This article was accepted into the corpus but its outbound wikilinks were never NER-processed — typical at the deepest BFS hop or when the run's entity cap was reached. No expansion funnel to show.
| Clean Line Energy Partners | |
|---|---|
| Name | Clean Line Energy Partners |
| Type | Private |
| Industry | Energy transmission, Renewable energy |
| Fate | Dissolved assets / project cancellations |
| Founded | 2009 |
| Founder | Jonathan Bourne III |
| Headquarters | Houston, Texas |
| Key people | Michael Skelly, Jonathan Bourne III |
| Products | High-voltage direct current transmission, transmission development |
| Num employees | 100–200 (peak) |
Clean Line Energy Partners was an American transmission development company focused on delivering long-distance, high-voltage direct current (HVDC) lines to move electricity from wind- and solar-rich regions to population centers. The firm sought to link resource basins such as the Great Plains and the Southwest United States to load centers like Chicago, Los Angeles, and St. Louis via merchant and contracted transmission. Its activities intersected with actors including independent system operators, utilities, private investors, and multiple state and federal permitting agencies.
Founded in 2009 by Jonathan Bourne III and led by Michael Skelly, Clean Line emerged amid post-Energy Policy Act of 2005 debates on grid expansion, following trends set by companies such as TransWest Express LLC, Anbaric Transmission, and NextEra Energy. Early years involved feasibility studies in collaboration with regional entities like Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Southwest Power Pool, and Electric Reliability Council of Texas. The firm announced major proposals during the 2010s energy transition alongside actors such as American Wind Energy Association, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, and investors including Kaiser Ventures and Google. Regulatory milestones involved filings with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and permitting interactions with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and multiple state public utility commissions such as the Iowa Utilities Board and Missouri Public Service Commission. By the late 2010s many projects were contested, and Clean Line wound down several developments amid litigation, shifting market conditions, and evolving policies under administrations including the Obama administration and the Trump administration.
Clean Line proposed multiple large-scale HVDC projects, notably the Atlantic Wind Connection-style vision reoriented toward specific corridors. Major named initiatives included the Grain Belt Express, intended to run from the Kansas wind belt to Indiana and Illinois; the Plains and Eastern Clean Line, proposed to carry power from Oklahoma wind resources to Tennessee and Arkansas; and the Rock Island Clean Line, planned across Iowa to Illinois. These proposals engaged stakeholders such as Evergy, MidAmerican Energy, Duke Energy, Southern Company, and regional regulators. The Grain Belt Express required coordination with states including Kansas, Missouri, and Illinois and interactions with National Environmental Policy Act processes and state siting statutes. The Plains and Eastern route intersected with federal programs like the National Historic Preservation Act consultation and biodiversity assessments involving the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Many proposed corridors echoed prior transmission efforts such as Path 15 and Pacific DC Intertie but faced opposition from landowners, local governments, and interest groups.
Clean Line pursued a merchant transmission model combining HVDC technology, converter stations, and long-distance right-of-way acquisition, drawing on suppliers and partners like ABB, Siemens, and GE Energy. The company proposed to monetize capacity via long-term transmission contracts with utilities and traders including American Electric Power, Exelon, and NRG Energy', as well as through wholesale markets operated by PJM Interconnection and MISO. Technically, projects relied on monopole or bipolar HVDC lines, DC/AC converter stations, and integration strategies used in projects like Tres Amigas Project and historic projects such as the Pacific DC Intertie. The business plan referenced grid reliability concerns raised by entities like the North American Electric Reliability Corporation and sought to access renewable energy tax incentives administered through the Internal Revenue Service and tax equity investors such as Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase.
Regulatory engagement spanned filings at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for interconnection and rate matters, state siting proceedings before bodies like the Oklahoma Corporation Commission and Illinois Commerce Commission, and environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act. Legal challenges involved landowner eminent domain claims in states with varying statutes, appeals to state supreme courts such as the Iowa Supreme Court and litigation in federal district courts, with parties including American Farm Bureau Federation, Sierra Club, and local county governments. The company also navigated complex interjurisdictional issues similar to disputes in cases before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and precedent from decisions involving FERC Order Nos. affecting transmission planning.
Clean Line operated as a privately held development firm funded by venture and strategic investors. Capital commitments involved private equity and strategic partnerships with firms such as Kleiner Perkins, Google, and infrastructure investors comparable to BlackRock and Macquarie Group. Financing strategies included tax equity, project finance leveraged debt from commercial banks like Bank of America and Wells Fargo, and potential sale-lease arrangements to utilities similar to transactions involving NextEra Energy. As projects stalled, asset sales, write-downs, and investor negotiations resulted in restructuring and disposition of rights-of-way, with some assets reverting to landowners or being acquired by other transmission developers.
Clean Line asserted potential benefits in reducing carbon dioxide emissions by enabling deployment of utility-scale wind farms in regions such as the Nebraska Sandhills and Oklahoma Panhandle and connecting to urban load centers like Chicago and St. Louis. Environmental reviews engaged agencies such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and non-governmental organizations like The Nature Conservancy and Audubon Society. Community impacts included debates over property rights, visual and ecological concerns raised by county boards and regional planning commissions, and potential economic development claims promoted by state economic development agencies like Iowa Economic Development Authority and Kansas Department of Commerce.
Critics included landowner groups, agricultural associations like the American Farm Bureau Federation, environmental activists including Sierra Club chapters, and state officials skeptical of private eminent domain use. Controversies centered on alleged overreach in utilizing state siting statutes, transparency in financing and rate assumptions questioned by consumer advocates such as Public Citizen, and conflicts with local zoning authorities. Litigation touched on precedent around eminent domain for private transmission projects, echoing earlier disputes involving entities like TransCanada Corporation and pipeline controversies such as Keystone XL pipeline. Political debates spanned state legislatures, with interventions by elected officials from the Iowa Legislature, Kansas Legislature, and members of Congress.
Category:Electric power transmission companies of the United States