Developers abandon Lone Oak solar project
Invenergy has withdrawn its appeal in Grant County for a judicial review of the Madison County Board of Zoning Appeals decision not to grant an extension for the start of construction.
Jeff Graham, attorney for Madison County, said Tuesday that the withdrawal of the appeal means the project will not move forward.
In March, the Indiana Supreme Court denied a request by the developers of the facility to consider a decision by the Indiana Court of Appeals.
The Court of Appeals denied the request of the developers to overturn a decision by the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission to assume jurisdiction in a complaint filed by Invenergy, affirming a decision in April not to take jurisdiction.
The company obtained a special use permit from the Board of Zoning Appeals in 2019 with construction to have been completed by Dec. 31, 2023.
Previously, Invenergy asked and the IURC agreed not to exercise jurisdiction over the project.
In a 2024 complaint, Invenergy maintained that it was unreasonable for the Madison County Board of Zoning Appeals to require that the Lone Oak facility be operational by Dec. 31, 2023.
The company wanted the IURC to rule that the county's decision not to grant a two-year extension was unreasonable and that the county's 2017 solar ordinance should be voided.
If that action was not approved, the company wanted the state commission to provide an additional three years to complete the project.
The original request for the IURC to assume jurisdiction asked that one of two steps be taken to allow for future construction of the $110 million project that would produce 120 megawatts of electricity on 800 acres.
The company was asking the IURC to rule that the county's solar ordinance is unreasonable or void.
In its decision, the IURC noted that Invenergy had requested a judicial review of the BZA decision and that the review was pending in Grant County.
Invenergy maintains that it couldn't begin work on the Lone Oak facility for several reasons, including a pending lawsuit by remonstrators that hindered financing, the COVID-19 pandemic and related supply-chain issues.
At a 2023 hearing, Michael Hill, an attorney for Invenergy, said that if the IURC declined to exercise jurisdiction, the ordinance and BZA denial of the extension would 'effectively kill' the facility.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Editorial: Saving lives no more — RFK risks us all in targeting mRNA vaccine research
Showing that his loyalty to his own anti-vax mentality is greater than his loyalty to President Donald Trump, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the dangerous quack atop the Department of Health and Human Services, has announced that he will be rescinding a half billion dollars in grants and contracts for the development of mRNA technology and vaccines. It was mRNA that was key to both the Pfizer-BioNTech and the Moderna COVID vaccines that were created under Trump in his first term, but RFK does not like life-saving vaccines and so he's pulling the plug. Part of the problem with policymaking at the level of the federal government is that the impacts are often too large, too long-winded, too abstract to really be able to nearly encompass their full breadth, particularly for busy people who have their own immediate concerns to worry about. In this case, though, we can point to very clear, very grim and almost unavoidable repercussions directly caused by this decision: many people worldwide — including in the United States — will die deaths that could have been prevented. Setting aside all of the jargon, at its most basic level a vaccine is about allowing the body to ward off or survive pathogens that would otherwise be extremely dangerous and debilitating or kill a person outright. The model itself is far from new; inoculations in some form of another, including the basic utilization of a dead virus to create antibodies that can attack a live one, date back centuries. What's mainly changed since then is that we have only advanced our understanding and technology to keep infectious diseases from running rampant in our society. One such technological leap was the mRNA process, an innovation so significant that its pioneers won the Nobel prize. The effectiveness and the safety of this process has been well-documented in research settings, but we don't even have to parse the studies to know this