Sears Island selected as preferred site for offshore wind power port

Maine Public | By Susan Sharon
Published February 20, 2024 at 1:26 PM EST

Gov. Janet Mills at a press conference announcing Sears Island as the preferred site for an offshore wind port on Tuesday, Feb. 20, 2024.
Nicole Ogrysko/Maine Public file
Members of a state working group tasked with finding a suitable port to serve the offshore wind industry toured Sears Island in Nov. 2022. Later, they toured the port of Mack Point, visible in the background.

This story will be updated.

Gov. Janet Mills announced Tuesday that her administration has selected Sears Island in Searsport as the preferred site for development of a large, offshore wind port designed to jumpstart the clean energy economy in Maine and the transition away from fossil fuels.

Selection of the site follows a public stakeholder process led by the Maine Department of Transportation and the Maine Port Authority to consider several potential options in the Port of Searsport, the Port of Eastport and the Port of Portland.

Nearly four years ago, Gov. Mills identified the Port of Searsport as the leading site in Maine to "support the transportation, assembly and fabrication of offshore wind turbines." She also called for further study of the port's assets and future needs. That study was completed in 2021.

And today, Mills said, based on input from port and offshore wind stakeholders, including the University of Maine and on technical and engineering analyses, the state has concluded that the Sears Island parcel is the most feasible port development site. It's expected to be 100 acres of development in total.

The site of a proposed offshore wind port on Sears Island.
MaineDOT
The site of a proposed offshore wind port on Sears Island.

"This was not an easy decision, nor is it one that I made lightly," Mills said. "For more than two years, my Administration has evaluated Sears Island and Mack Point thoroughly and with an open mind, recognizing that each site has its own set of benefits and its own set of drawbacks. In carefully considering all of these, I believe that, on balance, Sears Island is the best choice for an offshore wind port because it is already owned by the state, designated for the purpose of port development, will cost less in the short-term and long-term, and is expected to result in less environmental harm."

Included in those considerations are the expected need for dredging at Mack Point and avoided impacts on commercial activities in the Port of Searsport.

While the governor's decision is not a surprise, it is likely to spark strong opposition from a coalition of conservation and fishing groups who do not think the largescale development plans are compatible with fishing in the area or with Sears Island, the largest undeveloped island in Penobscot Bay.

In fact, even before the governor called a press conference to make the announcement, the Alliance for Sears Island and other opponents were planning a rally on Wednesday afternoon. They and others have argued that nearby Mack Point is a more suitable alternative because it is developed and already contains a cargo port.

Steven Miller, executive director of the Islesboro Island Trust and the Alliance for Sears Island, says the state's decision to choose Sears Island is a violation of a pact made in 2007 to choose Mack Point as the preferred location for future marine transportation development.

"The Alliance is profoundly disappointed," Miller said. "Mack Point consolidates industry in one location. It economizes existing infrastructure like rail and road access.

The Offshore Wind Port Advisory Group toured Sears Island in November.
Murray Carpenter
/
Maine Public
The Offshore Wind Port Advisory Group toured Sears Island in Nov. 2022.

“This is not NIMBY. We’re YIMBY, we’re saying yes, build it in our background. But build it at Mack Point, not at Sears Island.”

The 940-acre Sears Island, which is owned by the state, has a rich history. For thousands of years, it was stewarded by the Wabanaki who used it as a summer gathering place for hunting and fishing. Later, farmers cleared the land and grazed livestock on it. Since the 1970's, it has been targeted for several development projects, including a nuclear power plant, a coal-fired power plant and in 1996, a deepwater cargo port, supported by then-Gov. Angus King. None of them ever came to fruition. And Gov. King was deeply dismayed when federal regulators rejected the cargo port because they said it would harm the bay's ecosystem.

"Do you know what one of the issues was? One of the major environmental issues raised in connection with this project?" King said at the time. "Eelgrass. Not only eelgrass, shade on eelgrass."

More than a decade later, in 2009, Gov. John Baldacci issued an executive order reserving the right for the Department of Transportation to develop 330 acres in the island's northwest corner for a port and preserving the rest through a conservation easement that is managed by Maine Coast Heritage Trust.

Over the years, Sears Island, with its trails and beaches has become a popular place for family outings, dog walkers and hikers.

Rolf Olsen, of Friends of Sears Island, on one of the trails the group maintains on the island.
Murray Carpenter
/
Maine Public
Rolf Olsen, of Friends of Sears Island, on one of the trails the group maintains on the island in Nov. 2022.

Mills says she recognizes that the construction of a port is not insubstantial, and it will be a change to an area that is enjoyed by many people. But she says the Sears Island parcel......................

Maine Public reporter Murray Carpenter contributed to this story.

https://www.mainepublic.org/2024-02-20/janet-mills-announces-sears-...

