By Evelyn Pyburn

So, how dare a political candidate even mention the concept of privatization!

When people started asking me about Republican candidate Tim Sheehy’s comments about privatizing health care, etc. as though it was an outrageous thing to say, my answer has been, “I only wish I thought he intended to do it.”

More than anything, though, I was most amazed at people’s response to it. Even that Senator Jon Tester should be so over the cliff as to think it would be a persuasive argument against his opponent! Not that it isn’t obvious that Tester is all for government controls, and fully in league with the socialists or Marxists, but I didn’t realize that the public in general would be so horrified about privatization that it could be used convincingly in a political debate in the United States of America. How truly sad and disappointing about the state of things in our country.

 We were never meant to be a county in which government ran or controlled the economy. The government was supposed to be as separate from the economy as it is from religion. The reason should be readily apparent in the current state of affairs. Most of the issues that trouble us today, including the very existence of “the swamp,” are manifestations of government controlling economic activity.

The real reason politicians and government leaders hate and fear Donald Trump is because he poses a threat to a system that has made a great many of them very rich in the selling of favors, pilfering, bribing, embezzling and other means of appropriating the unearned. President Biden and his son are not alone. They were simply more brazen than most.

But it is still hard to believe and disheartening that so many average Americans do not have greater appreciation for the amazing success and grand achievements that they have all been part of, as participants of the private sector. They are the private sector! They are the ones that Sen. Tester is disparaging.

The US is the strong, successful and desirable place to live that it is because of the private sector – not because of government. In fact, given the staggering mountain of regulations and tyrannical threats from government, that the private sector – the producers in our country – must deal with, it is most accurate to say that it’s in spite of the government that the private sector continues to produce.

One must understand that the government has nothing – absolutely nothing —  that it didn’t first confiscate from its citizens. Government creates absolutely nothing and advances our standard of living not at all. Everything that politicians are always eager to take credit for is not their doing one iota. They must always first take from the private sector which often means the disruption and destruction of the efforts of the private sector.

That is why all the other “isms” fail so quickly. To be in charge, the authoritarian regimes must destroy the very means – the creativity, ingenuity, and productivity – – of its citizens that it otherwise depends upon. If citizens are allowed to retain the personal, individual power they must have in order to produce, then there is nothing for the power mongers to appropriate and upon which to build any kind of pretense of supremacy.

I am sure that much of the reason that appreciation of the private sector has diminished so significantly is that we have been generations removed from a real free market, and those generations have no knowledge of it. They have certainly been taught nothing about it in government schools, and so intertwined is government in our daily lives, many people can’t imagine how we would manage without it.

And, sadly, it is undoubtedly true, as so many others aspects of American life is demonstrating, there is an ever greater lack of the moral integrity which spawns the free market AND which the free market spawns.

Much of the support of government programs came from and continues to be advanced by people seeking the unearned. The woman pleading for government health care in the Tester ads says as much. She wants free health care – knowing full well that it is not free — knowing that the unearned wealth for which she grabs must first be extracted from other citizens – from her neighbors.

People have responded saying “but without the government no one can afford health care.” But that is exactly what government intervention spawns. The only reason most people can’t afford health care is because the government has made it unaffordable. If you want to make any commodity unaffordable, just get the government involved. In my life time, there was a time, in which people could afford their own health care – and insurance was something of a novelty.

The recent experience with the COVID epidemic revealed, most excruciating, exactly how much government runs our medical system and what has come of it when hospitals and medical professionals bow more deeply to government than to their patients. Because of that there has been an increasing exodus, by medical professionals from government dominated institutions, who are going back to the private sector; and one of the first things they are reporting is how greatly they can reduce their prices.

Can you imagine how incredibly affordable health care might be if the people in the business ran their business without government intrusions, regulations, mandates, edicts, price controls, etc. Health care would be eminently affordable for most people. And, remember, before government programs, hospitals were often built, managed and supported, specifically to serve the poor, by philanthropic institutions – they too are part of the private sector.

A return to private markets in medical care would mean more options, better care and, yes, lower costs.

So if Tim Sheehy is a believer in the private sector more power to him. So am I. And, tsk, tsk, tsk that Sen. Jon Tester is not.

By Evelyn Pyburn

“How to Make America Competitive” according to Leen Weijers requires nothing more than lowering the cost of oil – the cost of competitiveness – and fracking has done that.

Weijers, as the featured speaker at the Montana Petroleum Association’s Appreciation Luncheon, explained how improved technology and efficiencies in the industry has lowered costs, increased production, reduced negative impacts and is drawing new business and companies into the US in order to better access natural gas.

Weijers is a highly experienced professional, currently serving as the VP of Engineering at Liberty Oilfield Services.  Weijers has been instrumental in developing hydraulic fracture growth simulators and conducting real-time fracture analysis.

“The amount of energy you have available to you, reflects how well you live your life,” asserted Weijers. Technology has made dramatic changes to the fracing industry and “the economic and humanitarian benefits are massive,” he said.

The technology of fracking allows the extraction of petroleum from shale, which holds vast quantities of petroleum that had never before been accessible. Fracking involves the fracturing of formations in bedrock by a pressurized liquid. The process involves the high-pressure injection of “fracking fluid” – mostly water — into a wellbore to create cracks in the deep-rock formations through which natural gas, petroleum, and brine will flow more freely. When the hydraulic pressure is removed from the well, small grains of hydraulic fracturing proppants hold the fractures open, which allows the oil to flow.

According to Weijers, 80 percent of all hydrocarbons come from shale and fracking, and 67 percent of oil is natural gas.

Weijers reported that fracking has improved production by two and half times, from 60 barrels to 160 barrels. Fracking in the US has increased oil production 134 percent since 2010 and continues to increase at a rate of 2-3 percent each year. The cost of producing a barrel of oil is 60 percent of what it used to be before fracing technology was refined.

During the technology’s 70 year history, much has changed – “all kinds of things have been modernized,” said Weijers. Sand is moved in containers; it is dust free, quick to unload and with less noise. Costs have been reduced 30 percent and it is simpler to deliver the finished product.

Because of the improved technology “US oil and gas workers are way more efficient in what they do.”

“The price of natural gas has come down tremendously.” It’s five times as cheap as diesel, said Weijers, which has prompted many companies to use natural gas and the industry is building equipment that runs exclusively on natural gas. In fact, said Weijers, many companies are moving to the US because of the availability of natural gas.

