REALITY CHECK REGARDING UTILITY-SCALE BATTERY SYSTEMS DURING A ONE-DAY WIND/SOLAR LULL

Environmental sciences professor, Jacobsen, at Stamford University, CA, claimed in 2015, almost all US energy requirements, for all uses, could be supplied by wind, solar and hydro. He excluded energy from nuclear and from bio sources, mainly because of excessive cropland area requirements, and because forests are a major absorber and storer of CO2.

 

NOTE: Coal, oil, gas, etc., are used as feedstocks to make millions of products that fill distribution channels and stores. It is a mystery to me where those feedstocks would come from, if coal, oil and gas, etc., were banned.

                                                                                                                                                               

This article deals with wind, solar and hydro for only the electricity part of all US energy, which, at present, is about 40% of all energy uses. See energy flow chart in URL

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/world-total-energy-con...

 

The below analysis shows the cost of the battery systems, if the US would have a major wind/solar lull covering 25% of the land area.

 

Electricity Short-Falls During Heat Waves with Simultaneous Wind Lulls in California

  

Typically, California imports about 30% of its electricity from nearby states to cover any electricity short-falls. This mode of operation sufficed, until the US Southwest had a major, multi-day, heat wave; during heat waves winds are minimal. As a result, electricity supplies to California were curtailed by the exporting states.

 

California had multiple days with rolling black-outs, i.e., tens of millions of people with no air-conditioning during periods with temperatures up to 115F. Living conditions were made even worse by the smoke of large-scale forest fires.

 

Hopefully, California learned an expensive lesson, due to over-reliance on weather-dependent, season-dependent, wind and solar electricity, and some battery systems.

 

Closing Down Power Plants: Prior to the heat wave, as a part of poorly planned climate-change fighting, California had unwisely closed down 15 of its 19 high-efficiency (up to 60%), gas-fired power plants, on the Pacific coast.

 

Those plants had not been kept in reserve, i.e., staffed, fueled and kept in good working order, to immediately provide electricity, just in case of a major heat wave and minimal wind.

 

Those plants had been operating at high percentages of rated capacity to produce reliable, not variable, not intermittent, low-CO2, low-cost electricity, 24/7/365, regardless of weather or season.

 

NOTE: Typically, in the middle of winter, Germany has periods of up to about 7 days, with minimal solar, because panels are covered with snow, and, simultaneously, minimal wind. Coal plants have to be operated at 100% capacity to keep the economy going.

Anti-fossil zealots are pushing New England in the same direction as Germany.

https://notrickszone.com/2021/01/28/berlin-on-the-brink-blackouts-l...

Electricity Short-Falls During a One-Day Wind/Solar Lulls

 

Any electric power system has to be designed for worst conditions. According to weather data, the US has multi-day, wind/solar lulls covering up to 25% of the land area. They occur at random times throughout the year.

 

In this article, a lull is defined at 15% of normal wind/solar electricity output for that time of year.

 

Electricity Short-Fall: US generators feed about 4000 billion kWh/y into the US grid, which likely would become at least 6000 TWh/y, after widespread use of EVs and heat pumps; 25% of the US land area would need about 6000 x 0.25 = 1500 TWh/y. See Note

 

A TWh = one billion kWh

 

Assume, for calculation purposes, the US has its electricity from wind, 40%, solar, 40%, and from hydro, bio, and other sources, 20%. No nuclear. Such percentages would be similar to the Jacobsen scenario.

 

The short-fall would be about 1500 x 0.8, wind/solar fraction x (1 - 0.15) = 1020 TWh/y, or about 1020/365 = 2.79 TWh/d. 
See Note.

NOTE: My annual electricity consumption increased about 50%, after I installed three 24,000 Btu/h heat pumps for heating and cooling my, well-sealed/well-insulated house. They displaced a fraction of my propane consumption.

 

My existing propane system, 95%-efficient in condensing mode, is used on cold days, 15 F or less, because heat pumps would have low efficiencies, i.e., low Btu/kWh, at exactly the same time my house would need the most heat!

 

There have been no energy cost savings, because of high household electric rates, augmented with taxes, fees and surcharges.

Amortizing the $24,000 capital cost at 3.5%/y for 15 years costs about $2,059/y.

There likely will be service calls and parts, as the years go by, in addition to service calls and parts for the existing propane system.

https://www.myamortizationchart.com 

EV Batteries for Grid-Scale Storage

 

In the future, as part of climate-change fighting, the following two schemes regarding EV storage capacity might be proposed:

 

1) EVs would be required to supply electricity, due to wind/solar shortfalls, may be up to the above 2.79 TWh

In case of 2.79 TWh, about 300 million EVs would be required.

