Halt the Power Lines is a grass roots organization favoring responsible electric utility management and stands against unnecessary expansion of aerial transmission lines.
We specifically oppose Xcel's plan to jeopardize the health of our children, families, economy and communities with its proposed extra-high transmission lines winding through Colorado neighborhoods: an ultra-high voltage (345kV) transmission line from Pawnee to Daniels Park.
The company has suggested the project is needed to integrate wind power into the Front Range Grid. Environmental solutions to energy issues must take into consideration all impacts and costs on nature and humans, including their physical and mental health.
What Can I Do to Help?
Tell the Mayor and Town Council you oppose all of Xcel's transmission-line plans:
1) NEW THIS MORNING (6/27/16): Sign a voter pledge:
"We cannot vote for elected officials who approve this proposed project in its current form."
2) Write to the Mayor and Town Council telling them you oppose Xcel's proposed project and all routing. Their email address is
council@parkeronline.org. Emails can be short. Just let them know how you feel. Remember, this is an election year, so they'll be anxious to hear from electors.
3) Sign our general online
petition. (We're up to more than 300 signatures.)
4) Crucial upcoming hearing in the Town of Parker:
- Town Council Hearing: July 5 at 7 pm at Town Hall
Many members of the community don't know about the proposal. Help us spread the word:
1) Follow us on Facebook and like and share our posts:
https://www.facebook.com/haltthepowerlines
2) Spread the word on NextDoor and other social media.
What are we asking for and why?
We call on the Town Council, elected representatives of Parker citizens, to reject all proposed routing of Xcel’s Pawnee to Daniels Park ultra-high-voltage long-distance transmission lines because:
1) The lines may never be needed and with dispersed energy generation and storage technology rapidly developing, they will likely be obsolete long before rate payers have finished paying for them, leaving Town residents with uncompensated and lingering depreciated home values, potential health risks, increased energy costs and the blight of underutilized lines.
Depreciated home values
Xcel sites studies (neutral?) that show little impact on property values. But stop and think. Some things don't even need to be studied. Intuitively, can't you feel that a house with a power line (or two) in its backyard will be less desirable to some people than the same house without power lines. Such disinterest would decrease demand for that house. Ask realtor friends if their experience suggests a power line (or two) impacts home price and sales.
But here's a study for you: In the case of a 345kV line being added to an existing 69kV transmission line property value dropped by 27% after announcement of the new line. (
http://puc.sd.gov/commission/dockets/electric/2013/EL13-028/guidelines.pdf)
If Xcel disputes the obvious—the lines will impact property values along any proposed path—it should unequivocally guarantee financial compensation to homeowners along the transmission line path who see appraised (by a neutral party) property values decline if the lines are approved and built.
Potential health risks
Health risks are an unsettled issue:
The EPA's site most recently concludes (
https://www3.epa.gov/radtown/subpage.html#?scene=The+Burbs&polaroid=Power+Lines&sheet=0):
"Scientific experiments have not clearly shown whether or not exposure to EMF increases cancer risk. Scientists continue to conduct research on the issue." But the agency seems to sound a warning: "The strength of electromagnetic fields fades with distance from the source. Limiting the amount of time spent around a source and increasing the distance from a source reduces exposure."
The California EMF (electro magnetic fields) Program published in 2002 “An Evaluation of the Possible Risks from Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMFS) from Power Lines, Internal Wiring, Electrical Occupations and Appliances” and concluded “after reviewing all the evidence,” it was “inclined to believe that EMFs can cause some degree of increased risk of childhood leukemia... .” (
http://www.ehib.org/ehib/www.ehib.org/emf/RiskEvaluation/ExecSumm.pdf)
In a 2001-2006 analysis done for the Public Service Commission of Maryland, authors concluded, “There were three significant major national and international reviews in the last reporting period that concluded there was a consistent association reported between magnetic field exposure and leukemia in children in epidemiological studies; however, uncertainties in the data and little confirmatory evidence in laboratory studies led to a conclusion that it could not be stated with certitude that magnetic fields cause cancer. Little has changed since then. Reviews and evaluations have continued. As Feychting, Ahlbom, and Kheifets stated in their review: 'Research on ELF fields has been performed for more than two decades, and the methodology and quality of studies have improved over time. Studies have consistently shown increased risk for childhood leukemia associated with ELF magnetic fields... .'” (
http://ceds.org/DCSE/I-Status%20Report%20on%20Investigations%20of%20Potential%20Human.pdf)
The National Institutes of Health's August 2007 issue of Environmental Health Perspectives, carries a column by Michael Kundi of the Institute of Environmental Health Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. After reviewing and critiquing multiple studies on childhood leukemia and EMFs, he concluded, “It is high time that exposure to power frequency EMFs is recognized as a potential risk factor for childhood leukemia... .” (
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1940086/)
With so much uncertainty and associated fear, who with a clear conscience would be willing to subject any Colorado or Parker residents to the possible health risks associated with living by power lines?
If Xcel is sure transmission lines don't pose a threat to the health of residents adjacent to the power lines, let it provide each homeowner along the proposed transmission line—and communicate it as well to the overall community through the local media—a legal affidavit stating unequivocally that there would be no health risk to homeowners from the proposed lines if they were installed. We've invited them to do that before. We're still waiting.
Increased energy costs
Ratepayers (including customers of IREA) will pay for the costs of these transmission lines for decades to come, even if the lines never carry the power Xcel has projected. That's probably one of the main reasons Xcel is pushing this project—lock in long-term guaranteed financial returns as their traditional approach to business comes under pressure from technological advances.
