- [Female Narrator] "Flatland" is brought to you in part through the generous support of AARP, the Health Forward Foundation, and RSM.

- Hi, I'm D. Rashaan Gilmore.

Welcome to "Flatland."

Every month we dig into one issue that's raising questions, causing tensions, or has gone curiously unexplored in our area.

And for this episode, we'll be talking at out an infrastructure project that promises to bring renewable wind energy across the Midwest.

(upbeat music) (air whooshes) It's no secret that the climate crisis poses a real imminent threat to life on this planet, and that greenhouse gases produced from coal and natural gas are a major contributor.

In comes the Grain Belt Express, a project that hopes to connect renewable wind energy produced by wind farms in Kansas with the energy grid servicing much of the Eastern portion of the United States.

But in order to tap into that energy source, Grain Belt must construct one of the largest tracts of direct current transmission lines our country has ever seen across farm lines in Kansas, Missouri, and Illinois, leaving many land owners in its path, concerned about how their homes and businesses will be affected.

Let's take a look at the issues raised by land owners, the realities of responding to climate change, and the legislative battles that threaten to halt the project altogether.

(air whooshes) (anticipative music) - [Billy] We need to act now takes drastic measures at the federal, at the state, and at the local level to transition away from something that is harming us, and that is our fossil fuel economy, use of oil and fracked gas and coal.

And because these are subject to market impacts, that could be a war, catastrophic act in a far off place, it's impacted by a worsening climate crisis.

You know, we saw climate catastrophe in the form of Winter Storm Uri.

These impacts are getting more severe.

They're hitting the most vulnerable in our communities first and hardest.

Without concrete and bold action at all levels of government, we are only going to see worsening climate catastrophe.

(ominous music) - [Patrick] Grain Belt was started about a decade ago in terms of development and our company of energy transmission acquired the project in 2018 from the original developer to the largest transmission line we've been involved with developing, and it's the second largest transmission line.

I believe, in development in the United States right now.

The Grain Belt Line will be able to carry the energy equivalent of 15 million barrels of oil per year in that clean, domestically-produced power.

- [John] The Grain Belt project will deliver wholesale electricity from wind farms in Kansas, will bring low cost wind energy to our customers.

There's a really good wind belt from the Dakotas down through Nebraska and Kansas and Oklahoma, but then you have to get the energy from where it is generated in this case, Southwestern Kansas, to places where people live, and you have to have a transmission system to do that.

- [Allison] When you transmit electricity from its generation source to somebody's home, you lose some electricity along the way.

Grain Belt Express, in particular, is a type of transmission line that is supposed to shed less power along the way.

- Grain Belt express will connect three of the United States' largest regional electric grids.

The Southwest Power Pool, or the SSP.

The Middle Grid is the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, which is the MISO grid.

And then the third Eastern most grid is the PJM.

Under most conditions, Grain Belt will move power from that Southwest Kansas point east into the MISO and PJM markets.

One of the major reliability benefits for Grain Belt will be the ability to also move power under emergency conditions from east to west.

By doing that, it will be a reliability backbone for the Midwestern U.S. and for the 25 states that are served by those three electric grids.

- It needed approval from the state to use what's called eminent domain to assemble land for the transmission line.

It finally got approval from the PSC in 2019.

There has been pushback from some landowners, particularly in Missouri, I would say.

And so, there have been efforts at the legislature to basically stop the use of eminent domain for particularly this project.

- There is no transmission line that is without impacts, but the best we can do is to make sure that landowners are fairly compensated.

The total landowner compensation associated with the agreements we have signed is now $77 million.

And we have already paid out, as upfront payments, $10 million of those easement agreements.

Footprint of that structure is only gonna be 1% of the acreage in easement, and landowners maintain the ownership of their land, and they can maintain the use of their land in that 99% remaining area of the easement around the structure.

- [Wayne] As a century farm owner, I'm entitled to 150% of the value.

I am receiving that, and I didn't have to fight to get that.

