The BDN Editorial Board operates independently from the newsroom, and does not set policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com.
Decades ago, the state purchased Sears Island with the consideration of building a port there. The island has sat mostly undisturbed since then. In 2008, in reaction to a proposal to build a natural gas terminal on Sears Island, the state agreed to preserve much of the island, while about a third was set aside — again — for port development.
With a goal for 80 percent of the state’s energy to come from renewable sources by 2030 and 100 percent by 2050, the state is moving ahead on numerous renewable energy projects, including offshore wind. Maine has one of the best potential offshore wind resources in the country.
In addition to a plan to generate electricity far off the Maine coast, state officials, environmental groups and unions hope to also develop and grow an offshore wind industry in Maine. This could include the construction, assembly and installation of offshore wind turbines and other infrastructure from Maine. An accessible port is integral to this plan, which could create thousands of jobs and new economic activity for the state and area where it is located.
The governor’s office and Maine Department of Transportation have reviewed possible locations, including existing ports in Eastport and Portland, for this new facility. They zeroed in on the Searsport area, with further assessment of both Sears Island and an existing port terminal at nearby Mack Point.
In coming months, the Mills administration is expected to file an application for a permit to construct a new port to support a new offshore wind industry, both of which will require lengthy state and federal permitting processes. The decision on where that port should be can be guided by a simple notion: It is reasonable to propose building a port on an island that was purchased specifically for a port (with a large portion later set aside for conservation). Especially when doing so would align several vital state economic and environmental objectives, including a necessary transition to cleaner energy sources.
A private engineering firm assessed both locations and determined that Sears Island was a better option. In part because the state already owns Sears Island, the expected cost of building port facilities would be lower there. In addition, because the water is deeper off the island, less dredging, which brings environmental concerns, could be needed if the new facility is built on Sears Island rather than at Mack Point.
Members of an offshore wind advisory group, which was created in 2022 as an avenue for stakeholder engagement in the port development process, agreed that saying no to an offshore wind port facility was not an option given the need to rapidly develop cleaner energy sources. They did not, however, vote to recommend a specific location for such a facility, although many members of the group supported building it on Sears Island, while some favored Mack Point.
Some groups that were part of the negotiations to preserve a portion of Sears Island, such as the Friends of Sears Island, want the port built at Mack Point instead, though building new facilities there would also surely impact nearby Sears Island. We’ve been struck by an argument that building the wind port on Sears Island is inappropriate because the 2007 consensus agreement that divided the island between conservation and development called for a “cargo/container port” and the proposed offshore wind staging area would not be such a port.
This kind of narrow semantic focus is an example of the sometimes frustrating types of opposition that have been used to stifle needed economic development plans in Maine. Frankly, if a port facility cannot be built on an island that the state specifically purchased for a potential port facility, Maine will miss out on opportunities to grow our economy, create needed jobs and meet our climate goals at the same time.
We do agree, however, that the lack of early consultation with tribes in Maine, especially those with a close connection to Sears Island, is concerning. As this project moves forward, in either location, the expertise and concerns of tribal members must be more fully included.
Port facilities to support Maine’s nascent offshore wind industry are very far from fruition, but pursuing them on Sears Island could meet a decades-old goal for the state-owned land, while helping Maine meet some of its climate and economic goals.