (3), Sherwood Park News (4), iNews 880 (3), CTV (4), Edmonton Journal (4), Sherwood Park News (5), Edmonton Journal (5), Sherwood Park News (6) and Sherwood Park News (7).

Colchester School to Fight Heartland Power Line Decision

Over 100 concerned parents who attended a meeting November 14 made it clear that they will fight to keep Colchester Elementary School open and get the Heartland line buried next to the school. They are angry about the recent AUC (Alberta Utilities Commission) decision that favours big business over the health and safety of young children. See iNews 880 coverage and Sherwood Park News article.

Elk Island Public Schools, Strathcona County Council, RETA and many others are supportive of getting the line buried so the school can stay open. The well-maintained school, built in 1958, would close if the power line is built above ground as decided by the AUC, because parents would not want to jeopardize the health and safety of their children. Many peer-reviewed studies indicate significant increased risks of childhood leukemia and many other diseases associated with nearby overhead high voltage power lines.

The President of the Colchester Parents Association, Cheryl Przybilla, has challenged the Alberta Government to put health and safety of children before big power industry.

Alberta Government Flip Flop on Heartland Power Line

Early on October 21, the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) issued a letter to all Heartland registered and interested parties indicating that Alberta Energy Minister Ted Morton had formally asked the AUC to suspend or adjourn its consideration of the Heartland, Western Alberta and Eastern Alberta transmission lines. Rightfully so, the suspension would give the government time to review its approach to these controversial and unnecessary lines. A few hours later, Premier Redford unilaterally overturned her Energy Minister’s direction , and ordered the AUC to go ahead with the Heartland line, because she mistakenly believed the Heartland line is critical to Alberta’s economy.

RETA has now had an opportunity to review the many responses and hundreds of news articles plus electronic media coverage on the unbelievable flip flop by the Alberta Government regarding its approach to the Heartland power line. Following are some of the more common themes to responses from Albertans:

1. Premier Redford has seriously overstepped her authority both as Premier and a lawyer by ordering the AUC to continue its consideration of the Heartland line which she emphatically stated was critical. She has interfered with a quasi-judicial process which is similar to phoning a judge about a friend who received a drunk driving ticket in hopes of getting the charge dropped.

2. Albertans and all Opposition parties were shocked that the new Premier would interfere politically with a quasi-judicial process. It raises serious questions about the independence of the AUC.

3. How can the Premier give the go-ahead to the Heartland line which is supposed to connect the proposed Eastern Alberta and Western Alberta lines, when she agrees that the need for the Eastern and Western Alberta lines must be reviewed? The Heartland line makes no sense unless both the Eastern and Western Alberta lines are also built.

4. How can the Premier consider the Heartland line necessary when there has been no factual information whatsoever presented by the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO), Alberta Government, AltaLink or EPCOR to show that the line is needed? In fact, all of the credible evidence by industry, academics and responsible electricity use associations indicates clearly that the line is not needed. If it is built, it will be a line to nowhere.

5. The Alberta Government Cabinet obviously does not have its act together when it comes to the electricity file, because first the Energy Minister told the AUC to suspend its consideration of the Heartland line, and then a few short hours later Premier Redford overturned that direction.

6. Bill 50, which legislated the building of the Heartland line, must be scrapped – not simply reviewed – but scrapped.

Following is a small sampling of the response by RETA, as reported by the media, to this incredulous flip flop by the P.C. Government: Energize Alberta, Edmonton Journal, St. Albert Gazette, and Journal of Commerce.

Here are just some of the responses reported by the media from other Albertans: Global TV (1), Edmonton Journal (1), CBC, Calgary Herald, iNews 880, Wildrose News Release, NDP News Release, Calgary Beacon, CTV (1), Canadian Business, Global TV (2), Edmonton Sun, Sherwood Park News (1), CTV (2), Edmonton Journal (2), Red Deer Advocate, Sherwood Park News (2), Edmonton Journal (3) and Edmonton Journal (4).

Power Line Meeting: Fate of Colchester Elementary School

In light of Premier Redford’s support of the Heartland line and her direction to the AUC (Alberta Utilities Commission) in late October to hand down its decision, Colchester Elementary School will most probably close down.

Colchester is one of the oldest schools in Strathcona County, and has been not only a school, but also a centre of community activities for many years. It has been well maintained, is in fine physical condition,  and has a reputation of offering students some of the most dedicated teachers and administration in the County.

About 200 students are currently enrolled in the school.

With the AUC’s decision that it is in the public interest that EPCOR and AltaLink build the double circuit 500 kilovolt power line above ground within the Sherwood Park Greenbelt and right next to Colchester School, the fate of the school hangs on a thread. Parents are understandably concerned about the health and safety of their children, based on hundreds of scientific and medical studies that clearly indicate increased risks of many serious diseases and other health problems associated with overhead high voltage line EMFs and corona effect.

Attend this most critical meeting to find out what is planned for our school:

Monday, November 14, 2011

7:00 p.m.

Colchester Elementary School

Stay tuned for media coverage of the AUC’s November 1 decision to grant approval for EPCOR and AltaLink to build the most massive overhead high voltage power line towers and lines ever seen in Alberta right through the Sherwood Park and Edmonton Greenbelts and next to Colchester School. Over 15,000 Edmonton, Sherwood Park, Strathcona County and Sturgeon County residents will be directly and adversely affected.

Also stay tuned for media coverage of the unbelievable flip flop by the Alberta Government in late October to first put a hold on the Heartland decision and then a few hours later to have that hold overturned by Premier Redford who mistakenly thinks the Heartland line is critical to Alberta’s economy.

Heartland Line Goes Overhead!

As you have probably heard, the completely independent Alberta Utilities Commission, who, on Oct 19th was told to “suspend or adjourn its consideration of [three Critical Transmission Infrastructure] applications,” only to have that rescinded three hours later by Premier Alison Redford, today rendered their decision on the Heartland Transmission Line.

The inevitable outcome… yes, it’s going ahead and it will be overhead.  Brilliant.  Couldn’t have predicted that one.

Many of you had suggested in the past the AUC Hearing was simply theatre with a predetermined outcome.  Well, I had hoped better, but apparently, no.

What a wonderful process it was.  Let me see… the Applicants (AltaLink and Epcor) had two years to build their case. We, the interveners, had about 5 weeks to hire our expert witnesses and put our arguments together.  Seems fair.

The applicants had limitless resources, which, if they were successful, would be paid for by you and I.  We had to pay for this out of our own pockets and hope the AUC might reimburse us if they so decided.  Seems fair.

We have day jobs we need to attend to not to mention the stress of trying to keep a grass-roots organization going.  They get to hire a team of people whose only objective is to discredit us and further the goals of a multi-million dollar corporation, based out of Quebec, that doesn’t actually have to live with these power lines.  Seems fair.

And, by the way, don’t worry, these power lines are harmless. In time, you’ll grow to love them, and they hardly affect property values at all.  Any health impacts are purely imaginary and we’ll deny them until we’re blue in the face.  Remember asbestos and tobacco?

Well, anyway, rather than dwelling on what was a pretty predictable outcome we need to think about what we do next because we’re not going to roll over and play dead.

First of all, the root of the problem is the government, who, without being able to demonstrate there is a customer at the end of this, deems this line to be “critical”.  They also maintain it is “critical” despite the fact it won’t be energized to more than 15% of its capacity until at least 2027.  (This is in the applicant’s own submission).  Clearly, that must be critical.  That’s why they put Bill 50 in place to make sure the AUC didn’t even get to question the need for this line.

So, what do we do?  I think the answer is we need to do whatever we can to make sure this government doesn’t continue ruining the lives of Albertans.  I never wanted to get really political but I think the time has come.  I would appreciate your perspective on this, but, from where I sit, this government needs to go.

Second of all, we need to pursue whatever legal avenues we can.  I don’t know if there is any ability to challenge the AUC’s decision, and, let’s face it, if we do they will probably decide we won’t get reimbursed for our more than $500,000 in expenses for the hearing (wow, that’s fair too!).  But still, it is an avenue we must explore.

I think our last line of defense against this insanity is a class-action lawsuit.  Anyone who maintains there is no loss of property value when power lines are run by people’s homes is clearly delusional.  The loss in value is real and it is huge – at a modest 15% we estimate around $200M, and 15% is a very low-ball estimate.  Anyway, that’s for the class-action counsel to figure out.

So, please stay with us as we sort out what we’re going to do.  Change government, appeal decision, sue for losses?  Not sure.  Perhaps there are other avenues and we welcome hearing from you.

As always thank you for your support. I wish we had a better message to send tonight but I suppose this was reasonably predictable.

Thanks.

Bruce Johnson

President, RETA

Just Kidding!!

In a completely unpredictable move, nascent Alberta Premier Alison Redford publicly contradicts her appointed Energy Minister Ted Morton saying that she didn’t want three pointless proposed overbuilds of transmission infrastructure to be reviewed, only two of them.

Apparently, despite written letters from the Industrial Power Consumers Association of Alberta and Alberta Direct Connect, not to mention dozens of other objections from industry associations and taxpayer advocacy groups, Premier Redford has determined that the Heartland Transmission Line, in all of it’s 6,000 megawatt glory, is in fact actually required.

Two questions: If this is so critical then who are the customers (no one seems to be putting their hand up), and again, if this is so critical, why does the Heartland Project Team’s own documents show that the line won’t be energized to more than 15% of its capacity until at least 2027?  Doesn’t sound particularly critical to me, but then, who am I (as a taxpayer who has to foot the bill) to judge?

Critical Transmission Infrastructure Isn’t Critical

In a bold move, the new Alberta Energy Minister, Ted Morton, has asked the AUC to suspend its consideration of the applications for three of the so called Critical Transmission Infrastructure projects, the Heartland Line, the Western Alberta Transmission Line and the Eastern Alberta Transmission Line, while it reviews their approach for these projects.  You can read Ted Morton’s letter here.  The AUC has responded by sending a letter to all of the stakeholders informing them that they will suspend hearings and not render their decision for the Heartland transmission project until after the government has concluded its review.

RETA has maintained these transmission projects are not required and congratulates Minister Morton for deciding to conduct a review.  We will be asking the government to be included in the review process so that we can lend our perspective and offer alternatives to building massive transmission towers all across the landscape of our province.

Premier Must Consider Heartland Facts

Premier Redford has suggested that the Heartland power line is needed.

Consistent with RETA’s Final Argument and Reply Argument submitted to the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC), RETA VP Technical, John Kristensen, has responded in this letter to the Sherwood Park News that the facts clearly indicate the Heartland line is not needed. There are many reasons it is not needed including: 85% of its capacity will not be used, there is only one tar sands upgrader being built in the Heartland region, any tar sands upgraders built don’t need coal-fired power from Wabamun because they will co-generate their own electricity, local industry and municipal governments have shown the line is not needed, and residents living along the applicants’ preferred and alternate routes have shown it is not needed.

This is why RETA has asked the AUC in its Final Argument and Reply Argument to deny AltaLink’s and EPCOR’s application altogether to build the line, or if somehow the AUC determines it is in the best public interest that the line is built, to direct the applicants to bury the line when it runs near people and environmentally sensitive areas. Burying high voltage power lines eliminates almost all of the very negative impacts on health, safety, livestock, crops, the environment, property values and aesthetics.

The Sherwood Park News reports that Strathcona County Council believes it is important to keep an open dialogue with the new Premier and Cabinet on Bill 50 and the proposed Heartland line. This is particularly important because Strathcona County’s 13-year Cabinet representation has been lost with the announcement of Premier Redford’s new Cabinet. Some Councillors have indicated the County is going to continue the fight and they’re going to keep trying to get the line buried.

In this article, Garnett Genuis, Wildrose Alliance candidate for Sherwood Park, says, “…the new Premier’s support for the Heartland Transmission Project further indicates that Sherwood Park’s concerns are not a priority for this government.”

Stay tuned for more on this.

Bill 50 Must Be Scrapped

Letters to the Sherwood Park News editor (letter 1, letter 2) reiterate how upset Albertans are with Bill 50, the Electric Statutes Amendment Act, 2009, the legislation passed by the Alberta Government in late 2009. This legislation took away any role by the public, industry or the Alberta Utilities Commission (the regulator) in determining whether or not new high voltage power lines labelled as “critical transmission infrastructure” by the government are necessary.

What is particularly angering Albertans is the fact that, although we now have no input on the need for all of these new expensive lines, we have to pay 100% of the cost of these lines, while the transmission companies like AltaLink, EPCOR and ATCO end up owning them, and reaping a guaranteed 9% annual return on our investment. And, to top it all off, those Albertans who are so unfortunate to live next to these proposed so-called “critical” power lines, will suffer a double-whammy……they will have to pay for those lines, and then have their health, safety, property values and overall quality of life negatively impacted.

Is it any wonder Albertans want the controversial Bill 50 repealed?

Impacts of Overhead High Voltage Lines on Crops

CBC News reports that an organic vegetable farmer near Innisfail, Alberta, is worried a new overhead high voltage power line will negatively affect his livelihood. The farmer is worried he might lose his organic farming certification if a high voltage line is built on his land. AltaLink, which is proposing the controversial Red Deer Area Transmission Development Project, suggests the line would reinforce the transmission system between Wetaskiwin and Didsbury.

RETA has previously reported on research that indicates exposure to overhead high voltage power line electromagnetic fields (EMFs) reduces overall crop growth and negatively affects numerous important physiological characteristics including: shoot length, root length, leaf area, leaf weight, shoot/root ratio, total biomass and total water content. These impacts obviously result in economic loss.

Burying high voltage lines would significantly reduce these agricultural economic losses by reducing EMFs.

Heartland Power Line Not Needed

First, Premier Redford was quoted this week in the Calgary Herald as stating that the Heartland transmission line is necessary. More recently, the Sherwood Park News reports that Sherwood Park MLA Iris Evans has also indicated the proposed Heartland line is needed. The facts suggest otherwise.

The proponents of the Heartland Transmission Project, AltaLink and EPCOR, indicate in their facility application to the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) that a whopping 85% of the capacity of this proposed line will not be used until 2027, and then 70% of its capacity will not be used thereafter. Whether you’re an electrical engineer or not, the obvious question is, “Why then is this massive double-circuit 500 kilovolt power line being proposed?” The line, with towers up to 77 metres tall (253 feet) would be the largest power line ever built in Alberta, with negative impacts not ever experienced before in our province.

The reason both the Alberta Government and the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) have given for building the Heartland line is the new tar sands upgraders in the Industrial Heartland will need the power. Well, in 2008, nine upgraders were planned – now there is only one. The real irony is, any tar sands upgraders that might get built in the Industrial Heartland will co-generate their own electricity, so will not require the dirty coal-fired electricity from Wabamun that the proposed Heartland line would transmit. Again, the obvious question is, “Why then is the Heartland line deemed necessary by the Alberta Government and the AESO?”

Hopefully, the upcoming decision by the AUC will reflect the facts presented at the Heartland hearing that lasted from April 11 to May 18, 2011. The facts clearly indicate that the Heartland Transmission Project is not needed. However, if this line is built, it must be buried when it runs close to homes, schools, daycares, hospitals and environmentally sensitive areas.

Premier-Designate Redford Speaks on Power Lines

Although Premier-designate Redford said very little about electricity transmission during the P.C. leadership race, she has something to say now. Some of it makes sense, while some of it does not.

Her recent comment to the Calgary Herald that makes sense is that not all the lines labelled as “critical transmission infrastructure” by the Alberta Government in Bill 50 are necessary. Another comment that makes sense is that, “If for any reason there was ever a decision made to export electricity, the cost of all of that transmission must be paid by the customer – and the customer in that case would be the United States.” As well, her comment that the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) needs to more seriously consider electricity costs to consumers, makes sense.

A comment by the new Premier that does not make sense is that the proposed Heartland transmission line is necessary. RETA President Bruce Johnson has already responded by asking why the Heartland line needs to be so massive, and why does it need to be above ground and ruin countless people’s lives?

According to AltaLink and EPCOR, the proposed Heartland line will be energized to only 15% of its total capacity until 2027, and then to only 30% of its total capacity thereafter. Why then is a double-circuit 500 kilovolt line with 77-metre-tall towers needed if 85% and 70% of its total capacity will never be used?? This makes no sense whatsoever. To add to the question of why the Heartland line is even necessary, when the line was first planned, there were 9 bitumen upgraders that were going to be built in the Industrial Heartland – now there is only one. And, any upgrader that is built in the Heartland will co-generate its own electricity, will not require dirty coal-fired power from Wabamun, and therefore the Heartland line is not needed.

If the new Premier thinks a Heartland line between Wabamun and the Industrial Heartland is necessary, and if it is built above ground, it will negatively impact 5,194 homes (15,000 – 18,000 people), several schools, many businesses including daycares, and a hospital. These impacts include health, safety, property values, the local environment, aesthetics and overall quality of life. RETA’s position for the past 3 years has been that high voltage power lines must be buried if they are built close to homes, schools, daycares, hospitals and environmentally sensitive areas. If high voltage lines are not buried in such unique circumstances, then those impacted must be fairly compensated on the basis of replacement value (not market value which has already been significantly diminished by power line proposals).

It appears that Edmonton, Sherwood Park and Strathcona County residents are in for a long battle to keep the proposed Heartland line from being built above ground through the Sherwood Park and Edmonton Greenbelts (AltaLink’s and EPCOR’s preferred route).

Thank You Gary Mar

RETA wishes to sincerely thank Alberta Progressive Conservative leadership candidate Gary Mar for supporting our position that the Alberta Government develop a policy on where high voltage power lines should be buried.

Gary Mar received 49% of the final votes cast for the second ballot on October 1 (when voters’ 1st choices and 2nd choices of those who voted for Doug Horner were combined). Alison Redford received 51% of the votes, and is the new leader of the Alberta P.C. Party and new Premier of Alberta. RETA congratulates Premier Redford on her victory.

The Latest from Gary Mar on Power Lines

Here are the latest statements from Alberta P.C. leadership candidate Gary Mar on electricity transmission in Alberta, as quoted from a recent Sherwood Park News ad:

“Gary has clearly stated that there are problems in the way electricity is handled in Alberta. AESO and the AUC need to consider the impact to Albertans when approving new generation and transmission lines. Government needs to have clear policies on where transmission lines should be buried. Determining where they go is not as simple as drawing straight lines on a map.”

With these commitments from Gary Mar, we encourage Albertans who want to fix the way electricity generation and transmission have been handled in Alberta to vote for Gary Mar on Saturday, October 1 from 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Click here to find your poll.

Support Gary Mar for Premier

As Albertans are aware, Alberta Progressive Conservative leadership candidate Rick Orman garnered a respectable 10.1% of the total votes cast for the 1st ballot, but did not make it to the 2nd ballot. He has put his support behind Gary Mar for the 2nd and final ballot, and is encouraging everyone who voted for him on the 1st ballot to do the same.

Gary Mar has said, if he becomes Premier,  he would put the Heartland Transmission Project on hold until his many questions are answered, several of which are:

1. Is it feasible to bury the line?

2. Is the line even needed?

3. How much is it really going to cost?

4. How long are Alberta ratepayers going to pay for this line?

5. How does it affect the school that is close to the line?

6. How does it affect people’s property values?

Mar has also said he would amend Bill 50 to remove Cabinet’s discretionary power to decide which new transmission projects are “critical”, and that the need for new power lines can be determined, as in the past, by the Alberta Utilities Commission in full consultation with Alberta consumers.

As a result of his considered approach on this subject, we are encouraging RETA members and other Albertans who have concerns about overhead high voltage power lines to vote for Gary Mar on Saturday, October 1, 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

To find out where your poll is click on http://www.albertapc.ab.ca/admin/Contentx/default.cfm?PageId=10031. $5.00 P.C. memberships are available for purchase at the polls.

P.C. Leadership Candidates – Power Lines

Results of the first ballot conducted on September 17 for leader of the Alberta Progressive Conservative Party and next Premier of Alberta saw Gary Mar garner 41% of the vote, Alison Redford 19% and Doug Horner 14%. These 3 candidates move forward to the second ballot which will be held October 1. So what has each of the candidates said about electricity transmission and the proposed high voltage power lines dubiously labelled “critical transmission infrastructure” by the Alberta Government?

Within his first 90 days as Premier, leadership candidate Gary Mar has recently said he would change Bill 50 so Cabinet no longer had the authority to create critical transmission infrastructure. He would ensure that Alberta ratepayers have input on the need for new high voltage lines. The St. Albert Gazette reports that he would also ask the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) to take another look at proposed north-south transmission lines. As well, Mar’s website indicates he would look at lowering electricity costs while maintaining reliability, which might require new and more efficient generation and transmission technologies.

In the past, Mar has indicated he would put a hold on the Heartland Transmission Project until numerous questions he has are answered. For example, in August, the Sherwood Park News reported that he said, “There are wide variances in respect to what it’s going to cost and over how long a period you’re going to pay for it and even very basic questions, such as do you need all this transmission now?” These questions need to be answered to his satisfaction before he would approve continuation of the project.

When asked about the Heartland line in April of this year, Mar told the Sherwood Park News, “I need to ask questions about how much power is needed in this area, is it feasible to bury the line underground? How does it affect the school that is close to the line? How is it affecting people’s property values? Those are all factors you need to take into account.”

Doug Horner was recently reported by the Edmonton Journal, Edmonton Sun and Calgary Herald  as promising, if he becomes Premier, to issue a request-for-proposals to bury power lines such as the proposed Heartland Transmission Project. He wants to find out how much it really costs to bury high voltage power lines, and then determine whether those additional capital costs to bury lines in special circumstances when they run close to high-density areas can be justified.

(RETA’s expert testimony at the recent Alberta Utilities Commission hearing on the proposed Heartland line indicates that a partially buried Heartland line could cost as little as only 15% more to build than an entirely above-ground line. However, if capital, maintenance and transmission loss costs are combined over the life of a line, a buried line can be cheaper than an above-ground line.)

Horner has also said a  government under his leadership would conduct a review of how competitive Alberta’s entire electrical system is, including an analysis of how transmission lines are built and financed, consumer price protection, and a strategy on alternative fuels and power generation. He’s also recommending a new mandate for the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO).

Alison Redford wants to review Bill 50 and the need for both of the proposed north-south high voltage power lines. She has also recently suggested that the proposed Heartland line is necessary.

Line Buried to Protect People

This Cairns.co.au article reports that $4.5 million will be spent to bury a 220 kilovolt power line in Cairns, Queensland, Australia. The project will involve burying the high voltage line near an elderly care centre, school, and shopping centre, where there are high concentrations of people.

The power company, Ergon Energy, says the underground lines will provide long-term benefits to customers in the area, provide a more secure power supply to facilities, and permit faster restoration of power supply following major weather impacts on the network. The buried lines also allow the power company to defer building more substations, thereby resulting in cost savings.

(Why can’t transmission facility operators in Alberta adopt the same attitude about the benefits of burying specific sections of new high voltage power lines where there are high concentrations of people?)

More on SNC-Lavalin and AltaLink

RETA has been reporting on Montreal-based SNC-Lavalin’s ownership of AltaLink. Well, it’s now official…the Daily Commercial News reports that SNC-Lavalin has finalized the purchase of the remaining 23.08% of ownership in Calgary-based AltaLink, so now owns 100% of the company.

Concerns were raised at the recent Alberta Utilities Commission hearing on the proposed Heartland power line about the high SNC-Lavalin engineering and management costs on this project. However, since the Alberta Government has included the Heartland Transmission Project within the Bill 50 dubiously-labeled “critical transmission infrastructure”, the public, industry and business community have no opportunity to ask questions on the cost accounting (or indeed the need) for this line. It’s nice to know the profits reaped by AltaLink from all of its projects in Alberta will be flowing to SNC-Lavalin in Montreal. And, the good news is, all of AltaLink’s transmission infrastructure will be fully paid for by Alberta electricity ratepayers, thanks to the Alberta Government’s changes to the infrastructure funding model some years ago.

The news gets even better. A little digging on SNC-Lavalin provides some insight into the kind of company that owns and controls AltaLink. Rabble.ca reports that SNC-Lavalin built a jail in Libya for Gadhafi to throw protesters into (before he was overthrown), and has been conducting other significant business with Gadhafi since 1986, totalling well over $1 billion.

This recent article provides details on many other SNC-Lavalin business arrangements (that Bourque Newswatch considers questionable) in Newfoundland, Quebec, Bangladesh and India, involving alleged kickbacks, creative accounting, and heavy lobbying of Canada’s federal Ministers and senior federal bureaucrats by SNC-Lavalin.

High Bird Counts Near Proposed Power Line

During the recent Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) hearing on the proposed double circuit 500kV Heartland power line, numerous interveners provided expert evidence on the anticipated impacts of an above ground Heartland line on bird deaths. For example, based on power line bird mortality data from the U.S. and the Netherlands,  RETA’s Direct Environmental Impact Evidence estimated that between 8,200 and 14,100 birds may be killed annually colliding with an overhead Heartland line along AltaLink’s and EPCOR’s preferred route.

Throughout the AUC hearing, the applicants’ environmental consultants (Stantec Consulting Ltd.) referred to the wetlands and wetland complexes along their preferred route as “lower quality”, “not particularly important” and of “relatively low value to wildlife”. RETA, Strathcona County and the Sherwood Park Fish and Game Association challenged this erroneous habitat characterization by Stantec, pointing out the high numbers of birds along this route in normal water-level years.

Unlike the very biased low bird counts obtained by Stantec and included in their hearing evidence, they might be well advised to have conducted bird surveys this Fall. For example, RETA biologists have conducted daily bird surveys of the Bretona Pond wetland complex along and under the proposed Heartland line, and have counted anywhere from 500 to 2,300 waterbirds daily just before sunset. It is hard to believe how any professional biologists (Stantec) could characterize habitat with such high bird counts as “not particularly important”.

This is just one of many examples of the very biased environmental impact information presented by AltaLink’s and EPCOR’s consultants to the recent AUC hearing on the proposed Heartland line.

World-wide Battle Against Overhead Power Lines

RETA is entering its fourth year of educating the public, governments, regulators, industry and other businesses, yes and even electricity transmission companies, about the negative impacts of overhead high voltage power lines and the benefits of burying these lines. During this period, it’s been absolutely amazing to find out how many other organizations and communities around the world are conducting similar education campaigns. Check out our “Links to Other Websites” for some of these.

For example, one such organization in Chino Hills, California, known as Hope For The Hills, has been battling Southern California Edison and the California Public Utilities Commission to keep a 500 kilovolt line with towers up to 200 feet tall from being built right next to their homes. Chino Hills City has even sued Southern California Edison in an attempt to stop this line from being built so close to homes. Residents are worried about cancer and other health risks from the line’s electromagnetic fields, property devaluation, and towers falling over in earthquakes or wind storms. This is just one of hundreds of communities that has organized itself to protect residents’ health, safety, assets and overall quality of life.