 

************************************* 


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: 66

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 February 24, 2024 at 10:41am

APPENDIX 1

 

Floating Offshore Wind Systems in the Impoverished State of Maine

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/floating-offshore-wind...

 

World Offshore Wind Capacity Placed on Operation in 2021

 

During 2021, worldwide offshore wind capacity placed in operation was 17,398 MW, of which China 13,790 MW, and the rest of the world 3,608 MW, of which UK 1,855 MW; Vietnam 643 MW; Denmark 604 MW; Netherlands 402 MW; Taiwan 109 MW

Of the 17,398 MW, just 57.1 MW was floating, about 1/3%

At end of 2021, 50,623 MW was in operation, of which just 123.4 MW was floating, about 1/4%

https://www.energy.gov/eere/wind/articles/offshore-wind-market-repo...

 

Despite the meager floating offshore MW in the world, pro-wind politicians, bureaucrats, etc., aided and abetted by the lapdog Main Media and "academia/think tanks", in the impoverished State of Maine, continue to fantasize about building 3,000 MW of 850-ft-tall floating offshore wind turbines by 2040!!

 

Maine government bureaucrats, etc., in a world of their own climate-fighting fantasies, want to have about 3,000 MW of floating wind turbines by 2040; a most expensive, totally unrealistic goal, that would further impoverish the already-poor State of Maine for many decades.

 

Those bureaucrats, etc., would help fatten the lucrative, 20-y, tax-shelters of mostly out-of-state, multi-millionaire, wind-subsidy chasers, who likely have minimal regard for:

 

1) Impacts on the environment and the fishing and tourist industries of Maine, and

2) Already-overstressed, over-taxed, over-regulated Maine ratepayers and taxpayers, who are trying to make ends meet in a near-zero, real-growth economy.

 

Those fishery-destroying, 850-ft-tall floaters, with 24/7/365 strobe lights, visible 30 miles from any shore, would cost at least $7,500/ installed kW, or at least $22.5 billion, if built in 2023 (more after 2023)

See below Norwegian floating offshore cost of $8,300/installed kW

 

Almost the entire supply of the Maine projects would be designed and made in Europe, then transported across the Atlantic Ocean, in European specialized ships, then unloaded at a new, $450-million Maine storage/pre-assembly/staging area, then barged to European specialized erection ships, for erection of the floating turbines. The financing will be mostly by European pension funds.

 

About 300 Maine people would have pre-assembly/staging/erection/barging jobs, during the erection phase

The other erection jobs would be by specialized European people, mostly on cranes and ships

About 100 Maine people would have long-term O&M jobs, using European spare parts, during the 20-y electricity production phase.

https://www.maine.gov/governor/mills/news/governor-mills-signs-bill...

 

The Maine woke bureaucrats are falling over each other to prove their “greenness”, offering $millions of this and that for free, but all their primping and preening efforts has resulted in no floating offshore bids from European companies

 

The Maine people have much greater burdens to look forward to for the next 20 years, courtesy of the Governor Mills incompetent, woke bureaucracy that has infested the state government 

 

The Maine people need to finally wake up, and put an end to all the climate scare-mongering, which aims to subjugate and further impoverish them, by voting the entire Democrat woke cabal out and replace it with rational Republicans in 2024

The present course leads to financial disaster for the impoverished State of Maine and its people.

The purposely-kept-ignorant Maine people do not deserve such maltreatment

 

Electricity Cost: Assume a $750 million, 100 MW project consists of foundations, wind turbines, cabling to shore, and installation at $7,500/kW.

 

Production 100 MW x 8766 h/y x 0.40, CF = 350,640,000 kWh/y

Amortize bank loan for $525 million, 70% of project, at 6.5%/y for 20 years, 13.396 c/kWh.

Owner return on $225 million, 30% of project, at 10%/y for 20 years, 7.431 c/kWh

Offshore O&M, about 30 miles out to sea, 8 c/kWh.

Supply chain, special ships, and ocean transport, 3 c/kWh

All other items, 4 c/kWh 

Total cost 13.396 + 7.431 + 8 + 3 + 4 = 35.827 c/kWh

Less 50% subsidies (ITC, 5-y depreciation, interest deduction on borrowed funds) 17.913 c/kWh

Owner sells to utility at 17.913 c/kWh

 

NOTE: If li-ion battery systems were contemplated, they would add 30 to 50 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-costs-losses-and-aging

 

NOTE: The above prices compare with the average New England wholesale price of about 5 c/kWh, during the 2009 - 2022 period, 13 years, courtesy of:

 

Gas-fueled CCGT plants, with low-cost, low-CO2, very-low particulate/kWh

Nuclear plants, with low-cost, near-zero CO2, zero particulate/kWh

Hydro plants, with low-cost, near-zero-CO2, zero particulate/kWh

Cabling to Shore Plus $Billions for Additional Gridwork on Shore

 

A high voltage cable would be hanging from each unit, until it reaches bottom, say about 200 to 500 feet. 
The cables would need some type of flexible support system

There would be about 5 cables, each connected to sixty, 10 MW wind turbines, making landfall on the Maine shore, for connection to 5 substations (each having a 600 MW capacity, requiring several acres of equipment), then to connect to the New England high voltage grid. 