They're open to about anything if you are willing to verbalize it to 'em and will negotiate in good faith.

I believe in the project.

And I think it's the best for the country.

And I think it's gonna be good for the state of Missouri.

(ominous music) - [Loren] Grain Belt is trying to acquire three tracts, the parcels of land across our property.

See the strip through there?

That's where the pipelines go.

So there'll be another new strip going through there where any trees are cut.

So probably those trees'll be clear cut.

And this particular tower would happen to be on location, where we were planning to build our home.

Those plans are dashed.

It runs this whole area of land for me and reduces value because I can no longer build the home I planned to, our dream home at this location.

But I think the more insidious issue to me is this individual who lives here in his home.

The power line doesn't go in his property.

He receives no compensation for it.

However, with a tower, as we talked about, the size of the Mamba built right here, it'll probably decrease the value of his property by half.

It's not about renewable energy.

It's really about the issue of property rights on our part.

And by their use of eminent domain, they basically take away our ability to have much influence or communications with 'em about the construction of the line.

- [John] They can force you to sell.

They can give you what they determine.

It's a fair price for your property.

- [Marylin] The unknowns, I think, bother me the most.

Are we gonna have to get all new equipment?

We have huge equipment.

Is it going to be able to run close to these lines?

And it's not that we're pushing back because it's a renewable.

That's not it.

We're pushing back because this is our livelihood.

Why should your business be able to run through the middle of my business?

- There are portions of this bill that we want to be engaged in the conversation around how to make sure that landowners are compensated fairly.

There's a provision of the bill that would require every county in Missouri to approve a project before an application can be submitted to the Missouri Public Service Commission.

This puts major infrastructure projects in the hands of any two county commissioners who could say no at any point along a line like Grain Belt.

That's not a common sense way to develop infrastructure.

You'd see no projects get done in the future.

- If I owned a hundred acres across which this line was going to pass, I would probably have some of the very same concerns that folks are expressing today.

You have to think about the broader, common good here.

There are advantages to these 39 communities.

There's tax revenues in addition to the savings associated with wholesale power supply.

There are broadband advancements that are gonna be made when Grain Belt is built.

Lots of traditional power plants, mostly fossil fire power plants are being retired.

Rule number one is to keep the lights on.

Something has to give.

Well, the thing that has to give is we've gotta build new renewable infrastructure, and we have to deliver it from places where it is generated, places where it's used.

- Condemnation of private land for a public service.

It's no small thing, but it is meant to be a tool of last resort.

If there are folks who have been left out, and there have been folks left out, we need to be able to evaluate the good things and the bad things of every project, including Grain Belt Express.

It's not a perfect project, but we have to do the best we can in these processes, these decision-making processes.

We need to be able to meet people where they're at.

(air whooshes) - And welcome back for the discussion portion of today's program.

With us in studio today is John Twitty, President of the Missouri Public Utility Alliance; Loren Sprouse, farmer and former electrical worker from Braymer, Missouri in Caldwell County; and Billy Davies, Conservation Program Manager at Sierra Club's Missouri chapter.

I wanna start with you, Billy, and ask you if you could help us with a little bit of a level set here.

I think sometimes being in the Midwest, we don't think of issues like climate change being things that we need to worry about.

We're not gonna fall off into the Pacific Ocean or some such thing that you hear about all the time.

Why should Midwesterners be concerned about climate change?

How are their lives impacted and what's at stake?

- What Missourians and Kansans and folks across the Midwest are seeing, just as everyone else is seeing is that report after report by the world's foremost scientists continue to affirm the imminent dangers of the climate crisis.

And we're seeing those impacts here in Missouri with exacerbated and worsening heat island effect in our urban areas that disproportionally impact low income neighborhoods, communities of color, having worse heat impacts in urban areas.

Also seeing this in examples of increased drought, as well as flooding and across Missouri and across the Midwest, communities are taking action locally to address the climate crisis, doing what they can.