With as much concern being expressed, almost universally, about the negative impacts of overhead lines on health, safety, the environment, property values and aesthetics, you would think the power generation and transmission industry would be doing all it could to address these concerns. Why aren’t more companies looking more seriously at generating power closer to where the power is needed, so fewer long transmission lines are required? Why aren’t more companies more seriously considering improved transmission technologies, such as burying new lines whenever they are built close to homes, schools, daycares, hospitals and environmentally sensitive areas? Why aren’t transmission companies compensating homeowners and businesses that are disadvantaged  by having high voltage lines built right next to them (disadvantaged financially and in terms of health)? Why would transmission companies rather spend millions of dollars fighting communities in order to continue building more overhead high voltage lines, rather than using safer technologies or routing choices? Spending a bit more money to address people’s concerns about overhead lines would in many cases cost far less than fighting communities over protracted periods of time.

As communities around the world become more organized, as they share more and more research and other information, and as safer transmission technologies are improved and drop in price, power transmission companies can no longer ignore the facts and try to pull the wool over our eyes. Yes, we all want and need electricity, but there are safer ways of getting it to our communities, our homes and our businesses. It’s time the electricity transmission industry joined the 21st century.

Thank You Rick Orman

RETA wishes to sincerely thank Alberta Progressive Conservative Party leadership candidate, Rick Orman, for supporting our position to bury new high voltage power lines when they are built close to residential areas and schools.

Rick garnered a respectable 10.1% of the total number of votes cast on September 17, province-wide,  for the new leader of the P.C. Party and next Premier of Alberta.

Kill Bill 50

This letter to the Edmonton Sun points out the frustration of many Albertans about Bill 50, the undemocratic law that legislates the building of numerous new high voltage power lines. Even though Alberta ratepayers foot 100% of the costs to get these new lines built, Bill 50 took away any public input on the need and accounting for these lines. The Alberta Government Cabinet unilaterally makes these decisions now.

The writer suggests Albertans contact their MLA and demand that this draconian legislation be rescinded.

This Candidate Would Bury the Power Line

Click here to see the following RETA ad (full size) in the Sherwood Park News.

Vote to Bury High Voltage Power Lines

Do you support burying new high voltage power lines when they run close to densely-populated residential areas and schools?

If you do, vote RICK ORMAN for Alberta’s next Premier, Saturday, Sept. 17 from 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

Click http://www.albertapc.ab.ca/admin/Contentx/default.cfm?PageId=10031 to find out where you vote in your constituency.

Sturgeon County Says No to Heartland Line

The Morinville News reports that Sturgeon County Council passed the following motion at its September 13 meeting:

“That County Council having reviewed the evidence presented at the recent Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) Heartland Transmission Line Hearings has concluded that the social and economic costs to the County, the Heartland and the Province greatly exceed the benefits. Accordingly, Sturgeon County Council opposes the construction of the Heartland Transmission Line as proposed.”

This position differs from the one the County took at the AUC hearings, where Sturgeon County recognized the need for a safe, secure and affordable electricity supply in order to meet Alberta’s present and future needs, but it shouldn’t jeopardize the viability of current or future commercial and industrial interests.

Sturgeon’s latest motion is in recognition of the massive overbuild of the planned Heartland line which will result in a significant increase in electricity transmission costs to Alberta ratepayers. This St. Albert Gazette article reports that RETA agrees the Heartland line is a massive overbuild. (The line would be energized to only 15% of its capacity until 2027, and then to only 30% of its capacity thereafter – which makes it a gargantuan overbuild.)

Rick Orman for Premier

The Sherwood Park News recently interviewed Rick Orman, one of the 6 candidates for leader of the Alberta Progressive Conservative Party, and next Premier of Alberta.

Not only has Rick committed to get new high voltage power lines buried when they are built close to densely-populated residential areas and schools (like the proposed Heartland line), but he has also enunciated well-thought-out policies on education, health care and many other sectors that would be refreshing changes for Alberta. He proposes a tax credit that would allow post-secondary students to pay off their student loans faster and stay in Alberta to work. In health care, Rick promises to address inordinate billing practices, abuse by health care service users, additional extended care facilities for chronically ill patients, and an improved home care system. He has also committed to follow through on finishing the Sherwood Park hospital promised by the Alberta Government so many years ago.

See earlier RETA blogs for details on how to vote for Rick Orman at the advance polls September 13, or at the election day polls September 17.

Electricity Transmission Report Card

Fact: Until there is a provincial general election, we know the next Premier of Alberta will be Progressive Conservative.

RETA has either spoken directly with each Alberta Progressive Conservative leadership candidate or a campaign representative, or researched each candidate’s positions on: burying high voltage power lines in special circumstances, who should pay to have lines buried in special circumstances, electricity transmission and related land use legislation, and specific views on the proposed Heartland Transmission Project. On the basis of this research, RETA has assigned a grade to each candidate and ranked them as follows:

1.  Rick Orman:  A+

2.  Gary Mar:  C

3.  Doug Horner:  C

4.  Ted Morton:  C-

5.  Doug Griffiths:  D

6.  Alison Redford:  D

On the basis of this report card ranking, the RETA Board is endorsing Rick Orman as the new leader of the Alberta P.C. Party and next Premier of Alberta. The RETA Board encourages its members and all Albertans concerned about overhead high voltage power line impacts on health, safety, property values, the environment and aesthetics, to vote for Rick Orman at the advance polls Tuesday, September 13 or at the election day polls on Saturday, September 17.

Polls are open from 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. To find out where to vote either at the advance polls on September 13 or at the election day polls on September 17, click on your provincial constituency here. To vote, you need a $5.00 membership in the Alberta P.C. Party; memberships can be purchased at your poll. Because so many fewer people vote in political party leadership elections than in provincial general elections, your vote REALLY COUNTS this time.

You can help change the way electricity is transmitted in Alberta by voting for Rick Orman.

Repeal Bill 50 Says New Alberta Liberal Leader

The Globe and Mail reports that newly-elected Alberta Liberal Party leader, Dr. Raj Sherman, says he would repeal Bill 50 if the Liberals form the next government. Bill 50 is the controversial Electric Statutes Amendment Act, 2009, that removed public input on the need for all the new high voltage power lines that the Alberta Government and the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) have planned throughout Alberta.

In March 2011, the Alberta Liberal Energy Critic, Kent Hehr, indicated to the Legislative Assembly (see Alberta Hansard) that the Liberal Party supports burying the proposed Heartland Transmission Project due to health concerns by residents who would be living next to the line.

Vote to Bury the Heartland Power Line

RETA has endorsed RICK ORMAN as the next leader of the Alberta Progressive Conservative Party. See RETA’s news release here. RETA is also encouraging its members and other Albertans who support burying new high voltage power lines when they run near densely-populated residential areas and schools to support Orman.

The way to ensure new high voltage power lines in Alberta are buried in these special circumstances is to:

• Vote for Rick Orman to become Alberta’s next Premier.

• Purchase a $5.00 membership in the Alberta P.C. Party here.

• To find out where to vote either at the advance polls on September 13 or at the election day polls on September 17, click on your provincial constituency here. (For example, residents living along the Sherwood Park and Edmonton Greenbelts, where AltaLink and EPCOR propose to build the Heartland line, would click on Sherwood Park, Strathcona, or Edmonton Ellerslie.)

Voting in this election is about getting new high voltage power lines buried when they should be, to reduce or eliminate negative impacts of overhead lines. It doesn’t matter how you normally vote in a provincial general election (which may well be called in Spring 2012); rather it’s about ensuring that an Alberta Government policy is written before the next provincial election that allows new power lines, such as the proposed Heartland line, to be buried in special circumstances.

On August 25, 2011, Rick Orman held a news conference in Sherwood Park where he clearly stated that, if he becomes Premier, he would ensure a new policy is developed that would allow new high voltage power lines to get buried in special circumstances when they are built near schools or densely-populated residential areas.  He cited the proposed Heartland line, with its massive 77-metre-tall (253 feet) towers, as an example. (See articles in the Edmonton Journal, Edmonton Sun and Sherwood Park News.)

Orman also indicated that any additional capital costs of burying new high voltage lines in special circumstances should be shared by all Alberta ratepayers, just as is the case with other electricity transmission infrastructure. He went on to say that “While the capital costs of burying a high-voltage power line may be higher than those for above-ground lines, these are offset by lower maintenance and loss-of-transmission costs for an underground line throughout its lifetime.”

VOTE FOR RICK ORMAN SEPTEMBER 17, 2011.

P.C. Leadership Candidates’ Views – Power Lines

As the September 17 first ballot vote for the new Alberta Progressive Conservative Party leader draws near, the debate on electricity transmission in Alberta is heating up.

Regarding Bill 50 that removed public input on the need for new high voltage power lines, candidate Ted Morton says he would repeal the bill if he becomes Premier. Doug Griffiths, Alison Redford, Rick Orman and Gary Mar have gone on record as saying the bill needs to be reviewed or changes are required to make sure the public has some say on whether the new proposed lines are needed. Doug Horner says Bill 50 is fine as it is and does not require review. See this Winnipeg Free Press article.

Specifically on the issue of burying high voltage lines in special circumstances, only one candidate – Rick Orman – has been unequivocal that the lines need to be buried when they run near densely-populated residential areas. Orman has cited the proposed massive 500kV double-circuit Heartland line as the “poster child” for power line special circumstances, and would get the line buried near the densely-populated residential areas in Strathcona County and Edmonton if he becomes Premier. No other candidate has publicly addressed burying high voltage power lines as strongly or directly as Orman. Most recently, candidate Doug Horner asked a lot of questions about the underground technology but gave no answers.

Rick Orman’s support for burying high voltage lines in special circumstances has earned the strong endorsement of Strathcona Mayor Linda Osinchuk and RETA. RETA has encouraged its members and other Albertans concerned about the negative impacts of overhead high voltage power lines to support Rick Orman’s bid to become Premier by purchasing a $5.00 membership in the Alberta P.C. Party at http://www.voterickorman.com/ and voting for Orman September 17. Irrespective of your political history or how you have voted in provincial general elections, RETA encourages Albertans to help decide who becomes Alberta’s next Premier.

Hearing Date Set for ATCO 500kV Line

The Alberta Utilities Commission has scheduled January 16, 2012 as the beginning of the public hearing on ATCO Electric’s proposed Eastern Alberta Transmission Line to run from Gibbons to Brooks, Alberta.

This 500 kilovolt high voltage direct current (HVDC) line has many landowners concerned about their health, safety, property values, the environment and aesthetics. For over a year now, affected landowners have formed numerous groups to oppose the line (e.g., Vegreville Area Landowners Transmission Line Opposition Association {VALTOA}, and Voice of Community and Land {VOCAL}). This is one of several proposed new power lines dubiously labeled as “critical transmission infrastructure” in Bill 50, the controversial legislation passed in 2009 by the Alberta Government which took away any public input on the need and accountability for all these new high voltage lines.

Want to be Updated Automatically?

If you’re interested in receiving automatic notifications by email of new posts to RETA’s home page (blog), scroll down the right-hand menu bar to “Email Subscription” and enter your email address.  This way you won’t miss any new information on electricity transmission issues in Alberta, North America, and around the world.

You will have to check regularly, however, for frequent updates to our “Latest News”.

Based on your requests, we have also recently added a home page search option…..just scroll down the right-hand menu bar to “Home Page Search Categories” and click on your category choice.

Opposition to ATC 345kV Line Grows

The Dellona Town Board is the latest to join the growing opposition to American Transmission Company’s (ATC) proposed Badger Coulee Transmission Line from La Crosse to Dane County, Wisconsin. The Wisconsin News (article 1, article 2) reports that Dellona residents are worried about the negative impacts of the proposed above-ground line on development, the economy, the environment, property values, and livestock.

Many municipalities and citizen groups (e.g., SOUL) have expressed their opposition to this line since it was proposed by ATC. (Opposition would be minimal, or eliminated, if the line was buried.)

More Concerns by Candidates about Heartland Line

Recently-elected Wildrose candidate for the Strathcona-Sherwood Park provincial constituency, Paul Nemetchek, has concerns about the proposed Heartland power line. The Sherwood Park News reports that Nemetchek indicates AltaLink’s and EPCOR’s preferred route for the line is an area intended to be a green space. See this letter to the Edmonton Journal for details on the history of the Sherwood Park Greenbelt, which indeed clarifies that the intent of the Sherwood Park Greenbelt was to provide a buffer between sprawling Edmonton and rural Strathcona County. Mr. Nemetchek will be running against the incumbent MLA, Dave Quest, in the next provincial election.

This Sherwood Park News article reports Alberta P.C. leadership candidate Gary Mar wants to put a hold on construction of the Heartland line because there are too many unanswered questions regarding its cost, the period over which ratepayers would be paying for the line, and do we need all this transmission now? Mar wants these questions answered before he would approve continuation of the project.

These comments follow closely on the heels of Alberta P.C. leadership candidate Rick Orman’s commitment last week to get the Heartland line buried if it is built, and ensure that the costs are shared by all Alberta electricity ratepayers. This strong commitment by Mr. Orman earned the support of Strathcona County Mayor Linda Osinchuk and RETA . RETA encourages its members, and other Albertans concerned about overhead high voltage power lines, to purchase a $5.00 membership in the Alberta P.C. Party and vote for Rick Orman on September 17. Regardless of your political background, RETA encourages Albertans to participate in the election of Alberta’s next Premier.

The Perfect Case for Burying Power Lines

There are hundreds of reports of downed electricity transmission and distribution lines in the wake of Hurricane Irene. For example, this Bloomberg article reports that about 5.94 million customers were or are without power in 13 states in the eastern U.S. from North Carolina to Maine. This is far greater than the number of outages from Hurricane Gloria in 1985 or Hurricane Isabel in 2003. As well, this Edmonton Journal article reports thousands of customers in eastern Canada without power due to Irene.

Would it not make sense to bury power lines in areas that are ravaged by hurricanes on a regular basis? The millions of dollars saved in power line repair and maintenance costs, as well as down time and lost revenues from industry and businesses would more than pay any additional capital costs to bury the lines. Over the life of a power line, underground lines are cheaper than overhead lines.

Rick Orman Listens to Power Line Concerns

At a news conference August 25, Alberta P.C. Party leadership candidate Rick Orman distanced himself from the other five candidates on electricity transmission by saying new high voltage power lines should be buried when they run close to densely-populated residential areas. He also said, if there is any additional capital cost to bury these lines, it must be shared among Alberta ratepayers. See Edmonton Journal, Edmonton Sun and front-page Sherwood Park News coverage.

Mr. Orman went on to say, if elected leader of the Alberta P.C. Party, he would make sure a policy was written that would allow for power lines to be buried in areas where there are dense residential populations and where there are special circumstances (such as for the proposed Heartland line).

RETA President Bruce Johnson said RETA supports Mr. Orman’s position and encourages its over 8,000 members, and other Albertans concerned about the negative effects of overhead high voltage power lines, to buy a $5.00 membership in the P.C. Party and vote for Rick Orman on September 17. Memberships can be purchased online at http://www.voterickorman.com/. Regardless of your political background, RETA encourages you to participate in the election of Alberta’s next Premier.

Mayor Linda Osinchuk also supports Mr. Orman for his strong stand on the power line issue, as well as other issues important to Strathcona County residents.

Rick Orman Says Bury the Line

Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta leadership candidate Rick Orman announced today that new high voltage power lines should be buried in specific and unique situations when they run close to very densely-populated residential areas. He cited the proposed Heartland Transmission Project as an example. See Rick Orman’s news release here.

Strathcona County Mayor Linda Osinchuk and RETA President Bruce Johnson are delighted that one of the P.C. leadership candidates has come out so strong in support of something they have been fighting for for over 3 years. Both indicated that Mr. Orman was bold in supporting the underground transmission technology that has been gaining rapid support around the world as people find out more about the negative health, safety, environmental, property value and aesthetic impacts of overhead high voltage power lines. See the Mayor’s support here and RETA’s news release here .

The RETA Executive will be encouraging its over 8,000 registered members to support Rick Orman by purchasing a P.C. membership and voting for him on September 17 and October 1 (if the vote goes to a second ballot). Bruce Johnson said, “If Mr. Orman is willing to support us, we certainly are willing to support him.”

Read more about the benefits of burying high voltage power lines here.

Altered Power Line Route Triggers New Hearing

The Lethbridge Herald and CTV News report that local landowners are upset with AltaLink for dramatically altering the route of a proposed high voltage power line in Southwest Alberta that was approved 2 years ago.

The Livingstone Landowners Group, representing about 100 area landowners, accuse AltaLink and the Alberta Electric System Operator of trying to move an already approved route between Pincher Creek and the Crowsnest Pass  to a more pristine area. The main beef by affected landowners is with not being consulted about this major proposed routing change. Landowners argue AltaLink’s new proposed route would effectively industrialize and fragment the Porcupine Hills, Oldman River basin and the Livingstone Range (all iconic landscapes).

The Alberta Utilities Commission felt the proposed changes were significant enough to warrant a separate 3-day public hearing, scheduled to end August 25.

Bird Deaths – High Voltage Power Lines

The Sherwood Park News reports that AltaLink and the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee recently hosted a workshop on bird deaths resulting from electrocution and collision with overhead power lines and towers. RETA criticized some of the mitigation measures as inadequate.

Electricity transmission companies have been developing measures for years in an attempt to mitigate the high numbers of bird deaths resulting primarily from collision with high voltage power lines and towers. They have tried using markers, flags and other diverters to decrease bird deaths that are reported in the literature to be up to 214 deaths/kilometre of power line/year (and even higher in ideal avian habitat). Estimates of bird deaths in most studies are generally considered to be low due to a number of factors including: inability to find dead birds that have crashed into lines, injured birds that are able to crawl away from under the lines and die later some distance from the lines, predators consuming dead birds before they can be found and counted, etc.

Avian biologists for Strathcona County (Dr. Erin Bayne) and RETA (John Kristensen) presented evidence at the recent Alberta Utilities Commission hearing on the proposed 500kV double-circuit Heartland line that would have towers up to 77m tall. Evidence focused on studies that estimated the magnitude of bird deaths from collision with overhead high voltage lines. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service estimates up to 174 million bird deaths annually in the U.S. from collisions with overhead transmission lines. Studies in North Dakota prairie wetlands estimate 124 bird deaths/kilometre/year. In the Netherlands, studies have estimated 58 bird deaths/kilometre/year, 113 deaths/km/yr and 464 deaths/km/yr in agricultural lands, grassland and near rivers, respectively. See this Fact Sheet for some of these studies.

Based on extrapolations from the literature, and the high numbers of birds and bird species present along the proposed Heartland power line, as many as 14,000 birds could get killed annually along the 66-kilometre overhead line between the Ellerslie community in Edmonton and the Industrial Heartland. The only way to effectively reduce bird deaths from collision with power lines and towers is to bury the lines, especially near areas with known high bird populations. Simply put, buried power lines do not kill birds.

Putting markers or diverters on high voltage lines is just a band-aid solution. Not only do birds continue to get killed, but the markers add to the unsightliness of the already unsightly lines and towers.

Read about the many other benefits of burying high voltage lines.

Dave Conroy – Bury Power Line

It has now been 3 months since respected Sherwood Park resident, Dave Conroy, passed away May 15, 2011 at the age of 91. As this Sherwood Park News article reports, Mr. Conroy was well known to Sherwood Park residents for his passion about local issues important to the community.

Among his many other accomplishments and interests, Mr. Conroy was a strong supporter of RETA, and voiced his opposition in many ways to the proposed overhead Heartland power line. On April 20, 2011, he appeared at the Heartland Alberta Utilities Commission Community Hearing Session in Sherwood Park to formally make his views known on the proposed line.

Mr. Conroy spoke about his concerns primarily about the health impacts of overhead high voltage line electromagnetic fields, and secondarily about the financial impacts to nearby property values. He stressed that if there were any additional capital costs associated with burying the Heartland line, ratepayers in the entire province should contribute toward these costs (since presumably the Heartland line would benefit all Albertans). Mr. Conroy ended his presentation to the AUC by asking the Commission to please think of the children first when developing its decision on the Heartland line.

Mr. Conroy’s son indicated that his father’s final request was for people to phone their MLA and request that the Heartland power line be buried and the Sherwood Park hospital finished.

RETA salutes Dave Conroy and his many contributions to issues important to Strathcona County.

Heartland Power Line Decision Coming

This Sherwood Park News article reports that the County of Strathcona and RETA are positive about the submissions made to the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) affecting its decision on the proposed Heartland power line. Both the County and RETA think the evidence submitted to the AUC provides sufficient information for AltaLink’s and EPCOR’s application to be completely denied, or if the AUC decides the line can be built, to bury it when it runs close to people.

Significant evidence was submitted at the AUC hearing to show the line isn’t necessary because the Industrial Heartland will not require the coal-fired electricity from Wabamun, as was initially anticipated. And, so many facts were submitted on the negative impacts of an overhead Heartland line on health, safety, property values, the environment and aesthetics that, should the AUC decide the line can be built, it must be buried to eliminate these negative effects.

RETA indicates the facts speak for themselves, and the RETA membership won’t stand quietly by and let a decision be made to build the line above ground through the Sherwood Park and Edmonton Greenbelts.

Heartland Line Overbuild Says Ex-EPCOR VP

This recent Alberta Venture article reports that former EPCOR Vice-President, Rick Cowburn, says the proposed Heartland Transmission Project is “an insane overbuild”.

Mr. Cowburn joins hundreds of organizations and individual Albertans who have indicated publicly and at the recent Heartland Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) hearing that the Heartland line is either a massive overbuild or is not necessary at all.

The proposed double circuit 500kV line is rated to carry a whopping 6,000 megawatts of electricity from coal-fired generation at Wabamun to the Industrial Heartland. This compares to peak provincial demand of about only 10,000 megawatts. This means the proposed Heartland line would add 60% of the entire province of Alberta’s peak transmission requirement.

The Alberta Government’s and the Alberta Electric System Operator’s (AESO) initial rationale for this gargantuan power line was the construction of 9 new tar sands upgraders in the Industrial Heartland. Due to changing economic realities that involve tar sands companies shipping bitumen by pipeline to the U.S. where it is cheaper to process, only one upgrader might now be built in the Industrial Heartland. The real irony is none of the upgraders initially planned, or any actually to be built, will require dirty coal-fired electricity from Wabamun because they will be co-generating their own cleaner electricity on-site.

And this is one of the reasons why the vast majority of the interveners in the recent Heartland hearing have asked the AUC to deny the application by AltaLink and EPCOR to build this massive power line, the largest ever planned for Alberta.

The Alberta Venture article focuses on Alberta’s failed attempt to deregulate electricity generation and retail. According to Rick Cowburn, there isn’t an area of economic activity in Alberta more beset by failure than electricity. He says, “The glorious experiment that we’ve tried with competitive electric markets is severely challenged – and I’m being polite about it.”

Cowburn goes on to say, “The balancing that we were hoping was going to happen – that there’d be strong retailers who could get some sort of stability and balance in policy – isn’t there.” The retail market remains dominated by the same players that dominated before deregulation began. “They’re the only ones that have the size to be able to function in this thing, and they have all the infrastructure they inherited from the old monopoly system.”

This failed deregulation experiment is being criticized as one of the reasons Alberta electricity costs are skyrocketing. Power generation and retail deregulation have also failed in the U.S.

Solar Storms and Overhead Power Lines

RETA has previously referenced the impacts of solar or geomagnetic storms on the operation of high voltage transmission lines. One such storm in Quebec in 1989 knocked out power in Hydro-Quebec’s overhead high voltage grid, resulting in 6 million people going without power for 9 hours. The storm caused $10 million in damages to Hydro-Quebec’s overhead transmission infrastructure, and tens of millions of dollars in losses to its customers.

A recent National Geographic article provides more insight into the potential for solar storms causing significant power outages at the regional or national level for weeks or even months.

Solar storm clouds can carry billions of tons of matter moving at 2,000 kilometres/second. If these clouds reach Earth’s magnetosphere, their charged particles become electromagnetically coupled to Earth’s magnetic field and generate large electrical currents millions of amperes strong. The sprawling electrical grid on Earth’s surface acts like an antenna, allowing these currents to flow into high voltage transmission lines. These powerful currents can cause transformers to overheat and burn out. This can then lead to voltage collapse when it is no longer possible to push needed power through transmission lines.

A full power collapse may result, or even if this does not happen, fluctuating voltage in the transmission system can cause the grid to become unstable which can impact transformers, relays, capacitors and even the power plant generators. Of course, all of these impacts have significant costs.

The “perfect storm” is brewing. Scientists anticipate stronger solar storms in 2013, and indicate that risks to Earth’s electrical grids are greatest at higher latitudes. Solar storms are global in nature, and could wreak havoc in Canada.

Rather than attempting to minimize the potential impacts of solar storms on our electrical grid in Canada, transmission facility owners continue to plan for and build more overhead high voltage and super-high-voltage power lines. If new high voltage lines were buried, over time, the majority of our grid system would be underground and not susceptible to solar storms.

Read about the many other benefits of burying high voltage power lines.

Negative Health Effects of EMFs Proven

In 2009 and early 2010, RETA conducted a significant survey of the peer-reviewed medical and scientific studies on the effects of overhead high voltage power line electromagnetic fields (EMFs) on human health. Hundreds of studies were researched from dozens of respected medical and scientific journals. Results of some of these studies are summarized in our Fact Sheet series.

The majority of studies researched report anywhere from minor to major increased risks of health problems associated with prolonged exposure to EMFs. Health problems include increased risks of childhood and adult leukemia, many other forms of cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, Lou Gehrig’s disease, suicide, depression, stress, several types of heart disease, tumor growths, skin growths, impairment of perception and memory, genetic defects, gland production deficiencies, mental and behavioural problems, immune system deficiencies, nervous system disorders, miscarriages, birth defects, stunting of growth, blood and circulatory problems, fatigue, headache, nausea, male sexual dysfunction, sleep deprivation, electromagnetic hypersensitivity, and aggravation of asthma, tinnitus, multiple sclerosis, diabetes and Attention Deficit Disorder.

While well-known and respected scientists have referred to the “conclusive links” and “causal correlations” between EMFs and the above-mentioned diseases, electricity transmission facility owners refuse to recognize these results, and continue to cite Health Canada and the World Health Organization (WHO). Both of these institutions have seriously downplayed the negative health effects of overhead high voltage power lines, and have been heavily criticized by EMF health experts as being out-of-touch and unduly influenced by the power industry.

Those who deny the health effects of EMFs have argued there is no biological mechanism to explain the negative health risks. RETA has reported on what has been described by scientists as the core biological mechanism or explanation for so many documented negative health impacts of EMFs. Melatonin, which is a hormone produced in the pineal gland of the brain, is one of the body’s most powerful natural defenses against many diseases and other health problems. EMF exposure can reduce melatonin production to the point where this hormone is no longer able to defend the body against disease.

Until recently, most medical and scientific studies have referred to the “strong correlations” between EMFs and reduced melatonin production, but most scientists have been reluctant to label the relationship as “cause and effect” without definitive proof. Several very recent studies provide proof. A 2010 study which appeared in Bioelectromagnetics, Signal Transduction of the Melatonin Receptor MT1 is Disrupted in Breast Cancer Cells by Electromagnetic Fields, includes the following quote:

“These results convincingly prove the negative effect of EMF on the antiestrogenic effect of melatonin in breast cancer cells.”