Weijers emphasized the efficiencies that have been gained in the industry, saying that the petroleum industry employs 400,000 workers – so does solar and wind, but they produce only five percent of the energy that the petroleum workers produce.

“We pump faster at higher rates into a well at a hundred barrels a minute.” That keeps the sand in suspension so “we don’t need as many chemicals.”

The more oil that is produced the less expensive it is and the more competitive all of US industry can be, according to Weijers.

Also during a half day program which was part of the Montana Petroleum Associations (MPA) annual conference, Economist Pat Barkey of the Bureau of Business and Economic Research, presented an over view of what it is going to take to transition to a green economy and the unlikelihood of being able to achieve the goals that have been set. It will take longer than energy transitions of the past because of economic issues. In the past the economy was smaller and energy use was less. And, this transition is being driven by “policies and not economics.”

“In fact we have a well-run system of cheap energy,” said Barkey.

Also, hampering the transition is that it has to be complete in order to achieve the goal. Historically, the US transitioned from coal to petroleum, but coal is still present. “That can’t happen” with this transition, said Barkey. “To impact climate it must be carried out globally, not just in the US and in rich industrial countries. It is a global problem. ..The speed that is promised is unprecedented.”

Barkey pointed out that much of the energy that is produced and transmitted is wasted. “What you actually get is smaller than the energy that is wasted.” The job of achieving the goals “isn’t quite as big if we can do away with wasted energy.”

The transition to green energy alternatives means a “significant” increase in demand for the many different minerals that are necessary to produce the alternatives – such as copper, lithium, nickel, zink, rare earth metals, etc. The increased production of just one of those minerals, such as copper, would have to double in the US, said Barkey. In fact, it will require more copper than the world has ever produced. That requires more energy usage for mining and recycling.

“That’s a very tall order for just one narrow part of the transition,” said Barkey, especially in light of the timeline required in getting mining operations permitted and approved in the US. The Black Butte mine has so far taken 14 years. “This pace of new production is incompatible with energy transition as proposed by those who support it.”

Barkey also emphasized that cheap and abundant energy has enabled the industrialization of the world which has reduced, significantly, extreme poverty throughout the world. Since the 90s,  extreme poverty has declined by a third – much of that was in China.

There are many other issues that may be impacted by a transition to more expensive green energy, pointed out Barkey – all requiring greater energy usage.

In his message to the membership, MPA President Dave Linn stated, “The taxes and salaries of our businesses and employees significantly contribute to our schools and local governments. Our products and services are used by virtually everyone and are essential to all aspects of our modern life.”

He pointed out that “we are an industry at the forefront of an idealistic battle… For an engineer/project manager like me, it is easy to recognize that the goals and timelines for this change are best driven by technology, well-vetted plans, and the free market, not by politically driven government mandates”

Linn underscored the pressures under which the industry functions. “… it seems that every week there is new legislation or regulations being proposed with hard-hitting impacts to our industry and our sustainability.” As an example he pointed to the Montana court ruling regarding the Child Climate lawsuit. “Rarely are old laws revised if the new interpretation is contrary to existing policy. Meanwhile, for our industry, it’s business as usual as we are required to keep our operations and companies going and the critical products flowing to customers while these legal battles slowly move through the courts.”

During the conference there were panel discussions about the Child Climate lawsuit, about property taxes and about the Supreme Court Chevron decision.

Earlier this year, Dave Galt, a former MPA Executive Director, assumed the role of interim Executive Director, as Alan Olson resigned to serve as a director of government affairs for NorthWestern Energy.

Olson has been MPA Executive Director the past eight years.

Galt, too, commented about “the onslaught of federal regulations being hastily passed by the Biden administration.”

He stated, “Methane rules will dramatically increase costs for all producers and may be the demise of many of Montana’s marginal wells. This will have a huge impact on Montana communities. Recent rule changes of the Bureau of Land Management are just as egregious. Past changes in things like allowing leases for buffalo are curious. New BLM policies that will allow a ‘conservation’ to compete with oil, gas, mining, and grazing leases adds a whole new aspect to management of huge swaths of federal lands in Montana. Other than the initial lease payment, I see a huge potential change in recent income from activities on federal lands. If this actually comes to pass, I see a significant impact on Montana’s revenue, quality of life, and harm to rural communities.”

As Yellowstone County officials approved, on Tuesday, Sept. 12, a $182,369,879 million county budget, for 2024-25 fiscal year, they are also focused on imminent future needs for the county. Many of the decisions about how to spend their revenues today are dictated by what they see as needed revenue for the future.

During two earlier public hearings, county commissioners and department heads made it clear that they are well aware that significant needs loom ahead, especially for the justice system, including the possibility of adding onto the jail (Yellowstone County Detention Facility) and the possibility of having to accommodate as many as three additional district court judges. But the immediate challenges for the 2024-25FY are being imposed by inflation and the struggle to retain staff, according to Jennifer Jones, the county’s Director of Finance and Budget. While those issues impact all county departments to some degree, they are especially impacting the justice system — the Sheriff’s department, the County Attorney’s department, the courts and the Youth Services Center, which deals with delinquent youth and children in need of temporary shelter.

The county’s budget is balanced. Jones commented that it is the cooperation of all the county departments in “building this budget” that results in a financial plan that demonstrates “our sound position and our continued commitment to address needs well into the future.”

Total county revenues for FY2025 is $139,803,741. The revenue budget for 2024 was $145,787,437; for 2023 it was $132,843,880; and for 2022 it was $116,487,362.

The budget for total county expenditures for FY2025 is $182,369,879. That compares to $134,152,923 in 2024; $119,847,614 in 2023 and $111,160,023 in 2022. Some expenditures are drawn from reserves and other non-tax revenue.

Fiscal Year 2025 revenues, from all sources, are budgeted at $139.8 million, of which $70 million comes from property taxes. Yellowstone County property tax revenue is $4.2 million more, over the property tax revenue collected in 2024.

New properties assessed for the first time – which are an indicator of economic growth – amounted to almost $2 million of that increase. State law allows the county to increase their levy to accommodate for inflation, which contributed $1.7 million to the $4.2 million total increase. Because inflation has been so onerous, the rest of that increase is attributable to the county using last year’s inflation increase authority, which it did not use, but finds it necessary to do so this year.

