Rep. Reagan Paul delivers this week's Republican Radio Address regarding the selection of Sears Island as the offshore wind port
2024 02 22 Paul Radio Address (youtube.com)
AUGUSTA – Governor Mills announced this week that Sears Island has been selected as the location where her administration will launch its long-awaited offshore wind energy project. Climate extremists were ecstatic with the news. Renewable energy lobbyists were bouncing off the State House walls. But sadly there is a clear loser here – it’s Maine’s environment.
Hello, this is Representative Reagan Paul of Winterport. I’m pleased to join you for this week’s Republican Radio Address; but I’m afraid my message today is not so pleasing.
Simply put, climate activists now represent a clear and present danger to Maine’s environment and even our livelihoods. Yes, the very people who claim to be doing everything they can to save our environment are instead doing everything they can to destroy it.
Just off Searsport, Sears Island has long been known as a place of tranquility and home to abundant wildlife, migratory birds, botanical resources and historical sites. It boasts a wealth of Wabanaki history as well as historical significance dating back to the Revolutionary War.
It is also the largest undeveloped, uninhabited island on our nation’s East Coast. This local treasure is important to the Midcoast community as a significant tourist attraction, welcoming thousands of visitors from around the globe every year.
The State owns the 940-acre island and has maintained it for years as an ecological sanctuary. In 2007, 601 acres were placed under a conservation easement held by the Maine Coast Heritage Trust. About 330 acres were reserved on the Transportation parcel for possible future use as a cargo port. Unfortunately, that changed this week when Gov. Mills announced they would develop about 100 acres of it into an offshore wind port.
Interestingly, a Maine DOT slideshow shows 100-PLUS acres would be utilized. What is the plus? Habib Dagher of the University of Maine, who is developing this technology, was recently quoted as saying an offshore wind port would require 200 to 600 acres. Maybe he knows what the “plus” really means. Whatever the amount of land, up to 330 acres could be used to house a complex to “support the transportation, assembly and fabrication of offshore wind turbines.”
The Mills Administration apparently thinks turning a pristine natural environment into an industrial one with hazardous chemicals, composites and construction materials will be good for the environment. But more than that, it begs the question, “What is really going on here?” Especially when in 1995, the EPA and other agencies said that using Sears Island as a cargo terminal would irreparably harm the aquatic environment and significantly degrade waters in the United States.
As the representative for Searsport and other coastal communities, I share the concerns of many constituents who have voiced their opposition to this plan. I’ve heard the larger concern of thousands of acres of Maine’s pristine landscape being covered with solar panels that will prove more toxic than PFAS when decayed e-waste starts piling up. I’ve also heard the concerns of those who may have their property taken by eminent domain for the transmission lines that will be required to make this “green” nightmare come to fruition.
And the windmills as tall as skyscrapers that are being proposed offshore will threaten everything from endangered right whales, Piping Plovers and Least Terns to the collapse of our fishing industry. The hypocrisy here is almost laughable.
It all has to do with this cult-like desire to attain a greenhouse gas-free environment. Well, removing 100 acres of trees certainly doesn’t help, nor does the fact that China accounts for more than 30 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions compared to only 15 percent for the U.S.
But climate zealots don’t want to hear that. They’d rather we clean up our air to benefit Europe than worry about China exporting their dirty air to us.
Still, if the goal here is to protect our environment, these climate extremists are failing spectacularly. Consider the fact that the push toward electric vehicles requires the mining of 500,000 pounds of ore just to produce the nickel, lithium, cobalt and magnesium to make one car battery.
In fact, Republicans held a press briefing earlier this week that outlined how nuclear power is the cleanest, most stable form of energy generation we can achieve. This brings me to my final point: There are cleaner alternatives than wind and solar.
For example, you would need millions of acres of offshore wind with a 30% capacity factor, hundreds of thousands of acres for onshore wind with a 30% capacity factor, hundreds of thousands of acres of solar panels with a 15% capacity factor, or just 35 acres of small modular nuclear reactor with a 92% capacity factor to produce the same 1,000 megawatts of electricity.
All you have to do is drive by a solar farm after a snowstorm like today and see every single panel covered with snow or think about steel corroding in saltwater. Billions of dollars in subsidies have been handed to solar and wind companies for inefficient and expensive energy sources that do nothing but ecological and economic harm. This isn’t complicated.
That is why I submitted LD 1549, which would direct the PUC to request information about the time, estimated cost and potential site locations for such reactors in Maine. It’s a no brainer. Unfortunately, Democrats have left my bill – mind you, a simple informational request to look into this technology – in the purgatory of unfinished business for nearly nine months.
The bottom line is we’re going to destroy potentially hundreds of acres of beautiful Maine habitat to chase a dream that may not even bear fruit. What if this venture fails? What if we find dead whales washed ashore as they did in New York and New Jersey, two states that have since abandoned offshore wind?
It’s time Maine drops this green energy pipe dream and instead pursue cleaner options like hydro, geothermal and nuclear energies. Only then will we truly be in charge of our environmental future and stop Maine from looking like a science experiment. The way it’s shaping up now, climate activists represent an existential threat to Maine’s environment and economy.
Again, this is Representative Reagan Paul of Winterport. I thank you for listening.
Representative Reagan Paul of Winterport is in her first term representing District 37, which includes several communities in Waldo County. She serves on the Legislature’s Energy, Utilities and Technology Committee.
Views: 19
Comment
-
Comment by Willem Post on February 28, 2024 at 12:46pm
-
Wow, it does not get much better than this.
.
The Washington, DC, perpetrators of these EV follies want to be re-elected to have power over you, to use more of your money, to do more of the same follies, “for as long as it takes”, while they debilitate the US with open borders and over-top-war mongering
.
