With The Rejection of NECEC, Maine Could Be the Black Sheep of the Regional New England Electric Network.

Comment

Comment by Eric A. Tuttle on December 23, 2021 at 10:26am

Yes, Maine could be again viewed as the black sheep of this situation. But only because we (some of us at least) are unwilling to sell out cheap.

Vermont had already approved this project, NY had a competing project near if not also approved. Both were similar in design. [ _UNDERGROUND ] Both were belayed to see what Maine could offer after the NH Northern Pass failed, by way of citizen rejection and prevention. 

However, the Maine proposal was NOT on equal footing of the three past proposed options which was approved by the EPA and ACE, along with other agencies. FERC even decided to step away from the issue in Maine and chose not to intervene for the time being. Though it still retains the federal authority to impose its will upon our state and override any state decision or wish. 

The NECEC which was proposed for Maine, was to serve more than power from HQ to Mass, as it had at least three purposes. 

● The obvious was HQ to Mass power, for a possible need 30 years from now.
● Wind Power from Quebec and Ontario.
● Wind Power Expansion within Maine in the near future.
● The status name of "Corridor" which can become inclusive of any other form of energy transportation.

Maine, has long been viewed as the Cheap Sheep of New England, even by those Profiteers within this state.

Serving up our State for the profits of two foreign nations to serve and feed the need of a wasteful southern New England is akin to making atomic weapons in the US to supply those that would treat us badly, given the chance.

30 years is a ways away yet. They have alternatives at hand, and permitted. There are other options as well. If they wish to waste, they should pay for their wasteful ways.  

Comment by Willem Post on December 23, 2021 at 6:37am

“BUILD BACK BETTER” WOULD COST $4.490 TRILLION OVER THE NEXT DECADE, IF PROVISIONS WERE MADE TO LAST 10 YEARS

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/build-back-better-woul...

 

Distrust in Government

 

I am not surprised at the lack of public trust in Washington, DC, and elsewhere. The games of smoke and mirrors played in Washington are off-the-charts outrageous.

 

Never, ever, has there been such a level of deceit, as Democrats have inflicted on the US People, since January 2021, after using a fraudulent election in 2020 (see Appendix), to achieve a coup d’etat, to relentlessly push for a major increase of:

 

1) The size and intrusiveness of government, and

2) Democrat command/control over the federal government and the American people.

 

Here is a most egregious example:

 

Build Back Better' Would Cost $4.490 Trillion Over the Next Decade, if Provisions Were Made to Last 10 Years

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/build-back-better-woul...

 

PHASE 1; All BBB programs have carefully chosen expiration dates

 

Some BBB Bill History

 

The cost of the original BBB bill was $6.0 trillion, as crafted by left-leaning Sanders. When that proved to be a non-starter, he “whittled it down” to an alleged $3.5 trillion, which, he declared, was the “absolute minimum”. Whittled down means, he shortened the duration of some programs from 10 years to 1 year, or 2 years, etc., as explained in next sections. See table 1

 

Manchin, a moderate US Senator from West Virginia, who knows how to co-operate with moderate Republicans, had stated, he would consider a BBB bill costing about $1.5 trillion. 

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/11/10/joe-manchin-dc-can-no...

 

Frustrated Sanders and White House staff further whittled down the cost of the BBB bill from $3.5 to $1.75 trillion, to placate Manchin, mainly by shortening program durations. See table 1

https://rules.house.gov/sites/democrats.rules.house.gov/files/Secti...

 

Manchin and Sanders had frequent shouting matches about:

 

1) BBB budgeting smoke-and-mirror shenanigans, such as short program durations to reduce costs

2) BBB causing a major increase in the size, bureaucrat headcount, and intrusiveness of the federal government

3) BBB worsening high inflation rates in 2022, and beyond

4) BBB worsening multi-billion US budget deficits in 2022, and beyond

5) BBB worsening the rapidly-growing US national debt

6) BBB worsening US trade competitiveness and US trade deficits

7) BBB worsening the precarious financial condition of the Social Security and Medicare Systems. See Note

 

The BBB bill is a Green New Deal cornucopia for boosting Democrat constituencies. See table 1

The BBB bill, aka “budget reconciliation bill,” has morphed into a vast expansion and increase of:

 

1) The socialistic welfare state for individuals, and

2) The decades-long bonanza for multi-millionaire subsidy-seekers in the renewable energy sector.

Comment by Willem Post on December 22, 2021 at 10:36am

The EU is facing an energy crisis, because:

1) Brussels’ RE idiots refused to sign long-term contract for gas from Russia
2) NATO and the US are stupidly trying to contain and pressure Russia.
3 There is minimal wind, minimal solar, and some nuclear plants are down with “issues”
4) Russia retaliated by merely limiting gas flow to the EU to CONTRACTED amounts, plus 5%, to ensure TOTAL compliance with SIGNED contracts.
5) Owners are diverting LNG carriers to the EU to rake in on the bonanza.
6)
US spot price $7/million Btu
EU spot price $65/million Btu

7) The 5% is sold by Gazprom on the spot market at very high prices.

