Maine - "Welcome Home taxpayers, ratepayers and other horribly misinformed victims of the ongoing green heist"

Rust never sleeps. Nor do the compromised, the greedy, the dishonest, the arrogant and the ignorant.

Undersea cable survey marks milestone in Maine’s offshore wind quest

............... Aqua Ventus has been in contact with fishing interests this winter to brief them on the path and work schedule. It intentionally chose to work in March, despite the greater potential for bad weather, because there are no conflicts with recreational boaters and fewer lobstermen working traps.

The partnership has told fishermen that gear in the path of the survey vessels will need to be removed before work begins. It has published information listing the coordinates of cable and anchor survey locations. Any gear that becomes entangled during the survey will be turned over to the Maine Marine Patrol, the developers say.


Fair Use Notice: This website may reproduce or have links to copyrighted material the use of which has not been expressly authorized by the copyright owner. We make such material available, without profit, as part of our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, economic, scientific, and related issues. It is our understanding that this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided by law. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes that go beyond "fair use," you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Views: 199


You need to be a member of Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine to add comments!

Join Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine

Comment by Willem Post on March 5, 2021 at 8:35am



China, India, New England and Vermont


Electric bus proponents often point to China to advance their interests, i.e., sell more electric buses

China has made electric buses and EVs in urban areas a priority to reduce its well-known excessive pollution.


This pollution is due to: 1) using a lot of coal in dirty, inefficient power plants, and 2) vastly increased vehicle traffic in urban complexes with 15 to 30 million people each.


India has a China pollution problem, but not China's money and work ethic, i.e., few electric vehicles.


Those two countries emit about 45 - 50% of all world pollution and GHG.


The US has much less of a pollution problem than China, except in its larger urban areas. 

The US uses more domestic gas and much less coal, and nuclear is still around.


New England has a pollution problem in its southern urban areas.


Vermont, known for its cleaner air, has a minor pollution problem in Burlington and some of its other urban areas, i.e., no need to get panicky, and to use scare-mongering to rush into expensively advancing Montpelier’s TCI and RE goals.


Governor and Senators Seeking More Electric Vehicles and Buses with Federal COVID Money


The energy priorities of New England governments are driven by a self-serving cabal of RE zealots, because of excessive subsidies for wind, solar, etc. They have powerful allies on Wall Street, which is molding the minds of people by means of generous donations to universities and think tanks. Here is an example of the resulting double-speak:


Vermont’s Governor: “Investing in more energy-efficient public transportation is important for our economy and environment,” the governor said. He added that the COVID money is enabling the transportation agency to replace as many as 30 buses and fund energy-efficient projects."


The Vermont House Energy/Environment Committee and the VT Transportation Department echo the same message, to "convince" legislators, people in the Governor's Office, and Vermonters to use COVID money to buy expensive electric buses to deal with a minor pollution problem in a few urban areas in Vermont.

Such an electric vehicle measure would be much more appropriate in the over-crowded Boston Area and the Connecticut Gold Coast.


They urge Vermonters to buy electric buses at about:


$750,000 - $1,000,000 per mass-transit bus, plus high-speed charging systems; a standard diesel mass-transit bus costs $380,000 - $420,000

$330,000 - $375,000, per school bus, plus high-speed charging systems; a standard diesel/gasoline school bus costs about $100,000


Federal COVID Money for Expensive Electric School Buses


The Governor and bureaucrats are throwing COVID money, meant for suffering households and businesses, into another climate-fighting black hole.


Vermont has cold winters, and hills, and snow-covered roads, and dirt roads in rural areas; kWh/mile would be high.

Those buses likely would need 4-wheel-drive, or all-wheel-drive in rural areas.


Spending huge amounts of capital that yield minor reductions in CO2, is a recipe for low economic efficiency, and for low economic growth, on a state-wide and nation-wide scale, which would adversely affect state and US competitiveness in markets, and adversely affect living standards and job creation.


Charging Electric Buses During Cold Daytimes and Night-times



1) On cold days, the electric bus battery would use its own energy to heat itself above a required minimum temperature during parking and driving

2) No charging of Li-ion batteries is permitted, if the battery temperature is less than 32F, i.e., letting the battery get too cold, when an electric bus is parked outdoors, and then charging it, is not permitted. See URL

3) The batteries provide electricity to operate various “always-on” systems, similar to Teslas and other EVs  

4) On cold days, the electric bus should be ready for service, with a warm battery, as soon as the driver enters the bus, instead of waiting to warm up the battery 

5) On cold days, the driver would need at least 70% charge to make his morning round, because batteries would require more energy per mile. No one should risk having an electric bus run out of juice, with a busload of children, in the winter.

6) Battery University recommends operating batteries between 20% charge and 80% charge for long life, say 15 years. That range also happens to have the highest efficiency. See URLs


NOTE: If the battery temperature is less than 40F or more than 115F, they will not deliver their peak performance.

They prefer to be around 60F to 80F for high efficiency. Batteries are more affected by temperature while charging.