In lay terms, it means this study convincingly proves that EMFs negatively affect one of the body’s most powerful natural defenses against cancer.

For close to 3 years, RETA has advocated the burial of high voltage power lines whenever they are built close to where people live, work or attend school, because burying these lines eliminates the negative health effects of overhead line EMFs. When will transmission facility owners, the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO), the Alberta Government, Health Canada and the WHO start taking the health of citizens seriously when it comes to high voltage power lines??

Tornadoes Topple High Voltage Towers

There are many examples of tornadoes and other high wind storms toppling high voltage transmission towers and lines.

One of the most recent tornadoes in Canada occurred July 23, 2011 in Lambton County, Ontario. Environment Canada confirmed that a force F2 tornado with wind speeds between 180 and 230km/hour touched down and toppled 8 high voltage steel transmission towers. The downed towers and power lines cut electricity to 13,000 customers from Sarnia to London. There was significant damage and destruction but fortunately no deaths or injuries were reported. A Hydro One spokesperson said the amount of damage to the towers was highly unusual, as they are built to withstand very strong winds.

Similar assurances are given by other transmission facility owners, namely that their high voltage towers are built to withstand tornadoes and other high winds. However, in 1987, a force F3 tornado touched down in Edmonton, Alberta, causing between $6 million and $8 million damage to TransAlta’s high voltage transmission equipment.  The storm destroyed 49 240kV double circuit steel towers, 17 138kV double circuit steel towers, and 134 138kV single circuit wooden structures. Winds were estimated as high as 330km/hour. A total of 27 people were killed, nearly 300 were injured, and 750 families were left homeless. See this Fact Sheet for further details of this tornado and other high voltage power lines brought down by severe weather conditions.

There is much speculation that tornadoes, once touched down, will follow the path of high voltage transmission lines such as was the case with the Edmonton tornado in 1987. This is just one of the many reasons residents and businesses are worried about being located near high voltage power lines. Common sense suggests that new high voltage lines should not be built near homes, schools, daycare centres or any other facilities with high numbers of people. As a result, one would think that both transmission facility owners and governments would want to exercise caution when siting new high voltage lines.

Unfortunately, AltaLink, EPCOR, the Alberta Electric System Operator, and the Alberta Government all prefer the proposed 500kV double circuit Heartland Transmission Line to be built above ground next to 5,194 homes, several schools and daycare centres, and a hospital in Edmonton, Sherwood Park and Sturgeon County. An above ground high voltage power line with towers up to 76m tall built so close to so many people would be an accident waiting to happen, should another tornado ever touch down in the Edmonton area.

New high voltage power lines built near so many people must be buried. Underground lines do not blow over in wind storms and have many other benefits when compared to overhead lines.

High Voltage Lines and Helicopters

As part of RETA’s ongoing research on the benefits of burying high voltage power lines vs the negative impacts of above ground lines, we have run across many examples of helicopters crashing into overhead lines, causing death and injury.

On the basis of news reports, crashes occur under a number of circumstances including during: take off and landing, crop dusting, drying moisture off cherries, military training, and sudden altitude loss. Two examples are reported by the Associated Press and KTLA News.

RETA Submits Heartland Reply Argument

On July 6, RETA submitted  its Reply Argument, along with many other interveners on the Heartland Transmission Project application by AltaLink and EPCOR.

RETA’s submission, which may be read here, summarizes reasons for the Alberta Utilities Commission to deny the Heartland application, or if the Commission deems it in the public interest that the line be built, to direct the applicants to bury the line when it runs near people and environmentally sensitive areas.

Why Would MLA Dave Quest Support Doug Horner?

This Sherwood Park Independent  article indicates that Strathcona MLA Dave Quest is supporting MLA Doug Horner to be the next leader of the Alberta Progressive Conservative Party and Premier of Alberta. This is a rather odd choice for Mr. Quest to make considering the following reasons.

First, one of the most challenging issues facing Quest in his constituency is the contentious Heartland Transmission Project. His constituents insist the Heartland line is not necessary and Bill 50 that legislated the building of this line should be scrapped; or, if the Alberta Government insists on getting this line built, it must be buried whenever it is built near homes, schools, daycare centres, hospitals and environmentally sensitive areas.

Second, Doug Horner has been reported (May 25) to say Bill 50 does not need to be repealed or even reviewed. And, Mr. Horner has also said numerous times that an above ground Heartland line should be built in the Sherwood Park Greenbelt (right next to Dave Quest’s constituents, including Colchester Elementary School). In fact, Mr. Horner is the only one of the six P.C. leadership candidates who has been so clear on his support of Bill 50 and of an overhead line being built along AltaLink’s and EPCOR’s preferred route which would directly and adversely impact 5,194 homes (over 15,000 people) within the constituencies of Hon. Iris Evans, Hon. Gene Zwozdesky, Dave Quest, Naresh Bhardwaj, Peter Sandhu, Tony Vandermeer and Jeff Johnson. The other five P.C. leadership candidates have indicated they would either repeal or review Bill 50 if elected leader, and several have suggested that burying high voltage power lines should be considered in some circumstances.

AltaLink’s Parent Company in Bed with Gadhafi

This Edmonton Journal article on Canada’s waning international public image due to a number of scandals and the poor environmental record of a growing number of Canadian industries, lists Montreal-based SNC-Lavalin Group Inc. as one of the companies damaging Canada’s good reputation. The article reports that SNC-Lavalin, which owns 100% of AltaLink, is building prisons for the Libyan regime of Moammar Gadhafi.

RETA reported some time ago that SNC-Lavalin has been doing business with Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi since 1986. Based on news reports including this rabble.ca article, SNC-Lavalin has signed deals worth well over $1 billion with Gadhafi. SNC-Lavalin’s annual revenues in Libya apparently totaled $279 million in 2009 and $418 million in 2010. Most shocking is the revelation that SNC-Lavalin has been playing a role in building prisons in Libya including a $275 million state-of-the-art prison for Gadhafi in the Libyan capital of Tripoli.

As AltaLink’s parent company, is SNC-Lavalin the kind of company Albertans want to be involved in building AltaLink’s proposed Heartland Transmission Project and Western Alberta Transmission Line? SNC-Lavalin would be conducting the engineering and contract management work for AltaLink, as well as much of the construction of overhead towers and lines.

Heartland Power Line Hearing – Final Arguments

The Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) hearing into the Heartland Transmission Project (HTP) facility application by AltaLink and EPCOR (the Applicants) to build a double circuit 500 kilovolt transmission line took place from April 11 to May 18, 2011. Evidence was heard during 26 days over a 6-week period, which is one of the longer hearings ever held in Alberta on an electricity transmission line application. Thousands of pages of evidence were filed and thousands of pages of  transcripts were prepared. You may read these at the AUC website, or read the summaries which appear earlier (below) on RETA’s home page.

Final written arguments by the Applicants and interveners were due June 20, 2011. As one of many interveners that opposes this project as submitted by AltaLink and EPCOR, RETA has filed its final written arguments on behalf of its many members who would be directly and adversely impacted, as well as on behalf of the many other RETA members who strongly support RETA’s position and arguments. RETA currently has well over 8,000 registered members.

We encourage you to read RETA’s final arguments here. Briefly, we agree with the many other interveners who argue that a 500kV Heartland line is not needed. The Applicants, the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) and the Alberta Government have failed to show, at the AUC hearing or to the public, that this line is needed. In fact, the Applicants plan on energizing the Heartland line to only 15% of its capacity to 2027, and after that to only 30% of its capacity. Perhaps only 1 or 2 of the 9 tar sands upgraders initially planned might actually be built in the Industrial Heartland, and ironically, any that are built would co-generate their own electricity and not require the proposed Heartland line to transmit dirty coal-fired electricity from Wabamun.

RETA also argues that the Applicants failed to conduct an appropriate public consultation process under AUC rules. During the hearing, almost every intervener that represented a landowner interest provided example after example of how AltaLink and EPCOR failed to adequately consult with them. Tower heights were changed, preferred and alternate routes were changed, there were mail out errors, many landowners were not even consulted, consultation forms started off with very leading and biased comments, critical information was withheld from landowners, some landowners were intimidated, visual simulations of the towers and lines were misrepresented, baseline environmental data and other public input was ignored, and neighbours were pitted against one another by the Applicants.

The Applicants failed to put forward sufficient evidence on routing. Their preferred and alternate routes were selected on the basis of desk-top analyses and predetermined biases. The Applicants did not statistically weight any of their selection variables or metrics, which means variables like short-term soil compaction impacts during construction are weighted equally with the impacts on thousands of households throughout the 60-year life of the line. The Applicants recommend building an above ground line with towers up to 77m tall (the tallest anywhere in Alberta) next to 5,200 households (over 15,000 people), an elementary school, a daycare centre, many other businesses and many environmentally sensitive areas. AltaLink and EPCOR could not have selected a worse location with greater impacts…even if they had tried.

As well, the Applicants failed to put forward sufficient evidence on the most appropriate and cost-effective underground option. They intentionally and significantly inflated the costs of partial undergrounding, by including only an underground option with construction and operation failure rate standards many times that of their above ground option. In fact, they “gold-plated” the underground option in their facility application to intentionally make it appear less attractive compared to their above ground option. RETA experts provided evidence that, rather than a doubling of the costs to bury the line as suggested by the Applicants, the capital cost could be only 15% higher than an overhead option. And, when you combine capital, maintenance and transmission loss costs over the 60-year life of the line, an underground line would be less costly than an overhead line.

On the basis of the above, and many other reasons, RETA has requested that the AUC deny the HTP facility application.

Should the AUC decide they have sufficient evidence to make a decision on routing, which RETA does not believe to be the case, then RETA requests that the line be buried whenever it is built close to homes, schools, daycares, hospitals and environmentally sensitive areas.  A buried line:

1. eliminates the electrical field and reduces the magnetic field through phase cancellation,
2. reduces the negative health impacts of an overhead line to almost zero,
3. is safer because it can’t electrocute people or animals,
4. is safer because 77m-tall towers and lines can’t fall over in storms,
5. does not cause nearby pipeline corrosion or hazardous induced currents in pipelines,
6. does not lower adjacent property values,
7. is not an eyesore,
8. does not buzz or hum,
9. does not negatively affect tourism,
10. does not kill thousands of birds annually through collision,
11. is more reliable,
12. has lower maintenance costs,
13. is more efficient and has lower transmission loss costs, and
14. can be buried for almost the same capital cost as an overhead line.

Finally, in the event the AUC approves the application as filed , RETA submits that impacted homeowners, landowners, schools and businesses should be fairly compensated such that none of these is out-of-pocket.

RETA strongly believes that the AUC has sufficient evidence to deny the Heartland Transmission Project facility application as filed and amended prior to, during and following the hearing. AltaLink and EPCOR cannot be permitted to negatively impact so many people, businesses, schools, and environmentally sensitive areas.

If this line is approved, it must be noted that the Heartland line was characterized throughout the hearing by the Applicants, interveners, and the Commission as the largest project ever to be built in Alberta. RETA submits that unique projects and their impacts require unique solutions. In the event it is approved, the Heartland line must be buried when it is built near people and environmentally sensitive areas.

Electromagnetic Field Impacts on Crops

There is a wealth of research on the negative impacts of above ground high voltage power line electromagnetic fields (EMFs) on human and animal health, safety, the environment, property values and aesthetics (see RETA Fact Sheets); but significantly less research on EMF impacts on plants. RETA has just been made aware of a December 2007 Ph.D. thesis that reported on the effects of EMFs on cultivated crops and vegetation in natural forests.  

The research, conducted by S. Somasekaran through the Madurai Kamaraj University in India, studied the effects of overhead high voltage power line 230 kilovolt and 110 kilovolt EMFs on four selected crops: black gram (black lentil), maize (corn), cow pea (field pea), and rice. In both field and laboratory studies, where experimental plants exposed to EMFs  and control plants not exposed to EMFs were compared, the following growth and physiological characteristics of the four crop plants  were reduced significantly for exposed plants: shoot length, root length, leaf area, leaf fresh weight, specific leaf weight, shoot/root ratio, total biomass content and total water content. A similar trend was reported in biochemical characteristics including chloropyll a, b and total content; carotenoid content, soluble sugar, soluble starch; and soluble protein.

Reduced growth and physiological factors were due primarily to the negative effect of EMFs on cell division and cell enlargement. The reduction in growth, and physiological and biochemical parameters of the crop plants was greater in close proximity to the 230kV power lines than to the 110kV lines.

The author concluded that overhead high voltage power line EMFs cause stress in these crop plants which negatively affects production, leading to economic loss.

Somasekaran also studied the effects of high voltage power line EMFs on natural vegetation, and found the number of herbaceous species, the number of taxonomic families and the herb diversity indices were all higher in a natural control forest than in a forest under high voltage transmission lines.

Results of this research can most certainly be extrapolated to other cultivated crop and natural vegetation species around the world.  One would expect that farmers and forest harvest companies would be concerned about such economic losses associated with overhead high voltage power lines. Buried power lines would cause no such losses.

Electricity Export from Alberta to United States

The latest debacle over Alberta’s electricity transmission plans is based on cables sent from Ottawa’s U.S. embassy in 2003 and 2008, and recently made public by WikiLeaks. The Alberta Government promised senior U.S. officials as far back as 2003 that there was abundant electricity to export to the U.S. and the only limiting factor was transmission capacity.  See The Tyee, Calgary Herald, Wildrose Caucus, Edmonton Sun, CBC, Oilweek, Vue Weekly, Red Deer Advocate and Sherwood Park News for details.

This information confirms what many Albertans have feared for the past several years. As a result of these most recently-leaked documents, critics of the Alberta Government’s plans to build a $16 billion electricity transmission system without any accountability or public studies to determine whether or not the new lines are needed are calling for a major judicial inquiry into the massive export project to be funded by Alberta power consumers.

Shortly following the 2003 cable from the Ottawa U.S. embassy, Alberta Energy Minister Murray Smith and the rest of the Alberta Energy Department started planning for the export of Alberta electricity. First, the previous 50:50 split for financing power lines between the transmission industry and Alberta ratepayers was changed to place the entire financial burden on Alberta ratepayers.

A year after the 2008 cable was sent, the Alberta Government passed 3 controversial and interconnected bills (Bills 19, 36 and 50) that concentrated decision-making on power lines with the Alberta Cabinet. A growing public backlash against these 3 bills has been problematic for the provincial government. First, opposition parties (Wildrose, Liberal, NDP, Alberta Party) criticized the bills, as well as a growing number of Alberta landowners, industry and businesses. Most recently, several Alberta Progressive Conservative Party leadership candidates have questioned Bill 50 and the provincial government’s plans to build massive new high voltage power lines throughout Alberta. See Ted Morton news release, Alberta Surface Rights Group blog, Calgary Sun, Calgary Herald (1), Calgary Herald (2), Edmonton Journal (1), Edmonton Journal (2), Cochrane Eagle and Camrose Booster for details.

The 8-fold increase in Alberta’s electricity transmission capacity, as planned by the provincial government, is not necessary and in fact the Industrial Power Consumers Association of Alberta says it will make Alberta industry uncompetitive due to high transmission costs to pay for all the new lines. A significant portion of the profits will flow from Alberta to AltaLink’s parent company in Montreal, SNC-Lavalin, which now owns 100% of AltaLink.

AltaLink and the Alberta P.C. Party are closely aligned, with AltaLink’s Senior VP (Leigh Clarke) serving as Calgary Region VP of the P.C. Party until very recently; and Patricia Nelson, a former Tory Energy Minister, currently sitting on AltaLink’s Board of Directors. Many other key Tory insiders have strong relationships with AltaLink.

This mess gets worse with revelations last week that SNC-Lavalin has been working for Moammar Gadhafi in Libya since 1986, and is reported to be currently building a jail for Gadhafi in Tripoli. Is this the kind of company we want building overhead high voltage power lines in Alberta?

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 25

Dr. Ross Harris presented his concerns on May 17 about the Applicants’ preferred route interfering with his Edmonton East Heliport. The heliport, which has federal certification and is listed in Wikipedia, is situated right next to the Sherwood Park Greenbelt, and is used by Dr. Harris (opthalmologist), other doctors, Stars Ambulance and the police. The Applicants have refused to register the heliport’s flight path and to designate a safety setback distance, as they have done for other less used airports. The Applicants’ preferred route, including the most recently revised route, would sterilize the heliport. Dr. Harris asked that the Heartland line be built in the alternate route or if it was built in the preferred route, that it be buried so as not to penetrate the heliport’s obstacle limitation surface.

Rural landowners along the Applicants’ preferred route presented experts on radio interference and routing. The radio interference expert confirmed information presented earlier at the hearing that the Applicants’ 3.95 km setback from the Department of National Defence radio receiver site was far more than the DND’s required 1.6 km setback. Existing 138kV and 240kV lines less than DND’s setback distance from the radio receiver site have caused no radio interference to date, and neither would the proposed 500kV line. If the line was built closer to the DND site, fewer rural landowners would be negatively impacted.

The routing expert discussed the Applicants’ flawed public consultation process, particularly with respect to routing. Many routing segments were dropped or added without any consultation  with directly affected landowners or other stakeholders. The Applicant did not properly identify the overall lowest impact route when it selected its preferred route. The routing expert discussed several other routes he had proposed which would follow existing roadways or transmission lines, or minimize the total distance of the power line through more industrial land. He suggested the Applicants did not appear to have fairly or properly weighted environmental, agricultural, proximity and other factors when selecting their preferred route.

A panel of 15 rural landowners presented their concerns with the preferred route, as well as personal accounts of how they had been treated by the Applicants and their agents. Landowners described their concerns about health impacts of overhead power line EMFs, visual impacts,  electromagnetic sensitivity, noise, stress, and interference with internet access. They were not asked by Heartland staff what plans they had for their land and what impacts would the proposed power line have on those plans.

The Applicants were criticized for avoiding buyouts by jogging around homes just enough to meet their subjectively-selected 150-metre minimum distance between homes and the power line (less if the line is not built on your property). Unskilled people who were not able or willing to answer many questions were sent to interview landowners. Neighbours were pitted against neighbours by the Applicants, and landowners’ positions were often misrepresented to neighbours in an attempt to rationalize specific routing decisions.

Corporate Interests vs. Albertans

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 24

On May 16, the City of Edmonton, County of Parkland and City of Spruce Grove presented evidence at the hearing.

City of Edmonton Councillor Karen Leibovici spoke about the September 2009 Motion passed by Council that all 500kV power lines within the City must be buried or if not buried they should be built where they have the least impact on residents. (The Applicants’ preferred route affected the greatest number of residents.) As well, the City’s Motion stated that the citizens of Edmonton should not disproportionately subsidize the costs of such a line. She went on to say the City and RETA had worked together to present expert testimony on health effects of overhead power line EMFs, stress, property devaluation, visual impacts, environmental impacts, benefits of burying the line, and undergrounding costs.

Councillor Leibovici discussed the negative impacts of an overhead Heartland line on the North Saskatchewan River, the City’s “crown jewel”, and indicated the river valley was protected by City bylaw. She said adding a third overhead high voltage line in the Ellerslie community would be too much of an assault on people’s visual senses, and that a line of massive towers would circle the south and east sides of Edmonton “like a giant electrified fence”. Monster lines with towers twice as high as any built before in Alberta were never contemplated.

She stated that the Edmonton Greenbelt (TUC) was meant for transportation and utilities that directly benefited Edmonton; whereas the proposed Heartland line would not serve Edmonton. She indicated that burying the line would eliminate all of the negative impacts of an overhead line. City planners discussed a recently conducted Angus Reid survey that reported 43% of Edmontonians surveyed are of the view that the Heartland Project should bypass Edmonton, 32% feel the line should be built in the Greenbelt (TUC) but it should be buried, and only 16% believe the line should be built above ground in the Greenbelt.

Cross examination of the Edmonton panel focused on establishment of the Restricted Development Area (Greenbelt) legislation in the 1970s to protect the land, and subsequent policy changes by the Alberta Government focusing on transportation and utilities.

Parkland County Mayor Rod Shaigec indicated the County agrees with the Applicants’ preferred route, suggesting that’s what the TUCs were developed for. Parkland had passed a Motion that the Heartland line should be buried when feasible. He discussed the potential impacts of an overhead line on the Wagner Natural Area, which is legislatively protected.

The City of Spruce Grove discussed the negative impacts an overhead line would have on two proposed residential developments by Beaverbrook Pioneer Ltd. and Qualico Developments West Ltd. An overhead line would ruin the view and landscape for several thousand future residents within 800m of the proposed line and would decrease values of future properties. Concerns were expressed about de-watering of bore holes for tower foundations because of the high water table in the area. A Spruce Grove planner said if the alternate route is selected, the line should be buried by Spruce Grove.

Don Rigney, Mayor of Sturgeon County and past Chair (and current Board member) of the Alberta Industrial Heartland Association (AIHA) spoke about the changing economic realities associated with need for the Heartland line. He pointed out that when the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) developed its power plan in 2008 there were plans for 5 to 9 bitumen upgraders in the Industrial Heartland – now there is only one. Bitumen upgraders are uneconomical in Alberta and that’s why tar sands companies are shipping the bitumen south to the U.S. through pipelines.

He discussed how much more efficient and environmentally friendly natural-gas-fired and co-generated electricity are than coal-fired electricity, and there was no need to transmit dirty coal-fired electricity from Wabamun to the Industrial Heartland.  He indicated the AIHA electricity demand forecasts were 12% to 50% of those estimated by the AESO. The AIHA had met with Alberta Energy and requested a re-evaluation of AESO’s demand forecast, but discovered that the government and the AESO were working closely together and were not willing to review need for all of these new lines based on changing economic scenarios.

Mayor Rigney concluded by saying that approval of the Heartland line was not in the public interest and would hurt the goals of the AIHA. He asked the AUC to stop this process and request a review of the AESO’s Needs Identification Document.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 23

The Colchester School Parents Association expressed concerns at the May 13 proceedings about the proposed Heartland line being built so close to their elementary school (105 metres from the power line ROW). They spoke about the history of the school, initially a loghouse school in 1898, a newer structure built in 1938 and finally the current school built in 1958. The school has been and continues to be not only a school but a community centre for many activities.

Parents are worried about the potential health risks to their children who are particularly vulnerable because their immune systems are not yet fully developed. Parents had recently been surveyed, and 95% indicated they would pull their children out of the school if an overhead Heartland line was built. This would result in Colchester School closing down, and parents wondered which other schools their children would be bused to, or whether there were even enough spaces available in other schools.

Those parents with special needs children are very concerned about the school being closed down because Colchester is one of only 2 schools in Strathcona County with special classes for their children. A 9-year-old student expressed her concern about either getting sick by staying in Colchester School after an overhead line was built or being forced to move to another school and lose all of her friends. Parents are unanimous in their request to get the power line buried by the school. Even if one or more of the towers were moved a bit further away from the school, parents still insist on the line being buried instead.

Lawyers representing rural landowners along the Applicants’ preferred route questioned the Department of National Defence on its 3.2-kilometre setback requirements from a radio receiver site, which means the proposed Heartland line would be built too close to several farmers. Two existing high voltage power lines situated much closer to the DND radio receiver site had apparently not caused any radio interference to date.

A panel of businessmen, business and industry representatives, and Sturgeon County residents expressed concerns about the negative socio-economic impacts of building the Heartland line and other 500kV lines legislated by Bill 50. Following are some of their comments. Landowners have been told to “take the hit” by having the Heartland line situated on their land for the greater public good. What a waste to have the new Heartland Substation built on prime agricultural land which could be producing food.

This is another financial transfer from Alberta to Quebec (AltaLink’s parent company is SNC-Lavalin centred in Montreal). The Heartland line and other planned 500kV lines are not needed or at minimum are overbuilds that will cost Albertans and Alberta business and industry billions of dollars. The Alberta Government, the AESO and transmission facility owners have not had to justify why all of these new lines are necessary. Bill 50 simply legislated that they be built.

The transmission part of our monthly electricity bills will increase significantly, and because industry pays the lion’s share of transmission costs, many companies will be forced to “go off the grid” and generate their own electricity, if they are able. This will leave remaining businesses, industry and residents to pay an even higher proportion of the overall provincial transmission costs, forcing some industry and business to leave Alberta and locate in other provinces where electricity prices are lower. Electricity bills for an Alberta-based steel manufacturer are 1.6 to 2.2 times higher than for its major competitors located in other provinces and the U.S.

The Industrial Power Consumers Association of Alberta indicated the transmission component of our monthly power bills will triple by 2017. For many businesses like the value-added food processing industry, competition from Europe and the U.S. is forcing Alberta companies to become as efficient as possible, which means they need to automate. Automation invariably uses more electricity and if electricity bills keep increasing in Alberta, companies either have to shut down or move somewhere else.

The Alberta Food Processors Association, representing 223 companies, has surveyed its members who have indicated that monthly power bills comprise rising percentages of their total operating costs. The AFPA estimates that hundreds of jobs will be lost in Alberta as owners look to relocate outside Alberta where electricity costs are lower.  This could be significant considering that currently about 27,000 people in Alberta are employed in this $11 billion (Alberta alone) industry. The panel will continue May 16.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 22

May 12 proceedings started off with Cable Consulting International (CCI) discussing their underground report. CCI was commissioned by the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) in 2009 and 2010 to conduct a study of the feasibility of burying a section of the Applicants’ preferred route. CCI experts indicated that partial undergrounding of high voltage power lines has been conducted successfully for years in Europe. Cables in Great Britain are buried very close to homes because electromagnetic field levels (EMFs) are so low above these cables.

There are many more direct-buried XLPE cables than duct bank-buried cables in the world, and CCI recommended that an underground Heartland option also be direct buried, where the backfill soil above the buried line would act as a thermal insulator during Edmonton’s cold winter months. CCI pointed out that, although winter air temperatures in Edmonton were cold, the underground temperatures below frost line would be much higher. (As well, underground copper cables, once energized, would generate heat which would counter any colder ground temperatures.)

CCI further indicated that they trusted cable manufacturers when they state that their cables are safe and reliable at Edmonton’s winter ground temperatures. They suggested that underground technology would continue to improve in years to come. CCI indicated that an ideal route for an underground line might not necessarily be the same as an ideal route for an overhead line. (However, the Applicants have proposed identical underground and overhead routes through the Edmonton and Sherwood Park Greenbelts.)

The rural landowner along the preferred route who had been intimidated by AltaLink land agents in April further discussed their predicament and asked that they be dealt with in a special way, considering the unique circumstances of being surrounded on 2 sides by the Applicants’ proposed power line.

The County of Strathcona presented their panel – Mayor Linda Osinchuk, Strathcona Chief Commissioner, and experts in EMFs and health, routing, and ornithology. Mayor Osinchuk provided details of Strathcona County Council’s 2009 and 2011 resolutions (motions) that recommended burying the Heartland line through densely populated areas (wherever it is built), but that if it wasn’t buried it should be built where it would affect the fewest number of people (the Applicants’ alternate route).

Strathcona Council further asked that the costs of the Heartland line, regardless of the route or technology selected, should be borne by all Albertans, since the Heartland line would benefit all Albertans. Mayor Osinchuk also expressed frustration that neither County Council nor Strathcona residents were asked for their views on the Applicants’ surprise announcement on April 26, 2011 to move their preferred route a short distance farther west. She suggested that unique considerations should be required for construction of the Heartland line, considering the unique magnitude of this project with towers and lines twice as high as any ever built in Alberta.