Lines may never be needed and, with dispersed energy generation and storage technology rapidly developing, they will likely be obsolete long before rate payers have finished paying for them
The energy industry is in rapid upheaval and experiencing dramatic market changes, specifically related most recently to solar. No one anticipated the dramatic drop in cost of roof-top and solar gardens (
http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci27985150/9-metro-denver-solar-gardens-rooted-another-10-start-to-sprout) over the last several years. The industry was perhaps imagining only government-subsidized wind turbines and solar at the utility level.
As the Washington Post recently reported, “'Grid-connected self-consuming solar will become economic for nearly all customers imminently, with grid-connected solar plus-battery systems following soon after,' notes [a] study” by “the Rocky Mountain Institute, an influential energy policy think tank.” (
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/04/07/study-the-way-we-get-electricity-may-be-on-the-verge-of-a-major-change/)
While watching solar cost decline precipitously, one is left wondering if large wind turbines will be the best long-term energy solution for Colorado consumers and the environment. Yet, Xcel presents gas-fired generation and as-yet-unbuilt turbines as the only basis for this proposal; even as it wrestles before the PUC to decrease payments to roof-top solar customers. (
http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/2014-3-may-june/feature/throwing-shade-how-nations-investor-owned-utilities-are-moving-blot)
As battery technology improves (
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/if-the-industry-makes-its-connections-your-next-home-may-run-off-a-battery/2015/04/25/c4a68482-de00-11e4-a500-1c5bb1d8ff6a_story.html) and energy is increasingly generated at the point of use, the need for costly and inefficient transmission lines will, we anticipate, decrease.
2) Very little (if any) of the power will feed Parker homes or businesses.
In the town’s query to Xcel on this point, the company gives multiple ways this line will “benefit” Parker IREA customers, including “the Town will get the benefit of a more robust and reliable transmission system..., reduced carbon emissions with the injection of Rush Creek Wind Project [an as-yet unapproved project], the potential for additional renewable injection helping to reduce further reliance on fossil fuel sources, and more tax revenue.”
In short, the company doesn't even claim—because it can't—that power carried on this proposed transmission line is needed for electricity in Parker now or in the future.
3) It appears Xcel has attempted to divide the community by pitting Town residents against one another to grease its way to approved routing for its financially self-serving project.
We believe the Parker community should be united in its efforts. However, Xcel has something different in mind.
Here's an excerpt from a posting on a Parker area homeowners association site where Xcel reveals its divisive tactics. Please remember that
Halt the Power Lines opposes this project in its entirety and all proposed routing of overhead lines. The petition mentioned was used to fight the overall project at the Public Utility Commission (PUC) at a time when only one routing option was offered.
The online post reported (bolding added): "
I met Tom Henley, Xcel Energy Area Manager, Community and Local Government Affairs. He introduced me to Randy Pye, Xcel Energy’s public affairs consultant on this project. Randy said expansion of the existing line is what Xcel Energy wants to pursue as it is the most cost effective as Xcel already owns the land. However, there are several Parker residents who are opposed to this. Randy indicated there are 350+ Town of Parker residents who have signed a petition in opposition of expanding the existing line and
it will be important for the surrounding neighborhoods to out-petition them."
Don't let Xcel divide us: We are asking all of Parker to stand together in rejecting this project and all proposed routing.
4) Xcel is prematurely seeking Town approval of routing because it is concurrently seeking PUC permission to begin the project earlier than previously allowed by the PUC.
After filing with the Town for review and approval of routing, Xcel changed the “rules of the game” and chose to seek PUC permission to accelerate the development of this project (from PUC approved 2020 to 2017). While the company has the right to seek this approval, the Town and its citizens must exercise the right to have PUC project clearance and timing finalized before reviewing the project. While we encourage the Town to reject the project outright, rejecting now because the PUC is reviewing timing would be a welcome short-term tactic.
If Xcel is set on this project and wants to rout it through any Colorado neighborhoods, it must find a new way of doing it, develop new technologies, partner with entrepreneurial companies and state and federal government to explore new, cost-effective, environmentally and human friendly approaches to the problem of extra-high voltage transmission lines through neighborhoods. We’re 25 years into the Internet age, and we're seeing amazing advancement in energy production and storage. We know rapid development can take place where there is a desire and concerted effort. After more than two years of dealing with Xcel, we've seen no desire or effort in improving its transmission plan or technology.
Governments must not allow the company to merely string lines on poles and destroy our communities.
Report on June 30 Planning Commission Meeting:
The Planning Commission Hearing lasted for more than four and 1/2 hours. We counted at least 125 resident there, not counting the Xcel folks, Parker staff, etc. Standing room only. Incredible turnout.
In the end, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to support the routing. Their major concern seemed to be about how much it will cost the Town in legal fees if Xcel "appeals" a Town rejection to the PUC. Beyond that they seemed to buy into the faulty logic that there's big growth going on throughout south Denver, therefore we need more power, therefore we need this project. But Xcel is always carefully scripted when they talk about how it will benefit Parker, because they know it's only marginally beneficial to the Town. The Planning Commission seemed to be making up their positions based on their own thoughts in this area and did not seem to listen to the dozens of citizens who spoke bravely. We were really pleased the vast, vast majority of neighbors spoke in a unified opposition to the project.
Unfortunately the meeting went on for more than four hours. Many citizens who had signed up to present had gone home by the time their names were called. (And parts of the first two hours were drawn out and boring.)