Last year was an appraisal year performed by the Montana Department of Revenue which resulted in large valuation increases, and therefore called for a reduction of levied mills for the county over the previous fiscal year. This year, valuations will not be evaluated however Yellowstone County experienced a 2.4% reduction in countywide taxable value, due to adjustments made by the Department of Revenue. Those adjustments meant lost revenue to the county unless it raised its levy to compensate, so given that increase, plus the increase in mills which were allowed for inflation, and the increase in the permissive medical levy, the county added 5.88 mills for fiscal year 2025.

Each year the county gets entitlement money from the state, which came in 4.64% higher than the last fiscal year. The funding increased because the state legislature passed legislation which exempted Class 8 property from property taxes, and a portion of that reduced property tax was then distributed to each county.

At the same time, the county is in the process of preparing a new administration building (the Miller Building, 301 North 29th Street) for occupancy by most of the county departments, except those that are part of the judicial system. As other county departments vacate the County Court House they will make room for the new judges that are expected, if the next state legislature approves their funding.

Also, Yellowstone County is in the process of building a temporary detention facility in collaboration with the City of Billings during the coming year. Projected cost is $6 million, of which the city is contributing $2.7 million.

“One important project that deserves mentioning again this year is the criminal justice needs assessment study we engaged in last fiscal year,” reports Jones, “This study will provide recommendations for system efficiency improvement, capacity management and enhanced outcomes for both adults and youths involved in the criminal justice system.” It will help guide many of those future decisions regarding public safety, mental health programs, detention space at the state and county levels, and the Youth Service Center.

“If the eventual decision is made to expand the Detention Facility again, it will be nothing like our previous expansion completed in 2020. Both a material increase in the county’s mill levy and a significant debt obligation will need approval by our voters,” stated Jones.

Construction and remodeling for the new administration building will begin this fall. Besides moving other departments, the Clerk and Recorder’s office, Public Works, Finance, and the County’s Commissioners’ office on the third floor of the Stillwater Building will move into the building by the fall of 2025, and the county will cease to be a tenant of the city’s.

Remodeling the administration building and the Court House will be done without any need for a tax increase or debt, according to Jones, because of reserves in the County’s Capital Improvement Fund.

Focusing on MetraPark – a county owned facility – Jones explained that the American Rescue Plan Act has allowed the county “to address infrastructure challenges at MetraPark, for which funding options were few.” The projects — for which much of the work has been highly visible to the community— will improve the facility for overall safety and functionality, said Jones. All APRA projects at MetraPark are expected to be completed by the fall of 2025.

Another aspect of preparing MetraPark for the future has been the engagement of an industry consulting group, whose study is to be completed by the end of FY2025. Their work has already seen “material results,” for MetraPark, according to Jones. MetraPark’s “non-tax related revenues for FY24 exceeded budget by 9.4%, while expenditures remained in check. A highlight in this area is a 20% reduction in overtime dollars compared to FY23 and FY22.”

“All of this demonstrates that we are improving the bottom line at Metra, allowing for better funding of MetrPark capital expenditure needs going forward, without requiring County General Fund or General Fund CIP infusions,” said Jones. Property taxes under a dedicated levy for Metra Park contributed $4,166,773 to the MetraPark budget this year. Non-tax revenues, generated by the fair and rentals, were $7,025,823. MetraPark and Montana Fair’s projected total budget is $12,651,341 which compares to last year’s budget of $9,949,026.

Base operations for the county, not including capital improvement projects, increased approximately 4.6% over FY24.

The Sheriff’s budget, including the jail, will experience the heaviest burden due to inflationary costs. It has felt the impact in almost every category from the spike in food costs, insurance premiums, patrol vehicles, and medical services.

Tax revenues will fund the Sheriff’s department, also referred to as public safety, and all of the judicial departments of county government to the tune of $59,847,672, consuming 32.82% of the final budget.

The Yellowstone County Detention Center’s budget will be $16,285,787.

Yellowstone County Attorney budget is $8,115,511. Last year’s was $6,057,685.

Youth Services Center budget for 2025 is $3,838,996. A significant portion of its revenue is generated by charges made to other counties.

General government expenditures are $24,572,601, or 13.47% of the total budget.

Public Works – the building of roads and bridges, emergency services ($407,066), parks ($276,123) – is $19,919,406, or 10.93% of the total budget. The road fund alone is $13,663,329. The bridge fund is $2,884,625.

Capital Improvements, such as the administration building, will consume $23,714,850, or 13% of the total budget.

Human Services, $489,766 or 0.27% of the total budget.

Public Health has a budget of $6,070,006, or 3.33% of the budget.

Insurance costs require a budget of $20,353,603, or 11.16% of the total budget.

The county pays a debt service of $897,400 for the previous jail expansion, which comprises about 0.49% of the budget.

Social / Economic expenditures has a budget of $6,254,549, or about 3.43% of the total budget.

Community Development has a budget of $711,922 or 0.39% of the budget.

Miscellaneous budget items total $1,350,888, or 0.74%.

Some controversy was generated from the public regarding the county’s decision to reduce funding to the Yellowstone Art Museum. Commissioners reduced previous years’ contributions from $220,770  to $188,053 in 2025. Expenditures for county-owned museums remained much the same. Western Heritage Center, $282,080; Yellowstone County Museum, $282,080; and Huntley Museum, $141,040.

Riverstone Health (City/County Health Department) receives funding from a dedicated mill levy of 4.75, which was approved by voters in 2002. Otherwise it has operated as a separate entity since 1998.  Its county budget is $3,579,104.

Some individual budget categories: Clerk & Recorder’s /Surveyor department $789,391; Elections $990,611; Finance including finance, purchasing and central services $1,032,925; County Treasurer/Assessor /Supt. of Schools $1,951,170; Commissioners ($646,843); Clerk of District Court $1,846,636; Justice Court $2,411,896; Library $1,509,093; City-County Planning $659,004; Laurel Planning $131,015; Expenditures on ARPA projects $11,098,281; and Health Insurance Fund $12,472,600.

Big Sky Economic Development Agency (BSEDA), while a stand-alone entity, gets revenue every year from a dedicated county-wide mill levy. This year the levy is 3.16 and the revenue it generates is $1,560,072. The mill levy is only a portion of BSEDA revenues. The agency’s entitlement from the state is $284,296.

Five years ago, Yellowstone County News launched a non-profit, fund-raising entity called, Yellowstone Family, and under that umbrella began the very first Dig It Days in Lockwood. Despite it being a windy, blustery day, there was amazing turn out with many volunteers pitching in to make it happen. Dig It Days was aimed at being a family fun, educational event, with static displays of big construction equipment, a huge sand pile in which kids could play, and backhoes and excavators which kids could operate.

