Comments for: LePage’s energy czar questions offshore wind plan; most PUC comments supportive

Posted Sept. 14, 2012, at 5:34 p.m.
Last modified Sept. 15, 2012, at 5:36 a.m.

AUGUSTA | While environmental groups, business leaders and university officials continue to trumpet the long-term benefits of placing a wind farm off the coast of Maine, Gov. Paul LePage’s energy czar wants more answers about whether the effect on ratepayers and the proposed economic benefits justify the project. If …

Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News encourages comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service.

  1. Keep it civil and stay on topic
  2. No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
  3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.
The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. Here are some guidelines (see more):

  • Anonymous

    It is completely obvious that Republicans serve oil companies, not the best interest of the people, the Maine environment, or the planet Earth.

    • Anonymous

      Wrong again! Do you have a clue where that power will go once it’s so called “on the grid”?Right out of the State of Maine. Like the new wind project on Bull Hill, all power goes to Mass. . That’s right, someone profits on the power, we get the shaft. You’ll still be buying oil! Who you gonna blame for that?

      • Anonymous

        And what of the wind power on Vinalhaven, and Mars Hill, and in western Maine…?  All you TeaPublicans see is what you want to see.  You despise science.  You despise innovation.  You despise potential.  You certainly despise anything that might be good for the planet.  All you TeaPublicans ever, ever, ever care about is what is good for your big flabby fatcat oil company CEO’s whose toenails you dream night and day about smooching.  Right now the TeaPubs are dancing for joy that gas prices have been increasing because they just adore how much more money their plutocratic oil company CEO heroes are going to make.  It is just disgusting.  But that is where the TeaPubs are.  PS:  November 6 is a-comin’.  And oh boy, it’s gonna be one bad day for the TeaPubs.  A serious bruising at the polls is on the way.

        • Anonymous

          # one no name calling! # Two, I am not a TeaPublican, whatever that is. # Three, are you on something? # Four, I buy fuel for four diesel trucks and I love paying $4.25 a gallon so I can work, and of course kiss some fatcats toes! Hopefully the guys in the white suits aren’t far behind you.

      • Anonymous
        • Anonymous

          Read your own hand picked articles. If you believe everything you read on the internet read some of your crap sometime!

          • Anonymous

            Front page of the New York Times.  And everyone knows the Republicans take oil money.  It’s legal.  It’s on record.

            What do you have? (answer: bad grammar)

          • Anonymous

            Hey Spruce . . . . I read the article from the NY Times and basically it said the Solar and Wind companies were not buying ads for this year’s election.  Guess why?  They have NOTHING to show for the billions of dollars Obama has poured into them.  They were just given huge amounts of OUR money, then folded up their tent, went bankrupt, and gave the cash back to the Obama CAMPAIGN…. That is the way it works.  That cash NEVER got repaid to the people.  So they have nothing to use for ads.  Thanks to Obama, the oil industries have huge amounts of cash to spend.  Gas was $1.87 when he took office . . . it is now $4.00.  That makes for a lot of ads . . . . and a good November for us.

      • Lord Whiteman

        Maine is part of the Northeastern power grid. The electrons we excite here in Maine might go to New York or to Eastport but the point is. The money from their production satys in Maine in the form of high paying jobs.

        • Anonymous

          Wrong Again!!!  These projects produce almost NO jobs in Maine.  The ones they do produce are temporary.  The machines are made in Europe or China, and the towers are made overseas as well.  The only jobs are putting them up, and most of that is done by out of state companies that bring their own workers in.  JOBS – that three letter word Joe Biden likes.  LOL

          • Lord Whiteman

             After 2000 and all the factories left rural Maine I was forced to reinvent my business to survive.  One of the things that keeps my Maine company viable is the orders I get from the wind energy industry. 
             Since I am a local I spend that money locally which has a ripple effect.

        • Anonymous

          You are kidding, right?  

          • Lord Whiteman

            No

          • Anonymous

            Clarification:  Most of the money paid to the people building the project stays in Maine.  Most of the money from producing electricity with wind turbines goes to the investors or shareholders of the company owning and operating the turbines.  And in Maine, most wind project owners/operators are from out of state or out of country.  Wind power developments create very few permanent jobs.

          • Lord Whiteman

            Well since all the major energy company’s are from out of state.  The point is Maine wind is by it’s nature made in Maine. That is why Lepage hates it. He wants us to buy all our juice from his countrymen back in Canada.

          • Anonymous

            Wind power might be made in Maine (over Maine), but that enterprise belongs to out of state or foreign companies and their global shareholders.  In our infinite wisdom, we’ve given away some of our best assets to non-Maine entities in exchange for some temporary work – in my opinion.

            As far as LePage is concerned, if wind power were competitive without government mandates, supports and subsidies, I suspect he’d have no opposition to it whatsoever.

      • Ever try to chase down electrons?

        LOL

    • Anonymous

      “It is completely obvious that Republicans serve oil companies…..” says SpruceDweller, commenting on an article about a Republican administration saying “not so fast” to corporate welfare for a company called StatOIL………… ZOMG. Why do I even read this comment section?

    • Anonymous

      Maine gets the new scenary on our mountains and ocean, someone else gets the benefits.
      Do you ever wonder where this power goes, do you think you or your neighbors will get to use any of it? Power for Massachusetts is what you think is good for the Maine enviroment?Or are you just so politically biased you just want to shoot your mouth off?

      • Anonymous

        Talk about being ‘politically biased’ and ‘shooting your mouth off….You’ve nothing but an opinion yourself.   :-)

      • Anonymous

        How about refined gasoline? I think those nice folks in Louisiana and Texas ought to stop letting us use “their” gasoline. Based on your viewpoint, we shouldn’t export blueberries or lobster either.