because we all collectively lived it. As Trump's Operation Warp Speed produced, the first and most widespread COVID inoculations were mRNA-based vaccines, which enabled us to blunt the rampaging pandemic and much more quickly return our society to a semblance of normalcy. Those COVID vaccines have already been synthesized, but the real issue here are the ones that haven't, or even the inoculations for viruses that we have not even identified or think to be a threat today. Whether we like it or not, our relationship to infectious diseases is something akin to an arms race, in which we are constantly trying to counteract pathogens that, by dint of evolution, are constantly finding ways to elude our defenses and sicken us. We've stayed largely on top of this arms race over the last six decades or so in particular because of constant efforts that have developed sophisticated tools to fight back, including mRNA. A disarmament here for no other reason than ideologically-driven conspiracy that drives Bobby Kennedy is going to mean that we give the diseases an opening, which they will no doubt exploit to sicken and kill us. There are quite simply no two ways about it, and any pause in the research could have dire consequences, even if it is reversed later. Ongoing and sometimes multimonth or even multiyear projects will lose funding and might have to be shut down, with all their efforts wasted. There's no way to really put the genie back in the bottle so we have to stop it in the first place, which means RFK must be fired immediately or impeached and removed by Congress. Many lives hang in the balance. _____
Business Insider
3 hours ago
- Business Insider
BP,Shel,CVX: Oil Stocks Rise Despite ‘Bloated' Supply Threatening Prices
Oil stocks rose today despite a hit to prices on warnings of a supply glut by the end of the year. Elevate Your Investing Strategy: Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence. The price of Brent Crude was down around 1.3% in mid-trading after a warning from the International Energy Agency (IEA) that OPEC nations like Saudi Arabia were ready to switch on the taps despite weakening global demand. Oil Collision The IEA warned that this supply and demand imbalance would collide in the last three months of the year hurting prices. Despite this, the BP (BP) share price rose 0.13%, Shell (SHEL) was up 0.55% and Chevron (CVX), was also up 0.5%. The IEA cut its forecast for global demand growth this year to 680,000 barrels a day. This is a third lower than its prediction in January this year and the weakest pace since 2009 apart from the Covid 2019 slump. The main issue with demand is the continued global geopolitical uncertainty and it is particularly notable in China, India and Brazil. All three of these countries, of course, are in the firing line for hefty tariff hikes from President Trump. This weakening in appetite comes as the OPEC oil cartel looks to lift production. The IEA forecasts that supply will grow by 2.5 million barrels a day this year, a third higher than previous estimations. As can be seen above this uncertainty has led to huge volatility in the oil price this year. Supply Puzzle OPEC, however, made its own predictions today – and they didn't match those from the IEA. It believes that oil demand will climb by 1.38 million barrels of oil a day in 2026, double the forecast from the IEA. There is also added confusion given figures from U.S. Energy Information Administration, which suggests that over 300 million barrels of oil have been put into storage so far this year, with the IEA declaring that it is actually 225 million barrels. Analysts warn this uncertainty is making it harder to fully price in the impact of oversupply making the sector even more tricky for investors. 'The peak of the supply glut will be at the end of 2026, according to the IEA, which could keep a lid on the oil price for the long term,' said Kathleen Brooks of XTB. 'The discussions between President Trump and President Putin on Friday could also be weighing on the oil price. If they do find a solution to the war in Ukraine, then it could exacerbate the supply glut even further, and the bias could be to the downside for the oil price as we lead up to the talks.' Is BP a Good Stock to Buy Now? On TipRanks, BP has a Moderate Buy consensus based on 4 Buy and 6 Hold ratings. Its highest price target is $40. BP stock's consensus price target is $34.75, implying a 2% upside.