There was something magical about it. Kids and Family loved it and it was a great start to Yellowstone Family’ goal of raising funds for community non-profits that support Family. Somewhat of a surprise, though, was how well it fit in with the construction industry’s vital need to introduce young people to the career opportunities in the industry. Sponsor numbers quickly rose from all quarters of the industry, as they put their all into it, to introduce kids to their world and to generate funds for scholarships through Build Montana.

It has grown every year since. It is amazing how much kids love it. A common sight at Dig It Days is parents having to quite literally drag their kids away from the sand pile, after one or even two hours of play. They are carried away crying wanting to continue to play. And, gratitude is profusely expressed to sponsors and volunteers by parents and grandparents.

The next year, Dig It Days was invited to be a part of Montana Fair, and attendance has increased and so has the number of sponsors. While it’s hard to tell for sure, there was easily between 4,000 and 5,000 people – young ones and older ones – who attended this year, and there was a record 37 sponsors.

Special this year was the generous offer by Montana Fair for free entry tickets to the fair that were available at sponsor locations.

As the size and scope of the event has increased so has the importance of volunteers, and many of them come from the companies – equipment dealers, construction companies, material and equipment providers, colleges, mines, utility companies, etc.— who are sponsors.

Recognized for their dedicated support of Dig It Days this year were Dave Mills of Tri-State Truck and Euipment; Tina Beach of CHS Refinery, Dan Peterson and Andra Burnham.

While contributions are made to scholarships for the building trades, others recipients  of donations have been added to the list, including Yellowstone County Boys and Girls Club, Montana Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, Veteran’s Navigation Network, and a search continues for other worthy recipients.

Kids have an opportunity to win toy prizes. Also, each year more opportunity is given for young people to win cash to help contribute to their future education and training. A special drawing is held specifically for young people between the ages of 14 and 22. And, everyone has an opportunity for cash prizes if they visit every booth.

But perhaps the biggest joy for sponsors and producers is being able to now encounter young people who two or three years ago were able to get jobs in the construction industry and to find out that they are loving their new careers. Probably one of the greatest benefits of Dig It Days is the opportunity that attendees have to meet the owners of businesses and potential employers in the construction industry. Dig It Days is a mecca of opportunity.

New this year included a ride in a haul truck provided by Tri-State Truck & Equipment which kids and adults thoroughly enjoyed. Arnold Machinery brought a simulator for kids and adults to operate and learn about. More cash prizes were offered this year.

One of the most popular events at Dig It Days is the Big Dig Contest, among the backhoe /excavator operators, in which they compete to determine who can move the fastest , at least three of four eggs, by  spoons attached to a tooth of their bucket, without breaking them.

The competition was very close this year so tied second place winners also received cash awards. First place winner was Tyrel Twitchell, a Build Montana graduate, who won $400. Tied for second place was Travis Sutherland with Askin Construction and Clayton Naillon with CHS Refinery in Laurel. Both won $100.

Two of the young people who won $200 for future training and education were Tayon Hoff and Natalie Mason.

Each day of the two-day event, visitors who visited all the booths, were entered into drawings in which four won $50. Winners were:

* Jennette Rasch

* Dylan Burns

* Beau Sundheim

* Luke Syphend

* Ares Parkins

* Jack + Elliot + Carlson

* Cheyenne Lawson

* Nick Laferre

Another contest was a photo contest featured on Facebook, prior to Dig It Days. Winning $200 each in that contest were Laura Fries of Billings and Charey Harney of Billings.

Perusing many news articles and many business reports it appears that the issue of moving to nuclear as a future energy generator is a dominant consideration across the country as energy leaders worry about meeting the nation’s future demand for energy. The issue is also emerging as a strong consideration in Montana.

According to the Department of Energy (DOE), nearly one-third of existing U.S. coal plants are scheduled to shut down by 2035, as has been mandated by the federal government. At the same time demand for electricity is rising faster than at any time in “the past five or more years.”

Bear in mind, at the recent Southeastern Montana Development Energy Open Conference it was reported that both, Elon Musk and Bill Gates have predicted that demand for electricity in the future will be two -and -a -half to three times higher than it is today.

Other energy experts are predicting wide spread black outs in store for the country, in the near future – a reality that is already being experienced.

A primary contributor for the trend for more energy are tech companies — often among the first to endorse climate change fears and demand net-zero carbon goals– but who are now realizing they will need large amounts of energy to operate future data centers. An article in Epoch Times said that the tech companies are cutting side deals with nuclear power plants to get first call on their base-load power.

A regulatory agency charged with assessing grid reliability, North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), cited “clear evidence of growing resource adequacy concerns over the next 10 years.”

Coal generation produces 16 percent of the US energy needs. The options to fill that gap, if coal is abandoned, are wind, solar, natural gas, and nuclear energy. Those in fear of potential impacts of possible climate change believe that wind and solar are the solutions, arguing that they are the cheapest and cleanest options, but the fact is they are not the cheapest, when calculating in the cost of back up resources. Wind and solar require expensive backup power generation when they fail to produce.

Some analyst say that more wind and solar capacity could be paying more for less, as these sources fail when consumers need it.

“We built a heck of a lot of wind capacity in 2023 in the United States, but the actual amount of wind electricity produced went down, simply because you have wind droughts,” said energy economist Dan Kish, senior vice president of policy at the Institute for Energy Research (IER).

“The windiest spots have been hit pretty hard with wind turbines, so now they’re going to places that are less prolific in terms of wind, and the result is you’re getting less wind per installed megawatt of wind power than you did before.”

According to the EIA, while overall “renewable” energy production grew by 2 percent in 2023, largely because of the subsidized increases in biofuels and solar energy, consumption of wind energy declined for the first time in 25 years.

“Our entire grid has been built with the goal of moving power to people when they need it,” Kish said, but noted that, increasingly, this is shifting to providing electricity “whenever the wind blows or the sun shines.”

Coal plants, while emitting more carbon dioxide (CO2) than some alternatives, has provided an affordable, reliable, and flexible supply of “dispatchable” electricity, which can be ramped up or down to meet demand.

Natural gas has been the prime beneficiary of the transition away from coal — both as a supplier of base-load power and as a backup to wind and solar when the weather doesn’t cooperate.