The EVs would be divided in 24 groups; one group for each hour.

Each group would be assigned to an hour of the day to provide its assigned kWh.

They would be able to do that for only one day, because people would need their vehicles.

See description in Appendix.

 

2) The batteries of old EVs would be assembled into grid-scale storage systems. If each EV battery were to deliver 40 kWh AC, about 50 million would be required. These batteries would need to be kept fully charged at all times to ensure they would deliver the required electricity.

Daily Duty Cycle of Utility-Scale Battery Systems with High Levels of Wind and Solar

 

On a sunny day in summer, the battery systems would absorb solar electricity from around 10 AM to about 5 PM, aka, taming the grid-disturbing, midday DUCK-curve. They would discharge electricity during peak demand hours, about 5 PM to 9 PM. After that, they would be nearly empty and mostly idle until about 10 PM the next day.

 

In the US Southwest, the next day likely would be sunny, with major absorbing and discharging.

In New England, with mostly variable, cloudy weather, and, in winter, snow, ice, and fewer day-time hours with weak sun, the next day absorbing and discharging would be highly uncertain.

 

Also, the capacity of the battery systems required for daily DUCK-curve mitigation would be much less than required for a one-day wind/solar lull, i.e., hugely expensive battery systems would perform minimal service almost all hours of the year, except during wind/solar lulls.

 

Battery Reserve Capacity for Utility Service and Electric Vehicles

 

This section illustrates 1) the reasons for initial reserve capacity to prolong battery life, and 2) the significant, but often ignored, charging and discharging losses, which would be at least 20% of any electricity passing through them, on an A-to-Z basis.  See URL

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/economics-of-utility-s...

 

Battery Reserve Capacity for Utility Service: The capacity of any wind/solar-lull storage systems would need to be much greater than the discharge, because when a one-day lull would occur, the systems likely would not be fully charged.

In the real world, such major wind/solar lulls usually involve more than one day.

 

Typically, the capacity of large-scale battery systems would be specified as 100 MW/150 MWh, i.e., capable of delivering 100 MW of power for 1.5 hour to the grid, as AC.

 

However, they would need to be set up deliver only about 80% of that, or 100 MW for 1.2 hour, to achieve their 15-y battery life, i.e., an initial reserve of 20%. That reserve decreases as battery systems age.

 

Battery Reserve Capacity for Electric Vehicles:  The graph shows the percent aging of Tesla Model S batteries versus distance driven.

Ten years of driving results in about 8.5% of capacity loss (range loss) after 250,000 km, or 156,250 miles

Fifteen years of driving results in about 10% of capacity loss (range loss) after 375,000 km

An initial reserve of 9 to 10 percent appears appropriate for EVs.

This graph may not show on an iPad, but it does show on an iMac.

 

Utility Service versus Car Service: Much greater reserves would be needed, if utility-scale battery systems were used during utility service, i.e., 24/7/365 for 15 years.

Such service is much more demanding than the service of a car for a few hours per day for 10 years.

Cost of Midday DUCK-Curve Mitigation by Batteries

 

Cost of Electricity Loss: It is assumed net-metered electricity causes the midday DUCK-curve

 

An initial 1000 kWh AC of net-metered electricity becomes about 777.8 kWh AC, after it has passed through a battery system, and is fed into the grid system; an A-to-Z efficiency 77.8%

 

The electricity loss would be 100 x {(1 - (777.8)/1000)} = 22.2%.

 

The cost of loss is about (1000 - 777.8) x 1000 kWh x 0.215 $/kWh = $47.78/day.

 

NOTE: The battery system efficiency, operated near rated capacity, is from 975.2 kWh AC, at battery inlet, to 785.6 kWh AC, at battery outlet, an efficiency of 80.6%, which is in accordance with table 1.

 

Table 1A shows the round-trip efficiencies, AC-to-AC basis, of various battery systems. See URL

https://www.windpowerengineering.com/how-three-battery-types-work-i...

Table 1A/Type

Hours

Efficiency, %

Lithium-ion

 2.0

75 to 85

Lithium-ion

 0.5

65 to 75

Redox-flow

 >4.0

65 to 75

Zinc-hybrid

>4.0

 65 to 70

 

Cost of Amortizing Battery System: The turnkey capital cost of the battery system would be about 1000 kWh x $500/kWh = $500,000

The daily amortizing cost, at 3.5%/y for 15 years, would be $42,893/y or $117.52/day.