Pro-bus folks often point to California regarding electric buses, but in New England using electric buses to transport children would be a whole new ballgame, especially on cold days. See URLs


NOTE: Where would the electricity come from to charge and protect the expensive batteries during extended electricity outages, due to multi-day hot and cold weather events, as occur in California, Texas and New England?

Emergency standby diesel-generators? Emergency standby batteries?




An electric bus pilot program was funded through the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) with about $2 million, and administered by the Massachusetts State Department of Energy Resources.

Vermont Energy Investment Corporation, VEIC, performed the evaluation of the program


The pilot program operated electric buses from the Fall of 2016 to early 2018 

Three eLion buses were used in this pilot program by the school districts of Amherst, Concord, and Cambridge.


Lion Corporation of Quebec, Canada, builds eLion electric school buses. The eLion buses can have three, four or five battery packs. Five battery packs would provide about a 100-mile range, using 130 to 140 kWh DC of battery charge. This means the eLion buses would be capable of servicing almost any route of a school district.


NOTE: Lion states DC, because Lion does not know how and where the buses would be operated, i.e., uncontrolled charging in cold climates and hilly terrain, or controlled charging in warm climates and level terrain.


The capital cost at each site was $327,500 for the bus, plus about $25,000 for single-direction, Level 2 chargers.


There are other balance-of-plant costs for a complete electric bus system, but they were ignored for various reasons.

For example, the increased cost of parking facilities with chargers for an electric bus system vs much less costly parking facilities for diesel bus system was ignored


Here is an evaluation of the MA electric bus pilot program by VEIC.

See page 4 and 45 of URL

Comment by Willem Post on March 3, 2021 at 11:43am

Texas does not import electricity, because it has minor connections to nearby grids.

Texas prides itself going it alone. Don’t mess with Texas.


Here is an image of the Texas 2020 generation, by source. When wind is near zero many hours of the year, quick-starting, high-efficiency, combined-cycle, gas-turbine, CCGT, plants have to take up the slack, plus they have to ramp up and down to counteract the variations of wind, 24/7/365


Typically, CCGT plants operate near rated capacity to maximize production and revenues. However, with higher levels of wind electricity on the grid, they would have to vary their outputs from about 50% to 100% of rated capacity to counteract the variations of wind; operating below 50% needs to be avoided, because CCGT plants tend to become unstable.


Payments would need to be made to CCGT plant owners for forcing them to:


1) Generate less electricity, than without wind, i.e., operate uneconomically

2) Provide counteracting services, 24/7/365.


As CCGT plants perform the peaking, filling-in and balancing, to counteract variable, intermittent wind and solar electricity on the grid, they would:


1) Operate at varying outputs, which would be produced at lesser efficiency

2) Have lower-than-normal outputs, which would be produced at lesser efficiency

3) Have more frequent cold starts and stops, which would decrease inefficiency


The more wind and solar percentage on the grid:


1) The more extreme the output variations CCGT plants would have to counteract

2) The more frequent their start/stops

3) The larger the capacity on warm standby plants, in synchronous mode, would be required to immediately provide electricity when wind and solar are MIA or AWOL


Less efficient plant operation, and additional wind turbine build-outs means: 1) more Btu/kWh, 2) more CO2/kWh, and 3) more wear and tear, and 4) more grid augmentation/expansion/storage.



NOTE: New England imports about 19% of its electricity, because it has major connections to New York and Canadian grids.

Comment by Willem Post on March 3, 2021 at 9:37am



Texas does not import electricity, because it has minor connections to nearby grids.

Texas prides itself going it alone. Don’t mess with Texas.


NOTE: New England imports about 19% of its electricity, because it has major connections to New York and Canadian grids.


The New York Times, February 20, 2021, displayed a very revealing and useful graph, based on Energy Information Administration, EIA, data, of Texas electricity production, by source, a few days before, and a few days after, the major winter snow storm, which started early evening, February 14, 2021. You can google it, but it is behind a paywall. The graph showed:



Gas plant output was about 43,000 MW. The output decreased to about 29,000 MW about one day later, a 33% reduction (largely due to piping freeze-ups), then output went up and down, at an average of about 29,000 MW, to quickly/seamlessly counteract the output changes of other sources, especially of wind and solar.



Coal plant output was about 11,000 MW. The output decreased to about 8,000 MW about one day later, a 27% reduction (largely due to piping freeze-ups), then the output was about 7,000 to 8,000 MW



Wind plant output was about 9,000 MW, from an installed capacity of 30,904 MW (about 15,000 wind turbines); the capacity factor was 9000/30904 = 0.29. The output decreased to about 1,000 MW about one day later, an 89% reduction (largely due to freeze ups of 12,000 MW of capacity (per ERCOT, the grid operator), i.e., about 12000/30904 x 15000 = 5,825 wind turbines, or 5825/15000 = 39% of all wind turbines. Then output increased to about 4,000 MW for about a day, then decreased to about 1,000 MW, etc., due to wind-velocity variations, i.e., bouncing around at a low level, due to a lack of wind. The relatively few wind turbines on the Texas Gulf Coast were unaffected by the snow storm, and performed as usual.


