The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set newsroom policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com.
A proposed wind power and transmission project in Aroostook County would be the largest land-based wind project east of the Mississippi. As state energy regulators, environmental advocates, the governor’s office, Maine’s public advocate and others have stressed, this renewable energy project can play an important role in meeting Maine’s climate goals. It also has the potential to lower energy costs in the long term.
Recent Bangor Daily News reporting outlines how skepticism, both in Aroostook County and along the potential path of the proposed power line, could unravel the project. This would be a familiar but unfortunate turn of events. Maine is no stranger to opposition, sometimes local and sometimes fueled in part by project competitors, sinking large infrastructure projects that could help address statewide needs.
Local input and concerns are critical in projects such as these, but if the answer is always “not in my backyard,” needed updates to our energy and other critical infrastructure will never get built in any part of the state. That’s a recipe for continued cost increases and continued reliance on fossil fuels, imported from other states and countries.
Instead, the current skepticism and feedback from local stakeholders should influence the planning process to improve the wind and transmission project rather than completely derailing it. This work should include increased local benefits and minimized local negative impacts.
One of the issues of contention so far has been the already-secured legislative approval for the transmission line. This is a new, additional form of approval for large transmission projects resulting from a 2021 referendum approved by Maine voters. To be clear, it is not a final approval or the only form of approval needed. In June, the Legislature passed and the governor signed a bill providing that newly-required form of approval, but the specifics of the project, including the location of the transmission line, will still require approvals from several state agencies in a review process that could take years.
Critics, including some legislators, have taken issue with the fact that lawmakers were asked to provide their signoff for the project without having specifics about the transmission line’s proposed route. That is a fair concern, but while not ideal, it doesn’t preclude continued scrutiny of the route and the project in general. On this point, we share the perspective of Maine Public Advocate William Harwood, who called the timing and circumstances in which the Legislature was asked to approve this transmission line “unfortunate” while still supporting the legislation to provide that legislative approval.
“The permitting for the project has barely begun — the developer has not yet identified the location or the cost of the proposed transmission line. I am sorry that you and your fellow legislators are asked to vote on this project at this early stage of development,” Harwood testified in March. “However, rest assured that passage of this bill, with the OPA’s support, will not diminish our advocacy before the [Public Utilities Commission] on behalf of Maine ratepayers when the developer petitions the commission for the required Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN). The OPA’s support for the bill does not mean we support the project regardless of impact on CMP and Versant rates.”
Would it have been better if lawmakers had a precise route proposal, or proposals, before them when they provided this initial form of approval? Maybe. But that is not a reason to scuttle the project. Rather, it emphasizes the importance of information sharing and flexibility from project developers as they now engage with communities on the proposed route and seek relevant permits.
“Even after this step, this transmission project will still need to receive all the applicable permits,” Jack Shapiro, the climate and clean energy director at the Natural Resources Council of Maine, testified in March. “We will be following those permit application processes as they move forward to ensure that the developers are fully engaging communities along the route and taking necessary steps to minimize and mitigate environmental or ecological impacts from the project.”
As this process continues for both the transmission line and the wind farm, developers LS Power (for the transmission line) and Longroad Energy (for the wind farm) need to learn lessons from other contentious proposals. A representative from LS Power has already said as much. We, the Maine people, have some lessons to learn as well.
If local opposition always wins out over statewide and regional needs, then we’re never going to build out the large-scale infrastructure necessary to curb both energy costs and carbon emissions moving forward. Homegrown, renewable energy is exactly the type of project required to help both diversify and decarbonize our energy mix, and better insulate energy customers from cost spikes that are often driven by fossil fuel prices.
Yesterday’s energy generation and distribution just aren’t going to meet tomorrow’s realities. The same is true of Maine’s long standing resistance to large infrastructure projects.