    • Patten_Pete

      Keep chanting the mantra from George Soros and other anti-Americans who are trying to suffocate our economy and way of life with the war on fossil fuel.

      Until Election Day. Then get yourself some Excedrin.

      • Anonymous

        Gotta love the internet:

        (“Fossil Fuel Industry Opens Wallet To Defeat Obama”)

        http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/14/us/politics/fossil-fuel-industry-opens-wallet-to-defeat-obama.html

        • Anonymous

          Only you Sprucie, only you believe everything they read on the internet. Try using your own brain for once.

          • Anonymous

            Big oil doesn’t like wind power.  Big oil controls the Republicans.

            Think about it. Instead of just reflexively hurling insults, which puts you on the defense and makes you look weak–

            Think.

          • How come Lepage gets an Energy Czar and if the President has a Czar he is called a Socialist without an energy policy?

        • Patten_Pete

          What does wind power have to do with oil?

          ANSWER: Nothing.

          • Anonymous

            Answer:  Big Oil doesn’t like wind power, and Big Oil controls the Republicans. 

            Think about it.

          • Anonymous

            Actually, some big oil companies are investing in wind power.  Statoil deals in petroleum.  Wind power is no threat to the oil industry, so why would they care?

          • Anonymous

             Just because “some” oil companies invest in wind, it doesn’t mean wind isn’t a rival energy source. 

          • Anonymous

            We don’t generate electricity with oil, dimwit.

          • Anonymous

            Wind power makes a statement about global warming, which is a key issue for Big Oil–one they would rather avoid, and if not avoid, deny.  Being rude doesn’t help you impress independent thinkers.

          • Anonymous

            Wow, what logic. Spend billions in order to use an unreliable, unstorable, absurdly expensive, drop-in-the-bucket form of electricity that does nothing to lower emissions whatsoever, since it CANNOT result in the closing of a single power plant, to “make a statement about global warming”. Great, let’s all go bankrupt “making a statement”. That’ll show those big evil oil companies (who are responsible for virtually every technological advance made since 1840).

          • Anonymous

            Your anger is interfering with your logic and objectivity.

            Here is another example of how wind and oil are at odds, and the Republican bias for oil:

            http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/09/07/809091/americans-for-prosperity-calls-wind-tax-credit-deplorable-but-defends-government-support-of-oil-companies/?mobile=nc

            I invite you to supply a link, so maybe you can be more appealing to undecided readers.

          • Anonymous

            A link to what? I’ll be happy to supply any references you’d like, if you’ll be more specific. Here’s a good one to start with, though: 
            http://www.friendsofmainesmountains.org/learn/20-facts-about-wind-power-with-citations

          • Anonymous

            That’s a good link and I invite readers to check it out.  The main problem with the arguments at the link, is this: they are not thinking about the long-term benefits of wind power; and, also, they ignore the fear that the oil companies have of anything that seems to be a solution for global warming.  The oil companies, as you know, continue to deny that global warming is caused by human activity.  Burning oil is one of the main sources of warming gases in the atmosphere.

            Another problem with the link you provide is that it doesn’t consider the benefits of wind power for America as a whole.

          • Anonymous

            I’m for renewables that work. Wind isn’t one of them, at least here in Maine. But look at Hawaii, stuck dead in the middle of the tradewinds, some of the most constant, reliable winds in the world. They have abandoned windmills rusting away, abandoned the last time the subsidies dried up. The companies run the second the taxpayers stop filling their pockets, because the wind industry can’t do what they claim with regard to generation, or stand on their own without the subsidies and inflated rates.  As for the “good of the country”, nationwide wind turbines generate only about 25% of the nameplate capacity with which they’re sold. It’s like buying a Prius on the promise of 50 mpg and only getting 12.5. The machines will wear out long before they pay for themselves, if they ever can. It’s a raw deal, a scam of epic proportions, and we simply can’t afford it, even if it did any good.

          • Ever wonder why?

            It’s just—–To Darn Expensive!

          • Anonymous

            Who’s “we”?  Got a turd in your pocket?

          • Anonymous

            But, can you tell us how wind power is a rival to oil?  Big Oil could probably buy the entire U.S. wind industry with one year’s revenue.  So, can you tell us how Big Oil is threatened by an energy source with which it doesn’t compete?  Natural gas is a more likely rival to oil and I’ve not heard that the oil industry is trying to kill the natural gas industry.

          • Anonymous

            Here is an example of the competition between wind and oil, and also the Republican bias for oil:

            http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/09/07/809091/americans-for-prosperity-calls-wind-tax-credit-deplorable-but-defends-government-support-of-oil-companies/?mobile=nc

            I invite you to do some reading and research, or show that you have, by supplying some links. Otherwise, you’re just sitting in your armchair.

          • Anonymous

            Please.  Your link was for a blog that was voted “Best Liberal Blog” in 2006.  Would you completely trust anything from a blog voted “Best Conservative Blog”?  It’s hardly an unbiased source of information.  You made the charge that “Big Oil doesn’t like wind power, and Big Oil controls the Republicans.”  The onus of proof is on the person making the charge.  You’re asking me to prove a negative rather than you having to prove your own charge.  Your link is hardly proof of the charge.  The article doesn’t make a case that there is competition between wind and oil as energy sources.  It’s an article about a conservative group’s view of energy subsidies and tax credits.  That’s pretty thin evidence.

            There’s a big difference between subsidies and tax credits for oil as opposed to wind.  It’s gravy for oil interests.  It’s life support for wind interests.  Need evidence of that?  The American Wind Industry Association says preserving the PTC is their number one priority.  They also threaten the demise of the U.S. wind industry if the PTC is not renewed.  Do you think the oil industry would disappear if they lost their tax code favors?  Operate anything with an internal combustion engine lately?  The only similarity between subsidies for oil and wind is that both industries get them because of effective lobbying, not because they’re a good idea.