The County’s transmission line routing expert compared the Applicants’ preferred and alternate routes, indicating there were more pipelines paralleled and crossed, more railway line paralleled, more communication tower encounters, more transmission line crossings and more river crossings along the preferred route. With respect to residents, he indicated there were 342 residences along the alternate route and 5,194 residences along the preferred route, with about 15 times more residents along the preferred route than along the alternate route (based on 2.75 residents per residence). The consultant also provided evidence on the advantages of burying the line from visual impact and health perspectives (EMFs and corona-ionized aerial pollutants). He went on to question the Applicants on their decision to build a double circuit 500kV line from a system reliability perspective.

The County’s bird expert, Dr. Bayne, highlighted that it was illegal under the international Migratory Birds Convention Act of 1916 to destroy migratory birds. This would apply to the killing or “incidental take” of birds that collide with overhead transmission lines. He spoke about the 4 main risks to birds of overhead high voltage lines: changes in habitat (vegetation clearing), collisions with transmission lines and towers, electrocution, and EMF effects on reproduction and development.

Dr. Bayne focused on bird mortality through collision with overhead lines and towers, indicating that between 410 million and 820 million birds die annually in the U.S. colliding with man-made structures including overhead transmission lines. He cited research indicating 124 bird deaths/km of power line/yr and 464 deaths/km of power line/yr., pointing out that other studies report lower mortality rates but do not correct for biases in corpse detection. He stated that daily movement of waterbirds and risk of collision was highest in and along the preferred route because of the numerous wetlands in close proximity, and the greater migration and fog risks. Dr. Bayne concluded that a below ground Heartland option would have the fewest negative impacts on birds in the Edmonton area.

Dr. Blank, a world-renowned EMF and health expert, has conducted extensive research which provides convincing biological evidence of harm to living cells when they start to manufacture stress proteins upon exposure to EMFs. Many of Dr. Blank’s studies have been replicated by other scientists. He discussed research that shows DNA strand breaks at EMF exposure levels considered safe by many health institutions. These DNA effects, including missing DNA repair genes, increase the risk of cancers, including childhood leukemia. He discussed studies on increased risks of Alzheimer’s disease under prolonged EMF exposure, indicating increased risks with increased exposure periods. Dr. Blank considered an EMF level of 1 milligauss as safe, and any level above this as potentially harmful to human health.

Dr. Blank discussed his serious concerns with international health agencies like the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) that rely on advice from scientists who are not familiar with the most current research on EMF effects on health. He stated that the WHO is flawed and that they should be warning the public about potential impacts of EMFs on our health. Dr. Blank is also concerned, from an ethical perspective, about the close industrial ties of WHO and the ICNIRP that compromise the value of their opinions. This is particularly important because it is these institutions that transmission facility operators like AltaLink and EPCOR consistently quote as suggesting there are no negative health effects of overhead high voltage lines.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 21

RETA presented experts on property devaluation, visual impacts, noise and environmental impacts on May 11, as well as a panel of residents and business owners who would be directly impacted by the Applicants’ preferred route.

RETA’s environmental expert, John Kristensen, said the Applicants’ environmental assessment is deficient in many respects: poor baseline data, very limited literature review, misrepresentation of the data, and overt bias toward favouring the overhead lattice tower option over the underground option within the preferred route. On numerous occasions, RETA had provided the Applicants with published baseline data on the biological resources in and adjacent to the preferred route, but the Applicants chose to ignore these data.

Studies report 182 bird species, 26 mammal species and 3 amphibian species in the preferred route landscape area, of which 34 bird species and 2 mammal species are sensitive or threatened (as determined by the federal or Alberta governments). The Applicants’ consistent characterization of “inferior” and “low quality” wildlife habitat in and along their preferred route was criticized, by pointing out that many of the ponds and wetlands in the preferred route landscape area are home to thousands of waterbirds. For example, a photo of a very small pond in the preferred route very close to the proposed Heartland line was shown that had 1,615 waterfowl stopping over during Fall migration.

Environmental impacts of an overhead lattice tower option were shown to be significantly greater than for the underground option for numerous reasons. An estimated 8,200 to 14,100 birds could be killed annually colliding with an overhead Heartland line, especially because the proposed towers and lines would be the tallest ever built in Alberta and would consist of 20 wires (18 conductors and 2 shield wires) that would pose a significant hazard to birds that utilize the many ponds and wetland complexes in the preferred route.

RETA’s noise expert, FDI Acoustics Inc., pointed out that the Applicants’ noise impact assessment was inadequate for many reasons including: sound readings were not completed in all weather conditions, a cumulative noise impact assessment was not completed, and the impact of wind on the proposed above ground power lines was not considered. He indicated that burying the line would eliminate the corona noise and other above-ground-related noise.

RETA’s visual impact assessment expert, Riparia Ltd., indicated that the Applicants had only conducted visualizations – not visual impact assessments. He pointed out that the Applicants’ visual simulations were very biased through use of wide-angle and panoramic  photography which made proposed towers appear unnaturally small on large panel photos shown at open houses and information sessions. RETA’s expert had prepared accurate visual simulations which showed just how tall the proposed towers would appear in a number of neighbourhoods along the preferred route. His overall presentation clearly revealed how biased the Applicants’ visualization consultant (Truescape) had been in presenting visual simulations. Burying the line would eliminate any negative visual impacts.

RETA’s accredited property appraisal expert, Brian Gettel, estimated that the values of properties neighbouring an above ground Heartland line would be depreciated by 10% to 20%, with homes situated closest to the proposed line being affected the most. He also indicated the impacts to high value luxury homes would be even more significant. The fact that the proposed Heartland line would be the largest ever built in Alberta would negatively impact property values even more and for greater distances from the line. Burying the line would eliminate any property devaluation.

Residents along the preferred route raised many safety, health, property value, aesthetic and environmental concerns about an overhead line the magnitude of the Heartland line. They spoke about due diligence conducted before buying their homes revealing that the Sherwood Park Greenbelt legislation set aside this land as a green space and not for overhead power lines. Residents spoke about the stress and impacts on health the Applicants’ flawed public consultation process had already caused.

One resident (and RETA Board member) provided many examples of how biased the public consultation process had been, and that the AESO and Applicants had indicated their preference for the Edmonton and Sherwood Park Greenbelt route well before any public consultation commenced and well before any initial routes were proposed. He spoke about the relatively positive underground feasibility study conducted by Cable Consulting International and the positive comments by EPCOR and AltaLink engineers about the technical feasibility and reliability of the underground option; however then the AESO put their negative spin on the results because they were not supportive of burying the line.

Residents spoke about moving to the area because of the green space view, and had even paid a premium to live adjacent to the natural area. Another resident spoke about the thousands of birds that fly back and forth across the proposed power line route, especially during Spring and Fall migration. She pleaded with the AUC not to reward AltaLink’s and EPCOR’s poor consultation process by approving their recommended option of building the line above ground. A rural land owner living along the alternate route said he did not want the proposed line on his farm unless the line was buried.

The owner of A and D Daycare in Sherwood Park, situated next to the proposed line, discussed how the over 100 children in the daycare centre would be exposed to increased health risks, and many of the parents would pull their children out of the daycare if an above ground line was built. The Daycare, in existence for several decades, would in all likelihood close down and it would be difficult to relocate anywhere that offered a sufficiently large playground area (as required by law). The owners and staff would be out of work.

All residents stated that the line should be buried, especially because of its unique magnitude, and because it would be situated next to so many residents (15,000 to 18,000). The recently realigned preferred route did not satisfy them.

RETA spoke briefly in follow up to underground expert evidence provided last week. It was pointed out that the members of  Europacable, one of RETA’s information sources, were in the business of building both underground and overhead power lines, and were therefore not biased in their positive assessments of buried lines. The reduction of magnetic field levels to almost zero above buried lines was discussed as one of the primary benefits in terms of reducing health risks.

Colleen Boddez of the Sturgeon Landowners Group spoke about the Applicants’ flawed public consultation process. Their process has pitted neighbour against neighbour. She said no one deserves this line, regardless of which route they live on.  She pointed out that the Heartland line was not even necessary and that Albertans were “mad as hell” about Bill 50 and other legislation passed by the Alberta Government that has excluded the public from any meaningful input into electricity transmission decisions.

Sturgeon County criticized the AESO for not taking more of a leadership role in development of power line corridors. Under cross examination, it appeared that Sturgeon County was more concerned about the cost of burying the line than about the health, safety, property value and environmental impacts of an overhead line.

Members of the Gibbons Landowners Group provided many examples of the Applicants’ poor public consultation process. Land agents had mislead and misinformed them, and the power line route kept changing. Landowners were worried about health and property value impacts, noise, safety, and impacts on a local natural spring. One landowner was worried about the impacts on their horse stable commercial operation.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 20

During the proceedings on May 10, several residents and business owners along the Applicants’ alternate route passionately expressed their concerns about an overhead Heartland line. They spoke about property devaluation and how this would negatively affect their retirement plans. They discussed the stress of the flawed public consultation process and how this had already taken its toll on people’s health. Residents spoke about their concerns regarding the environmental impacts, noise from the overhead power line, the spreading of weeds during construction of the line, aesthetic impacts, and very serious impacts on their farm and tourism-related business opportunities.

They reiterated what many other landowners have raised previously at the hearing, namely AltaLink’s and EPCOR’s poor public consultation process. The Applicants have used a “divide and conquer” approach, pitting neighbour against neighbour. Residents have not been listened to and some residents’ positions have been misrepresented to their neighbours by AltaLink staff. Some residents had been notified but not consulted.

One resident read out the dictionary definition of “consultation” and then pointed out how this is not what the Applicants had been doing. Heartland staff who interviewed landowners were carefully scripted and did not “consult”. One resident expressed her frustration with the incessant AltaLink radio ads that suggest how much AltaLink cares about what landowners think, when in fact they don’t.

The Sturgeon Landowners Group (SLG) presented stray voltage and environmental experts. The environmental expert discussed the environmentally sensitive areas along the Applicants’ alternate route, including the Atim Creek area, Lois Hole Centennial Provincial Park and Wagner Natural Area, and how an overhead Heartland line would negatively affect these. He discussed the importance of maintaining biological diversity, and how these particular areas contributed in this regard. Under cross examination, he indicated that burying the line through horizontal drilling under these areas would mitigate the environmental concerns.

The negative impacts of stray voltage on residents and farming were discussed. The stray voltage expert described the challenges of properly grounding and maintaining this grounding. Livestock are particularly sensitive to even low stray voltages around fences and drinking tanks.

Mr. Berrien was hired by the SLG to make alternate routing suggestions for both the alternate and preferred routes. He didn’t think it was fair that AltaLink had conducted much more in-depth discussions/negotiations with landowners along the preferred route than along the alternate route. However, AltaLink has made it clear on many occasions that they feel confident their preferred route will be selected by the AUC. Berrien also thought that certain landowners who might not necessarily fit within the Applicants’ “buyout” criteria should be bought out.

Cross examiners of Mr. Berrien pointed out that no one (neither landowners nor the Applicants) appeared to support his routing suggestions. Under cross examination, it was also pointed out that Mr. Berrien had provided advice on a whole array of subject matters for which he was not qualified. The AUC Chair asked whether Mr. Berrien could provide any criteria that would be helpful to the AUC for determining which landowners should or could be bought out vs. having the power line jog around them.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 19

On May 9, BRUTE (Blue Route Utility Transmission Elimination) members presented personal examples of frustration with EPCOR’s and AltaLink’s public consultation process. They cited mailing errors where residents were informed that the route near them would not be considered anymore, whereas they later found out that they were living along the Applicants’ alternate route which was very much still being considered. Heartland Project team staff told some of the residents not to worry because the Applicant was only considering an alternate route because they had to, but that the line would be built in the Applicants’ preferred route.

Residents indicated they had been ignored by AltaLink and EPCOR. They were losing trust in the Alberta Government and big industry because of legislation the government had passed to streamline the process for power companies to build new lines. They pointed out the importance of some of the environmentally sensitive areas along the alternate route and how an overhead line would negatively affect these. Residents spoke about the stress brought on by the flawed consultation process, and about their concerns regarding effects of high voltage lines on cancer and other health problems.

Some of the BRUTE members felt that the Heartland line should be built in the Applicants’ preferred route in the Edmonton and Sherwood Park Greenbelts, because from their perspective that’s what the land was set aside for. (On the other hand, residents who live along the Sherwood Park Greenbelt point out that the 1974 legislation that established the Restricted Development Area indicates that the Minister may only approve activities in the Greenbelt that are compatible with agriculture, the propagation of plants and animals, and preservation of the environment.)

Economic impact analyses were conducted for 2 businesses that would be negatively affected by an overhead line. Land appraisal experts pointed out property devaluations of up to 22% for residential properties along the alternate route.

The Sturgeon Landowners Group (SLG) presented a panel of residents in the evening who spoke about the impacts of an overhead line on them. Because the RETA blogger unfortunately missed this session, please refer to the AUC transcripts for details of these presentations.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 18

FLAWED ALTALINK/EPCOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROCESS

Landowners who live along the Applicants’ alternate route spent most of May 6 describing their concerns and frustration with the Applicants’ plans.

Farmers raised concerns about the proposed line interfering with their farming operations. It would be difficult to farm around these towers because of large tractors and equipment, and their GIS units could not be used in these situations. They were worried about power line construction activities spreading noxious weeds onto their land.

They spoke about proposed compensation being inadequate, and that  Surface Rights Board legislation doesn’t really help landowners. Health, noise, aesthetic and property value concerns were raised by many landowners. Impacts on the natural environment, especially wetlands, were highlighted by several residents. They spoke about how their quality of life would be compromised, and the area would change overnight from peaceful rural to unsightly because of the magnitude of the Heartland project.

A number of landowners thought the line should be built in corridors established for such purposes, and their area had never been set aside for overhead power lines. One landowner suggested the best solution was to bury the line in the Applicants’ preferred route, and she was upset that the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) was not supportive of burying the line.

Residents were not convinced the line was needed and were very upset with Alberta Government legislation that has concentrated decision making for electricity transmission in the hands of the government at the exclusion of meaningful input from the public. They were upset that their MLA, Doug Horner, was not supporting them. They were concerned that Alberta ratepayers would be subsidizing the export of electricity from Alberta to California.

Many of the detailed routing decisions by the Applicants were made to avoid having to buy out landowners, and left them with these monster towers and lines on their properties with little compensation. One student characterized his presentation as a “Victim Impact Statement”, and described how the Applicants’ proposal had negatively affected his family because of all the time spent gathering information and helping to educate their neighbours.

Every presenter spoke about the Applicants’  flawed public consultation process. One resident said we “feel like cattle being herded through the chute”. Residents have been mislead and misinformed. The process was set up simply so the Applicants could say they had consulted, rather than to engage landowners. When information on health or any other matters was requested, nothing was provided in many cases. In other cases where some information was provided, it was one-sided and erroneously suggested there were no negative health, safety, property value or environmental impacts.

Several residents described the consultation as one-way, with the Heartland Team asking all of the questions but providing no responses to questions that were asked of them. Numerous residents were assured by Heartland Team staff that the line would not be built in the alternate route, so they really didn’t need  to worry. The alternate route had been moved so many times, residents were confused about where it actually is on a map. Some residents received letters indicating the route near them was not being considered anymore, only to find out later that the wrong letters had been sent to them.

Residents have became upset, frustrated, angry, resentful and disillusioned because of all of the time they have had to spend on this issue. They feel that they and their views are not important to the Applicants due to the way they have been treated. Many spoke about the stress it had caused to their families and how it was already negatively affecting their health.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 17

May 5 started off with the AUC Chairman indicating that the Commission had denied the motion by the Sturgeon Landowners Group to drop the Applicants’ west alternate route from consideration.

RETA experts on pipeline corrosion, underground high voltage power lines, and forensic auditing and accounting presented evidence. RETA submits the Applicants did not present sufficient evidence to justify their estimate that the underground option would cost 1.9 times as much as the overhead option in the Applicants’ preferred route. Through a variety of techniques, and based on other underground projects, RETA experts pointed out a range of savings between $364 million and $460 million for the Applicants’ underground option, suggesting that this option could be built for as little as 15% more than the overhead option. (This is a rounding error within the electrical transmission industry.) This additional cost would result in an additional 5 to 15 cents on the average residents’ monthly power bill.

RETA’s pipeline corrosion expert testified that, although there are a number of mitigation measures available to reduce the risks of building an overhead Heartland line so close to so many pipelines in the Applicants’ preferred route, uncertainty remains. He provided examples of induced electric currents on the pipeline, line-to-ground faults, electrical shock and other hazards. The Applicants’ most recent (April 26) amendment to their preferred route, moving it much closer to the dense network of pipelines running through the Sherwood Park Greenbelt, increases the possible power line/pipeline hazards.

In the evening, 18 RETA members, the majority of whom live along the Applicants’ preferred route, presented their concerns to the AUC which ranged from health to aesthetic impacts of an overhead Heartland line built so close to 5,200 homes (15,000 to 18,000 people). Residents, including 2 young students, spoke about health concerns, based on their reading of studies that report strong correlations between overhead high voltage power line electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and many diseases and other health problems. They spoke about particular health concerns for young children whose immune systems are not yet fully developed. Some residents pointed out that their property values would drop significantly and affect their family financial situations.

Residents spoke about safety concerns with the lines so close to their homes, and the impacts on the environment in the Greenbelt.  Almost all presenters spoke about the Applicants’ confusing public consultation process, the frustrations associated with trying to get meaningful information, and the constantly changing infrastructure plans by the Applicant (including the April 26 last-minute move of the Applicants’ preferred route farther west).

Presenters were consistent in their request that the Heartland line be buried, and that the Applicants’ recent moving of the preferred route a short distance farther away from the most densely-populated segment of the Sherwood Park Greenbelt was not good enough.

RETA President Bruce Johnson spoke about many other examples of successfully buried 500kV lines in the world, including in cold climates similar to Canada’s, and provided a list of these to the AUC. He also referenced a pool of over 300 health studies, one-half of which reported increased health risks of prolonged exposure to EMFs.

RETA’s stress expert spoke about the stress brought on by the Applicants’ approach to the public consultation process. Misinformation, mailing errors, changing routing and infrastructure plans throughout the process (e.g., changing tower heights), and uncertainty about all of the reported negative impacts of overhead power lines all have contributed to increased stress levels. He gave examples of the more serious health problems resulting  from stress, which are well reported in the literature and are well understood by the medical community.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 16

The Alberta Utilities Commission continued cross examination of the Applicants on May 4 with questions to Dr. William Bailey, who has been testifying as a health expert for the electricity transmission industry for over 23 years. (Dr. Bailey testified for TransAlta at the ERCB hearing in 1988 on TransAlta’s application to build a 240kV power line in east Edmonton. At that time, TransAlta wanted to build the line next to 2 existing high voltage lines in Mill Woods, whereas the Alberta Government wanted the line built in the Edmonton and Sherwood Park Greenbelts.)

Dr. Bailey dismissed almost any study that reported elevated health risks of prolonged exposure to overhead high voltage line electromagnetic fields (EMFs). He referred to conclusions of these studies as “erroneous” and  “mischaracterizing the facts”. He criticized the studies’ methodology or labeled them as “one-off”. Dr. Bailey essentially criticized any research that did not agree with the view generally held by the electric utility industry that there are no health risks associated with overhead high voltage power lines.

The AUC lawyer asked Dr. Bailey what he thought about scientific studies over time that eventually revealed that asbestos, smoking, DDT, and thalidomide caused negative health; and was it not possible that future research might also reveal a cause and effect relationship between EMFs and negative health.

AltaLink indicated that EMF levels of an overhead Heartland line would double in 2027 when they would increase energization of the line from 15% of its capacity to 30%.

The AUC Chair indicated he was struck by how many wetlands there are in the Sherwood Park Greenbelt. He asked the Applicants a number of questions about the concerns by Colchester Elementary School parents with an overhead Heartland line built next to the school. With respect to addressing landowner concerns, the Chair asked, since the Heartland towers would be the largest in our province’s history, had the Applicants discussed any special considerations of unique landowner situations, and not be concerned about setting a precedent. In response, AltaLink indicated that we will likely not see power line towers this tall again in Alberta; however,  the company was cautious about making any exceptions to their very limited landowner buyout policy because of cost. The Chair requested the Applicants to provide the AUC with a “straw dog” of principles or criteria (for this project only) that could be applied to exceptional cases for buyouts or routing adjustments.

Two families presented their concerns about the environmental, health, property value and visual impacts of an overhead line next to their homes. One family indicated their home, daycare centre and children’s school would all be located very close to the power line, and they would move in order to protect their children’s health.

The Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) was cross examined next. The very close working relationship between the AESO and Alberta Energy was exemplified by an e-mail request from Alberta Energy for a Ministerial briefing note from the AESO to explain why a 500kV Heartland line was necessary considering it would be energized to only 15% of its capacity. (The AESO purports to operate independently from the Alberta Government and the electrical transmission industry.)

Individual landowners and lawyers representing landowners and local governments questioned the AESO about the need for the line (at all) and about the proposed capacity of the line. Cross examiners pointed out how electricity demands had dropped drastically since the AESO conducted its load growth review in 2008 and 2009, and most large industries did not even need coal-fired electricity from Wabamun transmitted by the Heartland line because they either already were or would be co-generating their own electricity.

Cross examination by RETA and the AUC revealed that the AESO was not at all supportive of the underground option. The AESO had insisted on referring to this option as the “stakeholder-requested option” rather than simply the “underground option” because they were fearful the latter might “box the AUC into a corner”. An AESO engineer initially responded to the AUC that they had not certified the underground option as meeting the technical requirements and long-term transmission plans because of the cost.  The AUC pointed out that it was the AESO’s role to consider whether proposals met the technical requirements and long-term transmission plans – not to assess the economics of proposals. By the end of the evening, and following significant confusion, the AESO finally agreed that they had certified the underground option as meeting the technical requirements.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 15

Proceedings on May 3 included individuals and groups pointing out additional errors in the Applicants’ data, calculations and mailing lists.

RETA lawyers asked questions about the recent amendment realigning the Applicants’ preferred route closer to a series of pipelines that run through the Sherwood Park Greenbelt next to hundreds of homes. The new distance between the realigned power line and pipelines varies, and in some locations is as little as 36 metres. Under cross examination, the Applicants stated that they would still be able to mitigate any pipeline-power line hazards and achieve zero risk.

The Applicants made it clear that their first preference was to build the Heartland line in the recently-amended preferred route location, second preference in the initial preferred route, third preference either monopole or underground in their preferred route, and last preference in their alternate route.

With respect to submitting an amended preferred route in the middle of the AUC hearing (April 26), the Applicants were asked how it was possible to all of a sudden get agreement from Alberta Infrastructure to move their preferred route to another part of the Sherwood Park Greenbelt. This was particularly surprising considering all the careful work and negotiations on this route between the Applicants and Alberta Infrastructure during the past 3 years. No new assessments (visualization, environmental, etc) were conducted of this new routing before it was submitted to the AUC last week.

Consultations have begun with residents who would now be located much closer to the Applicants’ realigned preferred route. There was significant confusion about what opportunities would be available to these homeowners for participation in the AUC hearing process which has already been underway for over 3 weeks. The Applicants stated they had received emails from other people who are not appreciative of the proposed line being moved a short distance farther away from their homes; rather, they continue to want the line buried.

The rural landowner who had taped an April 16 conversation between his family and an AltaLink land agent continued cross examination of the Applicants. In spite of this family’s unique situation, with the proposed overhead Heartland line running along 2 sides of their farm home, the Applicants continued to suggest remedies unacceptable to the family. The Applicants’ business practices and overall approach were seriously questioned, with the landowner refusing to accept the Applicants’ April 29 apology for the “appalling” conduct of their land agent.

HALO (Homeowners Against Lines Overhead) continued to press the Applicants for more detailed data in order that a proper accounting and audit of the proposed project could be conducted. In the absence of these data, the Applicants were asked whether they would then agree to an independent third-party audit, considering all of the costing errors brought to the Applicants’ attention. They refused. As part of defending their costing estimates and the amount of time and money spent providing information to interveners including a stakeholder-requested underground option, the Applicants indicated there were pressures from other groups to keep costs down. For example, AltaLink’s Mr. Watson stated that the Industrial Consumers Association of Alberta couldn’t care less whether the Applicants run over wetlands and people’s homes with the power line – they were interested only in keeping costs down.

Under cross examination by the AUC, the Applicants indicated that the underground option was safer than the overhead option, and that there was little difference in the reliability and materials availability between the two options. The Applicant also indicated that staging was possible with the underground option, but not with the overhead option; in fact the Applicants indicated that staging construction of transmission capacity made sense from a cost perspective. With respect to in-service dates of transmission line operation, the Applicants indicated that the AUC should not consider this a major issue because the “lights would not go out” regardless of which option (underground or overhead) was selected. The Applicants indicated that if costs were equal, they would recommend the underground option; and in general that if costs were equal, transmission companies would be burying a lot more lines.

The Applicants indicated that their “150-metre” policy was not a hard and fast rule (wherein they would offer buyout only if the new power line was going to run within 150m of a home located on the property where the towers and lines would be built). As well, there was some flexibility in tower siting both along the centreline and off of the centreline. The Applicants suggested there would be no difference in property devaluation caused by lattice or monopole towers.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 14

Cross examination of the Applicants by a Village on the Lake, Strathcona County resident dominated May 2.  Several errors were pointed out in the CVs of Heartland Project Team panel members.

AltaLink provided a summary of the events leading up to the failed Edmonton-Calgary transmission line application in 2007. The hearing conducted by the Alberta Energy Utilities Board was contentious with landowners becoming very frustrated and upset with the whole process. Security tightened as the hearing proceeded, to the point where it really was not an open and transparent hearing any more. As a result of security issues, including investigators spying on concerned landowners, the process was terminated, and the matter went to court.

Many residents have lived in Sherwood Park and rural Strathcona County long before the Greenbelt or Restricted Development Area (RDA) was designated, and many more lived there before the Alberta Government quietly developed a Transportation Utility Corridor (TUC) policy in 1994, which unilaterally changed use of the Greenbelt. Residents were not involved in, or notified about, this policy change which did not affect the original legislation that established the RDA. As a result, Strathcona residents do not recognize the Alberta Government’s attempt to redesignate the RDA as a TUC (through policy).

Increasing the size of the RDA and Refinery Row infrastructure by building an overhead Heartland line in the Sherwood Park Greenbelt was discussed within the context of potentially creating a larger target for possible terrorist activities.

Urban and rural residents have been consulted differently by the Applicants, which was challenged as being unfair. Rural residents living within 800m of the proposed line were consulted one-on-one, while only urban residents who live along the front row of houses near the power line were consulted in this manner. As well, the Applicants were criticized for recognizing only “residences” (homes), whereas, the AUC indicates “residents” who are directly and adversely affected must be consulted. There are close to 5,200 residences within 800m of the Applicants’ preferred route, whereas there are 15,000 to 18,000 residents.