And part of that is adjust transition to more renewable energy away from fossil fuels that have been shown to exacerbate and power the climate crisis that we're all facing.

- Is it safe to say then that the Sierra Club is in favor of the Grain Belt Express project or sees benefit or value for Midwestern states like Missouri and Kansas?

- Yes, and we have gotten support of the project by opposing legislation, including legislation currently under consideration in state legislature, aimed at retroactively killing a project that has undergone extensive public review and has been showed to be a public necessity for communities in the Midwest, including communities in Missouri.

- So I do want to stipulate for the record that Invenergy was invited to be a part of today's broadcast, and they declined to take part in the panel, citing concern over confidentiality during their ongoing negotiations.

And so, it prompts me to wanna turn to you, Loren.

I know that there's a lotta support for this project, but there are people who are impacted who aren't quite as enthusiastic about Grain Belt Express, what it potentially portends for Midwestern states.

How are you impacted?

And what are your thoughts on the project?

- This line goes through my property for about a mile.

They're acquiring a 150-foot strips up the middle of a 480 acre property that we own.

It is my brother's partnership.

It is a century farm.

It's been in my family.

My grandfather purchased land before 1920.

We're in favor of renewable energy.

That's not the issue.

The issue is the property rights and how this route was approached.

From our perspective, there were lots of options that could been chosen for this, but the Grain Belt Express, Clean Line Energy Partners, and subsequently, Invenergy, chose to use what I would consider the lowest cost and the most aggressive approach is, and that is by using eminent domain to acquire private property.

- What might those have been, those other options that would've been more preferable for you and some of the landowners that you know?

- They could've used public rightaways.

They could have followed Highway 36 across the state.

They could've followed I-70.

They could've followed I-44.

They could have followed railroad rightaways that are all private rightaway options.

And they could've either put it overhead or buried it.

And the best example of what I think is a project that A, delivers renewable energy, but also causes less impact, which I think would be considerably important to Sierra Club and other people would be the Sioux Green Line project that's being done up at Illinois to Iowa.

In that case, they are using a railroad rightaway, the Sioux line.

They're building an underground route from Iowa, from the wind farms in Iowa to deliver power to Illinois.

And they do not require the use of eminent domain at all.

- Prompts me to turn to you, John, and ask this question.

I mean, you partially represent a coalition of 39 municipalities across Missouri who have signed up to receive power from this major transmission line.

Why is it important to these communities to receive low cost renewable energy?

But I wanna put a little spin on that too.

What is motivating them?

What need are they trying to meet by signing onto the project, especially given some of the concerns that Loren just mentioned?

- The Missouri Public Utility Alliance is a wholesale power supplier to around 60 Missouri municipally-owned utilities.

We call them hometown utilities, and these folks depend upon us to provide their wholesale power that they will then deliver to their customers.

As I think everybody knows, there are 39 specific cities in this project that would take Kansas wind energy, low cost renewable energy, and that energy would be delivered to those communities, resulting in savings of 12.8, $13 million a year, over a period of 25, for each year, over 25 years.

Not only is it very environmentally-friendly compared with some other generating resources.

But Kansas or the Wind Belt wind energy is really inexpensive.

And I was in the Capitol the other day, testifying before the Senate Rules Committee, and a couple of our members talked specifically about helping their corporate customers, their corporate retail customers, meet some of the standards that they are now requiring in terms of their energy profile.

- So it could lift all boats as it were, I mean, raising those standards?

- Well, that's certainly our view of it.

It's important to remember, we're not an owner, we're not a developer, we're not an operator.

We're simply a customer of this project.

And if we can help folks in those 39 communities and candidly, maybe more in the future, we think it's a good thing.

It's not perfect, obviously, whenever you get an eminent domain circumstance, but we think it's on balance, a pretty good project.

- Well, and I do wanna come back to this issue of eminent domain, but I first wanna ask you about, and I know you don't represent Invenergy, but you're very keyed into this project.