Tom's Guide
4 hours ago
- Tom's Guide
Right now is the worst time to buy a new iPhone — here's why
When someone asks me when it's the right time to buy an iPhone, I usually tell them "Whenever you need to get a new phone." And I truly believe that — you can drive yourself batty holding out for the latest and greatest hardware, since the nature of technology is that there's always something promising to be more impressive right down the road. But note the "usually" in my "buy a phone when you need a phone" advice. There's one time a year when I think it's a bad idea to spend money on a new iPhone. And folks, we're in that period right now. If you find yourself in the market for one of the best iPhones, better check the calendar first. That's because if you're within a few weeks of an Apple event, it's best to hold off, if possible, just to see what Apple might have in store for its latest devices. And the closer you get to that Apple event, the better idea it is to hold off on a purchase. We don't know exactly when Apple's going to hold its fall launch event, but given Apple's history, it's not to hard to guess an iPhone 17 release date. And we are close enough to that window to where my usual logic about upgrading when you need to no longer applies. Even a casual glance at the last few iPhone releases reveals a pretty universal fact — Apple likes releasing iPhones in the first two weeks of September. That gives the company enough time to get the new devices into stores before the end of the month, so that it has a full quarter worth of sales to show Wall Street for the three months culminating in holiday shopping — the most important time of year in Apple's fiscal calendar. Only once in recent memory has Apple gone through a September without releasing an iPhone. That would be in 2020 — the year the Covid-19 pandemic delayed production on the iPhone 12 and pushed the release later into the fall. No one wants a repeat of that, certainly not Apple. Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. But don't take my word for it. Bloomberg's Mark Gurman, a pretty good source of Apple-related info, has forecast an iPhone event for the second week of September. And if you want to get even more specific, a German site is listing a September 9 event date, with the new iPhone 17 models going on sale September 19. Again, that 10-day window between the announcement and the actual launch is pretty consistent with Apple's recent history. So we have a pretty good idea about when the iPhone 17 models are arriving. And thanks to all the rumors out there about Apple's latest phones, we have a pretty good idea of what new features are on the way, too. At this stage in the evolution of smartphones, we're at a point where we don't see dramatic changes every year. That said, rumors point to some pretty significant improvements coming to the existing iPhone models — and there could be an entirely new device from Apple this fall. The iPhone 17 could be getting one of the more significant changes in the form of an LTPO display. If you're not up to date on the merits of low-temperature polycrystalline oxide panels, don't fret — all you need to know is that it's the technology that enables the adaptive refresh rate on Apple's ProMotion displays. In other words, the entry-level iPhone will finally be able to support a fast refresh rate, allowing for smoother scrolling and more immersive graphics. That alone could make the iPhone 17 worth the price of admission, and that's before you get to more traditional year-over-year improvements to the chipset powering the phone to the battery size. The iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max could be in line for a marquee edition of their own, as rumors tip those phones to adopt a 48MP telephoto lens. There's some dispute over what kind of optical zoom the upgraded camera would support — some say 3.5x, others are arguing 8x — but there's no doubt that the high-resolution sensor would mean more detailed close-ups from this year's Pro models. Other Pro-specific features like a vapor cooling chamber to help boost performance could also be in the works for the iPhone 17 Pro. Then there's the fourth phone reportedly coming this fall, the iPhone 17 Air. This is supposed to be Apple's attempt at an ultra-thin phone in the vein of the Galaxy S25 Edge, only Apple's version might be even thinner if measurements of an alleged dummy unit prove to be accurate. It's unclear what else the iPhone 17 Air will bring to the table, but if you're in the market for an entirely new design, this phone could be of interest to you. To put it another way, these shouldn't just be run-of-the-mill upgrades from Apple in the fall. And even if you ultimately decide that there's not enough there to justify an upgrade, you're at least putting yourself in a position to make that call should you hold off on a purchase for another few weeks. There is a wrinkle to this year's buy-or-wait decision, and it comes down to iPhone 17 prices. Specifically, there's a concern that ongoing economic turbulence and in flux tariff policies might have an impact on what you pay for Apple's new phones. Earlier this year, a Wall Street Journal report said Apple was considering an increase to the cost of its iPhones, while a more recent analyst forecast had prices going up by $50 from the equivalent iPhone 16 models. That would mean a starting price of $849 for the iPhone 17, with the iPhone 17 Pro Max costing as much as $1,249. While it may be tempting to buy an iPhone 16 now and avoid any iPhone 17 price hikes, I think the window to do that closed during the summer. We're close enough to the rumored iPhone launch to see what features the new devices bring to the table. And if they're not impressive enough or fail to justify any price increase Apple imposes, you can always fall back to the iPhone 16, which should be available at a lower rate in a post-iPhone 17 world. Apple usually keeps a handful of older models around at reduced prices following one of its product launches. So the combination of an Apple event that will be here before you know it and rumored improvements that sound worth examining should put any planned iPhone purchase on hold at this point, no matter what kind of prices we ultimately see.