 

Battery capacity is 1000 kWh; reserve is 20%; available capacity is 800 kWh, which is slightly greater than 777.8 kWh.

 

https://www.myamortizationchart.com

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/economics-of-utility-s...

 

Total Cost, Excluding O&M: Total cost would be 47.78 + 117.52 = $165.29/day, or $165.29/777.8 kWh = 21.3 c/kWh.

 

Net-metered electricity is charge to the rate base at 21.5 c/kWh. See table 1

The fraction of net-metered passing through the batteries would have to be charged to the rate base at 21.5 + 21.3 = 42.8 c/kWh!!

 

On sunny days, this fraction is major.

On overcast days, this fraction is minor.

 

NOTE: The New England average wholesale electricity price has been less than 5 c/kWh, starting in 2009, due to low-cost gas and low-cost nuclear, which provide about 75% of all electricity generated in New England. Governments mandating the closure of such low-CO2 plants, to “make room” for wind/solar, would result in an economic tragedy for New England.

 

Table 1/Energy Cost of DUCK-curve

Net-metered paid to owner, c/kWh

18.0

Net-metered paid to utility, c/kWh

3.5

Charged to utility rate base, c/kWh

21.5

Net-metered electricity, kWh AC from solar system

1000.0

Step-up transformer loss, %

1.0

990.0

Transmission to battery system loss, %

1.5

975.2

Step-down transformer loss

1.0

965.4

AC to DC conversion loss, %

3.0

936.4

Battery charging loss, %

7.0

870.9

Battery discharging loss, %

7.0

809.9

DC to AC conversion loss

3.0

785.6

Step-up transformer loss, %

1.0

777.8

Efficiency, A-to-Z, %

22.2

US Turnkey and New England Capital Cost of Battery Systems

 

US Turnkey Capital Cost

 

This section shows the turnkey capital cost of the battery systems required in case of a one-day wind/solar lull on 25% of the US. 
The capacity would be sized to provide electricity for a second one-day lull.

The battery system would have a 20% margin to cover aging.

 

Assume battery design capacity is 16.25 TWh, in battery

Discharge loss, A-to-Z basis is 10%. See URL

Battery deliverable electricity is 16.25 x 0.9 = 14.625 TWh, as AC to HV grid

The capital cost will be based on deliverable electricity, per standard industrial practice.

 

Battery reserve is 20%

Available operating charge is 16.25 x (1 - 0.2) = 13 TWh, in battery

Assume battery is partially charged, at start of lull, is 50%

Available operating charge is 13/2 = 6.5 TWh, in battery

 

Charge required for one-day lull is 6/2 = 3.25 TWh/d, in battery

Charge remaining for subsequent one-day lull, or another event, is 3.25 TWh/d, in battery

Discharge loss, A-to-Z basis is 10%. See URL

Electricity for one-day lull is 3.25 x 0.9 = 2.93 TWh/d, as AC to HV grid, which is sufficient to serve the above 2.79 TWh/d short-fall

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/economics-of-utility-s...

 

Battery turnkey unit cost is assumed at futuristic $500/kWh, delivered as AC. See URL

Turnkey CAPEX would be about 500 x 14.625 billion = $7.313 TRILLION

Battery life is about 15 years. See Note.

 

NOTE: This EIA report, dd July 2020, shows an average turnkey capital cost of $772/kWh, based on the costs of 16 long-duration, utility-scale systems. See page 17 of URL

https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/electricity/batterystorage/pdf...

New England Turnkey Capital Cost

 

Turnkey CAPEX for New England would be $21.0 billion, based on a similar analysis.

However, a major NE wind/solar lull could cover all of New England, i.e., the CAPEX would be $84.1 billion

 

CAPEX for custom-designed, utility-scale, site-specific, battery systems would still be unaffordable, even if $/kWh, delivered as AC, were to decrease in the future. See URL for EIA cost estimates.

 

The spreading of solar across many distribution grids would cause DUCK-curves everywhere.

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/economics-of-utility-s...

 

Table 2/One-day Wind/Solar Lull

US

NE

NE

TWh/y

TWh/y

TWh/y

Electricity fed to US grid, at present

4000

115

115

EVs and heat pumps

2000

57.5

57.5

Electricity fed to grid, future

6000

172.5

172.5

US area covered by wind/solar lull, %

25

25

100

Electricity from wind/solar, %

80

80

80

Electricity from wind/solar = 6000 x 0.25 x 0.8

1200

34.5

138

Wind/solar electricity during lull, % of normal

15

15

15

Electricity short-fall during one-day wind/solar lull

1020

29

117

.