According to EIA, U.S. natural gas consumption reached a record 89.1 billion cubic feet per day in 2023 and has increased by an average of 4 percent per year since 2018. The report said that natural gas consumption set new records every month between March 2023 and November 2023, as coal-fired electric-generating capacity declined.

Unlike coal, however, gas is not stored onsite at power plants but rather delivered just in time via pipelines, a process that holds its own risks. During winter storm Uri in Texas, for example, freezing temperatures and electricity outages disrupted gas deliveries, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission reported, exacerbating the crisis that ended with widespread blackouts and the deaths of an estimated 246 people.

Despite the many attributes of  natural gas it doesn’t fit with the politics of climate worries or the government decreed goals of  “decarbonizing” energy and reducing global emissions by at least 43 percent by 2030, 60 percent by 2035, and reaching net-zero by 2050.

Given that, nuclear energy is increasingly being touted as the ideal solution.

According to Brian Bird, CEO of the NorthWestern Energy (NWE), even though the company is exploring the possibility of moving to nuclear,  there are two factors that detract from nuclear – the length of time it takes to permit and the cost.

The construction costs of Georgia’s Vogtle Nuclear Plant, which was expected to set a new standard for cost-effective nuclear production, reportedly ran $16 billion over budget, and the project was completed more than six years behind schedule, according to Epoch Times.

The 54 U.S. nuclear plants and 93 U.S. nuclear reactors, located across 28 states, currently generate about 19 percent of the nation’s electricity, according to the EIA.

A nuclear plant’s capacity factor, which measures the amount of usable energy it produces as a percentage of the maximum it could potentially produce, is the highest of all power sources, averaging more than 92 percent, according to the DOE.

By comparison, the capacity factors for wind and solar are the lowest of all major U.S. energy sources, at 35 percent and 25 percent, respectively.

Nuclear power plants are designed to run 24 hours per day, seven days per week, making them ideal for reliable, base-load electricity.

And advancing technology is making nuclear an ever improving option.

Energy economist Ryan Yonk, a director at the American Institute for Economic Research, said the safety of nuclear plants has improved with time, and although risk has not been completely eliminated, this leaves nuclear as the “no-carbon energy” of the future, provided that the industry can build plants that address risk concerns and regulatory concerns.

“If you really care deeply about CO2 and view it as a substantial problem, we have an established technology that doesn’t produce CO2, that produces large amounts of low-cost energy at relatively low risk,” he said.

The logic of nuclear is convincing more and more of those involved in finding energy solutions. Even the federal government seems to be testing the waters. The Inflation Reduction Act enacted by the administration offers a 30 percent federal investment tax credit for new nuclear projects – – which are going to be quite expensive until the technology is refined.

And, the White House is signing -on to last year’s multi-country declaration at COP28 to triple nuclear energy capacity globally by 2050; developing new reactor designs; extending the service lives of existing nuclear reactors; and growing the momentum behind new deployments.  The government initiatives was $6 billion in new loans, grants, and tax credits for nuclear facilities to keep aging plants up and running and restart some that had been shut down.

Among the first to take advantage of the government’s subsidies is Bill Gates who is building Naughton Power Plant in Kemmerer, Wyoming.

Others are in the wings. A little over a year ago it was announced that a “wave of advanced nuclear reactors could be coming to Wyoming.” TerraPower and PacifiCorp, a nuclear developer and electric utility aiming to build a first-of-its-kind facility at a retiring Wyoming coal plant before the end of the decade, announced they were considering adding up to five more of the same design by 2035.

Other reports that will benefit nuclear is legislation that will

streamline the approval process, and provide more staffing for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), which would theoretically speed the licensing process, reduce fees for plant applicants, and update the NRC’s mission statement, stipulating that it will not “unnecessarily limit” the production of nuclear energy.

The DOE is also working to ease the conversion of existing coal plants to nuclear. The agency stated that more than 300 existing and retired coal plants could be converted to nuclear energy, and this would increase the U.S. nuclear capacity by more than 250 gigawatts, nearly tripling its current capacity of 95 gigawatts.

The DOE is also collaborating with private industry through an initiative called the Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear (GAIN), which provides government support to commercialize nuclear energy technologies and to “educate those new to nuclear on its benefits. . .”

The average life of a nuclear power plant is about 40 years, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Some say the new technology could last longer than that.

As of April, the average age of U.S. commercial nuclear reactors was 42 years old.

Based on its annual assessment at the end of 2023, the IAEA stated that, worldwide, it “now sees a quarter more nuclear energy capacity installed by 2050 than it did as recently as 2020, underscoring how a growing number of countries are looking to this clean and reliable energy source to address the challenges” facing the world energy demands.”

Concerns about nuclear energy still linger from the plant meltdowns of the past.

These concerns stem from the fact that nuclear energy creates nuclear waste.

Dean Cooper, leader for energy at the World Wildlife Fund, said

“The truth is that the construction of new nuclear power generation capacity is too slow, too expensive, and too risky to make a difference.  .. Rather, governments must prioritize investments toward energy efficiency and deploying renewables, such as wind and solar, to decarbonize the grid.”

According to an Aug. 5 survey by the Pew Research Center, 56 percent of American adults polled said they wanted more nuclear power plants as a solution.

While this number is below the 78 percent who prefer expanding solar power and the 72 percent who favor expanding wind power, the survey noted that support for solar and wind power fell by double digits percentage points since 2020 while support for nuclear power grew by 13 percentage points.

Some critics charge that the government has become too overbearing in directing and controlling the U.S. energy industry through a deluge of new laws, regulations, subsidies, tax benefits, and cap-and-trade schemes.

Government intervention at the federal and state level is manipulating the industry away from what it can realistically achieve, they say, making the electric grid both more fragile and more expensive while disregarding Americans’ growing need for affordable, reliable energy.

“One of the major issues that comes up in the energy mix is that because we’ve spent so much time regulating and subsidizing within it, we don’t have a real clear sense of what the mix would be if it were based on consumer demand and the market’s capacity to provide,” Yonk said.

“One of the ways to get closer to that is to deal with the regulatory problems and to remove the subsidies so that we start to see the emergence of a mix that matches consumer demand; at the moment, we don’t have that.”

_________

Data and statements in this article came from a compilation of reports.

By Evelyn Pyburn

The price of something conveys a message.

Looking at the price of a can of soup is a message. Deciphering that message might be complicated but attempting to arbitrarily change it will not change the facts it attempts to convey.