            If I’m not the one making the charge, I DO get to sit in the armchair and wait for the person making the charge to prove that it is true.  Still waiting…..

          • Anonymous

            I’ve supplied two references already and your response is to commit the fallacy of ad hominen–that is, you ignore the arguments and information entirely.  This is simply poor reasoning on your part.  To hide your poor reasoning, you create a posture of offense.  I don’t think independent readers will be fooled.  Thank you, at least, for admitting that you are sitting around in your armchair, providing no links, no references.

            Here is yet another link, for independent voters, showing the importance of wind power, how it separates Democrats from Republicans, and how Republicans are pro-Oil but not pro-wind:

            http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/08/obama-to-hit-romney-on-wind-energy-in-iowa/

            Here’s a quote from the article, from Obama himself:

            “America generates more than twice as much electricity from wind than when I took office. That’s right. The wind industry supports about 7,000 jobs right here in Iowa. Without these wind energy tax credits, those jobs are at risk, 37,000 jobs across the country would be at risk.

            “So my attitude is let’s stop giving taxpayer subsidies to oil companies that don’t need them, and let’s invest in clean energy that will put people back to work right here in Iowa,” he added. “That’s a
            choice in this election.”

            So, Obama agrees with you that the tax credits for oil companies are “gravy”–and that they should be stopped.

          • Anonymous

            So your point is that Big Oil doesn’t like wind power subsidies?  Your statement was that Big Oil doesn’t like wind power.  That logic means that if one dislikes the subsidies for any given industry, they must then dislike the industry.  I dislike farm subsidies, but I don’t dislike farming.  I dislike fossil fuel subsidies, but I’m still using their products, albeit, as little of them as I can.
            Someone asked the question, “What does wind power have to do with oil?”  You responded. “Big Oil doesn’t like wind power…..”  You also implied that wind rivaled oil as an energy source.  If your point was actually that they don’t like wind power subsidies, then that’s what you should have said.  In that regard, they’re far from being alone.  I’ve talked with quite a few people who like wind power, but disapprove of wind power subsidies.  One does not necessarily follow the other.  You’ve not offered any evidence that I can find that wind is a genuine rival to or threatens oil as an energy source.  I’ve looked at all your links and I don’t find anything.  Did I miss it?Before you accuse me of ignoring the argument, you should first correctly frame the argument you intend to take up.

          • Anonymous

            I’ve supplied three references so far.  You none.  You continue to sit in your armchair and do your best to avoid dealing with the arguments.  Rather than continue this dog and pony show with you, I’m supplying one more link, not for you, but for anyone who is undecided and interested:

            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/31/romney-wind-energy-tax-credit_n_1726117.html

            Quote:

            “The American Wind Energy Association put the number of wind-industry supported U.S. jobs at 75,000 and said the industry drives as much as $20 billion in private investment. The trade group estimated the loss of 10,000 wind-industry jobs this year if the tax credit is allowed to expire.”

            You’re smart, but you’re just being lazy and spinning your wheels in specious verbiage.  Give us some references.

            Keep in mind that Obama is for wind tax credits, and Romney is against them, and Big Oil is supporting Romney, as noted above, and:

            http://www.denverpost.com/nationalpolitics/ci_21222427/romney-tilting-against-wind-tax-credit

          • Anonymous

            Yes, you’re very taken with your references.  In fact you hide behind them.  You answer questions by pasting links and mostly unrelated quotes rather than actually answering them yourself.  I looked back through your posts and you haven’t supported your argument in your own words yet.  You don’t even attempt to articulate your logic and line of reasoning.  You just paste a link or a quote and say, “see”, I’m right.  An Obama quote about wind jobs in Iowa doesn’t support your statements.  A New York times article about the fossil fuel industry spending money to promote the Republican candidate and themselves doesn’t support your statements.  A liberal blog about a conservative group’s disdain for the PTC and acceptance of oil credits is not proof for your argument.  A jobs estimate from the AWEA isn’t even related to the original argument.  I can paste a lot of distantly related links too, it doesn’t prove anything.  You left the original discussion a long way back and your logic is puzzling.  (Romney is against tax credits for wind.  Big Oil is for Romney.  Therefore, Big Oil dislikes wind power.  So, I guess, using that logic we can assume that if the Christian Right is for Romney, they also dislike wind power.  And anyone else for Romney, also dislikes wind power.  Actually, that’s not logic.)

            As long as we’re abandoning any attempt to find logical support for your original statements, here’s a reference for you:  The Brookings Institute says there were 24,294 wind jobs in 2010 – as opposed to the AWEA’s estimate of 75,000 in 2011.  (They were claiming 85,000 in 2010.)  Which do you think might be biased?

            http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/reports/2011/7/13%20clean%20economy/0713_clean_economy.pdf

            How much weight would you place on an oil industry jobs estimate from the American Petroleum Institute?  Be careful about trusting information from lobbying associations – whether it’s oil, wind or anything else.

          • Oil is not killing natural gas because oil owns natural gas. Oil is funding misinformation regarding renewable energy to protect the huge profits it makes.

          • Anonymous

            Good point about oil and natural gas.  Bad example on my part.

            I’m curious though, do you have any specific examples of misinformation about renewable energy that oil is funding?  I’m not doubting you, I’m just not aware of it.  There’s a lot of misinformation about renewable energy put out there by both sides of the debate and I am just curious what the oil industry has been doing.

          • The Norwegian government owns 67% of Statoil.

          • Greed controls Republicans! 

            Greed alone!