The onshore grid will need $billions for expansion/reinforcement to transmit electricity to load centers, mostly in southern New England.

 

Floating Offshore a Major Financial Burden on Maine People

 

Rich Norwegian people can afford to dabble in such expensive demonstration follies (See Appendix 2), but the over-taxed, over-regulated, impoverished Maine people would buckle under such a heavy burden, while trying to make ends meet in the near-zero, real-growth Maine economy.

Maine folks need lower energy bills, not higher energy bills.

 

APPENDIX 2

 

Floating Offshore Wind in Norway

 

Equinor, a Norwegian company, put in operation, 11 Hywind, floating offshore wind turbines, each 8 MW, for a total of 88 MW, in the North Sea. The wind turbines are supplied by Siemens, a German company

Production will be about 88 x 8766 x 0.5, claimed lifetime capacity factor = 385,704 MWh/y, which is about 35% of the electricity used by 2 nearby Norwegian oil rigs, which cost at least $1.0 billion each.

On an annual basis, the existing diesel and gas-turbine generators on the rigs, designed to provide 100% of the rigs electricity requirements, 24/7/365, will provide only 65%, i.e., the wind turbines have 100% back up.

The generators will counteract the up/down output of the wind turbines, on a less-than-minute-by-minute basis, 24/7/365

The generators will provide almost all the electricity during low-wind periods, and 100% during high-wind periods, when rotors are feathered and locked.

The capital cost of the entire project was about 8 billion Norwegian Kroner, or about $730 million, as of August 2023, when all 11 units were placed in operation, or $730 million/88 MW = $8,300/kW. See URL

That cost was much higher than the estimated 5 billion NOK in 2019, i.e., 60% higher

The project is located about 70 miles from Norway, which means minimal transport costs of the entire supply to the erection sites

 

https://www.offshore-mag.com/regional-reports/north-sea-europe/arti...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating_wind_turbine

 

The project would produce electricity at about 42 c/kWh, no subsidies, at about 21 c/kWh, with 50% subsidies 

In Norway, all work associated with oil rigs is very expensive.

Three shifts of workers are on the rigs for 6 weeks, work 60 h/week, and get 6 weeks off with pay, and are paid well over $150,000/y, plus benefits.

 

If Norwegian units were used in Maine, the production costs would be even higher in Maine, because of the additional cost of transport of almost the entire supply, including specialized ships and cranes, across the Atlantic Ocean, plus

A high voltage cable would be hanging from each unit, until it reaches bottom, say about 200 to 500 feet. 

The cables would need some type of flexible support system
The cables would be combined into several cables to run horizontally to shore, for at least 25 to 30 miles, to several onshore substations, to the New England high voltage grid.

.

.

APPENDIX 3

 

Offshore Wind in US and UK

 

Most folks, seeing only part of the picture, write about wind energy issues that only partially cover the offshore wind situation, which caused major declines of the stock prices of Siemens, Oersted, etc., starting at the end of 2020; the smart money got out
All this well before the Ukraine events, which started in February 2022. See costs/kWh in below article

 

World’s Largest Offshore Wind System Developer Abandons Two Major US Projects as Wind/Solar Bust Continues 
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/world-s-largest-offsho...

 

US/UK Governments Offshore Wind Goals

1) 30,000 MW of offshore by 2030, by the cabal of climate extremists in the US government 
2) 36,000 MW of offshore by 2030, and 40,000 MW by 2040, by the disconnected-from-markets UK government

 

Those US/UK goals were physically unachievable, even if there were abundant, low-cost financing, and low inflation, and low-cost energy, materials, labor, and a robust, smooth-running supply chain, to place in service about 9500 MW of offshore during each of the next 7 years, from start 2024 to end 2030, which has never been done before in such a short time. See article
 
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...

 

NOTE: During an interview, a commentator was reported to say” “renewables are not always reliable” 
That shows the types of ignorami driving the bus
The commentator should have said: Wind and solar are never, ever reliable 

US Offshore Wind Electricity Production and Cost

 

Electricity production about 30,000 MW x 8766 h/y x 0.40, lifetime capacity factor = 105,192,000 MWh, or 105.2 TWh. The production would be about 100 x 105.2/4000 = 2.63% of the annual electricity loaded onto US grids.