If the price has increased it may be saying the cost of the labor has increased. Or perhaps that the cost of the gas in the truck that brought it to the grocery store has gone up. If it has dropped in price perhaps it is saying there is a glut of canned soup on the market.  Or, maybe it is saying that no one else is making cans of soup and therefore customers have no choice but to buy this brand.

If one is buying an orange, a sky high price could be conveying that a late freeze destroyed much of the orange crop. Or that an infestation of bugs did so. Or perhaps that there are few people willing to pick oranges and labor costs are higher, or perhaps that the quality of the orange isn’t that great and the price has to be lowered to sell it.

All those things, individually or in concert with one another, dictates the utilitarian cost of everything we buy – or sell. How it works at a very basic level is not complicated. In fact, it is so simple that it feels almost condescending to write an explanation, but apparently some people need explanations.

In a free society, the price of something is what the buyer and seller agree upon. If the buyer refuses to purchase at what the seller is asking, then there is a message in that. And, the seller better pay attention. He may have just been informed that someone else can produce it for less, or that there is more of that product available than there are buyers to buy it. It’s a message that can change from one locale to another, and from day to day, or even minute to minute. It’s so multi-faceted and world encompassing that probably even God has trouble keeping tract – but not so our prospective presidential candidate Kamala Harris.

Everyone involved, even in a slight way in business, knows they have to pay attention to all those many messages, if they are to survive in the business world. To ignore or mistake any one of those messages could spell doom for your business or your household budget. It’s a huge challenge just for the owner of one small business – but apparently it’s nothing for Kamala to manage the entire world of economics.

Kamala seems not to realize that if someone capriciously and arbitrarily sets prices without relationship to any facts of the reality that it takes to create a product or service, they will destroy markets. That means they are destroying the means of human survival in the modern day world.

Mandatory price and wage controls – being told what to sell a product for or what the value of your labor is  — is also a message – a message that comes with a club, which has absolutely nothing to do with the market.

If you arbitrarily limit the price on a loaf of bread, you do not lower the cost of bread. You assure that there will be no more bread. Who makes bread when they can’t recover the cost for labor and materials to make it?

And while the fundamental basics of a single transaction is the same the world around, trying to manage all of the world’s transactions is not. Just think of the billions of such transactions that happen every single day in the world, for billions of products and services, by billions of people, and then imagine how every little transaction has its own ripple effect of information and impacts in the economy, world around. What human being can track all that, much less know how to manipulate it all, for any specific outcome? Well, apparently presidential hopeful, Kamala Harris can, which makes her most amazing.

She hasn’t been the only one, however. President Richard Nixon, in the early 70s tried the same thing. Fortunately, he understood his folly within just a couple years, and while having undoubtedly harmed thousands of individual citizens he abandoned the policy before destroying the whole economy. But one would really hope that people with such a profound lack of economic understanding would never rise to such high levels in government.

One has to wonder if Kamal Harris would ever figure it out or even see the disaster that would surely befall us all. One has to suspect she would see the consequences as being unrelated, Perhaps they would appear as inexplicable and mysterious as many of our other current leaders and “experts” seem to view inflation.

Economic literature is full of explanations — not only about why price and wage controls don’t work, but what has happened in the past when someone else tried it. Most of those same books also explain that high prices is what happens when you inflate the money supply. Apparently, that’s another read that Kamala missed.

Of course, governments and bureaucrats are already deep into manipulating markets. That they screw things up quite frequently usually passes unremarked upon. It’s another strange and mystical manifestation that just happens. No one traces it back to some stupid regulation or arbitrary restraint on the market. Apparently mystical and strange things happen all the time in the market place, just like they seem to do in how people rise to power.

By Evelyn Pyburn

Montana’s economy is not doing too badly, and Yellowstone County’s economy “grew like crazy” over the past few months, according to economist Pat Barkey, Director of the Bureau of Business and Economic Research  (BBER), University of Montana. He called the economy for Billings “a Goldilocks recovery,” following several years of lackluster performance because of a decline in mining, which happens to be the most important industry to the county because of the number of mines headquartered in Billings.

Barkey gave a mid-year update on what’s been happening economically in the state, early this month, at the Northern Hotel in Billings, with a special emphasis on the plight of housing.

The housing market is frozen. The country had a long period of low interest rates followed by high rates, which has prompted people who already own their home to resist selling because they don’t want to assume high interest rates, which is “freezing markets.”

Otherwise a little noted news story, he said, is how well the US economy is doing. The economy has accelerated – growing at 2.8 percent as compared to last summer’s 2 percent. We are leaving our “peers” behind, said Barkey, referring to Canada and European countries. He noted that the US share of the global economy is 26.5 percent – “higher than ever.”

He noted that India, China and Russia are growing at a faster rate, but in response to a question, he explained that he didn’t include them as “peer” countries, because their economies are not mature economies and are not as large. (China’s economy is 65 percent that of the US.)

It is no surprise that the cost of housing in Montana has skyrocketed over the past few years. The median cost of a home in Yellowstone County is currently about $419,000. In Gallatin County it’s $857,000 – about 120 percent more than in 2014.

A more meaningful stat is the ratio of the cost of housing to average income. In Gallatin County, which has the highest median income per household in the state, the ratio is 10.3. Yellowstone County has one of the better ratios at 5.5. Lewistown, however, has a ratio of 3.6.

The increase in the cost of housing has broader impacts, Barkey pointed out.  It increases sprawl as people move out seeking lower priced housing. It limits economic growth as mobility is reduced prohibiting people from seeking better jobs. And, those families have less to spend in all other aspects of life from food to recreation.

It generates a “war” between generations – one that “tragically the Boomers are winning – we have shut 20 and 30 year olds out of buying a house, which stops their wealth growth.” The level of home ownership for the younger generation compared to the “boomers” at the same age, is 40 percent less.

 The cost of housing also impacts the rate of homelessness, which has been rising in most Montana communities.

Barkey noted that there is always a flip side to every economic stat. “High prices are great for sellers.”

The solution for Montana communities is to build “houses, houses, houses.” “We are not building enough houses,” said Barkey, while showing graphs which demonstrated that in the past most Montana cities were building houses faster than their population was growing, especially so in the 1980s. That has totally flip-flopped; often to a dramatic degree for some cities.