EXCERPT from:

WIND AND SOLAR TO PROVIDE 30 PERCENT OF NEW ENGLAND ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION BY 2050
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/wind-and-solar-provide...

Energy systems analysts of Denmark, Ireland, Germany, the UK, the Netherlands, etc., have known for decades, if you have a significant percentage of (wind + solar) on your grid, you better have available:
 
– An adequate capacity, MW, of other power plants to counteract any variations of (W+S), 24/7/365
– High-capacity, MW, connections to nearby grids
– An adequate capacity of energy storage, such as:

1) Pumped hydro storage
2) Hydro plants with reservoir storage
3) Grid-scale battery systems

The more presence of variable (W+S) on the NE grid, the more the other generators have to vary their outputs, which causes these other generators to be less efficient (more wear and tear, more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh).

Owners in European countries with much wind and solar on the grids get compensated for their losses.

Those compensations are charged to the general public, not to the Owners of wind and solar systems, as part of the political (subsidy + cost shifting) regimen, to make wind and solar appear price-competitive versus fossil fuels.

RE folks often advocate:
 
1) Electricity must be 100% renewable, or zero carbon, or carbon-neutral by 2050
2) Getting rid of the remaining nuclear plants
3) Getting rid of natural gas, coal, and oil plants
4) More biomass burning
 
About This Article

This article has four parts and an Appendix

Part 1 provides an introduction to miscellaneous energy topics, and consumption of world energy quantities
Part 2 provides an introduction to existing NE grid conditions
Part 3 provides an introduction to daily NE grid load shaping, to deal with heat pumps and EVs in 2030
Part 4 provides the future NE grid conditions with 20% wind and 10% solar in 2050

The Appendix shows various energy topics, such as Turnkey Capital Costs of Grid-scale Battery Systems; Grid-scale Battery System Operating Cost in New England; Energy Losses of Battery Systems; “All-in” Electricity Cost of Wind and Solar in New England

Comment by Eric A. Tuttle on December 12, 2021 at 3:17pm

Sorry folks, I did not mean to accidently remove this comment
As I was attempting to post it to other forums, including France and Germany.

---

Obviously Some Promote the NECEC on the assumptions of others, while not looking deeply into the Facts. The NECEC or at least a portion of the corridor was slated to expand for future Wind Power from the Western Maine Mountains. One from Canada Wind, two from Maine future wind projects.

Also, some do not realize what a Corridor is as compared to a Right of Way. In that once established as a corridor, it can contain other forms of energy transportation by any means conceivable. Corridors can also be tweaked to expand from its current established path to accommodate newer energy transportation and with greater permitting ease. A portion of the NECEC corridor (the 54 mile section) is almost Identical to the proposed East West Transportation/Utility Highway corridor from the 2012 Peter Vigue proposal.

It is the term corridor that is the danger to Maine, as it opens the floodgate of various, possibly unwanted transportation of energy through Maine. Additional Energy lines, Rail, Pipe, Train, Trucking, Canals. Penobscot river to the East is an already Established corridor, 2000 feet wide. Combined with the MEPCO proposed corridor and the NECEC corridor, all but 30 miles of the 220 miles once proposed is set to become a Highway corridor.

Some should review the history of that proposal, what it entailed, what the limitations and restrictions were to be, along with the costs to travel the corridor. Some should dig deep into the weeds of Federal materials concerning what a corridor entails.

Maine people chose to say NO at this time as proposed though may have accepted it if done on a level playing field of Undergrounding the project as was approved in Vermont as recommended by the Federal EPA and ACE. Maine was viewed as the CHEAP buy alternative, as Avangrid eyed more opportunities for Wind Power transmission and selling access to other energy transportation methods. Massachusetts still views Maine as their Plantation, with us being the caretakers.

Vermont wants the project, they approved the project. Send it back to Vermont! And when Canada needs the power, they can unplug by way of Vermont.

Comment by Dan McKay on December 12, 2021 at 8:57am

Willem, if we follow Eric's suggestion, we may get there, even sooner.

Comment by Willem Post on December 12, 2021 at 8:11am

To hell with being the black sheep.

If all of New England were to disappear, it would not make one damned bit of difference regarding global warming.

The world has warmed since 1700, the low point of the Little Ice Age,

That warming has increased just a little after 1900, due to there being 7.5 BILLION people versus 1 BILLION in 1700 to 1800.

Those  7.5 billion people have a big environmental footprint, because many move around all over the place with planes and cruise ships and vehicles.

If the world would have 1 billion people, all that would be a lot less.

The sooner that happens, the better