The mailout errors made in January 2010 were raised again. Many residents living along the Applicants’ preferred or alternate routes had received incorrect notification that the route near them was not being considered anymore. Errors were also pointed out in the Applicants’ mailout and landowner consultation lists.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 13

The most revealing evidence filed at the hearing on April 29 was by a rural landowner along the Applicants’ preferred route who was approached by one of AltaLink’s land agents on April 16 with an offer of compensation to place 5 power line towers on the family’s farm. The towers would be placed on 2 sides of the family home, and because they would be more than 150 metres from the actual house, AltaLink refused to buy out the farm, which had been the family’s preference. (AltaLink has arbitrarily selected 150m as some “magic” threshold distance, and only if at least one of the proposed towers is built within this distance, and it must be on your property, will they consider a buy out.)

The land agent, who works for Standard Land, had used a number of intimidation tactics in an attempt to get the family to sign away some of their land rights. Among other comments, the land agent had said that AltaLink had the support of the Premier and the Alberta Progressive Conservative Party, that the AUC had already made their minds up that the line would be built in this location, that the western alternate route was nothing more than a bureaucratic optics show, that it was only a requirement that AltaLink had to fulfil, and that ultimately if the family did not sign and take the $10,000 offered, it wouldn’t be available when the AUC made its decision. See this Edmonton Journal article for details.

AltaLink apologized at the hearing for this land agent’s “appalling ” conduct and comments that were way out of line, and indicated the agent had been terminated from working for AltaLink. Any other landowners this land agent had contacted would be interviewed to determine how widespread this type of approach might have been. The cross examining landowner asked AltaLink if it would be willing to withdraw its facility application if it was determined that many other landowners had been similarly intimidated by land agents. AltaLink said “no”.

Although the Applicants admitted that this particular family’s situation was rather unique, AltaLink would not buy them out because of its “150m” policy, and it was worried about setting a precedent if they did buy them out. AltaLink suggested that if the family was concerned about their property depreciating in value, they could always sell it fairly soon in order to avoid any additional future property devaluation.

This particular incident highlights generally the very flawed public consultation process conducted by AltaLink and EPCOR , whether it’s land agents using intimidation tactics, the Applicants changing tower heights throughout the process, many changes in segments of both their preferred and alternate routes, leading questions during one-on-one consultations, erroneous mailouts, and misinformation or confusing information provided to stakeholders.

A rural landowner who lives along the Applicants’ alternate route raised concerns about proposed towers being built in front of his family’s home, and the negative impacts of an overhead line that close to a number of environmentally sensitive areas (wetlands and mature forest).

HALO (Homeowners Against Lines Overhead) asked for more background pipeline data from the Applicants because of their concern the Applicants were attempting to characterize the pipeline activity within the Applicants’ alternate and preferred routes as similar, when in fact the number, size of pipelines and hazards of contents in the preferred route were many-fold those in the alternate route. HALO also pointed out several additional errors in the Applicants’ costing and infrastructure data.

The Industrial Power Consumers Association of Alberta’s (IPCAA) lawyer continued cross examination about financial accountabilities associated with the Heartland line.  He asked about the very close working relationship between AltaLink and the AESO, especially regarding costing of proposed new lines including the Heartland line; and asked how a 60% cost escalation for the Heartland project between January and September 2010 was possible.

AltaLink admitted that some landowners and other stakeholders are concerned about the connection between Montreal-based SNC Lavalin and AltaLink (SNC Lavalin owns 100% of AltaLnk), considering the fact that SNC Lavalin conducts all of the engineering and construction management work for AltaLink at higher consultants’ fees. The IPCAA also raised concerns about possible “wolf-packing” that might be taking place by AltaLink’s parent company (stacking more people on a project than are required).

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 12

April 28 started off with the Sherwood Park Fish and Game Association (SPFGA) cross examining the Applicants on their environmental assessment. The SPFGA questioned the adequacy of the Applicants’ aerial and road-side surveys. Aerial surveys for wildlife (primarily birds) were conducted inconsistently along the Applicants’ preferred route at varying elevations and in some cases at elevations where it was difficult or impossible to discern numbers and species of birds present. As well, road-side wildlife and habitat surveys were conducted subjectively and randomly along the Applicants’ preferred route in areas that were undulating and “hilly”, where it was difficult or impossible to see much of the landscape at all.

These inadequate aerial and road-side surveys of wildlife and wildlife habitat, coupled with the fact that pond and marsh water levels were abnormally low when these surveys were conducted (lowest in over 30 years), raise serious questions about the credibility and representativeness of the Applicants’ field surveys which served as a basis for subsequent biophysical evaluations.

The SPFGA questioned the Applicants’ consistent characterization of the wetlands and wetland complexes along the Applicants’ preferred route as “lower quality” and “not particularly important”, when in fact these wetlands are home to thousands of waterbirds and other wildlife that can be enjoyed by many people due to their proximity to urban areas and ready access. The Applicants did admit that rural residential properties (acreages) along the Applicants’ preferred route often provide good wildlife habitat.

Several examples of erroneously-labeled maps in the Applicants’ environmental assessment of their preferred route were pointed out (e.g., labeling a large block of land as cultivated land when it should have been labeled as “wetland” and important habitat for waterbirds which could easily crash into power lines and towers if an overhead Heartland line was built here). The Applicants responded that it was easy to make errors of this type, leading the SPFGA to ask how many additional errors of this type might there be in the Applicants’ facility application.

The SPFGA asked whether a buried Heartland line would see any impacts on wildlife (particularly birds) during the 40 to 60-year life of the line, compared to an overhead line which would cause bird mortality as widely reported in the literature. As part of their response, the Applicants agreed that an underground line could easily be staged which an overhead line could not (i.e., you can build part of an underground system today and easily add to it if more capacity is required in the future, whereas you must build an overhead line to its fully-anticipated capacity at initial construction). However, the Applicant stated that it was not worth it to bury the Heartland line, and that it was all about cost and economics. (Throughout the hearing to date, the Applicants have repeated how economics and cost are more important than addressing residents’ concerns about health, safety, environmental, aesthetic and property value impacts of an overhead line.)

In summary, and based on the inadequate wildlife and wildlife habitat surveys and errors in the environmental assessment, the SPFGA questioned the reliability of the Applicants’ route selection process.

In response to cross examination by the Colchester School Parents’ Association (CSPA), the Applicants indicated that in California they have designated minimum distances between schools and overhead high voltage power lines (in order to protect the health of children). (Here in Alberta there are no such minimum distances.) The CSPA asked how close to a school had a 500kV line the size of the Heartland line ever been built anywhere. Parents were also concerned because, following the 1987 tornado that ripped through Edmonton and followed 2 high voltage power lines, there was much public discussion about whether overhead high voltage lines actually attract tornadoes.

When asked if it was possible to bury the line by the school, the Applicants indicated it was too expensive, even though the Applicant admitted that residents and parents had clearly indicated they wanted the line buried. The CSPA stated that Colchester School was built long before the Sherwood Park Restricted Development Area was established by the Alberta Government, and therefore the line should be buried.

The City of Edmonton agreed with all of the concerns about the Applicants” preferred route raised by previous cross examiners. The Applicants agreed that taller towers, such as those proposed for the Heartland line, would be visible for greater distances (and therefore affect more people and property values). The City noted that every statistically significant property value impact noted in the facility application was a negative effect. Cross examination revealed that the Applicants’ property appraisal report prepared by Serecon Consulting Group really did not help determine anything important in relation to the proposed Heartland line. The consultants had not looked at appraisals in Edmonton near 500kV lines, had not reviewed appraisals near towers as tall as the proposed Heartland towers, had not reviewed impacts of a new power line in a corridor where there currently is no line or where there already are existing lines, etc.

When asked whether people’s perceptions about overhead power line health impacts mattered, the Applicants called this “low-quality” information.

The Applicants had repeatedly stated that none of their proposed towers would be built in the North Saskatchewan River valley along their preferred route. The City’s lawyer pointed out that, in fact, 7 towers would be built in the river valley (towers #79-#85). The Applicants also suggested that there were not a lot of birds in the North Saskatchewan River valley where the Applicants’ preferred route would cross the river. (In fact, this valley is a major migration route for thousands of birds, and in general is very important bird habitat, as are most major rivers the size of the North Saskatchewan River).

Under cross examination by Spruce Grove’s lawyer, the Applicants admitted that the entrances into municipalities are important (e.g., in relation to visitors’ first impressions). (Huge unsightly towers built at such entrances would certainly not give visitors a positive first impression.)  Spruce Grove’s lawyer also asked why monopole and underground options had not been included as part of the Applicants’ alternate route.

Two interveners asked the Applicants questions about impacts of the proposed Heartland line on their heliport and airstrip. In one case, a private airstrip would have to close down based on the proximity of a new overhead line. It became apparent that the Applicants had subjectively determined which airstrips and heliports along their preferred and alternate routes were considered “no-go” zones (i.e., the new power line would stay clear of these areas).

The Industrial Power Consumers Association of Alberta started cross examination of the Applicants and will continue on Day 13. Initial questions reveal just how closely AltaLink and the Alberta Electricity System Operator (AESO) work to plan which new high voltage lines get built and where. Both are involved very early in costing exercises, and it is difficult to distinguish between the system operator (AESO) and the transmission facility operator (AltaLink). (The AESO purports to be an agency independent of industry and the provincial government.)

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 11

On April 27, the Applicants were cross examined about the cost burden of the Heartland line infrastructure and its impact on the competitiveness of Alberta industry and businesses which pay about 80% of this cost. (Alberta industry has indicated it cannot afford the additional costs of all the new transmission projects legislated in Bill 50.)

Montreal-based SNC Lavalin is about to own 100% of AltaLink, and as the parent company, does all of the engineering and construction management work for AltaLink’s transmission infrastructure projects on an untendered basis. Questions were asked about how this situation made it possible to keep costs contained.

AltaLink indicated they get a guaranteed 9% return on investment, including on all of the money they spend on advertising in an attempt to convince Albertans that all of the new high voltage lines are necessary and that AltaLink listens carefully to what stakeholders have to say. (Up to this point in the Heartland hearing, the Applicants have been criticized for their poor public consultation process.)

HALO (Homes Against Lines Overhead) pointed out many inaccuracies and inconsistencies in the Applicants’ spread sheets on proposed construction, contingency and related costs. During cross examination, many examples were cited of the Applicants intentionally underestimating the construction costs for their preferred route (overhead) and overestimating the construction costs for their alternate route in an attempt to make the preferred route appear more favourable. For example, the Applicants have proposed to delay construction of the alternate route by a whole year because they have chosen not to conduct as detailed land access discussions to date with landowners along this route as with landowners along their preferred route. This self-imposed one year delay adds significantly to the proposed construction costs for their alternate route due to inflation.

The Applicants also conceded that their line loss calculations were in error for their preferred route because they had not included the section of the line from the generation source (Keephills) to the Ellerslie Substation. This “error” also made the Applicants’ preferred route appear more favourable.

A landowner living along the proposed alternate route questioned the Applicants’ public consultation process and pointed out many examples where landowners were left confused by missing, incomplete or contradicting information. Landowners along the Applicants’ alternate and preferred routes were even erroneously informed by mail that the routes by their homes were no longer being considered. As well, confusing information or misinformation was provided by the Applicants about the need for the Heartland line and its capacity. The Applicants conceded that many landowners had complained about the Heartland public consultation process.

Several examples of conflict of interest were provided. For example, SVP Leigh Clarke of AltaLink was also Vice President of the Alberta P.C. Party (Calgary) when Bill 50 was passed. AltaLink has been awarded (without any tendering) the Heartland Transmission Project and the Western Alberta Transmission Line (both Bill 50-legislated lines).

With respect to electromagnetic field (EMF) impacts on health, the Applicants were asked why they consistently quote Health Canada and the World Health Organization (WHO), when both of these organizations have been heavily criticized by health experts. Examples were provided of Health Canada and WHO credibility problems, including conflict of interest associated with heavy lobbying from the electricity transmission industry.

Health Canada indicates that “typical daily” exposures or “typical EMF exposures” or “exposures normally found in Canadian living and working environments” pose no health hazards. The Applicants were asked whether living or working next to an overhead 500 kilovolt power line was “typical” or “normal”. (Since only a small percentage of the population lives or works next to overhead high voltage lines, these situations are obviously not “typical” or “normal”, thereby suggesting that Health Canada’s position is dubious.)

Examples were provided of poor routing decisions without local landowner input. There is little in the facility application that speaks to the “public interest” and how the project will benefit the Alberta ratepayer.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 10

AltaLink started off April 26 with a last-minute amendment to their preferred route. They filed new maps suggesting they are willing to consider moving their preferred route 100m to 200m to the west within a short section of the Sherwood Park Greenbelt (East TUC). This would get the line farther away from some homes, but put it closer to others, as well as closer to the pipelines that already run through the Greenbelt.

Many hearing participants were surprised by this proposal partway through the hearing. The Applicants have changed their minds on infrastructure and routing options along their preferred route throughout the public consultation process, and now even during the AUC hearing. For example, the Applicants had first proposed 60-metre-tall lattice towers during the public consultation process, then 73-metre-tall towers following the public consultation process, and most recently 77-metre-tall towers within their facility application. It has been difficult for stakeholders to know exactly what the Applicants are proposing, and what they might propose next – almost like pulling rabbits out of a hat.

Following this surprise move by the Applicants, cross examination continued by lawyers representing rural landowners along the Applicants’ preferred route. The Applicants were asked why last-minute changes have been made to the routing that impact some landowners less but others more. For example, one landowner would initially be told that the line would be about 1 mile from them. Then another landowner who did not want the line closer to them would convince the Applicants to move the proposed routing further way from them, but now bringing the line closer to the first landowner. This amendment to the routing would be done without the first landowner’s knowledge and without any consultation with this landowner. The Applicants were asked how they subjectively figure out which landowner’s concerns supersede other landowners’ concerns.

The Applicants conceded that nobody wants these towers and lines on their properties.

Applicants were asked why  they did not consider routing the line along existing linear infrastructure (e.g., railways, power lines) such as they had done with their Western Alberta Transmission Line application. Although the Applicants indicated they tried to avoid schools and daycares, their preferred route certainly runs close to numerous schools and daycares. In the case of Colchester Elementary School, the power line right-of-way is just over 100m from the school yard.

Compensation for property devaluation caused by an overhead Heartland line was discussed, with the Applicants making it clear the only case for which they would consider compensation is if the line would be built on someone’s property within 150m of their home. Compensation would not be considered in other cases, even if the line would run within 150m of someone’s home but not on their property. Lawyers also pointed out that the comments made to landowners by the Applicants’ field interviewers during one-on-one consultations were very leading and erroneously suggested very little property value impacts and then for only a short time following construction of the line. (The fact is, many studies show impacts of up to 38% for front-row homes and 16% to 29% for agricultural land. This appraisal showed rural property devaluation up to 91%.)

Cross examination started on the overbuilding of the proposed Heartland line, and will continue on April 27.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 9

The April 21 session started off with arguments for and against a Motion by the Sturgeon Landowners Group (SLG) and Blue Route Utility Transmission Elimination (BRUTE) to remove the Applicants’ west alternate route from consideration, leaving only the Applicants’ preferred route for the AUC to consider. Arguments to remove the alternate route included: specific wording in Bill 50 which legislated the building of new 500kV lines including the Heartland line, timing of Bill 50 legislation in relation to existing 500kV line in place at that time, and alleged manipulation of high voltage line numbering.

Arguments against removing the alternate route were presented by the AESO, City of Edmonton, County of Strathcona, AltaLink, and several lawyers representing rural landowners along the Applicants’ preferred route. Arguments included: the Motion is a “tactic” and is “absurd”, misinterpretation or narrow interpretation of the Bill 50 wording, Bill 50 was not meant to take away any AUC rights to determine routing, and timing of the Motion is impractical. The AUC panel will inform hearing participants shortly when they will decide on this matter.

Cross-examination of the Applicants continued for the rest of the day on routing selection. Legal counsel representing rural landowners along the Applicants’ preferred route questioned the Applicants on criteria used to eliminate and select specific sections of their preferred route. It became clear that most decisions in this regard were made subjectively by AltaLink very early in the route selection process as opposed to being based on facts and information obtained from research and stakeholders during the public consultation process.

As well, the Applicants made it clear that almost none of the factors allegedly considered for eliminating and selecting sections of the alternate route or the rural part of the preferred route were considered for that section of their preferred route within the Greenbelts (TUCs). (For example, homes within 150m of the proposed line within the Greenbelts were not counted by the Applicants.)

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 8

The AUC held a special evening Community Hearing Session in Sherwood Park April 20 to give residents and groups, who might not otherwise be able to attend the daytime hearing proceedings at the Edmonton EXPO Centre, an opportunity to speak.

The session was very well attended with 25 presenters, and the majority of audience chairs full. It would be impossible to give adequate justice to the presentations in a summary because, collectively, they covered so many issues and provided so many reasons for burying the Heartland line. Following, is our humble attempt to simply provide some of the highlights and common themes.

The most common theme was a plea to the AUC panel to direct the Applicants to bury the line. The many benefits of underground high voltage power lines were discussed by many presenters. If there was an additional capital cost to bury the line, it should be borne by all Alberta consumers.

The history of the development of the Greenbelts was described by many presenters. One presenter suggested that previous Alberta Environment Minister Bill Yurko would “turn over in his grave” if he was made aware of plans for an overhead 500kV power line in the Greenbelts, for it was under his authority that the Greenbelts were initially established in the early 1970s to protect the land. Another presenter indicated the TUC signs were erected by the Alberta Government as late as 2007, and pointed out that the Greenbelts were set aside primarily for purposes of protecting agriculture and the environment.

Presenters gave many examples of moving near the Sherwood Park Greenbelt, and being assured as they did their due diligence that additional pipelines might be buried there, but the surface would always remain open as a green space. Many referred to the abundant wildlife along the Greenbelt and how important this green space is aesthetically and how the Greenbelt served as a tool to educate their children about the natural environment and the outdoors. Others discussed the significant property devaluation that would occur should an above ground power line be built next to them, and that they must be adequately compensated if the line is built above ground.

The multitude of health risks associated with an overhead line the size of the proposed Heartland line were raised by many presenters, and particularly highlighted by the Colchester and Westboro School Parents’ Associations. They referred to the fact that young children’s immune systems are not yet fully developed and render them especially vulnerable to the negative health effects of EMFs. Numerous peer-reviewed health studies were referenced. Should the Heartland line be built above ground, there was a very high probability that reduced enrollment in at least two nearby elementary schools would result in school closure because parents would not want to risk their children’s health. One presenter said, “Parents will not put their children in harms way.”  The stress caused by the prospects of having a line built above ground next to your home or school was raised as a health concern. “Prudent Avoidance” and the “Precautionary Principle” were referenced by many presenters with respect to health risks of an overhead line.

The hazards were described of building an overhead power line so close to so many buried pipelines in the Sherwood Park Greenbelt, especially because so many homes, schools and daycares are right next to the pipelines. The chance of ignition and explosion of flammable pipeline contents were outlined.

The flawed public consultation process by the Applicants was referenced by presenters, and many examples were cited. One presenter summarized this fact by stating that the Applicants had not been “consulting”, rather they had been “insulting”; and that their public consultation process had been a “giant farce”.

Numerous presenters referred to the vast differences between information provided by the Applicants and others (including RETA) on the health, safety, environmental, property value and aesthetic impacts of overhead high voltage lines. They wondered why AltaLink and EPCOR did not share more information with them in this regard.

A number of presenters discussed the Alberta Government’s role in electricity transmission decisions and spoke about the assault by the government on our democratic rights and freedoms, and the loss of trust in our provincial government.

People spoke passionately about their love for Sherwood Park and Strathcona County, their pride in the community and their commitment through volunteerism over the years. All of that would change with an overhead line the size of the proposed Heartland line which would affect not only nearby residents and businesses, but the entire community of Sherwood Park.

Many pleaded with the AUC panel, and held high hope that the panel would weigh the evidence fairly and make the right decision. The panel was asked to please not rush into a wrong decision, especially since electricity generation and transmission technologies are changing and improving so quickly. The most consistent theme of the evening was that, if the Heartland line was necessary, then it must be buried, both from a common sense perspective and based on all of the evidence. And, if the line was buried, we could proudly tell the world of our achievement, and be cheerleaders of a technology that speaks to our society that cares for people’s health, safety and security of property. See front-page Sherwood Park News article.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 7

DND Radio Receiver Site More Important Than Homes, Schools, Daycares and Hospitals

Cross-examination continued on April 19 of Applicant experts on Department of National Defence (DND) Riverbend Radio Receiver Site interference along the Applicants’ preferred route. It appears that DND requires a 1.6-kilometre safe distance from overhead high voltage power lines, whereas AltaLink has determined they should be 3.95 kilometres away. This poses problems for neighbouring landowners who would be directly impacted by a Heartland line skirting around the DND site by this much.

It is most ironic that the Applicants are more than willing to move the proposed Heartland line much further away from this radio receiver site than requested by DND to ensure there is absolutely no radio interference whatsoever caused by overhead power line noise, whereas the Applicants have no concerns about building an overhead 500kV line next to 5,200 homes (15,000 people) and 8 schools, daycares and hospitals.

Lawyers for another group of rural landowners north of the North Saskatchewan River along the Applicants’ preferred route questioned the education and credentials of the AltaLink Manager of Project Siting. Questions were asked about why the many factors considered in the Applicants’ route selection process were not statistically weighted considering that some factors were obviously more important than others. The Applicants said they just wanted to present the raw data and made subjective value judgments on what was important and what was not;  and they would leave it up to others to assign weighting to the various factors if they so wished. (Without statistical weighting, the Applicants considered native vegetation located on the power line centre line as importantly as number of homes within 800m of the line.)

Once again, the Applicants admitted that their 150-metre impact zone was selected arbitrarily by AltaLink, and the cross-examiner suggested that this “impact distance” could just as easily have been 200m or 250m. The Applicants chose not to consider visual impacts of an overhead line in their final table that summarized the various categories of potential impacts. AltaLink admitted that their preferred route would be closer to many more homes and people than would the alternate route.

It was also clear during cross-examination that the Applicants’ primary criterion for selecting the Edmonton and Sherwood Park Greenbelts as their preferred route was because the Alberta Government had recently started calling this a Transportation Utility Corridor (TUC) even though 1974 legislation refers to it as a Restricted Development Area. (TUC signs were first erected along the Sherwood Park Greenbelt by the provincial government in late 2007.)

Attend Sherwood Park AUC Hearing

Alberta Utilities Commission Community Hearing Session

Heartland Transmission Project

Wednesday, April 20, 2011, 7:00 p.m.

Coast Edmonton East Hotel, Sherwood Park

(next to Millennium Place)

RETA encourages all concerned residents to attend this important AUC hearing session in Sherwood Park. We need to show the AUC that we want the Heartland line buried.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 6

RETA lawyers continued cross-examining the Applicants on April 18 about their flawed public consultation process. When asked whether they ever had a turnout for any of their open houses as large as the turnout for RETA’s Mother-of-All Power Lines Rally at Rexall Place (3,500 to 4,000 attendees), the Applicants said no and that the total turnout for all of their open houses combined was only 1,700.

The Applicants agreed that the parents of children attending Colchester Elementary School are very concerned about health risks of an above-ground Heartland line, the right-of-way which would be just over 100 metres from the school. However, in spite of these health concerns, and the probability that the school would close down if an overhead line was built that close to the school because parents would send their children to other schools, this was not a large consideration by the Applicants. Similarly, the A & D Daycare location right next to the Sherwood Park Greenbelt where the Heartland line would be built was also not considered important by the Applicants. In spite of Colchester School parents and A & D Daycare parents asking that the Heartland line be buried to allay their concerns, the Applicants have recommended building an above ground line.

Strathcona County’s lawyer got agreement from the Applicants that the Restricted Development Area legislation for the greenbelt (TUC) does not restrict development next to the greenbelt. He pointed out to the Applicants that there were 5,194 homes, numerous schools, numerous daycares and one hospital within 800 metres of the Applicants’ preferred route compared to only 342 homes and no schools, daycares or hospitals within 800 metres of the Applicants’ alternate route. He continued that the number of homes within 150 metres appeared to be a more important consideration by the Applicants (even though the Applicants stated that this distance was selected arbitrarily).

A lawyer representing several rural landowners along the Applicants’ preferred route pointed out numerous examples of confusion during the Applicants’ public consultation process, which left landowners uncertain about many aspects of the proposed line. As well, he pointed out several examples of misinformation provided by the Applicants which made the Applicants’ preferred route appear more suitable. The Applicants had already eliminated numerous routes on the basis of dubious data before they applied a more comprehensive list of factors to be considered for the remainder of the route selection process. The Applicants considered a Department of National Defence (DND) receiver site off limits for the proposed power line based on a consultant’s reports (Shel-Bar Electronics Industries Ltd.) which were shown to be full of formula and calculation errors.

Perhaps one of the more interesting revelations at today’s proceeding was the Applicant stating that they had started discussions with the DND about their preferred route in December, 2006; had worked closely together with the Alberta Infrastructure Department for several years on their preferred route; and had worked closely with the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) on their preferred route during the conceptual planning stages of the Heartland line. This revelation certainly  supports many of the concerned landowners along the Applicants’ preferred route who feel that the Applicants, the Alberta Government and the AESO have always wanted the Heartland line built in the Edmonton and Sherwood Park Greenbelts (East TUC), and that the Applicants’ public consultation process was a sham.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 5

Darin Watson of AltaLink Blames RETA for Residents’ Concerns about Heartland Line

Under cross-examination by RETA legal counsel on April 15, Darin Watson of AltaLink said it isn’t helpful when groups present information on health that is different than the health information AltaLink presents to the public. He said it’s been difficult for AltaLink to get its message across to residents that overhead high voltage power lines have no negative health impacts when groups like RETA provide information to the public that suggests there indeed is a health risk.

Watson did however admit that proposals, such as the Heartland proposal with its towers up to 77 metres tall, cause stress among those affected; in fact he said, “It’s bloody stressful”. This was following RETA lawyers presenting information from Health Canada that stress (such as that caused by the prospects of a high voltage power line being built next to you) can cause any number of more serious health problems and diseases. The Applicants’ EMF and health expert had also been asked to comment on the following statement by the Canadian Cancer Society:

“Until scientific evidence can clarify the link between exposure to magnetic fields from high-voltage power lines and cancer risk, you may not want your children to play directly beneath them for long periods of time.”

RETA’s lawyer also asked why the Applicants’  modeled EMF readings for the proposed Heartland line were 1.5 times higher right over an underground line than right under an overhead line, when actual and properly-conducted EMF readings taken jointly by EPCOR, AltaLink and RETA on June 24, 2009 were 4.6 times higher under an overhead line than over an underground line.

The Applicants were asked about how particularly vulnerable children with immune systems not yet fully developed are to health impacts of overhead high voltage line EMFs. The Applicants’ EMF and health expert was asked whether he agreed with the Bonneville Power Authority’s health research indicating that about one-half of the 323 different health studies reviewed showed adverse health impacts of overhead high voltage power line EMFs.