TWh/d

TWh/d

TWh/d

Days/y

365

365

365

Electricity short-fall during one-day wind/solar lull

2.79

0.080

0.321

Assume battery available charge, as AC to HV grid

13.0

0.37

1.50

Assume partially charged, at start of lull, %

50

50

50

Available charge

6.50

0.19

0.75

.

Charge required for one-day lull

3.25

0.09

0.37

Charge remaining for another one-day event

3.25

0.09

0.37

Discharge loss, A-to-Z basis, %

10

10

10

Electricity for one-day event, as AC to HV grid

2.93

0.084

0.336

.

CAPEX

Battery turnkey unit cost, $/kWh, as AC

500

500

500

Battery charge available, TWh, as AC = 16.25 x 0.9

14.625

0.420

1.682

CAPEX @ $500/kWh, $TRILLION

7.313

0.210

0.841

Battery life, years

15

15

15

 

APPENDIX 1

 

EV batteries could provide electricity to the distribution grids during wind/solar lulls.

 

Assume:

 

- Future EV battery capacity at 100 kWh, on average.

- EVs are equipped to provide AC electricity

- EV batteries are charged at 50%, at start of a one-day wind/solar lull, on average.

- One EV would deliver 10 kWh, on average, for only one day, as there would be not sufficient electricity to recharge them during the second day of a wind/solar lull

 

EVs required to deliver 2.79 TWh would be (2.79 billion kWh x 1/0.95, DC to AC x 1/0.98, voltage step-up transformer)/10 kWh/EV = 300 million.

What would supply electricity during the second day of a wind/solar lull?

APPENDIX 2

 

POOR ECONOMICS OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES IN NEW ENGLAND

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/poor-economics-of-elec...

REALITY CHECK REGARDING UTILITY-SCALE BATTERY SYSTEMS DURING A ONE-DAY WIND/SOLAR LULL

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/reality-check-regardin...

ECONOMICS OF UTILITY-SCALE BATTERY SYSTEMS FOR DUCK-CURVES

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/economics-of-utility-s...

 

THE VAGARIES OF SOLAR IN NEW ENGLAND

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-vagaries-of-solar-...

 

COST SHIFTING IS THE NAME OF THE GAME REGARDING WIND AND SOLAR

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/cost-shifting-is-the-na...

 

BURNING WOOD IS NOT RENEWABLE BY A LONG SHOT

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/burning-wood-is-not-ren...

 

NEW ENGLAND IS THE LEAST FAVORABLE FOR PV SOLAR, except areas near rainy Seattle

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/new-england-is-the-leas...

 

WORLD AND US TOTAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/world-total-energy-con...

 

VERMONT’S GLOBAL WARMING SOLUTIONS ACT, A DISASTER IN THE MAKING

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/vermont-s-global-warmi...

 

VERMONT IS GOING TO HELL IN A HANDBASKET REGARDING FOOLISH ENERGY SYSTEMS

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/vermont-is-going-to-hel...

 

THE GLOBAL WARMING SOLUTIONS ACT A DECADES-LONG BURDEN ON VERMONT

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-global-warming-sol...

 

VERMONT SOLAR MARKET PATHWAYS REPORT BASED ON OPTIMISTIC ASSUMPTIONS

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/vermont-solar-market-pa...

 

THE PROPER BASIS FOR CALCULATING CO2 OF ELECTRIC VEHICLE

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-proper-basis-for-ca...

 

ELECTRIC VEHICLES COMPARED WITH GASOLINE VEHICLES

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/electric-vehicles-compa...

 

VERMONT CO2 REDUCTION OF ASHPs IS BASED ON MISREPRESENTATIONS

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/vermont-co2-reduction-o...

 

VERMONT CO2 REDUCTION OF EVs IS BASED ON MISREPRESENTATIONS

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/vermont-co2-reduction-o...

 

ENERGY ACTION NETWORK REPORT TO REDUCE CO2 IN VERMONT

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/response-to-energy-acti...

 

FORTRESS VERMONT, A MULTI-BILLION BOONDOGGLE FOISTED ONTO RATEPAYERS AND TAXPAYERS

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/fortress-vermont-a-mult...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Views: 616

Comment

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 January 4, 2021 at 7:46am

Kenneth,

A snowball in hell comes to my mind

With enough subsidies, even pigs can be made to fly.

