Colorado’s largest energy provider hit a major roadblock on Thursday when the El Paso County Board of County Commissioners unanimously rejected Xcel Energy’s permit requests for a section of a $1.7 billion high voltage powerline project. 

“I have some great concerns about this project,” said Carrie Geitner, commission chair. 

The 550-mile Colorado Power Pathway project would connect wind and solar energy on the eastern plains to the Denver metropolitan area, part of the company’s efforts to meet Colorado’s clean energy goals.

Some sections of the project are already under construction or in place, while the portion that runs through El Paso, Arapahoe and Elbert Counties is still under review. 

The hearing on Thursday was on whether to grant the project a 1041 permit, which designates an area of state interest or activity. As a large utilities provider, Xcel follows different rules than a regular private developer, including the ability to condemn land deemed necessary for public interest projects like the powerline. 

‘Callously dismissive’ 

In a day-long hearing on the item, the commissioners had many questions about how the energy provider would mitigate wildfire risk on the 45-mile section of powerlines on the edge of the county.

The rural area is served by three volunteer fire departments, none of which provided communication on how they would serve the project, according to planning officials. 

Xcel had its own wildfire risk evaluations and planned to use surveillance monitoring, but the presentation did not satisfy Commissioner Bill Wysong. 

“I take exception that you’re not classifying this as a high-risk area,” he said. 

Is nuclear power a necessity in Colorado?

The commissioners discussed the possibility of “undergrounding” the powerlines for safety, though developers said that a project of Pathway’s scale had never been undergrounded in the state before. Andrew Holder, Xcel’s director of community relations, told commissioners the process was typically 13 times more expensive than the construction of a traditional powerline. 

The decision follows that of neighboring Elbert County, where commissioners also rejected the project 3-0 last month. Xcel representatives told commissioners the company would likely be appealing Elbert County’s rejection to the Colorado Public Utilities Commission, a state agency, and may also take the decision to district court.

Geitner said that Xcel representatives were being “callously dismissive” of local authorities in assuming the project would go ahead in Elbert County. 

“I was very disturbed on the response on that,” she said. 

Commissioner Holly Williams said she felt Xcel’s claims to enrich the county were thin. The energy company does not provide power to the area, but representatives said that the construction of the line would bring jobs. 

 “I don’t think that there’s going to be a huge economic benefit to the county,” she said. 

Electric transmission industry group highlights weaknesses in America’s power grid

Local residents weigh in

Some affected landowners were happy with the decision, including Jeremy Gardner. The rancher took an offer from Xcel for easements through part of his ranch that has been in the family since 1906. 

“That’s all this is, is a land grab,” he said. 

Gardner says he took a deal from the company after being threatened with imminent domain proceedings. The offer, as negotiations went on, went down from Xcel’s original price, he said. 

As of June 17, Xcel was anticipating filing condemnation proceedings on six of the 64 affected landowners, according to county documents. 

Ellie Cox, who lives nearby on 40 acres she uses to raise goats and horses, said she felt “a little torn” as a proponent of green energy on principle. She said she was against the project but thought things might have been different if it directly benefitted her and her neighbors. 

“It’s cattle country out there,” she said. “I think we have to balance that.” 

Rancher Ray Thieman told commissioners the Xcel powerline was a welcome addition to other non-traditional land uses in the area like the proliferation of wind energy. 

“That’s always been an income stream for farms and ranchers, and I look at this as another opportunity,” he said. 

Green energy corridor 

Driving through the far eastern edge of El Paso County, the infrastructure of the state’s new green energy corridor dominates the horizon in the form of oscillating wind turbines.

While the Xcel powerline faces uncertainty in the county, interest in the land for wind and solar is still high. 

On Wednesday, representatives for a proposed 3,650-acre solar farm were talking to dozens of locals who turned out for an information session at the Miami-Yoder School outside of Rush. 

The project, called Prairie Ridge Solar, LLC, is in preliminary talks with El Paso County.

While the project is still in planning stages, it would in its current form rely on connecting to the Colorado Pathways transmission line, according to Jose Valadez, director of product development for the developer 174 Power Global. 

Gardner says Prairie Ridge is just one of several projects that have expressed interest in the agricultural land around him in the lead-up to the construction of the Xcel Pathways project. The day of the meeting, he said he got a call from developers wanting to buy his entire 400-acre ranch. 

Gardner was in attendance at the project open house, where representatives said that the solar farm would operate on a decades-long land lease before being returned to pasture at the end of its operational life. 

“I’ll probably be dead by then,” was Gardner’s reply. 

State energy czar touts costliest path to ‘zero carbon’ electricity