Article published Jun 20, 2007

EIS for international power line is the right decision

At first glance, the 230-kilovolt power transmission line proposed to connect Montana and Alberta electricity grids seems like a no-brainer:

Montanans seem to want to generate clean wind power, but they have few ways to export it; Albertans want clean wind power, but there's no way at present to get it from here to there.

Wind farms proposed for northcentral Montana could provide the power the larger populations to the north crave, but only if something like the Montana Alberta Tie Line is built.

Thus the $120 million project that would connect Great Falls to Lethbridge, Alta., would seem to satisfy folks on both sides of the border.

Unless, of course, you happen to live or farm under the power line or the wind turbines.

For you, there may be issues, starting with difficulties navigating today's gargantuan farm implements beneath the H-frame poles and diagonal routes across fields proposed by MATL's builder, Montana Alberta Tie Ltd.

Objections by farmers, in fact, have prompted the U.S. Department of Energy to decide to do the most stringent review in its toolbox, a full environmental impact statement.

The move is good and proper.

The project may well prove to be the win-win that it seems to be at first glance, but if significant numbers of Montanans have problems with it, then they deserve a full hearing and the problems a full discussion.

By now most Montanans are familiar with EIS processes (see right). They're not perfect public-involvement tools, but they're about as close as anything government agencies have come up with to make sure all voices are heard and all problems considered.

Opponents of MATL cheered the DOE decision; MATL backers didn't seem to mind.

And if the process goes as it should, Montana and Alberta will wind up with a better international transmission setup than they would have had without the hearings and comment periods.