Comment by Kenneth Capron on January 1, 2021 at 6:14pm

"So you're saying I still have a chance ...."

Comment by Willem Post on January 1, 2021 at 12:31pm

Kenneth,

The electricity cost of LARGE-SCALE Maine offshore will be at least 10 - 12 c/kWh, on an A-to-Z basis, not including the cost of major grid expansion/augmentation and the cost of amortizing loans

Any storing with LAES would be in addition

Proposed NE generating capacity is 20,927 MW, of which wind is 14,256 MW;

MA offshore 8460 MW

RI offshore 880 MW

CT offshore 4160 MW

ME onshore 751 MW

MA onshore 5 MW

 

Integrating and transmission of their electricity production would require:

 

1) High-voltage, direct-current, HVDC, trunklines, from Cape Cod, Massachusetts to Quebec’s hydro plants, to connect the wind turbine systems, plus

 

2) Augmentation/extension of existing HVAC transmission systems.

 

The turnkey capital cost for items 1 and 2 would be at least $20 billion within New England, and plus another $10 billion within Quebec.

 

3) Storage capacity to supply electricity for extended periods.

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/economics-of-utility-scale-battery-systems-for-duck-curves

Comment by Willem Post on January 1, 2021 at 12:19pm

Lyn Oleum,

In case of Tambora, it would be great for the entire world to have at least 50% of all energy from nuclear.

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/world-total-energy-con...

Comment by Willem Post on December 28, 2020 at 11:19pm

Lynn,

I am well aware, even more storage would be required for seasonal electricity shifting, than for dealing with 5 to 7 day wind/solar lulls, which are common in New England, throughout the year

I wrote several articles on that subject regarding Germany and New England.

I knew Professor Evan Mearns for some years.

He did a number of studies on storage for seasonal shifting.

He closed down his blog site after he took a job in Switzerland.

He is an excellent analyst

Comment by Willem Post on December 28, 2020 at 11:11pm

Kenneth,

Selling high during peak hours and buying low during off peak hours is not economical, if A-to-Z costs are taken into account.

I wrote several articles with examples.

All produce losses.

Comment by Lynn Oleum on December 28, 2020 at 7:24pm

The context of my remark was whether you get firm power with only solar and wind generators, and a smattering of other stuff like hydro, biofuels, geothermal. Not on whether you can make money storing and selling electricity to an otherwise firm grid, that has coal, gas, and nuclear to keep it going during bad weather.

And, of course, there's the problem of what to do the next time Tambora erupts and gives another "year without a summer," as it did in 1815. Or the next time the Sun belches out a few trillion cubic miles of intensely hot plasma, and it hits the earth, frying all the solar panels with EMP.

Comment by Kenneth Capron on December 28, 2020 at 5:01pm

If I buy the energy off the grid at a price less than I can sell it back at off hours, then breakeven depends on volume. That's all I need to know.

If I can make 1 cent per Kwh and my costs are $500 per hour, I need to provide 50MWh to breakeven.

Comment by Lynn Oleum on December 28, 2020 at 3:47pm

24 hours storage is not nearly enough. Several studies have concluded 400-800 watt hours per watt of average solar + wind capacity are required for firm power.

Grid-Scale Storage of Renewable Energy: The Impossible Dream: http://euanmearns.com/grid-scale-storage-of-renewable-energy-the-im...

Geophysical constraints on the reliability of solar and wind power in the
United States: http://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2018/ee/c7ee03029k#!divAbstract

Is 100 Percent Renewable Energy Possible?:  https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/is_100_percent_ren...

More related material at http://vandyke.mynetgear.com/Nuclear.html

Also see http://vandyke.mynetgear.com/Worse.html

Comment by Kenneth Capron on December 27, 2020 at 11:44pm

I'll need to confirm those costs when combined as part of the ocean renewables and a LAES.

The renewable folks need storage to justify their existence. I abhor the lithium batteries despite

Elon Musk. He isn't always right - as recent hyperloops have shown. And TESLA is losing the profitable

sector of commercial EV's. Like UPS.

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."

https://pinetreewatch.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/

 

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

******** IF LINKS BELOW DON'T WORK, GOOGLE THEM*********

(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 https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/From 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?" https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-swept-task-force-set-the-rules/From 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.” https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/flaws-in-bill-like-skating-with-dull-skates/

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!

© 2021   Created by Webmaster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service