By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:
Section 1. Policy. America is blessed with an abundance of natural resources and is a leader in energy technologies and innovation that are critical to the economic prosperity and national security of the American people, as well as our partners and allies. We must expand all forms of reliable and affordable energy production to drive down inflation, grow our economy, create good-paying jobs, reestablish American leadership in manufacturing, lead the world in artificial intelligence, and restore peace through strength by wielding our commercial and diplomatic levers to end wars across the world. By utilizing our amazing national assets, including our crude oil, natural gas, lease condensates, natural gas liquids, refined petroleum products, uranium, coal, biofuels, geothermal heat, the kinetic movement of flowing water, and critical minerals, we will preserve and protect our most beautiful places, reduce our dependency on foreign imports, and grow our economy — thereby enabling the reduction of our deficits and our debt.
It shall be the policy of my Administration to make America energy dominant.
Sec. 2. Establishment. There is hereby established within the Executive Office of the President the National Energy Dominance Council (Council).
Sec. 3. Membership. (a) The Secretary of the Interior shall serve as Chair of the Council. The Secretary of Energy shall serve as Vice Chair of the Council.
(b) In addition to the Chair and the Vice Chair, the Council shall consist of the following members:
(i) the Secretary of State;
(ii) the Secretary of the Treasury;
(iii) the Secretary of Defense;
(iv) the Attorney General;
(v) the Secretary of Agriculture;
(vi) the Secretary of Commerce;
(vii) the Secretary of Transportation;
(viii) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency;
(ix) the Director of the Office of Management and Budget;
(x) the United States Trade Representative;
(xi) the Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy;
(xii) the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy;
(xiii) the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs;
(xiv) the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy;
(xv) the Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality;
(xvi) the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers;
(xvii) the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy; and
(xviii) the heads of such other executive departments and agencies (agencies) as the President may, from time to time, designate.
Sec. 4. Functions. (a) The Chair shall convene and preside over meetings of the Council, in consultation with the Office of the Chief of Staff, provided that in his absence the Vice Chair shall preside.
(b) The Council shall:
(i) advise the President on how best to exercise his authority to produce more energy to make America energy dominant;
(ii) advise the President on improving the processes for permitting, production, generation, distribution, regulation, transportation, and export of all forms of American energy, including critical minerals;
(iii) provide to the President a recommended National Energy Dominance Strategy to produce more energy that includes long-range goals for achieving energy dominance by cutting red tape, enhancing private sector investments across all sectors of the energy-producing economy, focusing on innovation, and seeking to eliminate longstanding, but unnecessary, regulation;
(iv) advise and assist the President in facilitating cooperation among the Federal Government and domestic private sector energy partners; and
(v) advise the President on facilitating consistency in energy production policies included in the Strategy developed under subsection (b)(iii) of this section.
(c) In performing the advisory functions listed under subsection (b) of this section, the Council, through the Chair, shall, when appropriate, coordinate with the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. The functions of the Council shall report to the Office of the Chief of Staff.
(d) Within 100 days of the date of this order, and from time to time thereafter as deemed appropriate by the Chair, the Council shall:
(i) recommend to the President a plan to raise awareness on a national level of matters related to energy dominance, such as the urgency of reliable energy; the improvements in technology achieved through reliable energy sources; the national security concerns with removing reliable and affordable energy sources; the jobs supported by the energy sector; and the regulatory constraints driving up the cost of reliable energy to consumers;
(ii) advise the President regarding the actions each agency can take under existing authorities to prioritize the policy objective of increasing energy production, such as rapidly and significantly increasing electricity capacity; rapidly facilitating approvals for energy infrastructure; approving the construction of natural gas pipelines to, or in, New England, California, Alaska, and other areas of the country underserved by American natural gas; facilitating the reopening of closed power plants; and bringing Small Modular Nuclear Reactors online;
(iii) provide to the President a review of markets most critical to power American homes, cars, and factories with reliable, abundant, and affordable energy;
(iv) advise the President regarding incentives to attract and retain private sector energy-production investments;
(v) advise the President on identifying and ending practices that raise the cost of energy; and
(vi) consult with officials from State, local, and Tribal governments and individuals from the private sector to solicit feedback on how best to expand all forms of energy production.
Sec. 5. Administration. (a) The Council shall have such staff and other assistance as may be necessary to carry out its functions.
(b) Agencies shall cooperate with the Council and provide such assistance, information, and advice to the Council related to policies that affect energy dominance as the Chair or, at the Chair’s direction, the Vice Chair, shall reasonably request, to the extent permitted by law.