So the state of Missouri has deemed that the Grain Belt Express would serve the public interest.

It's granted at utility status.

I'd like to hear from each of you, actually, your perspectives about whether or not this actually rings true or rings hollow.

I think a lot of times as constituents, we hear that some corporation's gonna do some good thing and it's gonna benefit the whole community.

Sometimes people are a little bit suspect of that.

So I'm just curious and I'll start with you, John, does that really ring true?

- Well, it does, and Rashaan, I guess the thing I also would say is in Missouri statutes, the Public Service Commission is created, and it is given certain powers.

And as you mention, Invenergy, or Grain Belt Express, has been granted utility status, and that gives them the right to own property for these purposes.

And it also grants the authority to use eminent domain when absolutely necessary.

and that's the law of our land.

You know, if there's a conversation to be had about eminent domain reform or codes of conduct for people trying to buy rights of way, then that's a conversation certainly that should be had, and at least our organization would be happy to participate in those conversations.

But it ought not to be retroactive.

- Loren, how does all of this ring for you?

I mean, you are an actual landowner, and your property will be impacted.

Is the eminent domain issue the real source of the rub here for you?

- Well, let's back up a second.

You know, I've been involved in this project for over 10 years.

Been involved, watching what's been going on here.

And if we go back to the real eye on the prize, that Clean Line Energy Partners, and subsequently, Invenergy has, is to deliver is to fly over the state of Missouri and deliver power to the Eastern power grid, where they can sell the renewable energy at the market prices, whatever marketable barrier.

And if you look back when this project was originally started, they weren't delivering any power to the state of Missouri, and duly so, the Public Service Commission rejected that offer.

Then they've come back multiple times trying to figure out how to get the support of stakeholders like John's organization to get across the state.

Even today, they're only planning to deliver less than 5% of that power to John's organization.

5% of the capability of that bond.

The bill, Senate Bill 1211 states requires that they deliver 50% or more of their power to be able to get the right of eminent domain.

And that just seems to be a common sense concept to do that.

- These kinds of projects, as Loren mentioned, are multiyear projects.

There's lots of engineering, there's lots of analysis about rights of way.

And unfortunately, at the end of the day, a route gets chosen for lots of different reasons, of course.

- [Rashaan] Sure, sure.

- Cost is one.

How many parcels it crosses, a lotta different things.

And at the end of the day, the route that is currently being worked is the one that was deemed by the folks at Invenergy to be the best.

Could it go different places?

It certainly could.

I guess I would only suggest that if it goes different places, there are simply different property owners that are impacted.

I've been in the business 39 years, and I've actually knocked on people's doors, asking them for rights of way.

And it's never a popular thing when you don't voluntarily agree and you have this right.

And hopefully there are appropriate protections built in to the process to assure that landowners are treated fairly and compensated fairly.

- What about the Grain Belt Express project for you and for Sierra Club rings true to the promises that they're making to landowners and others across these states?

- In my much more limited experience than the these gentlemen, I'm yet to see a perfect project.

will not say that any one project is perfect, but to agree with Mr. Twitty, that this has got an extensive review, and that the folks tasked with making an informed decision have made a decision, and it has passed muster at every turn.

There's also the cost of not increasing renewable energy.

- Just how much power is gonna be coming?

Because as we heard Loren say, the legislation that is currently in committee would require 50% of that to stay in Missouri.

And some do argue, I should say, some do argue that that would be like building the interstate highway system, but we say 50% of the cars that pass along it have to stay in Missouri.

Now that's an imperfect metaphor and I understand that, but I'm just curious, what is the potential and promise, not just in terms of savings, but the amount of power that will be flowing across that line to get people to get perspective on what they could anticipate?

- Missouri has one nuclear power plant over in Callaway County, obviously a clean resource.

We're not here today to talk about nuclear energy, but it doesn't emit any CO2.

And this would deliver about three and a half times, a little over three and a half times the capacity of Callaway.

That's the total capacity.

