Wind pusher Maine Sierra: Aroostook wind power line good, NECEC hydro power line bad
This is beyond absurd on so many levels.
Dan Neumann September 12, 2023
Not all renewable energy corridors are the same, says Matt Cannon, the state conservation and energy director for Sierra Club Maine, and environmental groups are standing firmly behind the planned Aroostook Renewable Gateway.
Media reports this summer have scrutinized the potential impacts to farmland and forests along a 140- to 160-mile transmission line corridor that is planned to connect wind power in Aroostook County to New England’s electric power grid. Those reports are investigating concerns similar to those around the controversial corridor project spearheaded by Central Maine Power.
But environmentalists like Cannon say there are some key differences, both in environmental impact and potential to decarbonize the regional grid. He described the Aroostook Gateway as a “much-needed step in the right direction.”
Cannon added it “harnesses enough power to supply 450,000 homes in Maine and Massachusetts, all on wind power. When broken down, this translates to around 270,000 homes in Maine alone, a substantial contribution to clean-energy generation. That’s huge.”
The proposed power lines would transmit 1,200 megawatts from King Pine Wind, a wind farm slated to be built by Longroad Energy in southern Aroostook County, to unincorporated Cooper Mills in Lincoln County where they would tie into the ISO New England energy grid.
A bill allowing for construction of the high-voltage transmission line by the New York-based firm LS Power Grid passed the Maine Legislature with bipartisan support earlier this summer and was signed off on by Gov. Janet Mills.
The Maine chapter of the Sierra Club, a prominent environmental organization dedicated to combating the climate crisis, is getting behind the gateway project despite previously opposing CMP’s corridor project — the New England Clean Energy Connect (NECEC), which will deliver hydro-electric power from Quebec to Massachusetts.
Cannon said the two corridors are categorically different:
“The Aroostook Gateway is 100% clean energy — it’s land-based wind,” he said. “We support wind power and many other renewable energy projects. The hard part to communicate to folks is, we also need the transmission infrastructure that accompanies that.”
The 3 billion kilowatt-hours per year of wind power generated in Northern Maine, taken together with offshore wind power from the Gulf of Maine that will come online in the future, will radically alter the mix of energy inputs currently powering the New England grid.
“Our regional grid has been heavily reliant on natural gas for power, resulting in polluted air, high energy costs, and unreliable power, especially in winter,” Cannon explained. “In Maine, obviously, we’re also heating-oil dependent, which is very dirty.”
In contrast, the NECEC corridor, which a large majority of Maine voters blocked in 2021 but was allowed to continue by a court decision, seeks to bring energy from a mega dam, a renewable source that Sierra Club chapters across the country do not endorse.
“We don’t support mega dams in general, because of all the environmental impacts they entail,” Cannon said.
He explained that mega dams have a history of displacing Indigenous communities, contributing to methylmercury concentrations, and potential methane leakage due to water damming. While environmentalists have supported some small-scale hydro power that minimizes environmental impacts and allows for fish passage, the movement has mostly shifted their emphasis to wind and solar generation.
The overall environmental benefit of the Aroostook Gateway is significant, Cannon said, compared with the potential impacts on properties and easements that invariably comes when planning large-scale infrastructure projects.
Read the full article at https://mainebeacon.com/environmentalists-aroostook-gateway-and-cmp...
*************************************
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: 91
Comment
-
Comment by Willem Post on September 17, 2023 at 12:16pm
-
US/UK 66,000 MW OF OFFSHORE WIND BY 2030; AN EXPENSIVE FANTASY
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/biden-30-000-mw-of-off...
The US government has the insane fantasy of wanting to build 30,000 MW of offshore by 2030, i.e., just 7 years, but several companies, building projects for Massachusetts, will be allowed to walk away from the signed PPAs, and rebid at much higher prices next year.
The UK government has the insane fantasy of wanting to build 36,000 MW of offshore by 2030, i.e., in just 7 years,
The continent-based European big wind companies have only 25% of the capacity per year for building 66,000 MW offshore by 2030, or about 9,500 MW/y. These companies will concentrate on the U.S. market, because Biden’s "Inflation-Reduction-Act” subsidies are much higher than in the UK
About 7,000 MW of offshore wind bids were rewarded by the UK 4th Auction, in 2022
Zero MW of offshore wind bids were submitted for the UK 5th Auction, in 2023
1) Vattenfall, Sweden, has put on hold 1,400 MW in 2023 (will re-evaluate its entire 4,200 MW zone), because its spreadsheets show a “net revenue shortage” of about 40%, meaning the prices, c/kWh, offered by the UK auctions are about 40% too low.
https://www.offshorewind.biz/2023/07/20/breaking-vattenfall-stops-d....