Sec. 6. Representation on the National Security Council. The Secretary of the Interior, as Chair of the Council, shall serve as a standing member of the National Security Council.
Sec. 7. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
THE WHITE HOUSE,
February 14, 2025.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/establishin...
Comment
The way Damnocrats fraudulently played hide and seek with $trillions of federal funds, OUR MONEY, over the years, in the same way they “win” elections.
How could the two not be related?
They need to control the federal bureaucrat government and Courts for lawfare, and for having $money to play hide and seek, and buy/pay off the corrupt Corporate Media, and subvert “study”-academia, and buy/pay off Damnocrat-infested NPR and PBS, to win elections
Lots of smug laughing/grinning has become desperate whining, after Trump won, and had Musk do some “vestigating”
I bet the Republicans, Trump, Musk, etc, had no idea the extent and duration of the gross malfeasance for at least 5 decades
Willem,
The IRS just completed the rules concerning the 2022 IRA ITC/PTC funds, January 17,2025. It is hard to say what has been committed so far. Maybe Elon can find out.
Dan,
Where are any unobligated funds parked/hidden?
Who controls the outlays
THE DYSFUNCTIONAL STATE OF MAINE?
The over-taxed, over-regulated, already-impoverished Maine people are super-screwed, trying to make ends meet in a near-zero, real growth Maine economy
The Maine economy has lots of low-tech/low-pay/low-benefit, bs jobs
The Maine economy has lots of woke, leftist bureaucrats
Screwed-over Mainers also have to pay for poverty-stricken, aliens of different cultures from all over, who illegally enter the US, a federal felony
.
Those illegal aliens:
– are the dregs of Third World countries, sent to Maine by their US-hating, leftist, woke governments, in cahoots with Soros/Biden-financed NGOs
– are getting free housing, free food, a never-empty credit card, free healthcare, free education and whatever other goodies they want. They mainly suck from the government tit
– have no skills, no training, no education, no modern industrial experience.
– will take low-tech/low-pay/low-benefit jobs away from screwed-over Mainers.
– are often good at crime, murder, rape, drug and human trafficking, and driving vehicles into merrymakers.
.
Many millions of illegal aliens have to be shipped back where they came from, before they forever ruin the US.
.
Down-trodden Mainers often have to put up with the visual ugliness and noise of hundreds of windmills, that are often idle, because of too little wind year-round, and many thousands of acres of solar panels, that are often covered with snow and ice in winter; there is no solar at night.
.
MAGA may lead to higher CO2 ppm to 1) increase growth of flora and fauna all over the world, and 2) increase crop yields to feed hungry people. What is not to like?
.
.
THE DYSFUNCTIONAL STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS WITH GIANT BATTERIES
A recent announcement is to install a statewide, 4-h battery system, installed capacity 5000 MW/20,000 MWh.
Tesla recommends not charging to more than 80% full and not discharging to less than 20% full, to achieve normal life of 15 years and normal aging at 1.5%/y.
The delivered capacity would be 20,000 MWh x 0.6, Tesla factor x aging factor x 0.9, outage factor = 10,800 MWh
The batteries would 1) absorb midday solar peaks and deliver the electricity during peak hours of late afternoon/early evening, and 2) stabilize the grid, due to varying W/S output, 24/7/365
The turnkey cost would be about $600/installed kWh, delivered as AC at battery outlet, 2024 pricing, or $600/kWh x 20 million kWh = $12.0 billion, about every 15 years.
I did not mention annually increasing insurance costs of risky W/S projects.
If 50% were borrowed from banks, the cost of amortizing $6 billion at 6% over 15 years = $608 million/y
If 50% were from Owners, the cost of amortizing $6 billion at 10% over 15 years = $774 million/y
The two items total $1,382 million/y; another hell-of-a-big subsidy to W/S
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/battery-system-capital...
.
No banks will finance W/S projects at acceptable interest rates and no insurance companies will insure them at acceptable premiums, no matter what the woke bureaucrats are announcing.
The sooner the U-turn, the better for the New England, US and Europe
.
.
NEW ENGLAND ELECTRICITY 100% FROM WIND AND SOLAR by 2050?
In New England, we have Net Zero nut cases. They know nothing about energy systems, but spout lots of nonsense.
“Keep it in the ground”, they say. “All electricity from wind and solar”, they say.
When presented with numbers and facts their eyes glaze over
Here is a simple analysis, if no fossil fuels, no nuclear, and minimal other sources of electricity
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/vermont-example-of-ele...
.