Billings had its own period when population exceeded housing supply – during the oil boom – but the oil bust changed that. Billings had a surplus of housing before COVID, but the aftermath of COVID “wiped it out” —  it is currently neutral.

Barkey noted that in the past federal policies and regulations have focused on increasing demand for housing, while local regulations focused more on increasing supply. Some of Barkey’s recommendations included:

—don’t add more policies. There tends to be a “disconnect between intentions and outcomes.”

—don’t add more to demand.

—consider ending policies that don’t accomplish their stated objectives.

—consider ending the mortgage tax deduction, since it did not do what was intended.

—start holding local governments accountable for achieving progress. One measure for that would be to “assess what percent of vacant land that is buildable is vacant.”

Besides dealing with the impacts of a frozen housing market, the country is experiencing a slowdown in manufacturing, but a big surprise is that generally the economy has accelerated – growing at 2.8 percent as compared to last summer’s 2 percent.

The forecast for Montana’s economy is not at a point of “high drama,” said Barkey, but “we continue to be surprised as it remains on “the upside.”

Little discussed is the fact that the US economy has accelerated, reported Barkey. The US economy is dominated by what the federal reserve is doing.

 The bad news is that while the rate of Inflation is fading, “high prices are not fading and they are here to stay.”

Some of the reason for the US growth is the expenditure by government of money that doesn’t exist. “We are eating a lot of sugar candy,” said Barkey, “and it is not sustainable….We are doing it more than other countries that are our peers.”

Interest payments on the national debt exceed what the US spends on defense.

In Montana ag prices “are pretty good.”

“The wood products industry is changing and it is tough…those prices are low.”

Metals and mining is a “mixed bag.”

Montana industries are impacted by inflation. While inflation was 9 percent and it has dropped to 3.1 percent, “it is not falling anymore.” The Feds target is 2 percent, reminded Barkey, noting that contributing the most to costs are transportation and housing.

Energy prices have “plateaued” but they have done so at high prices.

The bad news, emphasized Barkey, is that prices are not going to go down.

The “appetite” for labor is shrinking. Job postings are declining. “We are not seeing as many voluntary quits.”

Montana added 10,000 jobs last year, but that is less than the previous year, said Barkey, “The trajectory is smoothing out.”

Construction is starting to cool off, while health care is “coming back” and the accommodations industry is strong.

Workers’ wages in Montana increased $200 million last year, which has a lot to do with the tech, service and health care market segments.

Largely because of the health care industry recovery, “Billings is back on track.”

Counties of the major cities in Montana are all growing economically, except for Cascade which showed negative growth due to construction that happened last year which is not being repeated this year. Of the counties, Gallatin is growing the most followed by Yellowstone, Missoula and Flathead.

Looking at tax revenues for the state (the first report for which for this year just recently came out) indicate that the State of Montana tax revenues are not going to be as high as in the past couple of years. They look to remain flat. “Complete stagnation,” said Barkey, “Revenue growth is over.”

By Evelyn Pyburn

One really can’t look at the events of the world today without realizing that there are forces coming from every direction trying to destroy our country. As bit by bit government chips away at our lives, we must realize that the effort has actually been going on for a long time, but it has largely failed. The US is still the largest economy in the world and it is still growing daily.

A lot of people do not make the connection between our economy and our freedom but the power mongers do. That’s why so many of their attempted restraints focus on the activities of business and how people use their time and property. How we use those things determines our level of production, and that is the strength of the US far more so than armies. That’s what makes armies possible.

To cripple our ability to produce is what the savvy power mongers are trying to do with most every new law,  with every shut down, with every law suit, with every distortion of history, and twisting of common sense.

And it shouldn’t be surprising that  many of those efforts are focused as attacks on the availability of  cheap and abundant energy. There’s only one thing more important to the success of our economy than energy and that’s property rights – the right of every individual to own property, to own what they produce, to own their own life.

Americans go to work every day to acquire property just so they can be independent.

But, as vital as property rights are to our personal and national well being, there is astounding little public discourse about them.

Regulations that erode them are incorporated into local laws with hardly a comment – they are called regulations.

Judges who rule to destroy private property in favor of empowering government or the collective, are publically applauded, and few people are aware that they are cheering their own demise.

Individual property rights, as our forefathers provided for in the US Constitution, give each citizen great strength in how they function in society and in dealing with politics.

Our individual property rights are unique in human history and their creation unleashed a force in civilization never before seen, and never duplicated by any other country since, despite their proven effectiveness in achieving what every foreign despot – as well as many domestic ones – claim is their goal — a higher standard of living for the citizens.

That’s no accidental oversight on their part, they know full well what they need to do to retain power. The despots of the world who collaborate in the great effort to bring the US down, know full well that they could achieve the same level of economic success as the US, if they too granted the same level of private property rights for their citizens. That that has never happened says most clearly that their true interest is in gaining power over others.

It’s been claimed that ‘private property is standing room for the individual’ for very good reason.

So as individual citizens, if it is our freedom and our standard of living we want to preserve, we should be focused on preserving this most coveted of rights. We must fully understand the depth of its importance and defend it at every turn.

Property includes all that we value and that which has value. It includes ideas, the cash in our pocket or savings in the bank. Our means of protection, our homes and our businesses. When a thief takes any of those things, because of the degree that our individual wellbeing can depend upon them, it makes theft a most heinous crime. There was a good reason that they used to hang horse thieves.

We should understand that when we purchase a parcel of land we do not purchase a pile of dirt to put in our pocket but we purchase the RIGHT to determine how to use it. A property owner has the legal right to determine whether to grow wheat upon that land or build a building. It is the ability to make those choices that they purchased, not a pile of dirt. The owner of property has the legal stance to resell that right, lease all or part of it to others or improve its value in some manner they think fit, even if their neighbors or the government disagrees.

Any effort to minimize the property owner’s ability to make those decisions is a taking of the right he has acquired. Without that legal power a property is nothing. It has no value.

So when neighbors (and all too often government) gather together to try to stop a property owner from doing what he wants to do on a parcel of property — when they are imposing their choices upon how that property is used they are taking a value from the owner. In legal terminology that is exactly what it is called – “a takings”.

In most circumstances when someone takes the property of another it is called theft, but I guess for the sake of civil decorum judges and lawyers prefer calling it a takings – but a theft is exactly what is happening. And it is rampant. Every day we hear about one group or gang taking away all or some of this value from others. And the really amazing thing is they can stand up in righteous indignation to declare they should be allowed to conduct such a theft.