Questions were asked about many problems with, and weaknesses in, the Applicants’ public consultation process, including hundreds of residents being informed that the route near them was no longer being considered, when in fact they were next to what the Applicants had short-listed to their preferred and alternate routes.

During cross-examination of the Applicants’ visualization expert (Truescape), questions were raised about the company’s website which provides extremely biased information on the visual impacts of transmission towers and lines. As well, the website focuses on how Truescape’s work for the electrical transmission industry will help “stakeholders to immediately understand the true impact and benefits of the project”, help get “earlier stakeholder agreement” with proposed projects they are concerned about, and helps their clients achieve “smoother passage through siting, consultation and permitting, and faster approvals”. The website even boasts that one of Truescape’s visualizations for a transmission project where residents wanted power lines buried (might that be the Heartland project??) reassured concerned residents that an above ground power line posed “very little difference in visual impact between the existing alignment (no overhead line) and the proposed new above-ground alignment.” Many participants at the hearing found this website information incredulous.

The day ended with RETA legal counsel questioning the Applicants about the numerous ways their proposed project changed in scope, including adding the Ellerslie Substation after landowners had been consulted, and proposed towers changing in maximum height from 60 metres to 77 metres after landowners had been consulted. Such changes in project scope violate several legal requirements by the Alberta Utilities Commission.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 4

Under cross-examination by RETA’s legal counsel on April 14, AltaLink and EPCOR staff and experts made it clear that their estimated cost of burying part of the Heartland line is the determining factor in recommending against it. Cost is more important to the Applicants than addressing the concerns of about 15,000 residents (5,200 homes). (RETA’s written submission estimates that a partially buried Heartland line would cost less than 15% more than an entirely above-ground line, but that over the life of the line when all costs are considered, a buried line is far less costly.)

Although the Applicants have repeatedly indicated they are supportive of making affected landowners “whole again” from a compensation perspective, it is clear they would consider compensating only landowners who were forced to move because the proposed Heartland line would run extremely close to their homes. Today, they indicated that making the greatly impacted landowners “whole again” would include compensation based on replacement value.

AltaLink staff agreed that all Alberta electricity ratepayers would benefit from the Heartland line, that Alberta ratepayers are at financial risk for the costs of building the line, that AltaLink and EPCOR get a guaranteed financial return from the line, and that the thousands of residents who live near the line end up paying more for the line than other Albertans due to property devaluation. The Applicants’ appraisal expert admitted that the most significant property devaluation in his report was for a home next to a 500kV power line.

Regarding impacts of an overhead Heartland line on pipeline corrosion and explosion hazards (e.g., lightning strikes, induced electrical currents), the Applicants stated emphatically that they could guarantee zero risk with proper pipeline mitigation.

Although overhead high voltage power line noise (humming, buzzing, crackling, hissing) is loudest during foul and moist weather conditions, the Applicants assessed anticipated noise from an overhead Heartland line during only fair weather conditions. As well, the Applicants conducted only a partial noise assessment for the proposed Ellerslie Substation.

With respect to visual impacts, the Applicants did not conduct a visual impact assessment of the proposed line even though concerned residents have described the towers (up to 77m tall) as “monstrous”, “mammoth” and “a blight on the landscape”. The Applicants’ consultants conducted visualizations which are much less rigorous than a visual impact assessment, and often distort the true visual impacts (e.g., use of wide angle lens to make transmission towers appear very small in the distance).

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 3

Cross-examination of the Applicants (AltaLink and EPCOR) continued on April 13, with Darin Watson (senior AltaLink engineer on the Heartland Project Team) admitting that the “150-metre distance from the centre of the power line” was a distance arbitrarily selected by the Applicants as the highest zone of impact on homes, schools, daycares, hospitals and businesses. He said they could just as well have chosen 200m or 800m.

Under cross-examination from RETA legal counsel, AltaLink was confused about the total cost of proposed “critical transmission infrastructure” projects legislated by the Alberta Government in Bill 50. AltaLink indicated that burying part of the Heartland line is technically feasible, and that you can stage the construction of an underground line better than for an above ground line.

When asked about the aesthetically unpleasing overhead towers that would be up to 77m tall, Mr. Watson said, “To use the old adage beauty is in the eye of the beholder…..I like to personally think of them as little inukshuks all standing in a line”.

Mr. Watson repeated numerous times that, with respect to undergrounding,  not a dollar more should be spent than is necessary, and yet he stated numerous times that towers could easily be moved up to 30m this way or that way to accommodate resident concerns (at additional cost).

AltaLink agreed that property values of nearby homes and businesses would decrease with construction of an overhead line and that burying the line would ameliorate property devaluation. AltaLink also agreed that the proposed Heartland line has caused significant stress among those people who would live, work or attend school near the line. Mr. Watson did not think that school children should have the opportunity to voice their concerns or to otherwise participate in the Heartland public consultation process.

With respect to the route selection process (including narrowing down the routes), AltaLink admitted that this was done subjectively based on the Applicants’ value judgments. Cross-examination by RETA’s legal counsel also clarified that the Applicants had not researched the optimal routing for the underground option, deciding instead to bury it almost exactly along the very same route as the above ground option. (Significant cost savings could be achieved if optimal routing had been considered.) It became obvious that many judgment calls had been made on the Applicants’ costing of the underground option. For example, the Applicants arbitrarily decided at one point to increase the underground contingency costs (based on their risk assessment) by 20%.

Mr. Watson also admitted under cross-examination that environmental risks are greater for the overhead than for the underground option.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 2

Lawyers for the Sturgeon Landowners Group and Blue Route Utility Transmission Elimination (BRUTE) spent April 12 cross-examining AltaLink’s and EPCOR’s hired team of experts.

The Sturgeon Landowner Group’s lawyer filed a Motion asking that the Applicants’ alternate route be struck from consideration for the proposed Heartland line based on specific wording in Bill 50, the Electric Statutes Amendment Act, 2009. He argued that Bill 50 contemplated only the Applicants’ preferred route and not the alternate route.

Lawyers questioned the integrity and effectiveness of the Applicants’ public consultation process, citing many examples of landowners not being consulted at all, improper consultation, mailing of false information to landowners by the Applicants, and poor consultation follow up on the Applicants’ part. Lawyers also asked questions regarding landowners’ concerns about stray voltage and livestock, the line being built too close to homes and businesses, compensation, and lost business and residential development opportunities.

The Applicants admitted if they were unable to negotiate temporary workspace arrangements with landowners, they would be able to conduct construction within the power line right-of-way (thereby reducing construction footprint and costs).  Lawyers tripped up one of the AltaLink staff who said AltaLink was always able to resolve landowner concerns amicably. Lawyers presented information on the AUC forcing AltaLink to deal with a landowner concern several years ago.

During cross-examination of the Applicants, Strathcona County legal counsel challenged BRUTE lawyers, suggesting they were conducting “Sweetheart Questioning” of the Applicants. (“Sweetheart Questioning” means a cross-examiner is purposely asking questions to elicit responses that agree with the cross-examiner’s position….in this case, both the Applicants and BRUTE have made it clear that they want the Heartland line built in the Applicants’ preferred route.) The AUC Chair agreed with Strathcona’s legal counsel, and instructed the BRUTE lawyers to limit their cross-examination to questions that challenged the Applicants.

Some hearing participants on April 11 and 12 wondered why the AUC had hired armed sheriffs to watch over the hearing proceedings.

AUC Heartland Hearing – Day 1

Formalities dominated the first day (April 11) of the AUC hearing in Edmonton on the proposed double circuit 500 kilovolt Heartland Transmission Project. The massive expert team hired by AltaLink and EPCOR (the Applicants) was introduced.

Lawyers representing numerous landowners raised a procedural point regarding consulting reports on the Heartland line impacts on radio interference at nearby Department of National Defence installations. Lawyers argued that reports they had requested were not provided until very late on the last business day before the AUC hearing, and errors appeared in reports issued on different dates, with no explanation. Also, they argued that some “massaging” of radio interference readings had taken place between different reports on the subject. They insisted that authors of these reports appear at the hearing in order that they can be cross-examined. Applicant lawyers argued that their own experts could speak to the matter, and they would not be calling on the report authors to appear. The AUC ruled against AltaLink/EPCOR and in favour of the landowners on this matter.

Lawyers representing the Sturgeon Landowners Group and Blue Route Utility Transmission Elimination cross-examined AltaLink/EPCOR experts for most of the day, pointing out how poorly the public consultation data collected by the Applicants were reflected in their Facility Application. They also indicated that landowners along the Applicants’ alternate route had not been properly consulted in spite of the Applicants’ suggestion that they had consulted with “thousands” of landowners.

Media coverage includes CTV Edmonton, CHED News, CBC News and iNews 880.

AUC Heartland Transmission Line Hearing

The Alberta Utilities Commission hearing on the proposed Heartland Transmission Line is being held at:

Edmonton EXPO Centre (old Agricom) at Northlands

9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. daily starting Monday April 11, 2011.

Show your support for getting this line buried by attending.

The Real Cost

There has been endless speculation regarding the cost of undergrounding the Heartland Line.  Well RETA decided to hire underground experts and accounting firm Meyers Norris Penny to look at the application submitted by AltaLink and EPCOR to find where gold-plating and unreasonable assumptions were made.  We also asked them to consider alternative, more practical designs, and to compare the costs of these with what the Heartland Team submitted.  The results are part of our submission to the AUC but we thought we’d put them up here:

The bottom line is that the Heartland Team, through sleight of hand and making ridiculous assumptions said that putting 20km of the line underground would cost $1.1B, and when our team was done we had costs of around $668M or $424M less than theirs.  What this means is that burying 20km would only cost $87M more than the $581M they say it will cost to put the whole line overhead.  That’s 15%!  A far cry from the “4 to 20 times” their propaganda campaign talked endlessly about over the past 3 years.

Also, keep in mind that they had years to “engineer” their number and we only had a very short time to dissect it and suggest alternatives.  There are many other alternatives that we didn’t have the time or resources to explore including one 45km all-underground route which gets the power to the Heartland where they claim they need it and doesn’t needlessly cross the North Saskatchewan River.

The bottom line is they don’t want underground to happen and they will deceive everyone, gold-plate their “solution”, and, in short, do anything they can to prevent it from happening.  I’m pleased to say, thanks to some very talented people, we’ve called their bluff.

Edmonton Wants Heartland Line Buried

The City of Edmonton took a very strong position today that they want the proposed Heartland transmission line buried so it won’t negatively impact 5,300 homes in Edmonton and Strathcona County. City Council says Edmonton residents, along with Strathcona County and other groups are concerned about the impact an overhead power line would have on aesthetics, noise, potential health problems, wildlife, property values and planning.  Edmonton will be making these arguments at the Alberta Utilities Commission hearing starting next week at Edmonton’s EXPO Centre.  See Edmonton Sun, CTV, Edmonton Journal, Global TV, CBC, CHED News and iNews 880 coverage.

If the line isn’t buried, City Council wants the alternate route selected because it bypasses Edmonton and affects less than 400 homes.

Request to Suspend Heartland Hearing

In this news release and Edmonton Journal article, the Lavesta Area Group is calling upon the Alberta Government and the Alberta Utilities Commission to suspend the Heartland hearing proceedings, scheduled to start April 11.  The request is based on the Lavesta Area Group recently being granted leave to appeal against the AUC’s May 2010 decision to compensate AltaLink for expenses incurred in a transmission line hearing that ended suddenly as a result of a spying scandal.

Everything about Electricity

RETA encourages anyone interested in electricity generation or transmission in Canada within the North American context to read CBC News’ comprehensive coverage in the following recent article series:

• Special report: Power switch

• Electricity shocker: Power prices set to rise sharply

• Selling the grid: Private generators pick up the slack

• Major changes in works for Canada’s electrical grid

• Canada’s new power strategy excludes megaprojects

• The amazing ABCs of electricity generation

• Smart grid promises big benefits, but raises privacy concerns

• How it works: Where Canada’s surplus energy goes

• Green power projects often hit unexpected hurdles

• The power grid is getting smarter, but is it tougher?

• Canadian power plant database

It’s Time for the Truth about Electricity

RETA issued this news release and Myths vs. Facts backgrounder in response to public statements made recently about electricity transmission in Alberta by representatives of the Alberta Government, Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO), AltaLink, EPCOR and ATCO Electric.

Information provided to the public by the provincial government, AESO and transmission facility operators has been selective,  misleading and in some cases false. RETA is interested in setting the record straight on a variety of transmission issues including: need for new lines; public consultation; health, safety, environmental, property value and aesthetic impacts of overhead lines; benefits of burying these lines; comparative costs of building overhead and underground lines; concerns about provincial legislation; electricity export; and role of provincial MLAs.

RETA President Bruce Johnson said, “It’s time for the truth” when it comes to information on electricity transmission in Alberta.

Alberta’s Biggest Tourist Attraction

Successful Bury The Line Public Rally

About 500 adults and several hundred children rallied at the Legislature Building March 19, sending the Alberta Government a strong message that high voltage power lines must be buried whenever they are built near homes, schools, daycare centres, hospitals and environmentally sensitive areas.

Speakers included: Linda Duncan (MP, Edmonton Strathcona), Dave Quest (MLA, Strathcona), Naresh Bhardwaj (MLA, Edmonton Ellerslie), Brian Mason (Alberta NDP Leader), Kent Hehr (MLA, Calgary Buffalo), Laurie Blakeman (MLA, Edmonton Centre), Linda Osinchuk (Mayor, Strathcona County), Sue Huff (Alberta Party Leader), Shannon Stubbs (Wildrose Senior Advisor), Cheryl Przybilla (Colchester Elementary School Parents’ Association Chair), several Colchester students, Bruce Johnson (RETA), Kevin Melnyk (RETA) and John Kristensen (RETA).

Speakers criticized the Alberta Government’s Bill 50 which excluded any public input into determining the need for all of the government’s newly-planned high voltage power lines. They cited health, safety, environmental, property value, and aesthetic concerns about overhead lines. In pressing the government to bury these lines, they indicated that all of the negative impacts of above ground lines could be eliminated or significantly minimized. Plus, underground lines are more reliable, have lower maintenance and transmission loss costs, and can cost less than overhead lines when you combine the capital, maintenance and transmission loss costs over the life of a line.

With respect to cost, for example, a partially buried Heartland power line would cost only $87 million more than a $581 million entirely above ground line. This is only 15% more than the overhead cost, which is a rounding error in the electricity transmission industry. The question then is, “If underground lines have none of the negative impacts of overhead lines, have similar capital costs, and lower maintenance and transmission loss costs, why not bury high voltage power lines?” This is the question posed to the Alberta Government by rally protesters.

See the following media coverage of the rally: i880 News, CHED News, Edmonton Journal, CBC News, Global TV Edmonton, Global TV Winnipeg, Global TV Calgary, CTV News, Sherwood Park News (1), Sherwood Park News (2), Sherwood Park Independent, and Saint City News.

(Photo credits: Chris Schwarz, The Journal)

Bury The Line Rally – Details

RETA issued this news release with details on the Bury The Line Rally at the Legislature Building, Saturday, March 19. Confirmed speakers include: Linda Duncan, Dave Quest, Brian Mason, Kent Hehr,  Linda Osinchuk, Sue Huff, and the Colchester School Parents’ Association and students.

RETA encourages everyone interested in improving electricity generation and transmission in Alberta to attend the rally with the whole family. There will be hot chocolate, Timbits and Bury The Line T-shirts.

Bury The Line Rally Media Advisory

Today, RETA released a Media Advisory about the Bury the Line public rally at the Alberta Legislature Building on Saturday, March 19, 2:00 p.m.

RETA is encouraging anyone who is concerned about above ground high voltage power lines being built in communities across the province to attend the rally.

The Media Advisory includes information on the actual costs to bury high voltage power lines. Capital costs to bury lines are the same or similar to those of building them above ground. AltaLink, EPCOR, ATCO Electric, Alberta Energy and the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) have intentionally been grossly inflating the costs to bury power lines in an attempt to make this technology appear unattractive.

Alberta Energy Minister Ignores the Facts

This excerpt from the March 8, 2011 Alberta Hansard indicates that the Hon. Ron Liepert, Minister of Alberta Energy, is ignoring all of the medically documented negative health impacts of overhead high voltage power lines.

As well,  he is erroneously suggesting that the Alberta Government has no role to play in the building or siting of the Heartland power line. This of course is not true because his government passed Bill 50 in November 2009 which legislates the building of this line. And, the Alberta Minister of Infrastructure has the final legal say on whether or not the Heartland line can be built in the Sherwood Park Greenbelt (East TUC). It is also a well-known fact that the Alberta Energy department has been pushing to have the line built in the Sherwood Park Greenbelt.

So….for the Alberta Energy Minister to suggest that the Alberta Government has no role in this matter is simply not true.

Annual General Meeting

The RETA Annual General Meeting for the year ended Dec 31st, 2010 will be held on March 30th from 7:00 pm to 9:00 pm in room L2 at Strathcona County Hall.

Join RETA’s Facebook Page!

P.C. MLAs Don’t Answer Questions

In early February, RETA had sent a questionnaire about electricity transmission to the 21 MLAs directly impacted by one of the newly-planned 500 kilovolt power lines. Only one MLA responded – Rob Anderson, Wildrose Alliance MLA for Airdrie-Chestermere. Not one of the 20 Progressive Conservative MLAs took the time to respond. See news release, list of affected MLAs, and the questionnaire.

ATCO Electric is planning the Eastern Alberta DC Transmission Line, AltaLink is planning the Western Alberta DC Transmission Line, and AltaLink and EPCOR are planning the Heartland AC Transmission Project, all 500 kilovolt lines, some with towers 75m (246 feet) tall.

RETA’s AUC Submission

RETA has sent its submission to the Alberta Utilities Commission as part of the process leading up to the AUC hearing on the Heartland Line commencing on April 11th, 2011.   We think it’s a pretty good document and our arguments are extremely strong.  At the end of the document you will find hyperlinks to all of the expert witness submissions on things like cost, health, property values, aesthetics and so on.  You can access the document here.

Big Bury the Line Public Rally

What?: Bury the Line Public Rally

When?: Saturday, March 19, 2:00 p.m.

Where?: Alberta Legislature Building, 107 St. and 97 Ave.

Why?: Send strong message to Alberta Government that high voltage power lines must be buried whenever they are built close to homes, schools, daycares, hospitals, and environmentally sensitive areas

Who?: Sponsored by RETA

Last Chance to Sign Petition

Today and tomorrow (March 3 and 4) are your last days to sign the Strathcona County petition to bury the Heartland power line and other 500 kilovolt lines in Alberta whenever they are located in densely populated areas.

The petition can be signed at Millennium Place, County Hall, Strathcona County Library, Ardrossan Recreation Complex, Glen Allen Recreation Complex, and the Heartland Hall Contact Office. A copy of the petition is also attached here, which you can print and circulate in your neighbourhood or subdivision. At minimum, you can print a copy and have your family members sign it. All petitions, whether they have one name or 14, must be dropped off at the Strathcona County Mayor’s office, 3rd floor County Hall, by end of day Friday March 4.

Strathcona Responds to Residents

A March 3, 2009 Motion by Strathcona County Council opposed construction of any 240kV or higher voltage transmission line within the County unless the lines were buried. Council has expanded on this by passing a new Motion that would recognize the Alternate West Route as better representing the public interest. Strathcona’s news release indicates the Heartland Project Team’s preferred route through the Sherwood Park Greenbelt is adjacent to a greater number of residents and has more schools, daycares and hospitals within 800m of the edge of the Greenbelt. The new Motion still argues for burying high voltage lines when located adjacent to densely populated areas anywhere in Alberta. See Sherwood Park News and CTV coverage.

Strathcona County and RETA continue to work together to get high voltage power lines buried when they are built near homes, schools, daycares and hospitals.

Birds Killed By Power Lines

Burying High Voltage Power Lines

Alberta Primetime featured a story with panelists John Kristensen, VP Technical of RETA; and David MacLean, VP Communications and Policy of Alberta Enterprise Group, discussing health impacts of overhead high voltage power lines and the merits of burying them. The Chair of the Colchester Parents’ Association, Cheryl Przybilla, was also interviewed, as were several people selected at random along Whyte Avenue. Check out the video clip here.

Poll Supports County Funding to RETA

An online poll in today’s Sherwood Park-Strathcona County News overwhelmingly supports Strathcona Council’s recent financial contribution to RETA.  Poll results are as follows:

Should Strathcona County have given RETA funding?

Yes, but less than $95,000  …………   5%

Yes, but more than $95,000  ……..   82%

No, it’s taxpayer money  ……………   12%

Who cares?  ……………………………….   1%

 

SNC-Lavalin Owns All of AltaLink

This Montreal Gazette article reports that Montreal-based engineering giant SNC-Lavalin has just bought the last 23.08% stake it did not already own in AltaLink.

This does not bode well for the prospects of AltaLink seriously considering burying any of its new high voltage power lines planned in Alberta, considering that SNC-Lavalin is in the business of  building above ground towers and lines. If your parent company is pushing you to build overhead lines rather than underground lines, what do you think AltaLink will do?

The battle for Albertans to get high voltage power lines buried whenever they run close to homes, schools, daycares, hospitals and environmentally sensitive areas just got a whole lot harder. RETA is ready for this increased challenge.

Many Groups Fight Power Lines

RETA researchers have discovered a number of websites that we have recently added to our “Links”, so it will be easier for you to keep track of other organizations battling high voltage power lines in Alberta and elsewhere.

A common theme amongst the organizations appears to be educating the public with the facts about health, safety, property value and environmental impacts of overhead power lines. Transmission companies consistently hide this information from us in an attempt to convince us that the decades-old way of transmitting electricity (i.e., stringing long above ground monster lines and towers across the countryside) is fine. Well, the growing volume of facts speak for themselves, and power companies can no longer ignore the negative impacts of overhead lines, the benefits of burying these lines, and using other more advanced and environmentally-friendly technologies for both generating and transmitting electricity.

Be sure to check out some of the other sites which include:

1. Power Line Health Facts Website
2. Rural Albertans for Ethical Electricity Transmission
3. Citizens for Responsible Transmission Line Siting
4. Citizens Energy Task Force

Power Lines and Schools

A recent online poll conducted by the Sherwood Park – Strathcona County News indicated that a majority of the 64 people who responded were concerned about health risks associated with children attending school next to a power line. Poll results are as follows:

Would you pull your kid from school due to a nearby power line?

39% ….. No, health issues are fiction

55% ….. Yes, health issues are fact

6% …….. Maybe

ATCO 500kV Power Line Meeting – Tofield

VOCAL (Voice of Community and Land) is hosting an important meeting for landowners and homeowners concerned about the proposed ATCO Electric 500kV HVDC power line from the Gibbons area to Brooks:

Must Attend!

All Area Residents Affected by the

ATCO Eastern Alberta HVDC Transmission Project

IMPORTANT PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING

Transmission Lines and Landowner Rights

With Guest Speaker: Joe Anglin, B.A., M.Ed.

An expert on Alberta’s electrical transmission system and landowner advocate

7:30 p.m. February 16, 2011 at “The House”

5830 51 Street, Tofield, Alberta

For more information contact VocalAlberta@gmail.com

Remember to Sign Power Line Petition

Although we have previously posted information on Strathcona County’s petition to bury the Heartland power line, RETA reminds you that the deadline for signing the petition is March 4, 2011. The petition can be signed at Millennium Place, County Hall, Strathcona County Library, Ardrossan Recreation Complex, Glen Allen Recreation Complex, and the Heartland Hall Contact Office.

A copy of the petition is also attached here, which you can print and circulate in your neighbourhood or subdivision. At minimum, you can print a copy and have your family members sign it. All petitions, whether they have one name or 14, can be dropped off at any of the locations listed above.

Landowners Against Bills 19, 36, 50

Check out this very informative website about the Alberta Government’s recent passing of  Bill 19 – the Land Assembly Project Area Act; Bill 36 – the Alberta Land Stewardship Act; and Bill 50 – the Electric Statutes Amendment Act, 2009.

This legislation has strengthened the Alberta Government’s ability to determine and control what takes place on both public and private land to the point where private land owners’ rights have been seriously diminished. For example, Bill 19 gives the Alberta Government the authority to designate your private land as a high voltage power line route, and gives you no right or opportunity to do anything about it.  Bill 50 also has taken away the rights of Albertans to have any say on whether or not specific new high voltage lines are even necessary.

So check out this new website for all the details on these 3 Bills.

RETA Asks MLAs Power Line Questions

RETA has sent a letter and questionnaire to the 21 MLAs affected by proposed 500 kilovolt power lines that the Alberta Government has labeled as “critical transmission infrastructure” within the very controversial Bill 50. The 3 projects the Alberta Government is pushing through without any competitive bidding are: the ATCO Eastern Alberta DC Transmission Line, AltaLink Western Alberta DC Transmission Line, and the Heartland AC Transmission Project. See this news release as well.

MLAs are asked what their thoughts are about need for the lines, their impacts, and whether or not they believe these lines should be buried in certain circumstances. Responses from the MLAs will be posted on the RETA website.

This is a particularly opportune time to ask MLAs questions about electricity transmission because it has become one of the most pressing issues for Albertans. As well, the issue is bound to take centre stage as the Alberta P.C. Party and Alberta Liberal Party will be electing new Leaders shortly, and a provincial general election could be just around the corner.

Competitive Bid / EIA Requests of Premier Clearly Pointless

Well, given Premier Stelmach’s recent announcement, it’s probably pointless to hope he might do right by Albertans by demanding an open competitive bidding process or even an Environmental Impact Assessment for the Heartland Transmission Project let alone an independent needs assessment.

But the good news is that we now have a whole new crop of hopefuls who want to lead the PC’s into the next election.  New leaders? New parties? New choices!  Make sure you tell them what is important, not just for the Heartland line, but for all of the other transmission lines being foisted on Albertans under the dubious name “Critical Transmission Infrastructure.”

So far as we can tell the government has been completely unable to find one credible party to put their hand up and say they need more power.  We’re currently slated to nearly double the transmission capacity in the province (without having the power to energize the consequent transmission lines) in the face of roughly flat energy consumption over the last several years.

“But what about the future?” they cry.  Well, here’s the facts:  People and industry are becoming more conscious of energy conservation and supply continues to outstrip demand. The phantom “huge power need” of the Heartland Upgraders (who actually generate surplus power) has gone away.  There are much smarter options like building the power generation near where it’s needed (oh, that’s right, they don’t actually know where it’s needed).  There are clearly better methods of delivering energy to Albertans than burning coal in the middle of the province and shipping the energy through inefficient transmission lines ($220M lost in 2008) often to British Columbia because we can’t turn the coal-fired plants off at the flick of a switch.  They’re proposing to build enough infrastructure to support double the province’s population.  And you’re expected to pay for all this on your utility bill, even though, in their own estimation, only 15% of the Heartland Line’s capacity will be used until at least 2027.

Is there some mass immigration we are unaware of?  Are all the cancelled upgraders (who would have an energy surplus) suddenly going to come back to life and require massive amounts of power?  Is there, in fact, any credible reason we are supposed to embark on this massive infrastructure build?  Or is this just another chapter in the never ending saga of transmission company and government “collaboration”.