          • Anonymous

            To me the bigger issue is that taxpayers will pay MORE taxes not less and that energy costs won’t go down. Why should economically strapped people have to shoulder more for some “pilot”? Seems to me the better route would be to let the business who wants it pay for it and if it doesn’t lower costs to the consumer, screw them.

          • Anonymous

            Ask Angus, he has an opinion! But I wouldn’t believe it…

          • Now that’ s a “Patten” Falsehood!

            LOL

          • Anonymous

            Within 10 years gasoline and oil will be over $15.00 a gallon… Electric cars by that time will be developed that are very efficient and will travel over 200 miles per charge… Wind power energy cost will be much less expensive than fossil fuels to produce since the price of wind never goes up, WIND is FREE… Think about our children’s future. Wind and solar do NOT pollute… The Greedy – owned by oil GOP, does not want competition from solar or wind because the GOP is not OWNED or supported by oil or wind…

          • Patten_Pete

            What you just said about the cost of oil, electric cars and wind’s cost indicate you either have investments in wind or are living very far off the grid of reality.

          • Couple of points about the length of charge on EV’s:

            First, most drivers on their daily commute don’t come close to exceeding the current charge limit.

            Second, employers and even municipalities will learn to provide charging stations where EV’s are left for long periods of time – parking lots. Some employers may offer free charging to employees as a perk. In any case, for many workers, their vehicle sits for 8 or 9 hours unused while they are working – a perfect place to recharge it.

      • Lord Whiteman

         I don’t want to go to the middle east and die just so you can have your favorite energy .

         So when will you be shipping off to Iraq to protect Wall st investments there?

        • Anonymous

          What does the Middle East have to do with wind power?

          • What does + have to do with – ?

          • Anonymous

            Can you answer the question without asking a question?  Can you demonstrate that + wind turbines in Maine equals – oil from the Middle East?

            U.S. imports of oil have been declining since 2005.  Imports from the Persian Gulf region are in the single digits – around 7% of our total oil consumption.  U.S. demand for oil has been flat or declining since 2005, as well.  Neither of these favorable trends has been the result of more wind power development.

            In New England, wind power, as a fuel, displaces natural gas, almost exclusively.  So, I ask again, what does the Middle East have to do with wind power?  If you can answer with facts, I’m ready to be educated.  If you can’t, just say so.

          • pavel

            Dlbrt, in case you haven’t noticed is the master of one liners but not capable of stringing two thoughts together to reach a logical conclusion.  The extent of his caveman intelligence is “all republicans are bad”.  Useless comments like Dlbrts are best ignored.

          • Look up Sophisticated in he Dictionary, the last that I looked the definition was

            ( Lacking the privledge of being simple)

            The greatest equation’s are refined down to the simplest forms.

            Thats why the “one liners” !

          • Lord Whiteman

            Occam’s razor doesn’t work too well on “stoneheads”. :)

          •     Natural gas is a finate fossil fuel energy source, wind is an infinate energy source. Every Megawatt produced by an infinate energy source today is a Megawatt saved for a later date.

            Where as time is infinate and the wind is variable, it is only prudent to use wind when it is at its peak an stabilize the downtime with fossil fuel.

            It is the only logical solution to spread the use of energy out for the long run.

            Every arguement that I have ever heard about the cost effectiveness of Fossil Fuel excludes “Time ”

            This instant gratifiction mentality of NOW !

            Will be the undueing of the world

          • Anonymous

            I’ll assume that your decision to not actually address the question asked means that you can’t.

          • ASSUME

            That says it all!

          • Again it isn’t hard to figure out the association between wind versus fossil fuels. One is Finate the other is infinate and regardless of the amount used that comes from the middle east as long as some comes from it there is an association between the aggreagte supply of fossil fuels and the use of wind.

            This is grammar school math for &*&^ sake!

            Five apples and two pears  in the basket, is 7 fruits!  

          • Anonymous

            Your vigorous dodging of the question is really getting to be kind of funny.  We started talking about oil, and now it’s ALL fossil fuels, most of which we don’t get from the Middle East.  

            Once more:  What does the Middle East have to do with wind power?  Show me some of that grammar school math rather than just alluding to it.

            And, FYI, infinate is not in my dictionary.  I believe the word you’re trying unsuccessfully to use is infinite.  It’s grammar school spelling.

          • I failed spelling ,

             LOL

            No pretense there!

            Critical thinking skills I was at the very top!

            However!

            I gave you your answer, go fish!

            Edit; Here is a clue!

            Infinite refers to time

            Aggregate refers the sum of the parts.

          • Lord Whiteman

             It all about oils  “tipping point”  or so called “peak oil” .. Wind energy like all domestic energy sources help to delay the day when the world uses more oil then it can produce.
              http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/02/29/has-the-peak-oil-tipping-point-arrived

        • Anonymous

          Wind power does not heat your home of fuel your car.  That is where the oil is used.  Only natural gas can help in those cases.  Wind is just for electricity, and we won’t have to go to war except here in the good ol’ USA.

          • Anonymous

            Unless you happen to heat with electricity or drive a plug in electric vehicle. Which, by the way, a lot of folks sre starting to do.

          • Anonymous

            Not smart ones.

          • Lord Whiteman

             All our energy sources are fungible. as in, being of such nature or kind as to be freelyexchangeable or replaceable, in whole or in part, for another of like nature or kind.
            http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fungible 

        • Anonymous

          Fine.  You can dazzle us with 25 cent words.  But you can not seriously believe you can exchange gasoline or oil for wind.  They perform two different functions with two different outcomes.  If you want to compare wind to coal, ok.  But coal is not putting our troops or economy in harms way.  Coal comes from the USA.  You are assuming all energy is the same.  It clearly is NOT!  That is simple 10 cent words.