All that is even more true, because the EV charging stations are unreliable, often are out of service, and to top it of, EVs are unreliable, have high repair bills, and have poor range in cold weather, especially when having more than one passenger, and some cargo, and going uphill, on cold, snowy days, as in New England, etc.
.
Currently, the vast majority of charging infrastructure is concentrated in more densely populated coastal areas, as opposed to more rural areas of the country, according to the Department of Energy (DOE).
.
Almost all people in rural areas, often with dirt roads, and snow and ice and cold, and longer distances, are definitely not giving up their pick-ups and SUVs to “switch to EVs”, especially in impoverished states, such as Maine and Vermont. Their Socialist governments lost all sense of reality, and think money grows on trees..
Hertz has an EV fleet, and sold most of it at very low prices, because nobody wanted to rent them.
Nowadays, most EVs are bought under a lease, by upper class folks, because they make too much money to qualify for the EV tax credit
I read a lot of great comments.
We have to vote Trump in by a landslide, so all these idiotic self-serving politicians get wiped out all over the country, and out of the Congress, so Trump can unto the Biden damage, especially at the border, because every illegal is a Democrat vote.
DEPORT ALL THE ILLEGALS, INCLUDING ILLEGAL CRIMINALS
.
Wow, it does not get much better than this.
.
The Washington, DC, perpetrators of these EV follies want to be re-elected to have power over you, to use more of your money, to do more of the same follies, “for as long as it takes”, while they debilitate the US with open borders and over-top-war mongering
.
All that is even more true, because the EV charging stations are unreliable, often are out of service, and to top it of, EVs are unreliable, have high repair bills, and have poor range in cold weather, especially when having more than one passenger, and some cargo, and going uphill, on cold, snowy days, as in New England, etc.
.
Currently, the vast majority of charging infrastructure is concentrated in more densely populated coastal areas, as opposed to more rural areas of the country, according to the Department of Energy (DOE).
.
Almost all people in rural areas, often with dirt roads, and snow and ice and cold, and longer distances, are definitely not giving up their pick-ups and SUVs to “switch to EVs”, especially in impoverished states, such as Maine and Vermont. Their Socialist governments lost all sense of reality, and think money grows on trees.Insurance Costs Very High: Because EVs are much more costly to repair, EV insurance rates are about 3 times the rate of gasoline vehicles, completely wiping out any energy savings.
.
Monthly Payments Very High: Because EVs are more expensive and interest rates are high, monthly payments are much higher than for gasoline cars, completely wiping out any benefits of tax credit subsidies.
.
Useful Service Life Very Short: EV useful service lives are very short, usually at most 8 years.
No one in his/her right mind, would spend at least $15,000 to $20,000 to replace a battery in an 8-y-old EV, which by then. would have lost almost all of its value, unlike a gasoline vehicle.
.
Charging Cost Very High: EV charging cost is very high on the road, usually at least 30 c/kWh, at home at least 20 c/kWh in New England
As a result, annual fuel cost savings are minimal, because EVs are driven fewer miles per year than gasoline cars, and the price of gasoline is about $3.20/gallon
.
Minimal CO2 Reduction: EVs driven, on average, about 72,000 miles for 8 years, according to various studies, do not reduce CO2 emissions compared to efficient gasoline vehicles driven the same miles, if CO2 evaluations are made on a mine to hazardous-waste landfill basis, and same-mile basis.
The useful service lives of gasoline cars is much longer than of EVs.
.
Range Usually Much Less Than Advertised: EV owners experience much less range than advertised by EPA, especially with one or more passengers, with some luggage or a heavy load, cold weather, up and down hills, on wet/snowy dirt roads, hot weather, etc.
Teslas EVs, driven 75,000 to 80,000 miles, will have lost about 15 to 20% of battery capacity at end of year 8.
If traveling with one or more passengers, with some luggage, was a challenge on a longer trip, and even more of a challenge on a cold/snowy day, then an older EV, with an aging battery, has all that, and more, which is a good reason not to buy one.
.
Battery Aging a Serious Issue: If a new EV, it takes about 1.15 kWh to add a 1.0 kWh charge in the battery, plus, there is a loss of about 5% to get 1.0 kWh out of the battery to the drive train of the EV, etc.
If a 5-y-old EV, it takes about 1.25 kWh to add 1.0 kWh charge in the battery, plus there is a loss of about 5.5% to get 1.0 kWh out of the battery
The older the EV, the greater the losses, plus the battery has lost capacity, the ability to do work and go the distance; all that is worse on a cold day, or hot day, heavy loads, and other adverse conditions.
.
Charging Batteries at Less than 32 F: If an EV owner parks at an airport, goes away for a few days or a week, upon return he/she may find the EV with an empty battery (if the battery had a somewhat low charge to begin with), if during that week the weather were below freezing, because the battery thermal management system, BTMS, will maintain battery temperature, until the battery is empty, then the battery freezes to 32F, or less.
Charging would not be allowed, until the battery is warmed up in a garage.
In the future, with thousands of EVs at the airport, a percentage would have empty batteries. You would have to wait your turn to get a tow to the warm garage, get charged, pay up to $500, and be on your way, after 8 hours or so!!
.
Losing Value After 3 Years: Used EVs retain about 60% of their high original value, whereas gasoline vehicles retain at least 70% of their not so high original value, by the end of year 3.
Losing 40% of a $45,000 EV = $18,000
Losing 30% of an equivalent size, $35,000 gasoline vehicle = $10,500
The loss difference wipes out any tax credit subsidies.
.
LEGISLATOR’s CHEVY BOLT CATCHES FIRE WHILE CHARGING ON DRIVEWAY IN VERMONT
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/chevy-bolt-catches-fir...
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!
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/
© 2024 Created by Webmaster.
Powered by
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