It is assumed, 1) all W/S output, based on historic weather data, is loaded into batteries, 2) all demand is drawn from batteries, based on historic load on the grid, as published by ISO-NE.
An annual storage balance was created, which needed to stay well above zero; the batteries are not allowed to "run dry" in bad W/S years. The balance was used to determine the wind and solar capacities needed to achieve it.
.
New England would need a battery system with a capacity of about 10 TWh of DELIVERABLE electricity from batteries to HV grid.
Daily W/S output would be fed to the batteries, 140 TWh/y
Daily demand would be drawn from the batteries, 115 TWh/y in 2024
Battery system roundtrip loss, HV to HV, would be 25 TWh/y, more with aging
Transmission and Distribution to users incur additional losses of about 8%, or 0.08 x 115 = 9.2 TWh
The battery system would cover any multi-day W/S lulls throughout the year
Batteries would supplement W/S output, as needed, 24/7/365
W/S would charge excess output into the batteries, 24/7/365
Tesla recommends not charging to more than 80% full and not discharging to less than 20% full, to achieve normal life of 15 years and normal aging at 1.5%/y.
The INSTALLED battery capacity would need to be about 10 TWh / (0.6, Tesla factor x aging factor x 0.9, outage factor) = 18.5 TWh, delivered as AC at battery outlet.
The turnkey cost would be about $600/installed kWh, delivered as AC at battery outlet, 2024 pricing, or $600/kWh x 18.5 billion kWh = $11.1 trillion, about every 15 years.
I did not mention annually increasing insurance costs of risky W/S projects.
If 50% were borrowed from banks, the cost of amortizing $5.5 trillion at 6% over 15 years = $557 billion/y
If 50% were from Owners, the cost of amortizing $5.5 trillion at 10% over 15 years = $708 billion/y
The two items total $1265 billion/y, about the same as the New England GDP.
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/battery-system-capital...
.
No banks will finance W/S projects at acceptable interest rates and no insurance companies will insure them at acceptable premiums, no matter what the woke bureaucrats are pronouncing.
The sooner the U-turn, the better for New England, US and Europe
.
.
Excerpt from:
BATTERY SYSTEM CAPITAL COSTS, OPERATING COSTS, ENERGY LOSSES, AND AGING
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/battery-system-capital...
by Willem Post
.
Utility-scale, battery system pricing usually is not made public, but for this system it was.
Neoen, in western Australia, has just turned on its 219 MW/ 877 MWh Tesla Megapack battery, the largest in western Australia.
Ultimately, it will be a 560 MW/2,240 MWh battery system, $1,100,000,000/2,240,000 kWh = $491/kWh, delivered as AC, late 2024 pricing. Smaller capacity systems will cost much more than $500/kWh
.
Annual Cost of Megapack Battery Systems; 2023 pricing
.
Assume a system rated 45.3 MW/181.9 MWh, and an all-in turnkey cost of $104.5 million, per Example 2
Amortize bank loan for 50% of $104.5 million at 6.5%/y for 15 years, $5.484 million/y
Pay Owner return of 50% of $104.5 million at 10%/y for 15 years, $6.765 million/y (10% due to high inflation)
Lifetime (Bank + Owner) payments 15 x (5.484 + 6.765) = $183.7 million
Assume battery daily usage for 15 years at 10%, and loss factor = 1/(0.9 *0.9)
Battery lifetime output = 15 y x 365 d/y x 181.9 MWh x 0.1, usage x 1000 kWh/MWh = 99,590,250 kWh to HV grid; 122,950,926 kWh from HV grid; 233,606,676 kWh loss
(Bank + Owner) payments, $183.7 million / 99,590,250 kWh = 184.5 c/kWh
Less 50% subsidies (ITC, depreciation in 5 years, deduction of interest on borrowed funds) is 92.3c/kWh
At 10% throughput, (Bank + Owner) cost, 92.3 c/kWh
At 40% throughput, (Bank + Owner) cost, 23.1 c/kWh
Excluded costs/kWh: 1) O&M; 2) system aging, 1.5%/y, 3) 20% HV grid-to-HV grid loss, 4) grid extension/reinforcement to connect battery systems, 5) downtime of parts of the system, 6) decommissioning in year 15, i.e., disassembly, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites. Excluded costs would add at least 15 c/kWh
COMMENTS ON CALCULATION
Almost all existing battery systems operate at less than 10%, per EIA annual reports i.e., new systems would operate at about 92.4 + 15 = 107.4 c/kWh. They are used to stabilize the grid, i.e., frequency control and counteracting up/down W/S outputs. If 40% throughput, 23.1 + 15 = 38.1 c/kWh.