In the name of scenic views, preserving history, the environment, or to protect their own property values, they have no compunction about conducting such acts of theft. And quite often the legal system supports these acts of thefts even though there is a much easier way to resolve the issue. Buy the property. Purchase the right to determine how to use it, just as the existing owner had to do.

Oh that’s not so easy if you don’t have the money. When you don’t have the value needed to legally determine how to use the property. What makes you think it was any easier for the existing owner to acquire the right to determine how to use the property? That is the value you attempt to take at no cost to yourself!

If you want to have control about what happens on a piece of property next to your house, your farm, or your business there’s a very simple straightforward way to do it. Buy that control. Buy that right. There are very savvy business people who do that every day. They purchase a property just so they can assure some future use won’t have a detrimental effect on their business or their home.

If you want to preserve the view of the neighboring landscape owned by a farmer, property rights can allow that to happen probably cheaper than a court case. One can pay the property owner some lesser sum to guarantee he won’t build a granary there or some company can’t pay him to build a cell tower. There are numerous legal mechanisms that can be used to control such things – agreements, contracts, covenants etc. and the glorious thing is they recognize everyone’s property rights – but they don’t allow “takings.”

More importantly, the very nature of exercising legal property rights and the people involved are acting to preserve the integrity of private property rights which is by far the greatest value to be preserved for everyone’s sake.

Effective Jan. 1, 2026, NorthWestern Energy will acquire, at no cost, Puget Sound Energy’s 370 megawatt share of the Colstrip Plant.

The acquisition will allow NWE to leverage existing infrastructure that is “well established, dependable, reliable and consistently available when our customers need energy the most”.

An equivalent resource would cost more than $700 million to build and would not be available to serve customers for at least 5 years. Including the previously announced acquisition of Avista’s 222 megawatts, that are under the same terms and timeline, NorthWestern Energy will own 55% of the Colstrip Plant.

Puget Sound Energy is a Washington-based utility.

“We are working hard to keep energy costs affordable knowing that many Montanans live on fixed incomes and are managing other life expenses,” states the company’s press release, “This 370 megawatt additional share of the Colstrip Plant presents an affordable opportunity that benefits our customers.” An equivalent resource, such as a natural gas plant, would cost more than $700 million to build and would not be available to serve customers for at least 5 years.

“Today’s announcement is yet another step in securing a strong future for Montana-made energy,” Montana Governor Greg Gianforte said. “Working with our partners, we’ve defended our all-of-the-above energy strategy to increase access to affordable, reliable energy for all Montana consumers. I thank NorthWestern for their continued investment in our state and in the community of Colstrip.”

Majority ownership allows NorthWestern Energy to effectively guide investments in operation and maintenance of the Colstrip Plant, ensuring the plant continues to provide on-demand, 24/7 cost-effective generation for our Montana customers until viable, equivalent, carbon-free energy resources are commercially available.

Montana has considerable low cost wind and solar generation on its system today, but that generation is variable. The Colstrip Plant’s generation provides power for Montana customers when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining at costs that are typically much less than the cost of purchasing energy on the market.

When the sun is shining and the wind is blowing, the amount of power being generated by the Colstrip Plant can be lowered.

Montana’s energy demand is growing. “We are in discussions with several large customers seeking dependable, established and consistent energy. This additional portion of the Colstrip Plant will not only allow us to reliably serve our current customers into the future, but it will also allow us to support economic development and load growth in Montana while helping to insulate existing customers from costs associated with serving new large load customers,” said the press release.

Puget Sound Energy will retain its obligation for its portion of environmental and decommissioning costs associated with the future closure of the plant.

“Other states require a transition away from coal resources at a pace faster than is feasible in Montana. This no-cost acquisition allows our customers to transition to a cleaner energy future at a pace that works for Montanans,” states the press release.

The Colstrip Plant is seen as a “dependable” bridge to a cleaner energy future, which could ultimately include new lower- or no-carbon emitting resources such as gas-fired generation, small modular nuclear reactors, long-duration storage or other technologies, which we believe could be located in the Colstrip area. Such changes will, however, take time and “we will not sacrifice service reliability during the transition.”

This announcement follows an announcement a week ago, from NorthWestern Energy, about a $39 million deal to purchase Energy West Montana, a natural gas provider headquartered in Great Falls. The acquisition is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2025. It must be approved by the Montana Public Service Commission.

The Department of Energy is adding $700 million to a $3.6 billion project that will boost the electrical energy supply for North Dakota and Montana.

The funding from DOE’s Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships Program will go toward a 3,000-megawatt High-Voltage Direct Current Voltage Source Converter transmission line from Center, N.D., to Colstrip, Montana — the North Plains Connector.

The project will increase transfer capacity by 1,400% between three regional entities and add 3,800 megawatts of new capacity.

By developing a high voltage direct current transmission line between North Dakota and Montana, the Project will connect the U.S. eastern and western electric grids. As a critical link between regions, it will support economic growth for both states.

“North Dakota welcomes this investment in transmission infrastructure to ensure a resilient and reliable power grid. Still, in order to meet growing consumer demand for electricity and support economic expansion, we need to add transmission capacity AND build upon our existing baseload generation – not try to shut it down,” Gov. Burgum said. “The North Plains Connector project will create a critical link between electricity markets and regions, support our all-of-the-above energy approach and contribute to national energy security. We’re grateful to the North Dakota Transmission Authority and all the partners supporting this investment.”

“Still, in order to meet growing consumer demand for electricity and support economic expansion, we need to add transmission capacity AND build upon our existing baseload generation – not try to shut it down,” Burgum said in a news release.

Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte said a steady supply of energy is crucial to Montana and the country.

“Through this investment, we’re upgrading and modernizing Montana’s electrical transmission infrastructure to power our homes, schools and businesses,” Gianforte said.

The North Plains Connector will connect three regional control entities: the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC), Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), and Southwest Power Pool (SPP). According to DOE, the project will create up to 3,800 megawatts of new capacity and increase transfer capacity between WECC and the Eastern Interconnection in Montana and North Dakota by 1,400%.

In July, the Montana Department of Commerce announced it had been awarded $47.5 million from DOE for projects in Rosebud, Custer, and Fallon counties, as well as the Northern Cheyenne Tribe, to help mitigate the impact of construction of the North Plains Connector transmission line. Eligible projects will include infrastructure updates, such as roads, water, sewers, emergency services, and other projects related to workforce and infrastructure development.