      • Now, “THATS” a Patten falsehood!

        LOL

      • Anonymous

        And you keep chanting the mantra of the Kroch Bros and make this world uninhabitable for our kids! Just keep saying “Profit before Posterity!”

    • Anonymous

      How is paying way too much for electricity helping Mainers???

      • The same way as paying to much for groceries!

      • Lord Whiteman

         Electricity is expensive in Maine because our state is larger than the rest of New England combined but we have the the 38th lowest population density. 
         Now if we let the power companies charge by the actual costs to deliver power rural Maine’s price would likely double while the more densely populated south and urbin centers would pay half what they pay for delivery.

    • If you gave a Republican a Dollar in Tax Cuts, will he follow you home and be your friend?

      LOL

    • Anonymous

      It is completely obvious that you have no real arguments to support wind power (since there are none), and have nothing else to rely on except name-calling. WHAT PART OF “WE DON’T GENERATE ELECTRICITY WITH OIL” DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND?

      • Anonymous

        Your all-caps statement is worthy of a response…

        http://www.powerscorecard.org/tech_detail.cfm?resource_id=8

        • Anonymous

          One question was all caps, for a reason. You keep saying wind can get us off oil, when it can’t. 
          So New York, according to your link, gets a whopping 8% of their electricity from oil (“Though most oil is used for transportation or home heating purposes, a small percentage is still used as a fuel for electricity generating plants. “While oil continues to decline in popularity as an electricity fuel, in places such as New York, oil still comprises about 8 percent of the state’s electricity fuel mix). Let New York’s state government change that if they want to. Nationwide it’s less than 2%. 

      • Lord Whiteman

           You mean we don’t generate electricity with oil “ANY MORE”  We used to use #6 oil until it because too expensive to use compared to alternatives like Wind power.

        • Anonymous

           Wow, the total ignorance displayed in these comments is why scams like wind power keep succeeding. Wind power costs more per kw than any other form of electricity. Wake the h–l up.

  • Anonymous

    What business is Maine open to ?

    • Anonymous

      Hopefully not businesses that require Mainers to spend $203 million more on our electricity so they can put $63 million back into our economy. Doesn’t seem like a good idea to me. You like that return on investment? No wonder Maine is so screwed…

      Aren’t liberals opposed to “corporate welfare”?? Seems like LePage should be getting props from everyone for asking these questions…

      • Anonymous

        That’s an obvious BS number that should only fool fools.

        It is clearly the total cost of all the power over twenty years.
        Subtract the cost of the alternatively generated power not just at its low low recession, 
        natural gas glut, current cut rate, but at what the dinosaur fueled power will cost in 19 years, too.
        Then have your Buggy Whip Committee telegraph us the revised numbers.

        • Anonymous

          We WON’T get the power locally. It goes on the grid and out of state! Jeesh, do a little research, read something, will you?

          • Anonymous

            So ?

          • Anonymous

             So? We subsidize electricity consumers in Massachusetts and you don’t see anything wrong with that?

          • Anonymous

            We who ? 
            YOU pay for what YOU take from the grid.

          • Anonymous

            At much higher rates than all but four other states!!!

          • Anonymous

            Not all off the power goes out of state.

          • Anonymous

            All the Wind power goes out of state.  That is what the grid upgrades are for.  And the upgrades are being done by out of state crews, not Mainers.  And the construction jobs are being done by out of State crews.  And the towers and turbines are made out of the country and shipped to Maine on ships.  The whole thing is a scam, and we are paying for it through our increased rates.

          • Anonymous

            I thought the point was that it all goes into the same grid.

          • Anonymous

            And we gave the investors a guaranteed rate of return of over 14% on thier investmnet.  Pretty damned liberal don’t you think?

        • Anonymous

          News flash genius, the onus is on the company that wants the corporate welfare to provide the numbers, this is all they’ve provided.

          You want me to go get better numbers for StatOil than they have provided to aid them in charging the Maine electrical ratepayers $203 million more in exchange for a whopping 30 jobs?

          And FYI – the alternative power (electricity) does little to counter oil consumption/prices as we don’t use electric (especially the expensive alternative electricity) to heat homes or drive our cars, so, are you ready for this……? Your entire argument is…. Look… Look… over there ————————————–>  worthless.

      • Anonymous

        Yup, just keep spouting your corporate propaganda and keep on a-smooching the toenails of your oil corporation buddies who, while making record profits, still get BILLIONS of our tax dollars a year.  But, aw shucks you say, they’re just some good ole boy billionaires trying to make another dollar along with another mansion.  What foolishness you TeaPubs love to spout like vomit.  It takes time and investment to development new energy sources for the long term.  There is great potential here for our state to be at the cutting edge of this. Good things sometimes take some time.  Are there any TeaPublicans who can see anything at all beyond the end of their noses?

    • Anonymous

      Tourism, Maine is only open to tourists, anything else is… I don’t know, a good paying job???

    • Anonymous

      How about those that can support themselves without taxpayer funding and government mandates guaranteeing them business?

  • Anonymous

    Neanderthal TeaPublicans who do not believe in science, who do not believe in innovation, who do not believe in the future, who do not believe in what is good for the planet, and who exist solely to give pedicures to their corporate masters, are enough to make anyone want to throw up.

    • Patten_Pete

      Do you think wind is effective?

      If you do, you’ve not studied it.

      • Anonymous

        Is fracking? 

        • Patten_Pete

          VERY.

          • Anonymous

            Only as long as all that water, gone forever, is free.

          • Patten_Pete

            Fraudulent scare tactic.

          • Anonymous

            Nope.  Fracking may help produce a lot more oil and gas but it’s not the perfect solution.