A 4-h battery system costs 38.1 c/kWh of throughput, if operated at a duty factor of 40%.
That is on top of the cost/kWh of the electricity taken from the HV grid to feed the batteries
Up to 40% could occur by absorbing midday solar peaks and discharging during late-afternoon/early-evening, which occur every day in California and other sunny states. The more solar systems, the greater the peaks.
See URL for Megapacks required for a one-day wind lull in New England
40% throughput is close to Tesla’s recommendation of 60% maximum throughput, i.e., not charging above 80% full and not discharging below 20% full, to achieve a 15-y life, with normal aging.
Tesla’s recommendation was not heeded by the Owners of the Hornsdale Power Reserve in Australia. They excessively charged/discharged the system. After a few years, they added Megapacks to offset rapid aging of the original system, and added more Megapacks to increase the rating of the expanded system.
http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-hornsdale-power-res...
Regarding any project, the bank and Owner have to be paid, no matter what. I amortized the bank loan and Owner’s investment
Divide total payments over 15 years by the throughput during 15 years, you get c/kWh, as shown.
There is about a 20% round-trip loss, from HV grid to 1) step-down transformer, 2) front-end power electronics, 3) into battery, 4) out of battery, 5) back-end power electronics, 6) step-up transformer, to HV grid, i.e., you draw about 50 units from the HV grid to deliver about 40 units to the HV grid, because of A-to-Z system losses. That gets worse with aging.
A lot of people do not like these c/kWh numbers, because they have been repeatedly told by self-serving folks, battery Nirvana is just around the corner.
.
NOTE: Aerial photos of large-scale battery systems with many Megapacks, show many items of equipment, other than the Tesla supply, such as step-down/step-up transformers, switchgear, connections to the grid, land, access roads, fencing, security, site lighting, i.e., the cost of the Tesla supply is only one part of the battery system cost at a site.
.
NOTE: Battery system turnkey capital costs and electricity storage costs likely will be much higher in 2023 and future years, than in 2021 and earlier years, due to: 1) increased inflation rates, 2) increased interest rates, 3) supply chain disruptions, which delay projects and increase costs, 4) increased energy prices, such as of oil, gas, coal, electricity, etc., 5) increased materials prices, such as of tungsten, cobalt, lithium, copper, manganese, etc., 6) increased labor rates.
.
.
HIGH COST/kWh OF WIND AND SOLAR FOISTED ONTO A BRAINWASHED PUBLIC
What is generally not known, the more weather-dependent W/S sources, the less efficient the other, traditional generators They have a hell-of-a-time to counteract the ups and downs of W/S output.
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/fuel-and-co2-reduction...
.
At about 30% W/S, the entire system hits an increasingly thicker concrete wall, operationally and cost wise.
Germany and the UK are hitting that wall more and more hours each day
.
Base-load nuclear, gas and coal plants are the only rational way forward, plus the additional CO2 is very beneficial for additional flora and fauna growth
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/we-are-in-a-co2-famine
.
US gravy-train subsidies are:
1) Federal and state tax credits, up to 50%
- Community tax credit of 10 percent
- Base tax credit of 30 percent
- State tax credit and other incentives of up to 10%
2) 5-y Accelerated Depreciation write off of the entire project
3) Deduction of interest of borrowed money
.
The subsidies reduce the owning and operating cost of a project by 50%, which means electricity can be sold at 50% less than it costs to produce.
Utilities pay 15 c/kWh, wholesale, after 50% subsidies, for electricity from fixedoffshore wind systems
Utilities pay 18 c/kWh, wholesale, after 50% subsidies, for electricity from floating offshore wind
Utilities pay 12 c/kWh, wholesale, after 50% subsidies, for electricity from larger solar systems
.
Excluded costs, at a future 30% W/S annual penetration on the grid, based on UK and German experience:
- Onshore grid expansion/reinforcement to connect distributed W/S systems, about 2 c/kWh
- A fleet of traditional power plants to quickly counteract W/S variable output, on a less than minute-by-minute basis, 24/7/365, which leads to more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh
- A fleet of traditional power plants to provide electricity during 1) low-wind periods, 2) high-wind periods, when rotors are locked in place, and 3) low solar periods during mornings, evenings, at night, snow/ice on panels, which leads to more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh
- Pay W/S system Owners for electricity they could have produced, if not curtailed, about 1 c/kWh
- Importing electricity at high prices, when W/S output is low, 1 c/kWh
- Exporting electricity at low prices, when W/S output is high, 1 c/kWh
- Disassembly on land and at sea, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites, about 2 c/kWh
Some of these values exponentially increase as more W/S systems are added to the grid
.