2) OERSTED, Denmark, sees a $2.6 billion loss on its three US East Cost offshore wind systems, mainly due to high inflation, high interest rates, supply chain constrains and disruptions, and not being awarded “bonus” federal and state tax credits. Oersted, etc., urges Biden to ignore the domestic content requirements of the Inflation Reduction Act, so 100% of the wind turbines will be very expensively built in Europe, with US subsidies.
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/denmarks-orsted-anticipates...
3) EU big wind conglomerates want, on average, 40% more, because turnkey capital costs (foundations, turbines, cabling to shore, installation) have gone to at least $5,500/installed kW and interest rates to 6.25% in 2023, from $3,500/kW and 3% in 2021
UK and New York State bureaucrats are grossly uninformed regarding market conditions, as usual. They have zero business sense. New York State bureaucrats calculated their estimates of offshore wind contract prices, but when the owners saw those numbers, they said, we need up to 66% more, for our spreadsheets to make business sense. These contract prices are after 50% US subsidies. See Item 4 and note
Oersted, Denmark, Sunrise wind, original price $110.37/MWh, needs $139.99/MWh, a 27% increase
Equinor, Norway, Empire 1 wind, original price $118.38/MWh, needs $159.64/MWh, a 35% increase
Equinor, Norway, Empire 2 wind, original price $107.50/MWh, needs $177.84/MWh, a 66% increase
Equinor, Norway, Beacon Wind, original price $118.00/MWh, needs $190.82/MWh, a 62% increase
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/liars-lies-exposed-as-...
4)
Lifetime Performance of World’s First Offshore Wind Farm
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/lifetime-performance-o...
IRENA prepares glossy offshore wind reports, that 1) ignore industry cost data of offshore wind systems in the UK, 2) overestimates capacity factors, 3) underestimates decreases in output with aging, 4) underestimates O&M/MWh
IRENA is a government-controlled, offshore wind rah-rah site, that cannot be trusted
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/irena-a-european-renew...
NOTE: “The all-in, turnkey capital cost associated with a typical US offshore project, before bonus tax credits related to the "Inflation-Reduction-Act", has increased by 57% since 2021.
Increased costs of materials, energy, components, labor, and supply chain disruptions and constraints (shortage of European-owned specialized ships) explain about 40% of that, with 60% due to increased interest rates.”, per Bloomberg recently reported, citing figures from Bloomberg-NEF
Increased financing costs are due to larger amounts borrowed/installed kW, at higher interest rates
In 2021, borrowing $3500/installed kW at 3% for 20 years would cost 3.322 c/kWh
In 2023, borrowing $5500/installed kW at 6.25% for 20 years would cost 6.879 c/kWh
Part 1
BIDEN 30,000 MW OF OFFSHORE WIND BY 2030; AN EXPENSIVE FANTASY
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/biden-30-000-mw-of-off...
The Biden administration announced on October 13, 2021, it will subsidize the development of up to seven offshore wind systems (never call them farms) on the US East and West coasts, and in the Gulf of Mexico; a total of about 30,000 MW of offshore wind by 2030.
This is part of the “Inflation Reduction Act”, which CBO estimated at $391 billion, but Goldman Sachs estimated at $1.2 trillion, due to Biden’s handlers “liberally interpreting” the various open-ended measures.
This deficit spending will be added to the national debt, which would increase inflation. See URL for explanation.
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/biden-s-green-energy-p...
Biden's offshore wind systems would have an adverse, long-term impact on US electricity wholesale prices, and the prices of all other goods and services, because their expensive electricity would permeate into all economic activities.
The wind turbines would be at least 800-ft-tall, which would need to be located at least 30 miles from shores, to ensure minimal disturbance from night-time strobe lights.
Any commercial fishing areas would be significantly impacted by below-water infrastructures and cables. The low-frequency noise (less than 20 cycles per second, aka infrasound) of the wind turbines would adversely affect marine life, including whales, and productivity of fishing areas.
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/feds-finally-admits-of...
Offshore Wind Electricity Production and Cost
Electricity production would be about 30,000 MW x 8766 h/y x 0.40, lifetime-average capacity factor = 105,192,000 MWh, or 105.2 TWh
The additional wind production would be about 100 x 105.2/4000 = 2.63% of the annual electricity loaded onto US grids.
The US grid load would increase, due to tens of millions of future electric vehicles and heat pumps.
Electricity Cost: Assume an offshore project consists of wind turbines and cabling to shore, and installation at $5,500/kW
- Amortizing bank loan for 50% of the project at 6.25%/y for 20 years, 6.879 c/kWh.