          • Anonymous

            Only because you live where potable water is abundant.  

        • Anonymous

          Fracking isn’t taking government grants to do it, they make money the old fashioned way!

          • fourCatssoon

            that is the funniest comment of the day.

          • Anonymous

            Yes, by stomping on anything in their way.  Read up on fracking, talk to real people who live in areas where fracking is common and if they think natural gas is worth their water and their health.  We can live without gas, we can’t live without water.

          • Lord Whiteman

             Sorry lad.  Useful amounts of gas from  Fracking was developed with tax payer money by the  USDepartment of  Energy
             “As far as shale is concerned, I don’t know that 
            industry would ever have taken a look at it 
            without the federal program, because it didn’t 
            look like it had the porosity to be reachable. 
            Government’s not going to step in and develop 
            anything all the way through, but working with 
            industry you have a different set of  eyes. If  you 
            keep an open mind the government can become 
            a real catalyst.”
            Alex Crawley, former Associate Director for Research, National Petroleum Technology Office
            For the complete interview with Alex Crawley, go to 
            http://thebreakthrough.org/blog/2012/05/
            interview_with_alex_crawley_former_program_director_for_the_energ

      • Every Megawatt produced by wind is a Megawatt saved in the earth as oil for a later date!

        Ever fiquered out what you childrens , children are going to do for power in 2034?

        Then again ever think how “irrelevant” you are ?

        Nobody really cares any more about you than you care about your grandsons future!

        • Anonymous

          You do realize that WE DON’T GENERATE ELECTRICITY WITH OIL, don’t you? Wind has no potential to get us off oil whatsoever.

          • Fossil fuels , excuse me!

            Finate Resources , have Finate Energy producing capability.

            Is that real hard to understand?

          • Anonymous

            Yeah it is kinda hard to understand, since “finate” isn’t a word.

          • Anonymous

            Actually, we do generate a small amount in Maine and New England with diesel.

          • Anonymous

            Less than 1%, from the Cousins Island plant, which only starts up during peak loads, when Boston is maxing their A/C usage, on hot humid, WINDLESS days.

          • Anonymous

            Thank you for your acknowledgement. Next: from where do we import LNG in New England? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4GLTE smartphone. From : Disqus Subject : [bdn] Re: LePage’s energy czar questions offshore wind plan; most PUC comments supportive cowcharge wrote, in response to Ninelake: Less than 1%, from the Cousins Island plant, which only starts up during peak loads, when Boston is maxing their A/C usage, on hot humid, WINDLESS days. Link to comment Ninelake wrote: Actually, we do generate a small amount in Maine and New England with diesel. —– Options: Reply with “Like”to like this comment, or respond in the body to post a reply comment. To turn off notifications

          • Anonymous

            Thank you for your acknowledgement. Next: from where do we import LNG in New England? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4GLTE smartphone. From : Disqus Subject : [bdn] Re: LePage’s energy czar questions offshore wind plan; most PUC comments supportive cowcharge wrote, in response to Ninelake: Less than 1%, from the Cousins Island plant, which only starts up during peak loads, when Boston is maxing their A/C usage, on hot humid, WINDLESS days. Link to comment Ninelake wrote: Actually, we do generate a small amount in Maine and New England with diesel. —– Options: Reply with “Like”to like this comment, or respond in the body to post a reply comment. To turn off notifications

          • Anonymous

            The Southeast, the Midwest, and Canada.

          • Anonymous

            Actually a sizable portion comes from Trinidad. All of the Suez gas imported by tanker comes from there. The US is pulling significant amounts from Qatar and Yemen as well. Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4GLTE smartphone. From : Disqus Subject : [bdn] Re: LePage’s energy czar questions offshore wind plan; most PUC comments supportive cowcharge wrote, in response to Ninelake: The Southeast, the Midwest, and Canada. Link to comment Ninelake wrote: Thank you for your acknowledgement. Next: from where do we import LNG in New England? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4GLTE smartphone. From : Disqus Subject : [bdn] Re: LePage’s energy czar questions offshore wind plan; most PUC comments supportive cowcharge wrote, in response to Ninelake: Less than 1%, from the Cousins Island plant, which only starts up during peak loads, when Boston is maxing their A/C usage, on hot humid, WINDLESS days. Link to comment Ninelake wrote: Actually, we do generate a small amount in Maine and New England with diesel. —– Options: Reply with “Like”to like this comment, or respond in the body to post a reply comment. To turn off notifications —– Options: Reply with “Like”to like this comment, or respond in the body to post a reply comment. To turn off notifications

          • Anonymous

             According to the EIA:
            The natural gas pipeline and local distribution companies serving the
            Northeast have access to supplies from several major domestic natural
            gas producing areas and from Canada. Domestic natural gas flows into the
            region from the Southeast into Virginia and West Virginia, and from the
            Midwest into West Virginia and Pennsylvania. Canadian imports come into
            the region principally through New York, Maine, and New Hampshire.

            Liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies also enter the
            region through import terminals located in Massachusetts, Maryland, and
            New Brunswick, Canada.

            They don’t mention where any of the imports other than Canada come from. At any rate, I like natural gas. It works, and is relatively clean.

