ISO New England Retiring More Energy Plants - Is Maine Supposed to Foot the Bill?

Comment

Comment by Eric A. Tuttle on June 30, 2015 at 6:54pm

This study is about on, compared to other research I have done. But the Dragon is about to strike. A recent article I read about California and its leading in capacity of Solar revealed that Grid Scale Solar is over $5000 per kWh. Though when averaged into the Grid of sources it only reflects about a 5¢ - 7¢ increase for all consumers per kWh. Now that first Wind and others have cleared excessive amounts of land so that trees are below a certain level, the next logical step would be to cover the land so that it blocks the sun so that trees will not grow. Nor will much of anything else. Soil erosion ? Both sources should be reserved for Local production / Local Use on already occupied land. 

Comment by Tom Stacy on June 30, 2015 at 6:24pm

This post is very relevant to the study I did that was released by IER today that compares the average cost of electricity from existing generation resources to the cost of electricity from new plants.  Note especially the calculation of wind imposed cost - the true cost of intermittent generator technologies with capacity value/credit lower than their capacity factor. http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/press/what-is-the-true-cost-o...  Let me know if you have any questions, and keep up the good work!

Comment by Eric A. Tuttle on June 30, 2015 at 5:19pm

Science + Wind says home use is efficient. Grid Scale is not best use. Land that is already occupied by homes or businesses could better utilize the power of smaller turbines to provide 100% (with storage and energy efficient devices) for most homes and small businesses. Or to perform an Energy Assist to some larger businesses. The technology exists to convert and integrate stored DC from Solar or Stored Wind power even from smaller more efficient systems. Local production and Local use. If Maine invested as much money into home systems, Most of Maine would be near 100% renewable Green energy. Instead it was placed in the Corporate Plate for profit out of state. Meanwhile we burden the destruction, the bad reputation of high fossil fuel consumption. Of the natural Gas, we only use 16% in our homes and Businesses in Maine. The remainder is used for Electrical Generation.

Science shows Maine has off shore Wind, 99.99% of the time. Those platforms also benefit marine life per some reports. Solar panel & Wind barges could be created with either underwater transmission or Barge to ship to shore storage transfers powered by their Green energy. (with more permanent jobs than OnShore will ever provide). There are no scenic vistas. We can not grow trees,  grow crops or drink the water, watch wildlife, or recreate per our choice.    

Comment by Kathy Sherman on June 30, 2015 at 5:03pm

Long Islander:

But Logan is almost way out in the ocean.  Just south of there is a 2.2 MW less than 800 ft from residences is claiming he only gets 5.1 m/s at his 80 meter hub.  Coastal wind shear is really odd and unpredictable. 

Please stick to the point that Maine doesn't have good wind either. 

And the utilities and First Wind for winning the argument with Mass AG last year, saying transmission wasn't constrained, saying it is unnecessary to predict costs of required transmission, etc.  So meanwhile Maine Wind looks "cheap", but that's only because the PTC is not counted and a 6 cents per kWh "environmental" attribute isn't counted, and new transmission isn't counted.

I think it is probably right that Maine will pay 8% or less if it is to meet mandates of southern New Engl. But what about all those birds killed by transmission lines.  Stop this at PUC!!  tell Maine Audubon.  And let's ask ISO-NE to rethink integration of wind into the grid.

Comment by Penny Gray on June 30, 2015 at 4:55pm

The wind quality in northern Maine is not good.  Wind developers are targeting northern Maine to avoid the growing challenges of trashing landscapes in more populated areas.  The idea that Maine is going to wean New England off of heating oil in winter is downright bizarre.  We need a science based energy policy.  Ditch the green religion.

Comment by Eric A. Tuttle on June 30, 2015 at 3:18pm

This was part of the discussion during the EUT work sessions and testimony. Though they claim Maine is only responsible for 8% of the transmission expense, it seems to me if we are not the ones in need for this power, we should not be liable for one cent of its construction. They have plenty of land for other sources of energy to electricity conversions, but the scam is to save their land while devastating land in Maine which could be better used for Natural environment Tourism if managed properly. Something they obviously cherish in their own states, what little that remains. They are aware of Once it's Gone, It is Gone forever. So why not Maine, VT, northern NH, instead of their own states. And NO, New York is not part of New England, no matter what the news media inadvertently makes the mistake of claiming in weather reports. 

Comment by Long Islander on June 30, 2015 at 2:55pm

"As for wind, most blows in northern Maine." -- Totally untrue statement.

See more here:

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/hey-angus-hey-shell-com...