That's the 4,000 megawatts.

And some of it certainly stays in Missouri, but I would also mention that climate change is not geographically specific.

And you know, one of the great questions that we all talk about is, look, if we're gonna clean up America, let's hope other nations clean their air up too, because it's all part of that same process.

- Every month on our website, we answer your questions about life in Kansas City and the issues you care about through our curiousKC initiative.

Let's hear from our reporter, Cami Koons, about our question of the month.

(air whooshes) - This month's curiousKC question comes from Matthew who asked, "Have land agents threatened eminent domain "or condemnation in order to coerce easement agreements?"

(air whooshes) - So Loren, I'm compelled to go back to you on that question.

Have you experienced that or anybody that you know of experienced any coercion in terms of threatened eminent domain?

- Well, first of all, you know, every landowner across the state has received a letter from a law firm that states that the land agents will be making offer for their land, and they're with an appraised value that they've calculated for a strip 150 feet wide across your property.

And they said, if you do not respond to this within 30 to 60 days, they'll proceed to condemn your property.

So when we there's been a lotta discussion about voluntary acquisition of land, but it's voluntary with duress.

Some people are signing easements because frankly, the average land owner, farmer, they're not used to dealing with lawyers in those kinds of environment.

Yes, the land agents are out and about talking to 'em, but there's a very heavy weight of the condemnation hanging over all landowners from this project.

I used to be a telecommunications executive working in construction and engineering.

And when we looked at the use of eminent domain, it was our last option, absolutely our last option.

We never wanted use it.

But if you look at this project, what's happened is it's become their first option because it's their most inexpensive way to install this line.

- Burying a transmission project like this would be very, very, very costly, several multiples more expensive than putting it in the air.

And I also think it's important to know that in these kinds of projects, the towers, the structures only take up about 1% of the ground.

And so, row cropping, cattle grazing, can certainly still continue in these areas where right of way is obtained.

- What is the message from the Sierra Club?

Or what are your thoughts on the exchange that we're hearing between John and Loren?

And it does really revolve around that issue of eminent domain as a principle matter.

- See, I agree, Sierra agrees.

We should all agree.

Eminent domain must be used as a last resort, and that any project of this size, or smaller size, all the solutions that we're trying to achieve in Missouri to address climate crisis and increase the amount of renewable energy, increase access to it, must be done through a lens of justice and by using all means necessary to ensure that community voices are heard and that informed decisions are made.

On this bill does not solve that issue.

What this bill does is attempts to retroactively kill a bill that has passed muster through a number of regulatory bodies, as well as two federal courts and the Supreme Court of Missouri and would effectively make it nearly impossible to continue increasing access to renewable, affordable, clean energy from the Midwest to powering communities in the Midwest at a time when we need to be rapidly increasing the amount of renewable energy we have.

This bill would not stop, like for example, this bill is silent on pipelines that some of which have been proposed to come through Missouri.

This would not stop those scars from coming across the land and would allow us to continue investment in fossil fuels when they're not needed.

And we need to be moving forward renewables.

So this bill is not solution, although we should be absolutely finding ways to improve public engagement in these decision-making processes, wherever we can going forward.

- And that's where we wrap up today's conversation for this episode of "Flatland."

That's John Twitty, President of the Missouri Public Utility Alliance; Loren Sprouse from Caldwell County; and Billy Davies from the Sierra Club.

And this story is a part of the series on climate issues in the Kansas City region, produced by the KC Media Collective, an initiative designed to support and enhance local journalism.

Members of the KC Media Collective include Kansas City PBS and "Flatland," KCUR 89.3, the Missouri Business Alert, Startland News, the Kansas City Beacon, and American Public Square.

This has been "Flatland."

I'm D. Rashaan Gilmore, and as always, thank you for the pleasure of your time.

(air whooshes) (upbeat music) - [Female Announcer] "Flatland" is brought to you in part through the generous support of AARP, the Health Forward Foundation, and RSM.