          • Anonymous

            But importing it is essentially the same as importing foreign oil, and it has similar carbon emissions and nitrogen oxide by products. I am less concerned about warming than having an honest discussion about where energy dollars are spent in the long run. New England produces no natural gas. What energy can we produce? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4GLTE smartphone. From : Disqus Subject : [bdn] Re: LePage’s energy czar questions offshore wind plan; most PUC comments supportive cowcharge wrote, in response to Ninelake: According to the EIA: The natural gas pipeline and local distribution companies serving the Northeast have access to supplies from several major domestic natural gas producing areas and from Canada. Domestic natural gas flows into the region from the Southeast into Virginia and West Virginia, and from the Midwest into West Virginia and Pennsylvania. Canadian imports come into the region principally through New York, Maine, and New Hampshire. Liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies also enter the region through import terminals located in Massachusetts, Maryland, and New Brunswick, Canada. They don’t mention where any of the imports other than Canada come from. At any rate, I like natural gas. It works, and is relatively clean. Link to comment Ninelake wrote: Actually a sizable portion comes from Trinidad. All of the Suez gas imported by tanker comes from there. The US is pulling significant amounts from Qatar and Yemen as well. Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4GLTE smartphone. From : Disqus Subject : [bdn] Re: LePage’s energy czar questions offshore wind plan; most PUC comments supportive cowcharge wrote, in response to Ninelake: The Southeast, the Midwest, and Canada. Link to comment Ninelake wrote: Thank you for your acknowledgement. Next: from where do we import LNG in New England? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4GLTE smartphone. From : Disqus Subject : [bdn] Re: LePage’s energy czar questions offshore wind plan; most PUC comments supportive cowcharge wrote, in response to Ninelake: Less than 1%, from the Cousins Island plant, which on… —– Options: Reply with “Like”to like this comment, or respond in the body to post a reply comment. To turn off notifications

          • Anonymous

             Natural gas burns much cleaner than either oil or coal, and we import much less.

          • Anonymous

            But importing it is essentially the same as importing foreign oil, and it has similar carbon emissions and nitrogen oxide by products. I am less concerned about warming than having an honest discussion about where energy dollars are spent in the long run. New England produces no natural gas. What energy can we produce? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4GLTE smartphone. From : Disqus Subject : [bdn] Re: LePage’s energy czar questions offshore wind plan; most PUC comments supportive cowcharge wrote, in response to Ninelake: According to the EIA: The natural gas pipeline and local distribution companies serving the Northeast have access to supplies from several major domestic natural gas producing areas and from Canada. Domestic natural gas flows into the region from the Southeast into Virginia and West Virginia, and from the Midwest into West Virginia and Pennsylvania. Canadian imports come into the region principally through New York, Maine, and New Hampshire. Liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies also enter the region through import terminals located in Massachusetts, Maryland, and New Brunswick, Canada. They don’t mention where any of the imports other than Canada come from. At any rate, I like natural gas. It works, and is relatively clean. Link to comment Ninelake wrote: Actually a sizable portion comes from Trinidad. All of the Suez gas imported by tanker comes from there. The US is pulling significant amounts from Qatar and Yemen as well. Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4GLTE smartphone. From : Disqus Subject : [bdn] Re: LePage’s energy czar questions offshore wind plan; most PUC comments supportive cowcharge wrote, in response to Ninelake: The Southeast, the Midwest, and Canada. Link to comment Ninelake wrote: Thank you for your acknowledgement. Next: from where do we import LNG in New England? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4GLTE smartphone. From : Disqus Subject : [bdn] Re: LePage’s energy czar questions offshore wind plan; most PUC comments supportive cowcharge wrote, in response to Ninelake: Less than 1%, from the Cousins Island plant, which on… —– Options: Reply with “Like”to like this comment, or respond in the body to post a reply comment. To turn off notifications

          • “WINDLESS days ”

            Now you got it! Without the wind we burn oil!!!!!Oil is one of the best instant stabilisers for windpower!Wind don’t blow, —Turn it on, Wind Blows—Turn it off!No more oil– Wind don’t blow, –tough luck!–Wait!Thats why you turn it off when the wind blows so you can save it for later!

            DUH! 

          • Anonymous

             “Duh” is right. Once again, we don’t use freaking oil to generate power. We use coal and natural gas, primarily. And you can’t turn power plants on and off every five minutes. They must be kept running 24/7 whether the wind blows or not, which is one reason wind does almost nothing to help emissions. Windmills will never close a power plant.

      • Yes it produces electricity.

      • Lord Whiteman

         Effective???? Heck yes it’s effective.. 
          
        The United States produced enough electricity from wind in the 12 month period before July 2012 to power over 11 million US households annually[4] or meet the total energy demands of the Netherlands.[5] New wind farms can produce electricity in the 5-8 cents per kWh range, making wind power competitive with the cost of fossil fuel electricity generation in many markets.[6] Fourteen states have installed over 1,000 MW of wind capacity, and a total of 37 states now have installed at least some utility-scale wind power.[7] Texas, with 10,377 MW of capacity, has the most installed wind power capacity of any U.S. state, followed by Iowa with 4,322 MW.[8] The Alta Wind Energy Center in California is the largest wind farm in the United States with a capacity of 1020 MW of power[9]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_the_United_States 

    • Anonymous

      I call them Neo-Know Nothings.

      • Anonymous

        I have a feeling Mitt Nival is a wind shill.  He obviously has no idea what he is talking about. 

  • Patten_Pete

    Steal those U.S. subsidies Stattoil.

    Grovel for those grants Habib.

    • Anonymous

      Get some offa BP and Halliburton !

  • Anonymous

    This may, or may not be on topic, however I have long thought that I wish there was a smaller home size wind power charger, for resistance heating in homes, it would just be a very simple wind mill, that would generate power for resistance heating, no regulators, no batteries, just a lock out of the blades so when it was warm enough, you would not need heat, you could lock it out.

    • Try solar. Mini split heat pumps run on electricity and cost  much less to run than oil boilers.

  • Anonymous

    Halliburton  = Cheney

    • Anonymous

      Kazak oil = Al Gore. Little known fact.

  • Anonymous
  • Lord Whiteman

    Lepage always seems to oppose anything that might help Mainers while he always support projects that help his countrymen in Canada. 
     