The economic/financial insanity and environmental damage of it all is off the charts.
No wonder Europe’s near-zero, real-growth economy is in such big do-do
That economy has been tied into knots by inane people.
YOUR tax dollars are building these projects so YOU will have much higher electric bills.
Remove YOUR tax dollars using your vote, and none of these projects would be built, and YOUR electric bills would be lower
.
.
UK, GERMANY AND NORWAY
Norway gets 90% from hydro reservoir plants and 10% from west coast windmills.
Because of long distances, there is little connection between the north and south grid.
Any draw by the UK during W/S underproduction affects the south grid.
.
The grid is pumped by generators to a voltage with 50-cycle electromagnetic waves which travel at near the speed of light. Electrons do not travel. They just vibrate at 50 Hz
Any UK underproduction, resulting in voltage drops, is immediately sensed about 800 miles away, and compensated for, by automatically opening the water valves to hydro turbines in Norway.
.
A few years ago, during a W/S lull, Norway oversupplied Germany and the UK, which resulted in much higher wholesale prices in the south grid, too low water levels in reservoirs, rationing, aka blackouts/brownouts, and lots of Norwegians with mandated EVs and heat pumps being peed off.
.
This time the W/S lull happened again, and, just like that, the ruling-party government fell. A new ruling-party government was installed, which may, or may not, remedy the situation. INSTANT DEMOCRACY.
We should have it in the US, instead of endless lying, obfuscation, grandstanding, obstruction, etc., for up to 4 years, or, God forbid, 8 years
.
NOTE: I lived in Norway for 3 years. My brother-in-law, a managing director, worked at Norsk Hydro, which provides almost all hydro power in Norway. We talk shop. He thinks the nutcases in Oslo should be exiled to Nova Zembla.
Sponsor: | Rep. Ogles, Andrew [R-TN-5] (Introduced 01/03/2025) |
---|---|
Committees: | House - Ways and Means; Energy and Commerce; Agriculture; Natural Resources; Financial Services; Science, Space, and Technology; Transportation and Infrastructure; Oversight and Government Reform This bill repeals the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 and rescinds any unobligated funds made available by the act. |
The Inflation Reduction Act prolongs the ITC/PTC credit until 2032. Congress needs to look at this while working out taxation legislation in the Reconciliation Budget. These tax credits will add considerable costs to the debt and promote unreliable energy sources. The President's Energy Dominant Council is hopefully all over this fraud, but pushing Rinos like Collins to remove these subsidies isn't going to be easy.
Since wind and solar are neither reliable nor affordable, it would seem they've been effectively eliminated from President Trump's "all forms of energy" list. Let the screaming begin.
W/S systems are unreliable, weather-dependent, extremely expensive ways of generating electricity, that require subsidies of about 50% of the owning and operating cost to get built.
at a future 30% W/S annual penetration on the grid, based on UK and German experience:
- Onshore grid expansion/reinforcement to connect distributed W/S systems, about 2 c/kWh
- A fleet of traditional power plants to quickly counteract W/S variable output, on a less than minute-by-minute basis, 24/7/365, which leads to more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh
- A fleet of traditional power plants to provide electricity during 1) low-wind periods, 2) high-wind periods, when rotors are locked in place, and 3) low solar periods during mornings, evenings, at night, snow/ice on panels, which leads to more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh
- Pay W/S system Owners for electricity they could have produced, if not curtailed, about 1 c/kWh
- Importing electricity at high prices, when W/S output is low, 1 c/kWh
- Exporting electricity at low prices, when W/S output is high, 1 c/kWh
- Disassembly on land and at sea, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites, about 2 c/kWh
Some of these values exponentially increase as more W/S systems are added to the grid
.
The economic/financial insanity and environmental damage of it all is off the charts.
No wonder Europe’s near-zero, real-growth economy is in such big do-do
That economy has been tied into knots by inane people.
YOUR tax dollars are building these projects so YOU will have much higher electric bills.
Remove YOUR tax dollars using your vote, and none of these projects would be built, and YOUR electric bills would be lower
Both, the UK and Germany are economic basket cases, because of insanely expensive energy policies.
The elected folks in Maine should not act like zombies, beating the bushes for US subsidies for wind and solar that are disappearing.
The elected folks should get back to basics, such as reducing the bloated Maine government, so Mainers can breathe again.
Will Augusta Legislators pay attention to the elephant in the room ?
U.S. Sen Angus King
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 - 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/
© 2025 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