Perhaps the 214 birds per kilometre per year which would be killed by the Heartland Line wouldn’t mind if it was buried.  (Incidentally, that’s around 14,000 birds per year versus the 2,000 that got killed in the Syncrude tailings ponds.)

Perhaps a more enlightened government wouldn’t build unnecessary infrastructure and wouldn’t endanger our children’s health and safety or destroy our property values only to further corporate greed.  Well, the good news is we live in a democracy and you get to decide.

Perhaps its time we held our political servants – that’s right, we are the bosses – accountable for their actions.

Heartland Power Line Would Close School

The Colchester Parents’ Association issued this news release today, expressing alarm that Colchester Elementary School would likely be closed if AltaLink and EPCOR build an above ground Heartland power line right next to their school, which is what they are recommending to the Alberta Utilities Commission.

Parents would most probably move their children to other schools for fear of the health and safety impacts of overhead high voltage power line electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and the corona effect. For example, prolonged exposure to EMFs increases the risk of childhood leukemia up to 5 times the expected rate in the general population.

Such an exodus of students would likely force the school to be closed. And, where would all of these displaced students go? The parents want the Alberta Government to force AltaLink and EPCOR to bury the Heartland line.

Are the Lights Really Going to Go Out?

RETA issued this news release today to challenge the Premier, the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO), and transmission facility operators who keep saying “the lights are going to go out” if we don’t build a whole bunch of new high voltage power lines within the next few years. On one hand, Premier Stelmach has been telling the public we need more power and we need more power lines to avoid blackouts. On the other hand, TransAlta has recently shut down 2 of their Sundance generating units (560 MW) and has assured Albertans this will not affect us.

How can shutting down 26% of the Sundance power plant capacity during the coldest period of the year when electricity demand is the highest not affect Albertans, when the Premier says we’re on the verge of  “the lights going out”? The Sundance power plant is the largest coal-fired generating plant in Western Canada and supplies 18% of Alberta’s total electricity generation capacity.

Appeal for Environmental Study – Premier

After receiving Alberta Environment’s response that an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the Heartland power line is not necessary because Alberta Environment already knows what the impacts are, RETA has appealed to the Premier. In a letter to Premier Stelmach, RETA President Bruce Johnson says the Heartland Line is unique and so massive (73-metre-tall towers) that only a formal EIA under provincial legislation will adequately assess the environmental, public health, public safety and socio-economic impacts. Also see RETA’s news release.

Strathcona Continues Power Line Fight

Strathcona County has added $150,000 to its budget to intervene at the upcoming Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) hearings on the Heartland power line. The budget addition is to cover the costs of an anticipated longer AUC hearing because of the high number of registered interveners.  The County continues to press for the line to be buried where it’s populated, and is based on a Motion Council passed unanimously March 3, 2009. See Sherwood Park News article and Strathcona County news release.

A petition to bury the line can be signed until March 4, 2011 at Millennium Place,  County Hall,  Strathcona County Library, Ardrossan Recreation Complex, Glen Allan Recreation Complex and the Heartland Hall Contact Office.

RETA encourages its members and all visitors to our website to sign this petition as it will be an indication to the Alberta Government, AltaLink, EPCOR and the AUC how strongly opposed we are to the Heartland line being built above ground.

Your Government at Work!

In response to our recent request for Alberta Environment Minister Rob Renner to require an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the Heartland Transmission Project, we were relieved to hear that they already know the outcome and so don’t need to have one conducted.  What possible alchemy do they possess that they can determine the outcome of an EIA without even having one conducted?  It seems to us there are some substantial savings here for taxpayers as we no longer need all the hardworking employees at Alberta Environment, we just need to keep the handful who can see the answers.

Once again, your government at work!  Looking after your best interests with unfailing dedication.

See Edmonton Journal article, St. Albert Gazette article, CTV News coverage, CHED News coverage, Winnipeg Free Press article, Red Deer Advocate article and Saint City News article.

Environmental Assessment Needed for Heartland Line

In 2008, the Alberta Government amended legislation to exempt all electricity transmission lines from the requirement for Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA). However, even with this exemption, the Environment Minister retains the authority under the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act to require that an EIA be conducted for new high voltage power lines.

Because the proposed Heartland Line is so massive and in fact would be the largest power line ever built in Alberta (500kV double circuit with 73-metre-tall towers), RETA has written the Alberta Environment Minister asking that he require AltaLink and EPCOR to conduct a formal EIA of the Heartland Transmission Project. Other reasons for the request, and listed in the letter, include:

• There are significant natural areas and wildlife species along AltaLink’s and EPCOR’s preferred and alternate routes,

• This is the first project deemed “critical transmission infrastructure” by the Alberta Government, and

• The environmental and health impacts of an overhead Heartland Line are significant.

See RETA News Release and letter to Minister Rob Renner.

See Edmonton Journal article, St. Albert Gazette article, CTV News coverage, CHED News coverage, Winnipeg Free Press article, Red Deer Advocate article and Saint City News article.

Even Saint Nick Opposes These Lines!

And who can blame him?  The proposed towers are a blight on the landscape.  They harm people, destroy property and land values, kill millions of migratory birds and, just to top it all off, we get to pay for them even when it’s clear they’re not needed.

As we head into 2011, we thought it would be a good idea to remind everyone of what we’re fighting.  The Heartland Line, the first in a long series of inappropriately named “Critical Transmission Infrastructure” projects, proposes 73m (240′) towers every 300 metres or so, for 65km going by densely populated neighbourhoods and pristine Alberta farmland.  A monument to this government’s folly for the next 60 years.  We hope you’re proud Mr. Stelmach.

To put this in perspective, we’ve included a scale drawing so you can see just how big the proposed Heartland Towers are.

And it’s just the start.  The number of ill-conceived transmission projects proposed for this province appears to grow on an almost daily basis.

So, as we bring in the New Year, rest assured that the battle is just beginning!

Thank you for all of your support.

RETA Executive and Board

Leaked Letter from Premier’s Inner Circle

RETA has received a letter addressed to members of the Alberta Progressive Conservative Caucus leaked to RETA by a member of Premier Stelmach’s Inner Circle. The October 26, 2010 letter signed by the Executive Directors of Alberta Direct Connect (ADC) and Industrial Power Consumer’s Association of Alberta (IPCAA) clearly indicates that the electricity transmission plan developed by Alberta Energy and the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) is not affordable.

Based on their data and calculations, the two associations suggest that, if the government’s current electricity transmission plan is implemented, Alberta competitiveness is at risk and businesses and industry will be forced to leave Alberta due to high electricity costs.  The fact that RETA received this letter from a member of the Premier’s Inner Circle shows that even people close to the Premier disagree with the province’s electricity transmission plan. Click on the RETA news release and the letter from ADC and IPCAA for details.

Another 500kV Power Line Route Selected

There certainly appears to be a rush to build more 500kV power lines in Alberta. On December 8, hot on the heals of submitting its facility application for the Heartland Transmission Project, AltaLink announced its preferred and alternate routes for the 500kV direct current (HVDC) line from Genesee to Langdon (often referred to as the Western Alberta Transmission Line or Edmonton-Calgary line). RETA agrees with landowners located along the line, the Town of Crossfield, Enmax and many others who have repeatedly stated that the line is not needed. Even based on the Alberta Electric System Operator’s (AESO) own data, and the economic realities which have changed so dramatically since Alberta’s transmission plan was developed, this line is not necessary. Electricity generated closer to source of demand in southern Alberta will be able to handle any growth in demand. There is no need to transmit dirty electricity generated from burning coal in the Genesee area to southern Alberta.

So, although we in no way think that this line is needed, if the Alberta Government insists on it being built, RETA recommends that it be buried. Based on information we have from experts, HVDC lines are even less expensive than AC lines to bury, and considering the length of this line (365km), the capital cost would be no more than for an above ground HVDC line. And if you incorporate the lower maintenance and transmission loss costs for an underground line, a buried line would cost less than an above ground line over the life of the line. If this line is not buried, RETA strongly believes that landowners should be fairly compensated on the basis of replacement value if an above ground line runs near their homes or businesses.

If there are any landowners who live along the proposed Genesee to Langdon line who have not yet joined RETA but are interested in joining, you can do so on line at this website…it’s easy and it’s free. We currently have over 8,000 registered members, and growing.

Premier to Speak about Heartland Line

Premier Stelmach will be speaking about the Heartland Transmission Project, among other topics, at the Sherwood Park Chamber of Commerce luncheon on December 14 at Festival Place. See this article in the Sherwood Park News for other topics to be covered. When the Premier spoke to the Chamber May 20, 2009, he said that buried transmission lines and investments in new technology could one day help Alberta deliver environmentally-efficient electricity.

Wildrose to Speak about Transmission

Come listen to Wildrose Alliance Leader Danielle Smith talk about “Electricity Transmission”

Lion’s Banquet Hall

Dow Centennial Centre (8700-84 St.)

Fort Saskatchewan

Tuesday, December 7, 7:00 p.m.

Meeting on “Transmission Lines and Landowner Rights”

If you are concerned, as many Albertans are, about the proposed $14.5B expenditure required to build new high voltage power lines, the need for which cannot be challenged or debated in public due to Bill 50 passed a year ago, you should come out to:

The Sherwood Park Community Hall (Log Cabin)

50 Spruce Avenue, Sherwood Park

To listen to Keith Wilson and Joe Anglin

This coming Monday (November 29) at 7:00 p.m.

Keith and Joe won’t only talk about Bill 50, but also about some related Bills – Bill 19 and Bill 36 – which they indicate undermine individuals’ property rights in Alberta. Keith and Joe have been raising this issue across Alberta for many months and have been getting a lot of attention.

Incidentally, the proposed $14.5B is expected to grow to as much as $25B, and as always, the transmission facility operators (AltaLink, EPCOR, ATCO, etc.) and the AESO want to build all of these lines above ground on enormous towers, not just in your back yard, but in everyone’s back yard. This is every Albertan’s battle.

When these projects are undertaken, there is no competitive bidding process. Contracts are simply handed out to selected transmission facility operators as a windfall, and we the rate payers are expected to foot the bill without having any say or input. This needs to stop.

RETA believes transmission lines should be run responsibly which not only means underground but also means they should not be run at all if they’re not needed. To date, the only people saying these lines are needed, including the Heartland Line, are the AESO and Alberta Energy (plus predictably, the transmission facility operators).

If you want to learn more, come out to listen to Keith and Joe on November 29. See you there.

Petition Deadline Extended

Strathcona County has extended the deadline for residents to add their names to the Heartland Transmission Project petition.  Petitions are available at Millennium Place, County Hall, Strathcona County Library, Ardrossan Recreation Complex and Heartland Hall Contact Office.

Extending the deadline allows more signatures to be collected before April 11, when formal hearings of the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) on the proposed Heartland Transmission project are scheduled to begin. Signatures will be presented to the Legislative Assembly of Alberta when the spring session resumes in March.

Click here for the full story.

Several Arguments Needed to Fight Lines

Based on data presented by EPCOR, AltaLink and the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO), RETA does not believe the proposed Heartland power line and several other proposed lines are necessary (see postings and news articles elsewhere at this website).

However, because the Alberta Government has identified the Heartland line as “critical transmission infrastructure” (necessary) in legislation passed a year ago, the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) has said it will not hear any arguments on need for the line at hearings scheduled for next April. RETA therefore believes that concerned residents, associations and governments must ensure that this line and other lines are not overbuilt and that the best technologies are used to build the lines. We have argued for about two years now that these lines must be buried whenever they run near homes, schools, daycare centres, hospitals and environmentally sensitive areas. Burying high voltage power lines eliminates or mitigates all of the negative health, safety, property value, aesthetic and environmental impacts of overhead lines, and a partially buried Heartland line, for example, would cost no more than an overhead one.

In those cases where the lines would run within 800m of homes, schools, daycare centres, hospitals and environmentally sensitive areas, and would not be buried, RETA’s position is that the proponents must compensate affected parties fairly at replacement value. Compensation at market value would not be fair because public knowledge of the power line siting would already have significantly driven market value down.

In summary, more than one argument is required to make sure that power lines identified by the Alberta Government as “critical transmission infrastructure” are not built, but that if they are built they are not overbuilt and are built using the safest technologies.

Petition to Bury Heartland Line

The County of Strathcona is sponsoring a petition to bury the proposed Heartland power line. Residents can sign the petition at either Millennium Place or County Hall in Sherwood Park. Although some people may have already signed a petition previously, RETA encourages residents to also sign this one which MLA Dave Quest has indicated he will table in the Legislative Assembly.

AUC Heartland Process Hearing Summary

The AUC process meeting held at the Edmonton Expo Center Nov. 2 started at 9:00 am with a brief explanation of the day’s proceedings and an introduction of the three AUC panel members.  With several hundred groups and individuals registered to intervene each present intervener was given up to ten minutes to inform the panel who they were and why they wanted to participate.  Interveners also clarified to the panel what issues they intended to raise and the evidence they intended to submit.

Please read this St. Albert Gazette Article for a great synopsis of the day’s events. As well, the City of Edmonton and County of Strathcona made it clear they would accept the Heartland line within their respective jurisdictions only if the line was buried. RETA also clarified that if the line was built it must be buried when it runs near homes, schools, daycares, hospitals, and environmentally sensitive areas.

To read the full transcripts of the hearing click here

Process Meeting Update

We’ve had a number of people asking whether or not they should attend tomorrow’s AUC Process Meeting being held at the Edmonton Expo Centre.  While there is always value in staying on top of everything surrounding the Heartland Project, if you’re not going to attend every meeting then this is quite likely a meeting you can miss.  The purpose of the meeting, as we understand it, is to let the AUC panel understand the types of arguments that are going to be made at the hearing.  As you can imagine, there will be ample representation of dozens of arguments so, unless you have something new to add you can probably stay home (or at work, since it’s being held during work hours).  We will have someone there for the duration (as well as our legal counsel who will speak on RETA’s behalf) and we’ll be sure to post a summary of the meeting on the website (www.reta.ca).

Export of Alberta Electricity

Although many Albertans, certainly those who work in the electricity generation and transmission industries, are aware of plans to export Alberta electricity to the U.S., we thought we would just remind our readers of this fact. One could certainly argue, “Well what’s wrong with exporting electricity…..we export all kinds of other resources and products…..why not electricity?”  So this is not necessarily wrong or bad for Alberta…..but just wait a minute.

If the power lines to export this electricity were paid for by the companies that profit from the transmission and sale of this electricity to the U.S., this would be acceptable to many Albertans. However, this is not the case. The cost of some of these high voltage power lines (called critical transmission infrastructure) that will be part of the transmission system to export our electricity south, will be paid for by Alberta electricity consumers. This is not alright. Whoever gets the profits should pay the transmission costs.

The NorthernLights proposal involves the export of electricity through transmission lines running from Alberta to Oregon, and then other lines on the drawing board will carry the electricity to California, Nevada and elsewhere.  For details of the NorthernLights proposal within the overall plans of the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC), visit http://www.docstoc.com/docs/58423643/WECC-Phase-1-Rating-Process-Coordinated-Planning-and . (The NorthernLights proposal is summarized on pages 66-71 of the power point at this site.)

Heartland SIP Deadline – October 21, 2010

Further to RETA President Bruce Johnson’s message posted September 24, 2010, be sure to submit a Statement of Intent to Participate (SIP) to the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) by October 21, 2010, if you wish to become a registered participant in the AUC hearings scheduled to start April 11, 2011. To fill out your SIP form, go to http://www.auc.ab.ca/items-of-interest/heartland-transmission-project/Documents/SIP_Heartland_Form.pdf , and then when you’re ready to submit it, do so at filings@auc.ab.ca.

RETA will be participating (intervening) in the AUC hearings on behalf of its membership; however, individual RETA members are also permitted to intervene as individuals as long as they qualify. Anyone who lives or owns property within 800m of AltaLink’s and EPCOR’s preferred route or alternate route will be given automatic standing as interveners; however, they must register by submitting an SIP by October 21, 2010.

Others who live more than 800m from the preferred or alternate routes may also be considered to intervene, but must submit an SIP by October 21, 2010 to be considered.

Will There Be Justice?

Sometime early next week the Heartland Project Team will be making their formal submission for the Heartland line (known as a Facilities Application) to the Alberta Utilities Commission.  Many people have suggested to us that the AUC hearing will be more theatre than anything else – going through the motions only to deliver a verdict that was decided years ago: “the Heartland Line is going in and its going in on 73 metre tall gargantuan towers.”

Well we think the AUC will rise above this instead of  just agreeing with AltaLink’s, EPCOR’s and the Alberta Government’s recommendation to build the entire line above ground with towers twice as high as any in Alberta.  RETA has been preparing for this for some time.  Read the latest message from RETA’s President to see how you can help.

We do want to remind our readers that we really don’t think the Heartland line is needed, based on economic realities that are significantly different today than when the Heartland line was first proposed several years ago. However, considering the Alberta Government passed Bill 50 in November 2009 which took away our legal right to argue need, the AUC has indicated they will not be entertaining arguments on need.

What’s Wrong with the Transmission System? Not a Whole Lot!

This recent Alberta West News article strongly challenges the government’s and AESO’s position that $14.5 Billion dollars in transmission upgrades are critically needed in Alberta.  To read the article in its entirety please follow this link.

County Residents Challenge the “Need” for Power Lines

On September 8th over 100 Sturgeon County residents attended a forum challenging the province to prove the need for the Heartland Transmission Project.  Local MLA Jeff Johnson was invited to provide the governments position on the lines but he declined to attend.  Presentations from Joe Anglin and lawyer Keith Wilson were listened to by residents as they worked in conjunction to effectively dismantle the argument that the lines are critically necessary.  Later in the night Sturgeon County Mayor Don Rigney agreed that the lines are clearly an overbuild and attacked Bill 50 for eliminating the needs assessment required to build transmission lines.

Please read this article on the event in the St. Albert Gazette

For a complete legal analysis of Bills 19, 36 and 50 please click here

Vue Weekly Talks with RETA about Power Line Controversy

Listen to this Sept. 7th interview that RETA’s President Bruce Johnson gave to Vue Weekly.  Bruce focuses on the fact that the government has never satisfactorily proven that the proposed 14.5 billion dollars in power line infrastructure projects are even needed and furthermore that the government has used Bill 50 to undermine and stifle any sort of public ability to question the validity of the projects.  The necessity to bury any high voltage lines near homes, schools and daycares in order to mitigate any health or property value risks is also discussed.  Please listen to the Vue Weekly Podcast.

Petition Information

In case you haven’t heard yet, there is a petition being circulated in Sherwood Park that is asking for the Heartland Transmission Line to be buried and for the cost to be borne by all Albertans.  You can find the petition at Canadian Tire, Millenium Place and Busters’s Pizza.  Notice that KIDS CAN SIGN ON TOO (many kids have expressed frustration that they have no voice – well this gives them a chance to weigh in too)!

Please get as many people as you can to sign the petition.  More information can be found in a recent article in the Sherwood Park News.

Bill 50 & ATCO 500kV Line Meeting

Do you want to ask Premier Stelmach, Wildrose Alliance Leader Danielle Smith, Liberal Leader David Swann or NDP Leader Brian Mason some questions about Bill 50 which was passed last November? Well if you do, come to Vegreville August 25, 2010. Bill 50 is the piece of legislation that took away the public consultation process on the need for what the Alberta Government decided to call “critical transmission infrastructure”. These so-called critical power lines include the ATCO Electric HVDC line from Gibbons to Brooks, the EPCOR/AltaLink AC Heartland line from Wabamun to the Heartland area, the AltaLink HVDC line from Edmonton to Calgary, and two AC lines from Edmonton to Fort McMurray. No one needs to justify why these lines are needed….they’re just getting built because the Alberta Government says so. And, there’s no competitive bidding on these projects. Here are the details of this “critical” meeting:

Bigger Must Be Better!

Well once again the Heartland Transmission Project (HTP) team has displayed an uncanny ability to completely ignore the people whose input they are supposed to solicit i.e. the public.

RETA was invited to a “pre-publication” meeting with Bruce Brandell of EPCOR to review the latest news letter from the HTP team entitled “Consultation Update”.  In true HTP team style, the news letter was published and circulated before we met and so the meeting was little more than “Here’s what we’ve said.  Do you love it?”

The first bombshell they dropped (you’ve probably heard about this by now) is that they’ve decided to “upgrade” the towers from 60 metres tall to 73 metres (about 240’).  If you thought the last ones were big, well, let me tell you, these ones are huge!

And so we asked them what possible part of their public consultation resulted in this brilliant move. Their response was, “Well, it’s cheaper! Less steel.”

“So the 4,000 people you claim to be consulting with asked for bigger towers because they’re cheaper?” we asked.

“No” came the response.

“So, then this is entirely driven by cost?”

Once again, a mono-syllabic response. “Yes.”

“I see, so how many people have you consulted with who would like the line put underground despite it being more expensive?” I asked.

“We don’t really know but we’re going to go back and count them.  It was definitely in the top three issues though,” said Mr Brandell.

“And what are the other two top issues?” I queried.

“Health and property values,” came the reply.

“Both of which are mitigated by putting the lines underground,” I offered.

“I suppose so,” Brandell replied cautiously.

“So, what you’re telling me is that the top issues coming from your public consultation with over 4,000 Albertans were that people are concerned about health and property values and consequently want the lines buried, yet despite this you’re going to recommend putting the lines above ground?” I asked.

“Yes,” said Brandell smiling.

“Okay, so despite your fiduciary responsibility to consult with the public and to use the information gathered from consultation to inform your recommendation to the AUC, you’re simply deciding, all on your own, that what Albertans want is the solution that has the lowest immediate cost.  Nothing else matters.”

No response.  Hmmm.  Apparently “consultation” must have a different meaning which I was previously unaware of.  Something akin to “ignore” I suspect.

After this delightful debate the conversation turned to discussing what progress, if any, the HTP team had made on understanding the true costs of undergrounding the Heartland line.

“I understand there’s been some refining going on with regard to the cost of the above ground and underground options,” I said.

“That’s right.”

“And I’ve been led to believe that on further analysis, the cost of above ground is going up and the cost of underground is coming down,” I stated.

“Who told you that?” came a nervous response.

“I can’t recall,” I said, not wanting to reveal my sources, “but the work on above ground should be complete by now.”

“That’s right.”

“And, for that matter, I think that the work on refining underground costs should be done by now too,” I added.

“No.  The underground work hasn’t been finished,” responded Brandell.

“Why not ?” I asked.

Brandell paused and then hastily replied, “We’re having trouble getting the engineers together.”

I couldn’t resist an opportunity for sarcasm. “So, that happens quite a bit, then, does it?  I mean, losing your engineers and not being able to round them up?  But surely you’re planning on making this revised costing information available to the public?”

“Of course.”

“When?”

“We don’t know.”

“Before the submission to the AUC?”

“We don’t know right now.  I think so.”

So, once again, the team tasked with keeping the public informed about all of the options under consideration – the team responsible for getting our feedback on how our money is going to be spent – comes up completely short of the mark.  Well done.  Can’t say I’m surprised though.

* * *

On to one other quick update.  While it has been relatively quiet during the summer and attentions have been elsewhere, we recently issued a press release in response to Premier Stelmach’s response to our open letter of April this year asking him to re-evaluate the need for the lines (especially in view of all of the cancelled upgraders and general change in economic climate within the Province, not dissimilar to what he did when he reviewed the oil & gas royalty structure).

Well, his response was a well crafted letter that said nothing.  It pointed to two studies that showed nothing more than the need being largely dependent on the now cancelled upgraders.

It may well be that Bill 50 means that there is no public input on the needs process and it may well be that the government can simply call something “critical infrastructure” and it will be built regardless of the need, but that does not give the government the right to make these decisions without some kind of basis in fact.  To make this decision, surely they must have collected data and information to support their arguments and surely someone must have reviewed it.

Well fortunately, thanks to the Alberta Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, we still have the right to ask the government what that information was, who reviewed it and how it figured in to the decisions that were made.

Sadly, in the absence of the government being forthcoming on this information we have been forced to submit a series of “Requests to Access Information” as provided for under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (commonly known as FOIP requests).

It will take a few weeks to get the responses to these requests and the responses, no doubt, will in turn cause us to issue still further requests as the picture becomes somewhat less muddy.  We’ll be sure to keep you informed as to what our legal team uncovers.

That’s it for now.  Once again, I would like to urge you to write a letter to your MLA, as well as the Premier to let them know that they need to put this line underground before it becomes a major election issue for them.

Thanks, as always, for your continued support.

Bruce Johnson,

President, RETA

Kindred Spirits

This issue is far from just a local issue. Check out the website from the West Virginia based stopPathnw. Here’s one of their commercial videos…

Welcome To Your Future

500kV dual circuit power lines are coming to a neighbourhood near you… 200′ towers and 150′ wide, they’re sure to put a smile on every kid’s face!

We could bury them like they do in dozens of other countries but, no, that’s just not right for Alberta.  Our government knows what’s best for our kids so smile and say hello to your future…

If you can’t load the video here, you can see it at YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2JoYdo1kk8.

A Need Indeed?

We’re not against progress or delivering power when it’s needed if it’s done responsibly – i.e. put them underground near schools, houses, daycares etc.  But this all starts with understanding if they need to be run in the first place and from what we can determine, the Heartland lines are, at the very least, a huge overbuild.  It’s possible they’re not needed at all, but if there is a case to be made for their need, it certainly doesn’t add up to the 6,000MW circuit that’s being proposed. And the consequence of overbuild? It becomes exponentially more expensive to put the lines underground. Read our backgrounder on the diminished need for power in the Heartland and you be the judge.

RETA Requests Premier to Re-Evaluate Need for Heartland Line

RETA recently sent a letter to Premier Stelmach requesting the need for the Heartland Transmission Line, as proposed, to be re-evaluated in light of significantly reduced oil sands upgrader development in the Industrial Heartland northeast of Edmonton.

The letter makes the request, comparing it to the Alberta Government’s recent re-evaluation of the oil and gas sectors, based on changing provincial, national and global economies.  Just as the newly introduced Bill 1 by the Alberta Government reflects an economy changed from 2007 when the Alberta Government established the Alberta Royalty Framework, the requirements for a 6,000MW double-circuit 500kV power line, proposed about the same time in 2007, have changed significantly.

If a smaller-capacity power line is still required for the Industrial Heartland following a review (even though only less than two of the nine upgraders proposed in 2007 may be built), the letter goes on to suggest that the power line could be built at a lower cost, and thereby financially burden industry, other businesses and Alberta residents to a lesser extent.

Consistent with what Albertans have indicated to RETA and in a late 2009 Leger Marketing public opinion survey, the letter requests that if a smaller line is needed, it should be buried whenever it runs near homes, schools, daycares, hospitals and environmentally sensitive areas. The public opinion survey indicates that Albertans are concerned about the impacts of overhead high voltage power lines on health, safety, esthetics and property values. Those polled are particularly concerned about the health and safety impacts on children.

Read the full letter here.

New and Updated Fact Sheets

Our research team has added a number of new fact sheets on the effects of power lines on Melatonin, a summary of the Leger Marketing Opinion Survey, the World Health Organization, Compensation and International Precedents.  They’ve also updated several of the fact sheets as well as the references document.  Check them out!