NOTE: Wind turbines, whether producing or not, require electricity for self-use, i.e., each of those frozen wind turbines and all operating wind turbines would demand 30 to 60 kW from the grid, 24/7, for self-use, where ever the electricity would be available. See explanation in this URL



Nuclear plant output was about 4,000 MW. The output became about 3,000 MW about one day later (largely due to piping freeze-ups), a 25% reduction



Solar plant output was near zero on the early evening of February 14, 2021. The output increased to 3,000 MW, from an installed capacity of about 13,000 MW during the following midday. On a sunny day, peak midday production from 13,000 MW of panels is about 13000 x 0.8 = 10,400 MW, but peak production was only 3,000 MW, i.e., 6,000 MW/ 0.8 = 7,500 MW of panels, or 7500/13000 = 58% of all panels, were covered with snow. Then solar output went to near-zero again, starting late afternoon/early evening, etc. Solar is almost never there when it is needed.


NOTE: In New England, which is much smaller than Texas, a wide-spread snow storm would cover almost all panels, at least for a few days, longer if icing would occur.


None of the above had anything to do with the Texas distribution and transmission grids.


This had to do with an unusual freeze-up, which: 


1) Temporarily, a few days, reduced output of traditional sources.

2) Covered 39% of wind turbines with snow and ice.

3) Covered 58% of solar panels in many areas


Texas should be:


1) Investing in insulation to protect critical power plant and grid systems

2) Retrofitting wind turbines with freeze protection systems, as do New England and northern Europe, a multi-year effort.

NOTE: In the UK, the OLD England, wind was producing about 1% of demand. Thank the Lord for giving the world so much natural gas. Modern societies would be up Niagara Falls without a paddle.

Mind you, all these wind turbines need about 30 to 60 kW for self-use, whether operating or not.


All of Europe: Total generation percentages for Europe as a whole

45.5% Fossil Fuel
25.8% Nuclear
13% Hydro
NON renewables: 84.3%

11.3% Wind
4.1% Solar
0.2% Geothermal
0.1% Biomass
Renewables: 15.7%

Comment by Willem Post on March 3, 2021 at 9:14am



Regarding wind and solar, cost shifting is rarely mentioned, identified or quantified. Those costs, as c/kWh, could be quantified, but it is politically expedient, using various, often far-fetched reasons, to charge them to:


- Directly to ratepayers, via electric rate schedules, and/or added taxes, fees and surcharges on electric bills

- Directly to taxpayers, such as carbon taxes, user fees and surcharges.

- Directly to federal and state budgets and debts


Per Economics 101, no cost ever disappears.

Eventually, the various shifted wind and solar costs, plus direct and indirect wind and solar subsidies, would increase the prices of energy and of other goods and services.

Efficiency and productivity improvements elsewhere in the energy sector, and other sectors of the economy, may partially, or completely, offset such increases.

However, wind and solar subsidies would divert capital from other sectors of the economy, which likely would result in fewer improvements in efficiency and productivity in these sectors.


Comment by Art Brigades on March 3, 2021 at 8:35am


Here's a link where you can hook onto the gravy train.


Maine as Third World Country:

CMP Transmission Rate Skyrockets 19.6% Due to Wind Power


Click here to read how the Maine ratepayer has been sold down the river by the Angus King cabal.

Maine Center For Public Interest Reporting – Three Part Series: A CRITICAL LOOK AT MAINE’S WIND ACT


(excerpts) From Part 1 – On Maine’s Wind Law “Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine if the law’s goals were met." . – Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting, August 2010 Part 2 – On Wind and Oil Yet using wind energy doesn’t lower dependence on imported foreign oil. That’s because the majority of imported oil in Maine is used for heating and transportation. And switching our dependence from foreign oil to Maine-produced electricity isn’t likely to happen very soon, says Bartlett. “Right now, people can’t switch to electric cars and heating – if they did, we’d be in trouble.” So was one of the fundamental premises of the task force false, or at least misleading?" Part 3 – On Wind-Required New Transmission Lines Finally, the building of enormous, high-voltage transmission lines that the regional electricity system operator says are required to move substantial amounts of wind power to markets south of Maine was never even discussed by the task force – an omission that Mills said will come to haunt the state.“If you try to put 2,500 or 3,000 megawatts in northern or eastern Maine – oh, my god, try to build the transmission!” said Mills. “It’s not just the towers, it’s the lines – that’s when I begin to think that the goal is a little farfetched.”

Not yet a member?

Sign up today and lend your voice and presence to the steadily rising tide that will soon sweep the scourge of useless and wretched turbines from our beloved Maine countryside. For many of us, our little pieces of paradise have been hard won. Did the carpetbaggers think they could simply steal them from us?

We have the facts on our side. We have the truth on our side. All we need now is YOU.

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

 -- Mahatma Gandhi

"It's not whether you get knocked down: it's whether you get up."
Vince Lombardi 

Task Force membership is free. Please sign up today!

Hannah Pingree on the Maine expedited wind law

Hannah Pingree - Director of Maine's Office of Innovation and the Future

"Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine."

© 2024   Created by Webmaster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service