No matter what our politics are, or where we stand on Maine’s transition to a green energy future, we should agree on the need for a comprehensive grid plan that takes into account both environmental and socioeconomic factors. Otherwise, we’re doomed to play a zero-sum political game to the detriment of all.
In its current form, the Aroostook Renewable Gateway would cut a 160-mile-long, 150-foot-wide easements with 140- to 160-foot towers through rural Maine.
As others have pointed out, it would simultaneously deliver clean energy to Southern New England and leave in its wake diminished generational farms, vast environmental damage and, for hundreds of “host” landowners, lower property values. Yet the state has so far refused to study this conundrum, or even to push for a solution that follows the “best practice” of using existing corridors.
This is a serious problem. The Aroostook Renewable Gateway is slated to run through 41 municipalities that don’t have much money or power, a fact at odds with the Legislature’s statutory obligation to “promote energy equity with particular consideration given to the economic circumstances and opportunities in the State’s socially vulnerable counties and communities.”
Is a massive, above-ground system that destroys the landscape and creates hardship for vulnerable communities really something we should embrace without further study? Or should we approach the thorny issue of siting transmission with greater care, both now and into the future? These fundamental (if rhetorical) questions seem to be missing in our conversation.
In order to reach its 2045 carbon neutrality goals, Maine should move forward in a balanced way to harness its abundance of clean energy resources. But without a visible plan for getting there, and without any inclination to consider a less destructive version of the Aroostook Renewable Gateway, it’s easy to conclude that the current approach is bad for Maine at all levels. Even a cursory look at the the 2023 ISO New England Overview and Regional Update reveals that the Aroostook Renewable Gateway will be only one of many transmission projects to come through Maine. To meet this reality, are we ready to cut more corridors and erect endless above-ground high-impact transmission lines?
Historically, as advancements in technology have emerged, they have prompted paradigm shifts in business operations. Those who recognized and leveraged these shifts in their business models became extremely successful (take Ford Motor Co., Microsoft, Apple or General Electric). Those who failed to adapt ceased to exist. Consider the example of so many Maine paper companies, now gone. Business history abounds with case studies of other companies that succumbed to “groupthink” and eventually failed.
Organizations, and in our case the state, too often fall into this trap, whether due to happenstance, market pressures, political pressures, or simple refusal to see or listen to the obvious.
History also teaches that when we rush to market and let cost or fame solely dictate our direction, with little or no regard to other voices or data, we are headed for failure. In this case, Maine appears to be selling our resources to Southern New England and paying little attention to the environmental and socioeconomic impacts of the proposed strategy. If pursued, the short- and long-term consequences will be devastating.
We are moving into an election year. I’m suggesting that you reach out to your representatives and senators and ask that they (1) put this project on hold; (2) pull down the veil of secrecy surrounding it; and (3) push for an independent third party to conduct a comprehensive feasibility study on buried high-voltage direct current (HVDC) technology and show Maine a better way to embrace the paradigm shift happening within the energy industry.
New Hampshire, Vermont, New York and other states have embraced buried HVDC. Why can’t we do the same?
Send questions/comments to the editors.