 

Electricity Cost, c/kWh: Assume a $550 million, 100 MW project consists of foundations, wind turbines, cabling to shore, and installation, at $5,500/kW.

 

Production 100 MW x 8766 h/y x 0.40, CF = 350,640,000 kWh/y

Amortize bank loan for $385 million, 70% of project, at 6.5%/y for 20 y, 9.824 c/kWh.

Owner return on $165 million, 30% of project, at 10%/y for 20 y, 5.449 c/kWh

Offshore O&M, about 30 miles out to sea, 8 c/kWh.

Supply chain, special ships, ocean transport, 3 c/kWh

All other items, 4 c/kWh 

Total cost 9.824 + 5.449 + 8 + 3 + 4 = 30.273 c/kWh

Less 50% subsidies (ITC, 5-y depreciation, interest deduction on borrowed funds) 15.137 c/kWh

Owner sells to utility at 15.137 c/kWh; developers in NY state, etc., want much more. See Above.

 

Not included: At a future 30% wind/solar penetration on the grid:   

Cost of onshore grid expansion/reinforcement, about 2 c/kWh

Cost of a fleet of plants for counteracting/balancing, 24/7/365, about 2.0 c/kWh

In the UK, in 2020, it was 1.9 c/kWh at 28% wind/solar loaded onto the grid

Cost of curtailments, 2.0 c/kWh

Cost of decommissioning, i.e., disassembly at sea, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites

Comment by Whetstone_Willy on February 21, 2024 at 6:12pm

Comment by Willem Post on February 21, 2024 at 10:38am

Mills and her posse of co-conspirators are scheming to see, if:

1) Maine suckers can be fleeced again to build a storage, pre-assembly, staging, shipping area, for $350 million,

2) Any future, highly subsidized, European offshore wind bidders will think Maine is actually serious about strangling its impoverished economy with 17 c/kWh WHOLESALE electricity for floating 800-ft tall monstrosities.

They will be almost entirely designed and built in Europe, shipped with European specialized erection ships, financed by European pension funds, paying lucrative pensions to European retirees.

Biden and his posse of co-conspirators and Maine’s Democrats are screwing the Maine people while hiding behind their HOLY CROSS OF FAKE CLIMATE CHANGE

The above outrageously high prices compare with the average New England wholesale price of about 5 c/kWh, during the 2009 - 2022 period, 13 years, courtesy of:

 

Gas-fueled CCGT plants, with low-cost, low-CO2, very-low particulate/kWh

Nuclear plants, with low-cost, near-zero CO2, zero particulate/kWh

Hydro plants, with low-cost, near-zero-CO2, zero particulate/kWh

El Niños and the Hunga Tonga Sub-Surface Volcanic Eruption
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/hunga-tonga-volcanic-e...

Excerpts:

About 48.5% of solar energy to the world arrives, at the top of the atmosphere, in the Tropics.

Water Vapor, Tropics, is about 24811 ppm, at 27 C and 70% humidity 
WV molecules are about 24811/423 = 58.66 times more prevalent than CO2 molecules

IR Photon Absorption

Worldwide: H2O molecules absorb 4037/(4037 + 423) = 90.5%, and CO2 molecules 9.5%; some sources state up to 8% of IR photons is absorbed by CO2

CO2 has a few narrow absorption bands; IR photons with certain wavelengths can be absorbed

H20 has many wide absorption bands: IR photons with many more wavelengths can be absorbed

Temperate zones: H2O molecules absorb 9022/(9022 + 423) = 95.5% and CO2 molecules 4.5%

Tropics: H2O molecules absorb 24811/(24811+ 423) = 98.3%, and CO2 molecules 1.7%

Remember CO2 plays a 1.7% role in the Tropics, which gets 48.5% of all solar energy arriving at the top of the atmosphere. 

It is completely demented for the IPCC, and other GW hoax perpetrators, to assign any meaningful role to CO2 regarding GW

The CO2 and WV spectra overlap in places, meaning the rare CO2 molecules have to compete with the abundant WV molecules to catch photons. Some of these CO2 molecules catch almost nothing

Comment by Willem Post on February 21, 2024 at 8:48am

Dan,

Trump has to be elected by a landslide, so he can end all the bs, and lots of MAGA Republicans get elected, and lots of Senator Collin RINOS get ousted

Comment by Dan McKay on February 21, 2024 at 6:45am

These people need an intervention to their obsession. It's called Trump.

Comment by Willem Post on February 20, 2024 at 5:09pm

Mills looks like tired, old granny.

She will spout anything put in front of her by her handlers

Comment by Willem Post on February 20, 2024 at 5:04pm

That will be several hundred million dollars down the boondoggle drain

 

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service