Maine must hit pause on offshore wind turbines

Comment

Comment by Willem Post on August 1, 2023 at 9:08am

The UK fourth auction in 2022 had accepted bids for 7000 MW, of which Vattenfall represented 3 projects totaling 4200 MW.

Vattenfall has put it’s commitment of the 4200 MW “on hold”, because it’s spreadsheets show a 40% increase is needed in c/kWh to make the projects financially viable by Vattenfall standards.

Energy Giant Vattenfall Puts Gigantic Offshore Wind Project on Ice, “Threatening UK Climate Targets”
Energy Giant Vattenfall Puts Gigantic Offshore Wind Project On Ice,...

The UK bureaucracy is maintaining its stiff upper lip, so far, but the s..t will hit the fan.

US/UK 56,000 MW OF OFFSHORE WIND BY 2030; AN EXPENSIVE FANTASY   
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/biden-30-000-mw-of-off...

Comment by Dan McKay on August 1, 2023 at 5:54am

CMP and Versant Request:

"Versant and CMP believe there is a due process obligation which mandates that before the Commission can obligate the utilities to a contract on behalf of their customers, the contracting parties must have the ability to ask questions and receive answers on costs,
risks and methods to mitigate those costs and risks. The answers should be provided under oath in a record. And there may be a need to submit testimony on costs, budgets, and risks for the utilities and their customers to the Commission. As the Commission has not ruled
yet on whether Versant or CMP are parties or whether this is an adjudication, those issues may not be ripe at this time. Versant and CMP respectfully requests clarification that they are not waiving those questions which may be addressed in application of the statute.
Accordingly, Versant and CMP request that the deadline for briefs be extended to August 31, 2023 and for clarification, we are not waiving the ability to brief on other issues. Counsel for CMP has authorized me to represent that CMP joins in this request.
Thank you for your consideration of this request for extension and please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions."
Sincerely,
David P. Littel

Comment by Dan McKay on August 1, 2023 at 5:43am

Looks like strong arm rhetoric is the game that Pine Tree Offshore Wind, LLC is going to play to intimidate PUC Commissioners, CMP and Versant from gaining information to decide if floating offshore wind is in the best interests of the ratepayers and the fishermen. Hint, It isn't .

July 27, 2023
Robert A. Creamer, Presiding Officer
Elizabeth Wyman, Presiding Officer
Maine Public Utilities Commission
18 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04330-0018
RE: New England Aqua Ventus, LLC Request for Approval of Long-Term
Contract, Docket No. 2022-00100
Dear Presiding Officers Wyman and Creamer:
Petitioner Pine Tree Offshore Wind, LLC (“Pine Tree”) has just received the July 27,
2023 letter of Versant Power and Central Maine Power (“Utilities”) seeking both to further delay this proceeding and, once again, seeking to over-complicate issues and prevent any progress in this proceeding. We note the filing comes exactly 14 months since the Pine Tree Petition was filed on May 27, 2022.
      In those 14 months, there have only been two brief sessions at which MPUC Staff and the entities designated by the Legislature including Versant and CMP to participate in negotiations have been present, once in-person and once virtually. Indeed, negotiations about the contract terms have not really even commenced, as both meetings included only information exchanges.
     The most recent filing by the Utilities is a transparent attempt to frustrate by delay and unnecessary procedural complexity the clear Legislative intent for a long-term contract with the Utility purchasing the power (CMP) to have been negotiated, if not at least nearly negotiated, within 9 months of the May 27, 2022 Petition filing.
Moreover, the Legislature also made clear in the governing legislation, L.D. 336, P.L.
2021, Ch. 327, that the Commission shall—not “may”—require that the process governing this proceeding be that of 35-A, M.R.S.A. section 3210-C, with the sole exception being that invited to “participate in negotiations” would be “the Office of the Public Advocate, the Governor’s Energy Office and transmission and distribution utilities”. Period, end stop. The Commission is well-versed in Section 3210-C, and that its proceedings have been and continue to be Non adjudicatory, with contract terms and discussions subject to protective orders such as the one that was entered over a year ago in this proceeding, and final term sheets available for public comment.
  There has been no justification for the creation of new and additional Commission
process. All Utility questions (and all other’s), written or in person, have been promptly and thoroughly answered. This includes Versant’s recent late-filed written questions which were fully answered within days. Versant has no issue of which to complain, nor does CMP.

PRETI FLAHERTY
Page 2
   Additionally, the Commission’s July 24, 2023 Order lays out three important issues for
briefing that Pine Tree has been working on and which do need expeditious resolution by the Commission, followed by a firm negotiating schedule to achieve resolution of this proceeding— and not in 2025, which seems to be the Utilities’ goal. Rather, the Presiding Officers—in responding to Intervention requests of the Utilities—already made clear and confirmed that the Utilities have been participants in the two “negotiation” sessions to date, have received all the same materials that have been given to the Commission by Pine Tree, and further have had the opportunities to speak up at and participate in those sessions, and will be able to do so in the future. Indeed, Petitioner has been forthright in responding to all of the questions and information requests of Staff and its consultants, and confidentiality is critical in order for that to continue in this highly competitive environment of the developing offshore wind industry. There must be certainty that we are not providing business sensitive or proprietary information to competitors and others, including law firms that may be representing offshore wind interests that
could compete with Pine Tree.
    Thus, it is not only premature for any reconsideration of how the Presiding Officers and Commission have decided issues to date, but also the Utilities’ requests are contrary both to the Legislative declarations of policy and law, as well as to the Governor’s stated goal that when it comes to the State’s need for more clean energy generation, “Maine Won’t Wait”—indeed cannot, if it has a chance to achieve any of its statutory climate and emission goals.
       The Commission and participants are well aware, as are the Mills Administration and the Legislature, that the necessary Gulf of Maine protections from offshore wind and the large potential economic benefits of offshore wind to Maine can each be defeated by Maine delaying action on the Research Array. The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management selection of potential Gulf of Maine lease areas will occur in 2023, and lease competition in 2024. The Research Array is vital and using science to protect Gulf resources. Without the Research Array, the long prized objective of Maine offshore wind manufacturing and launching port is unlikely. And without the Maine port, the economic benefits of offshore wind to Maine are but a dream. Time is of the essence.
We respectfully request that you deny the Utilities’ requests.
Sincerely,
Anthony W. Buxton, Esq.
Jeffrey A. Thaler, Esq.
Counsel, Pine Tree Offshore Wind, LLC
cc: Service via MPUC e-notification to Active Party List