Annual General Meeting Notice

The 2010 RETA Annual General Meeting will be held at Colchester School (23358 Township Road 520, Sherwood Park, AB T8B 1G5) on Wednesday April 7th, 2010 at 7:00 p.m.

Please note: This is NOT a rally or town hall meeting so please don’t feel you need to attend unless you wish to vote or nominate a candidate.  Proxy voting forms will not be sent out as RETA’s bylaws do not currently permit proxy voting.  The primary business of the meeting will be to elect the members of the executive and board of RETA for 2010 and to vote on resolutions that may affect how RETA operates.

We do not necessarily anticipate any broad changes in either of these regards, however if you wish to nominate an individual or individuals to stand for the board or executive you will be given an opportunity to do so at the meeting.

The financial statements for 2009 along with proxy forms will also be sent out shortly.

Letter from RETA President

Things are definitely heating up and we’re committed to keeping you informed of deadlines and letting you know what you can do to help make sure that these lines go underground. Make sure you sign up and join RETA so we can email you directly. If you haven’t seen it yet, click here to read the latest update from RETA President, Bruce Johnson.

Underground Study Results Made Public

Well, it took some time but the study undertaken by the AESO and the Heartland Project Team to explore the feasibility of undergrounding for the Heartland Project was released today.  No big surprises… yes it is feasible (although some testing of the cables in Alberta weather needs to be undertaken) and, yes, it will cost somewhere between 30 cents and 50 cents a month per household in Alberta.

In general, we feel the study was thorough and balanced.  Still, there are a few areas that concern us.  First of all, the costs seem generally higher than they need to be.  The study uses the average cable cost from 15 quotes by vendors rather than taking the lowest competent bid.  Based on our preliminary evaluation of the report costs are probably 35% to 45% high overall.  We’ll be digging into this more over the next few weeks.

Second of all, we were somewhat concerned to see that the 6,000MW lines will only be energized to around 450MW per circuit (total of 900MW) until 2027.  Even given redundancy and an uncertain future, this seems like excessive capacity.

Lastly, the study takes a pessimistic approach to determining the “in-service dates” (or the time it would take to build the line).  Testing could start right now and probably be complete before the AUC rules on the line, and several experts we’ve spoken with have stated the underground cable could be delivered in much the same timeline as above ground lines.

All in all, though, the study is consistent with what we’ve been saying for some time… underground is viable and affordable.  For more information see the full press release.

New Fact Sheets + Thanks for Your Patience

We’ve just put up 3 new fact sheets:

1. Electric Shocks and High Voltage Power Lines
2. Pipelines and High Voltage Power Lines, and,
3. The Health Effects of the Corona Effect. Please check these out.

Also, we realize that there hasn’t been a lot of communication lately but part of that is due to the fact that we are currently assembling our legal team which has us completely engaged. Please look forward to a direct email though in the next few days and thanks for your patience.

Lastly, I want to commend everyone for sticking with the program – BURY THE LINES! People on the “eliminated” routes are holding steadfast – obviously people on the “preferred” and “secondary” routes are holding steadfast – and, more importantly, we keep hearing from people all over the province – Calgary, Red Deer, Capital Region and rural areas – that they support putting these things underground whenever they impact homes, schools and so on…

Thanks again for your support!

-The RETA Board

New “Latest News” Feature + Stay Tuned

If you want to follow all of the considerable press on the Heartland Project, we’ve just added a new feature that you can access on the sidebar that has all of the latest news articles and press releases.  Right now we’ve just started going forward from Jan. 22nd (you might want to read the article by Joe Anglin about how Assistant Deputy Minister, Tim Grant, refused to identify himself at a recent open house), but when we get time we’ll try to go back and add all of the news from our archives.

Also, many of you have asked why we’ve not been more communicative.  Well, we’re just checking into some stuff about the Enhanced Heartland Participation Options being proposed by the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC).  Once we’ve sorted these issues out we’ll be sending out an email detailing our recommended course of action.  Thanks for your patience and stay tuned!

Down To 2 Routes: Nothing Changes!

Well, as I’m sure you’ve heard, the other shoe has dropped and AltaLink and EPCOR have announced that they plan to propose the East TUC as the primary option for the Heartland Transmission Line with the Far West Route being their second choice. We always knew that they would announce a primary and secondary route and, as a consequence, it was highly likely that two of the four proposed routes would be eliminated so no real surprises here.

There was even some mention in EPCOR and AltaLink’s communication that an underground option would be acceptable but until the studies being conducted by the AESO/HPT and Alberta Energy are completed, the underground option has not been put front and centre where it belongs.

We will have a lot more information coming out shortly but, in the meantime, it has been heartening to receive so much support from the RETA members that are no longer directly affected saying that they remain committed to the principle of “burying the line” whenever it goes near homes, schools, hospitals, day cares, and environmentally sensitive areas. The outpouring of support has been very encouraging.

One thing is certain – with the AESO’s proposed $14.5B investment to strengthen the electrical grid in Alberta, it is just a matter of time before the routes that were eliminated this time as well as many other potential routes are chosen for very high voltage lines, similar to the ones being proposed for the Heartland Project. So now is the time to make sure that your elected representatives understand that Albertans want these things run underground whenever they are going to impact people.

Thank you for your continued support and please stay tuned for much more information coming shortly.

-RETA Board of Directors

A Well Deserved Rest

Once again, I’d like to thank our special guests, Magda Havas, Brian Gettel, Danny Hooper, Stephen Kane and Fred Ritter along with the 80+ volunteers, the students and staff of Colchester school, all the families who participated in the candlelight procession, the tireless RETA board members and the nearly 4,000 RETA members who came out to Rexall on November 24th. Because of you, the meeting was a great success!

I keep getting emails asking “What’s next?” Well, first of all, I think everyone deserves a rest so we’re going to take some down-time until the New Year. After that, we’ll be moving forward with renewed vigour and you can be sure we’ll be letting everyone know what the next steps are. In the meantime, please have a safe and happy holiday season, and rest soundly in the knowledge that even jolly old Saint Nick himself wants the lines buried.

Thank you,

Bruce Johnson,
President, RETA

Thank You!

We’ve counted the leftover programs and we can now say that between 3,500 and 4,000 people attended! Thank you so much for coming out!

It was a great event with presentations from Magda Havas, Brian Gettel, Stephen Kane (AltaLink) and Fred Ritter (AESO). And of course, it wouldn’t have been the same without Master of Ceremonies, Danny Hooper!

We want to extend a special thank you to the children who participated in the processional (both in person and at Colchester School on video – we hope to have the video up soon).

Also, Judy Weiss and all of the artists who made the awesome banners, were a key part of the evening. Photographer Rob Wallace was kind enough to take some pictures chronicling the making of the banners as well as pictures of the event.

And, just FYI, 99.3% of you said you were in favour of burying power lines by schools, houses, daycares, hospitals and environmentally sensitive areas. The full results of the survey will be up on the site soon.

We also had lots of great comments like this one written all over an envelope by a 14 year old attendee:

“I don’t know what it’s going to take to get through the thick skulls of our government. I am 14 years old, and this line could possibly pass within 30 metres of my house. I don’t want to get cancer because of this. As well, it’s not fair that so many people get affected for a line that will serve much fewer people. GOOD JOB RETA. It’s time somebody did something about this issue, and, with your help, I think we, as a large community, can pull this big shin-dig off. Keep up the good work. Let’s bury this line. Sincerely Jonah.” And then, in parentheses he adds “Sorry, there is no money donation in here but I wanted to write a comment so my ballot is in here. Sorry to disappoint.” Jonah, we’re not disappointed at all! Your comment is worth far more than a donation. Thanks.

Now remember. It’s not over! Now you need to write a letter to Minister Ronald Liepert (copy Premier Stelmach, your MLA, the AESO and the Heartland Project Team) and tell them to BURY THE LINE.

Nearly There…

Less than 24 hours from now, we’re going to be at an historic event… one of those seminal moments when things change forever.  By attending the Mother-of-All Power Line Meetings at Rexall Place on November 24th at 7:00 p.m. you will be casting your vote to change how we look at electricity transmission for good.  With your voice and the voice of thousands like you, we will send a message that will ring throughout the halls of the Alberta Legislature Building – BURY THE LINE!  With your support we will win!  Thank you in advance for coming out.

The Board of RETA.

We also have an updated picture for you of one of the nine panels that comprise our visual art petition..

A Picture Plus a Thousand Words

Thanks to Judy Weiss and her group of intrepid local artists, people coming out to the Mother-of-all Townhall Meetings on Nov 24th at Rexall at 7:00 pm, will get a chance to adorn one of nine panels that Judy’s group has created for the event. Each panel is approximately 6′ by 9′, depicting our main concerns with the lines. Attendees will be able to write directly on the panels, recording their comments, feelings and concerns.

After the meeting, the panels will be stitched together into one ‘visual art petition’ which will be presented Premier Stelmach and Minister of Energy, Mel Knight.

The Cost of Progress

We’ve had lots of queries on how we’re estimating costs for undergrounding in the Heartland Project.  First, let me say that we can only estimate costs based on what we have heard and seen but that better estimates should be forthcoming when the underground studies by AltaLink/EPCOR/AESO and Alberta Energy are completed.

Since these sorts of infrastructure projects are amortized over 40 years or so, we’re generally less interested in the absolute amount of capital expenditure and more interested in what it means to the average Albertan’s monthly electricity bill.  The AESO has said that the $8.1 billion capital expenditure they want to make to strengthen Alberta’s electric grid will cost the average household $8.00 per month on their bill, so, with this in mind, we can say that a capital expenditure of $1 billion amounts to an incremental $1/month/household.

What we do know is that the cost of the cable in the Nexans 500kV underground line in Shanghai worked out to $3M per kilometre. In this case the AESO wants to run 6,000MW of power which will require 4 of these circuits for a total cost of $12M per kilometre. (Incidentally, we certainly don’t need this out of the gate and could quite happily exist for a decade or two with half of this, but for now let’s assume that the whole 6,000MW capacity is being built).

On top of this cost there are installation costs and the cost of groundworks to bury the cable, plus a couple of devices known as shunt reactors etc., and we’re going to allow $5M per kilometre for this. (The actual undergrounding costs are likely to be pretty low as most of this line can be directly buried). So, now we’re at $17M per kilometre.

To calculate the incremental cost of going underground we need to subtract the cost of the above ground line which the AESO has estimated at around $4-$5M per kilometre. We’ll use $4.5M leaving an incremental cost of undergrounding of $17M – $4.5M = $12.5M per kilometre.

The entire distance from Ellerslie to the Heartland is about 40km, so if the entire line is to be undergrounded, the cost would be about $12.5M x 40 = $500M which would cost the average household 50 CENTS PER MONTH on their electricity bill. EPCOR has suggested that undergrounding 25km would cost $0.93 per kilometre but we feel that their estimate of 10x the cost of above ground is unrealistic. The real answer will be in soon but I suspect it will be closer to $0.50 per month which is good news as the recent Leger Marketing survey shows the average Albertan feels that spending between $3.50 and $4.00 for undergrounding is acceptable.

Public Opinion Survey

There has been a lot of speculation about what Albertans think about the merits of underground power lines, and what, if anything, Albertans are willing to pay to have very high voltage transmission lines put underground whenever they are run by schools, homes, daycares, hospitals, environmentally sensitive areas and so on.

Well RETA decided to end the speculation by asking Albertans what they think by way of a Leger Marketing survey conducted in October. At a high level, here’s what we heard from the survey:

• The telephone survey of 900 randomly selected Alberta households was conducted between October 16 and 26, 2009, and results are accurate to within ±3.3 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

• Alberta residents indicate concern about the safety of small children, potential health risks, and the noise and appearance associated with above ground high voltage power lines.

• While a majority of Albertans agree power lines can be located below ground by homes, schools or daycare centres, significantly fewer agree that power lines can be located above ground near these locations.

• On average, Albertans are willing to pay $3.55 on their monthly power bill to have power lines buried in the province of Alberta; this figure increases significantly to $4.02 when asked how much they would be willing to pay to have lines buried close to their own home or child’s school.

• This is good news since we’d be surprised if partial undergrounding in the case of the Heartland Project amounted to anything more than $0.50 per household per month and so Albertans would be willing to pay for 7 or 8 similar projects, amounting to some 48,000 MW in capacity (enough to power a population and attendant industry of around 18 million people – the peak load last year in the province was 9,800 MW).

• There were no significant differences as to whether or not individuals would be willing to pay for undergrounding based on whether they lived in Edmonton, Calgary or other parts of the province.

• The majority of Albertans (8 out of 10) feel that the value of a home is decreased when it is located near a high voltage power line, and on average, Albertans believe the home is devalued by 16% (note that this average also includes those who felt the value of a home would increase or stay the same and includes the opinions of both homeowners and renters).

Detailed survey results from Leger Marketing can be found here. These results will be discussed at the Mother-of-All Power Line Meetings sponsored by RETA to be held at Rexall Place at 7:00 p.m., November 24, 2009.  Note: the meeting venue has recently been upgraded by Northlands to Rexall Place from Hall D.

Nov. 24th Meeting Now at REXALL PLACE!

There’s been another minor change for our Town Hall Meeting on the 24th starting at 7:00 p.m. The good folk at Northlands have upgraded us to Rexall Place (it was to be held in Hall D) at no extra cost. This means that we won’t have any problems with overflow or not having enough seats for everyone but it also means we’ve got a lot more space to fill. It will be what they call a “concert bowl” that will have seating for 7,000+ people. So, now more than ever, please make sure all of your friends, neighbours and relatives come out to the biggest power line meeting of its kind in Canada’s history!

Special Guests…

Dr. Magda Havas

Associate Professor of Environmental & Resource Studies at Trent University
Dr. Magda Havas’ research deals with the health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic energy at the extremely low frequency range associated with electricity (60 Hertz) and at the radio frequency range commonly associated with wireless telecommunication. Since children are more sensitive than adults to the potentially harmful effects of EMFs Dr. Havas has been trying to encourage school boards to measure magnetic fields within their schools as part of their health and safety program. She also provides information to people who are concerned about antennas, power lines or transformers being built near their residence and is currently trying to help with a Private Member’s Motion that would establish guidelines and standards that reflect recent scientific studies and would truly protect public health.

Danny Hooper

The choice was obvious when RETA had the task of finding an Emcee for this huge meeting… Danny Hooper, of course! Upon hearing of the event and knowing about the issue, Mr. Hooper was on board in an instant offering to help in any way he could. Vision and focus are Danny Hooper’s trademarks. He is a classic Western Canadian entrepreneur – a true risk taker.

Brian Gettel

Accredited Appraiser Canadian Institute
Brian has been involved in doing appraisals since the mid 1970′s, and is a member of the Appraisal Institute of Canada. He has published articles on appraisal, been a guest speaker at a number of industry events and has been an expert witness at hearings for the Alberta Land Compensation board, Alberta Energy & Utilities Board, the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench and the British Columbia Supreme Court. With more than 35 years of experience, companies and individuals alike have come to rely on Brian to truly understand the impact industry can have on land and house values.

Plus more…

We’re also working on a couple of other special guests so stay tuned!

Mother of All Town Hall Meetings

RETA is pleased to announce that Dr. Magda Havas, a world renowned expert on the health effects of EMF from Trent University in Ontario, has graciously agreed to present at our Really Big Town Hall Meeting on November 24th at Rexall Place (was Northlands Hall D), starting at 7:00. We are equally delighted to announce that Danny Hooper has agreed to be our Master of Ceremonies that night. Expect quite a show.

I’ve already been to a meeting. Why should I come to another?

The answer is simple. This may be your last and best chance to “vote” on this issue before some critical decisions are made.  Thanks to your support, our elected representatives are listening now but we need over 5,000 people to come out to this meeting to make sure they understand that if they put these lines underground they have our support, but if they don’t they must be prepared to accept the consequences!

A long time ago we made a pact – we would do the “heavy lifting” (gather research, meet with the Heartland Team and the AESO, advocate with our elected representatives, arrange meetings, drive awareness and education and so on) and all you needed to do is come out to our meetings.  Well, the time has come – this is the Mother of All Town Hall Meetings, probably the most significant event of its kind in Alberta’s history with over 5,000 people expected – and we need you to do your bit.  Bring your friends, family, neighbours… anyone you know… and let’s make sure the message is heard loud and clear: “BURY THE LINE, WHEREVER IT GOES“.  Now is definitely not the time to be complacent and hope others will do what you need to do.

It’s only one night and we promise to have a terrific and informative show for you.

Thank you for your continued support.

RETA Board of Directors (now including the Board from the Coalition of West End Communities for Burying the Line)

All For One and One For All!

RETA is committed to ensuring that high voltage power lines are run underground wherever they go by schools and houses and, consequently, we are engaging with and enlisting the support of as many people as possible along all of the four proposed routes for the Heartland Transmission Project – including the west rural route, the west TUC, the east TUC and the east rural route. In fact, it is our considered opinion that the only way to win this battle is to speak with a unified voice to all of our elected representatives and to say that we all want the same thing – BURY THE LINE!

To this end, we recently agreed to merge RETA with the Coalition of West End Communities for burying the line. We strongly believe that there is strength in numbers and in unity. A few days ago, the Coalition’s board voted 7 to 3 in favour of merging our two organizations together. Three of the Coalition’s board members felt that it was important that the west TUC have its own voice and, while we feel that everyone should speak with a single, stronger voice, we also acknowledge the right of those three individuals to represent only the west TUC instead of all four proposed routes. The good news is that they still espouse the same principle which is “bury the line wherever it goes” and we wish them every success in their new organization.

On November 24th the new, stronger RETA will be holding a REALLY BIG MEETING at 7:00 p.m. at Northlands Hall D where we expect to have massive representation from all four routes – in fact, we want at least 5,000 people to turn out. We promise to do our best to have something pretty special for you – if you’ve been to our other Town Hall meetings at WECA, the Coast Hotel Sherwood Park, Belmead Community Hall, Festival Place or at meetings in St. Albert, Fultonvale School, Villeneuve Community Hall, Morinville, Namao and so on – I think you’ll agree it’s worth turning out.

While we are more than happy to do the “heavy lifting” – to engage with the AESO, the Heartland Project Team and our municipal and provincial leaders – the only reason we get the time of day with them is because you come out to our meetings. I can’t say this strongly enough: If you want us to succeed, if you haven’t already done so,  join RETA (go to www.reta.ca and encourage your friends to do so as well) PLUS we need you to come out to the meeting on November 24th.

Bruce Johnson,
President, RETA

(About the RETA and the Coalition: RETA and the Coalition of West End Communities for Burying the Line are all-volunteer organizations dedicated to preventing overhead high voltage power lines from being run near schools, homes, daycare centres, hospitals and environmentally sensitive areas. RETA is a registered Society in Alberta.)

Strength in Unity – RETA and West TUC Group Merge

The Coalition of West End Communities for Burying the Line and RETA have decided to merge together. The Coalition, which has been educating and informing west Edmonton residents about the hazards associated with high voltage power lines since June 2009, has been working closely with RETA to help ensure that the 500kV dual circuit transmission line proposed for the Heartland Transmission Project is buried wherever it goes near schools, houses, daycare centres, hospitals and environmentally sensitive areas.

“It just makes sense to merge the organizations – we’ve been working so closely together and we want exactly the same thing which is to bury the power line wherever it goes” said June McNeil, founding member of the Coalition. Bruce Johnson, President of RETA, added, “We’re delighted. By joining the groups together we send a strong message to our elected representatives that we expect them to all work together to get these lines put underground where they belong.” The groups have decided to come together under the RETA banner but will also keep the Coalition name for continuity.

This merger strengthens representation near the west TUC, helping to deliver on RETA’s mandate to represent all 4 of the proposed routes.

Read the full News Release.

Change of Meeting Notice

Due to some logistical issues we have decided to move the “Really Big Meeting” from October 28th to November 24th at 7:00 p.m. Our apologies for any inconvenience. Please stay tuned for more details and definitely plan on coming! Thanks.

A Great Show of Support from West Edmonton

On Monday, September 21st, more than 1,300 people primarily from West Edmonton came out to a Town Hall meeting put on by The Coalition of West End Communities and RETA. It was another outpouring of support for burying the power lines wherever they go. RETA wants to thank the Coalition of West End Communities for their tireless efforts in putting this town hall meeting together. For more details see the article in the Edmonton Journal.

A Sign of the Times

Thanks to Todd Oeming for putting this enormous sign up and helping to get the word out. It can be seen clearly from highway 14 on the north side of the highway.

Edmonton City Council Passes Motion Opposing Above Ground 500kV Lines

In a unanimous decision today, Edmonton City Council passed a motion opposing above ground 500kV lines within the city and setting the stage for the City to act as an intervener should the Heartland Project Team file an application with the Alberta Utilities Commission recommending above ground lines be constructed in any of the three proposed routes that go through parts of Edmonton.

There are now 5 municipalities that have passed resolutions opposing above ground power lines in the Capital Region and Edmonton’s motion is a great step forward for Albertans.

This does not mean that the battle is in any way over as the AUC still has the final word. We need to ensure that it becomes public policy to underground lines when they go by schools and houses and we need your continued support to make that happen.

R.E.T.A. wishes to thank all of Edmonton City Council for their insightful and non-NIMBY approach. Well done!

New Fact Sheets Added

Our research department has just published four more Fact Sheets , nos 18 through 21. If you haven’t had the chance to read our Fact Sheets yet, I strongly encourage you to do so. They are the results of in-depth research and a lot of work pulling together the latest thinking and information on High Voltage Power Lines.

Great Turnout for Meeting on June 17th

Thank you one and all for your attendance and participation. We estimate over 1,800 people came out to see Europacable and to ask questions of Europacable, AltaLink, EPCOR, the AESO, RETA and our elected officials from the County and the Province.

Once again, it’s time to write letters to our elected representatives (the Premier, Energy Minister Mel Knight and your MLA) but this time to thank them for their leadership in exploring the use of underground transmission lines in Alberta. This is an incredibly positive move and one, I daresay, that would not have happened if it wasn’t for the leadership of the Stelmach Government. Please take your time to express your thanks to the Premier, Minister Knight and your MLA, but you may also want to remind them that this is just the first step; simply studying underground power lines is not enough and we need to take the next step… actually putting these power lines underground wherever it is proposed that they go by schools and homes. There are still many forces at play though, some of whom would prefer to deceive rather than illuminate, and the government needs to be vigilant in ensuring that the right thing is done. Issues such as viability, reliability and cost have already been dealt with in countless other jurisdictions and it is clear that these are not insurmountable issues.

Let’s make Alberta a leader in this instead of following Austria, Germany, Italy, Israel and others. Your letters of support are very important so please don’t put it off – if you do, you’ll probably never send them. You can find some pointers on letter writing on our Write a Letter page.

RETA on Facebook and Twitter

RETA has just launched its Facebook page so please feel free to contribute, tell your friends or follow us on Twitter.

Town Hall Meeting – June 17th, Coast Edmonton East Hotel

We’re having an extremely important meeting that you need to attend, and, in fact, we would like to ask each of you to invite at least two other families who are not currently members of RETA so we can show our elected representatives that we are determined to be listened to – we will not let anyone run above ground by our schools and houses! Please go to our Attendance Confirmation Form so that we can ensure we have enough space and parking for everyone. (Please note: If you cannot make the meeting please still fill out the form so we can get an accurate picture of how many people are attending. Thank you.)

The address of the hotel is: 2100 Premier Way, Sherwood Park, Alberta T8H 2G4

At the meeting, we will update everyone and explain next steps. You will have a chance to ask questions, not only of RETA but also the AESO, AltaLink, EPCOR and some of your elected representatives. Plus we’ve also invited some very special guests that I think you will find very informative and helpful.

We have invited representatives from Europacable (The European Confederation of National Associations of Manufacturers of Insulated Wire and Cable) an industry association whose members have done much of the extremely high voltage underground installation around the world.

We are lucky enough to have Thomas Neesen, Secretary General of Europacable, Ernesto Zaccone, Europacable High Voltage Transmission Cable Expert and Volker Wendt, Consultant to Europacable join us at the meeting. They will be delivering a presentation about the feasibility of underground power lines as well as answering your questions.

We have also arranged for Europacable to meet with a number of MLA’s and Ministers while they are here as well as with the AESO and AltaLink and EPCOR.

Thank you in advance for your attendance and your continued support. I can’t stress enough how important it is that everyone attends (children are welcome – they have the most to lose). Now is not the time to relax and hope that everyone else “does their bit”. Now is the time to make sure we all stand together. Please remember to confirm your attendance by clicking here .

Fact Sheets

Check out the Fact Sheets put together by our researchers. You can view online or print. Covering everything from health effects to environmental impact, these sheets are fully researched and based on fact.

Update

Since RETA was formed some months ago, we have made tremendous progress. We have engaged in numerous discussions with our elected representatives, AltaLink, EPCOR and the AESO and have made it plain to them that residents are furious about the notion of running massive 500kV power lines by schools, daycare centres, businesses and homes.

As many of you will know, we had a very successful town hall meeting on March 5th and we now have over 2,000 registered members.

Many of you have requested to have the chance to ask AltaLink, EPCOR and the AESO questions directly and so we set about to schedule another town hall meeting in June. That was nearly a month ago and so far they have declined to confirm a date with us. So, we’re going ahead anyway. The date will be June 17th (venue TBD but much bigger than last time). We hope that AltaLink et. al. decide to come, but in any event we hope to have a pretty exciting agenda (and possibly some very extremely interesting guest speakers). More on that in the next few weeks, but set those dates aside.

Lastly, we will be emailing a much more detailed account out to members in the next couple of days so stay tuned.

Make Change Happen – Join RETA

We can make common sense prevail, but only if we all band together and make our voices heard. It’s time for you to do something about this threat to the health and safety of your children and family, the reckless regard for the environment and the complete disdain shown towards conserving the value of your single largest investment – your home. Join RETA now!

It’s Time to Write Letters

Thank you everyone for your support at the recent meeting at Festival Place.  Everyone at RETA appreciates your support.  Now it’s time to let your elected representatives hear from you.  Please visit our letter writing advice page and have your say!

RETA now has over 1,900 members and if we all write letters our voice will be heard!

Coming Soon to a Neighbourhood Near YOU!

Update (May 7th): This diagram needs to be updated as we were just informed that the towers in use will in fact be 60 metres tall (about 200 ft).  Incidentally, according to AltaLink, the new shorter (but much broader) towers increase the EMF exposure away from the towers by 7 times!

RETA stands for Responsible Electricity Transmission for Albertans. While we accept the need to continually improve Alberta’s infrastructure we believe this must be accomplished in a responsible manner. We represent families affected by the proposed Heartland Transmission Project and we have some HUGE CONCERNS about:

• The health and safety of your family
• Our environment
• The investment in your home

RETA Wants You!

Our effectiveness as an organization is directly proportional to the number of members we have (our elected representatives want to hear from as many people as possible on this issue).  So, if you share our concerns about the health and safety of our families and our children, and the impact on the environment and the value of your single largest investment – your home – please join RETA now.