- Paying Owner investment of 50% of the project at 9%/y for 20 years, is 8.468 c/kWh (9% because of high inflation).
- Offshore O&M, about 30 miles out to sea, 8 c/kWh.
- All other items, 4 c/kWh
- Total cost 6.879 + 8.468 + 8 + 4 = 27.347 c/kWh
- Less 50% subsidies (tax credits, depreciation in 5 years, interest deduction on borrowed funds) 13.673 c/kWh
- Owner sells to utility at 13.673 c/kWh
Not included:
- Levelized cost of onshore grid expansion/augmentation, about 2 c/kWh
- Levelized cost of curtailment/counteracting/balancing, 24/7/365, about 2 c/kWh
- Levelized cost of decommissioning, i.e., disassembly at sea, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites
Floating offshore wind, as in Maine and California offshore, would be about $7,500 per MW. Payments for Amortizing bank loan, Owner return, O&M, and All other items would be higher, and the c/kWh would be higher than offshore wind with foundations.
The subsidies, added to national debt, would be higher.
- Amortizing bank loan for 50% of the project at 6.25%/y for 20 years, 9.380 c/kWh.
- Paying Owner investment of 50% of the project at 9%/y for 20 years, is 11.547 c/kWh (9% because of high inflation).
- Offshore O&M, about 30 miles out to sea, 8 c/kWh.
- All other items, 4 c/kWh
- Total cost 6.879 + 8.468 + 8 + 4 = 32.927 c/kWh
- Less 50% subsidies (tax credits, depreciation in 5 years, interest deduction on borrowed funds) 16.464 c/kWh
- Owner sells to utility at 16.464 c/kWh
NOTE: If li-ion battery systems were contemplated, they would add 20 to 40 c/kWh to the cost of any electricity passing through them, during their about 15-y useful service lives! See Part 1 of URL
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/battery-system-capital...
-
Comment by Dan McKay on September 14, 2023 at 6:08am
-
King Pine Blow would add enough wind generation to Maine's mix to double the percentage of wind AND solar that is corrupting the Texas grid. Maine politicians have backed the state into a corner. If our largest land mass of all New England states does not host wind and solar projects to sell renewable energy credits to bring the smaller, denser populated states into compliance with their own renewable standards, Maine may find out how easy it is to blackmail them with threats of demanding their removal from the regional grid (ISO-NE) The stage has been set to inflict all out onslaught of wind and solar project suffocation of rural Maine land.
-
-
Sierra club is a sick joke, they are run by elitists that are big polluters that take money from bigger polluters while supporting the destruction of the land! Wake up people, they are in it for themselves!
-
-
What's truly amazing to me is how dumb many people are. They believe almost everything they're fed by the media. They don't question anything. In fact, they don't ask ANY questions. They aren't skeptical. They don't think critically. They don't expect or demand facts and figures to back up any of the propaganda. They just believe. It's a religion. How do you get through to them, before it's too late for Maine?
-
Comment by Art Brigades on September 13, 2023 at 11:22am
-
Amazing how much they objected to NECEC's 100' tall power lines. Now, an even bigger power line and those objections are gone. And even more stupefying is they don't mention the proposed 4.5MW to 7MW spinning blinking turbines that will be at least 600' tall.
We know over the last 15 years that First Wind and its successors made plans to install wind projects across the County, through the Allagash and St. John River basins, all the way to Daquaam on the Canadian border.
The area in red is one big bullseye. The area in blue is King Pine. The area in yellow is EDP's Number Nine, which is waiting in the wings.
If this transmission line gets built, then the lid will be off, and that entire red area could be toast. Sierra and the other so-called enviro groups are cheering this on, even as they howl about digging holes on Mt. Chase. (Which, ironically is to extract raw materials for their beloved EVs.)
These groups are right off the pages of Alice in Wonderland: “Well, then,” the Cat went on, “you see a dog growls when it’s angry, and wags it’s tail when it’s pleased. Now I growl when I’m pleased, and wag my tail when I’m angry...Nothing would be what it is because everything would be what it isn't. And contrariwise, what it is, it wouldn't be, and what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?"
-
Comment by Long Islander on September 13, 2023 at 10:25am
-
“Our regional grid has been heavily reliant on natural gas for power, resulting in polluted air, high energy costs, and unreliable power, especially in winter,” Cannon explained.
Sorry, but King Pine would make the grid even more reliant on natural gas. But who said propaganda has to be true?
-
-
Apparently, a few people of the club think the more environmentally damaging, the more expensive, the more useless and out of sync with real living an energy source is, the more they love it. Damn traitors to society.
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