  • Anonymous

    Whoopie!!!!!  They are talking private investment!!!!!!  That certainly is a start.  But it STILL does not address the transmission problem we have here in Maine.  You can build all the wind turbines you want in Maine, but if you can’t get the energy produced reliably into the New England grid, it is a waste of money and engineering.  The Spanish company that owns CMP, Ibradola, has stated that we have to put $19 -$26 BILLION into upgrading our current perfectly good grid to make Wind work.  A $1.5 billion upgrade that is due to be completed soon just raised our rates 19.6%.  We already pay higher electric rates than all but 5 states in the US, even though we produce the most renewable energy in the US.  That’s right, 50% of our energy comes from renewables.  And more than that would be produced if we would stop tearing down the dams that have been producing reliable cheap hydro electricity for over 100 years. 
    Our priorities are skewed.  They have been pushed and pushed by “scientists” that have alarmed the public with falsified “facts” and called climate change “settled”.  It is not.  2,500 scientists with the IPCC have done all this.  The new “scientists”,  35,000 of them, have come foreward to rebuke those facts and have exposed the IPCC and the East Anglia University Climate Research Unit for the fraudulent data.  They still have no idea why the climate since 1999 is COOLER, and will probably remain that way till 2030. 
    Please people.  Do a little research on your own and find out just what these frauds have been doing to us in the name of saving the planet.  They seek power and control, that is all.

  • Anonymous

    Maybe there’s potential there, maybe not.  

    Most importantly, someone needs to start being more transparent about the financials.  Everyone’s arguing over the price of the offshore wind energy, but no one’s talking about the cost of transmission.  No transmission currently exists.  Floating turbines are worthless without a means of transmission.  Transmission for a small experimental project relatively close to shore is one thing.  Transmission and the technology to handle thousands of megawatts of intermittent, variable power (20 miles offshore, no less) that has to be integrated into the grid is quite another.  Who’s paying for that?  I haven’t seen that addressed yet.  Is that discussion being intentionally avoided?  If it’s proponents believe it can work, they should start talking about ALL the associated costs.

    • What about jobs created constructing the turbines and building the transmission lines? The potential is enormous. If we don’t do it someone else will. Why not create the industry here in Maine?

      • Anonymous

        Jobs are great.  Economic development is great.  But, the project, regardless of what it is, has to be able to justify itself and it’s expenses on its own merits.  If you build a bridge, you do so because you need a bridge, and the post construction benefits outweigh the cost, not because it creates jobs in bridge construction or bridge component manufacturing.  That would be the tail wagging the dog.  Would you build a house in order to give a construction crew some work?  More likely, you build it because you need it and you can afford it – and then you keep construction costs as low as possible regardless of how the construction industry feels about it.

        But, when we stop having to actually write the checks ourselves, the rules seem to change.  Construction costs are no longer on the expense side of the page.  The people promoting these projects have somehow convinced us now that the costs of a public works project are no longer a cost, but a benefit, as if no cost exists.  They’re turning the balance sheet on its head and I think that’s a troubling trend.  It might be a reason we keep digging ourselves further into the debt hole.  If the project is not economical or feasible on its own, then it’s a jobs program being paid for by someone else – or not being paid for and just increasing the size of the debt hole.

        If wind power is going to be a meaningful part of New England’s energy supply, it’s offshore wind that would make that possible, not onshore.  But, it has to make sense on its own, and, presently, we’re not being told enough about the overall expense (nor the energy and environmental benefits for that matter) to determine whether or not it makes sense.

  • Anonymous

    Price oil so that the price includes all the costs that are incurred using it, such as health costs, military spending defending access, global warming such as drought, and the eventual rising sea level cost. Add all these costs to the current cost of oil, and wind will look damn attractive.

  • Anonymous

    This is a great way to get the people of Maine to clear out and leave the place as a park for us NEW YORK CITY folks.   Tax ’em out!

  • Anonymous

    Oil is a whole lot cheaper then wind energy and is not subsidized by the goverment.

    • Anonymous

      Oil is not subsidized by the government!!! You have got to be kidding. Do you actually think that the reason thousands of US troops were killed and TRILLIONS  of dollars spent on wars in the Middle East is not an oil subsidy? W’s war with Iraq was/is an oil subsidy and it is costing us a hell of a lot more than a few billion here or there in support of alternative energy sources.

      • Anonymous

        Oil has nothing to do with the Wind argument.  There are very few power companies using oil for power generation.  In Maine we have NONE!  Until you can put a windmill on your car, or heat your home with one, the Oil argument is just hype.

  • Ken Fletcher opposes renewable energy period. He voted against a feed-in tariff bill as a member of the Energy and Utilities Committee while serving as a state representative.

    Feed in tariff laws are in effect in more than 60 countries and are considered to be the most effective market based strategy to introduce technologies like wind and solar to produce electricity.

    Ken is very short sighted. The cost of producing electricity from solar has dropped 60% over the past 6 years. In the same period the cost of energy produced from fossil fuels has averaged a yearly 7% increase.  As our economy recovers the cost of dirty energy will rise at a faster pace.

    The question I have is: Who is Ken Fletcher looking out for?

  • Anonymous

    ROMNEY / RYAN  2012 !!!

  • Anonymous

    Stop this foolish project please

  • Anonymous

    What I would like to know is what is the guaranteed rate of return on the investmnet.  For the latest upgrade of the transmission lines it was over 14% which was agreed to by the PUC.  I assume this project probably has the same ROR so why wouldn’t they be pushing for it?  I would love to have a ROR of +14% on my investments!

    • One way to stop our utility companies from making this rate of return is to go solar and small wind. If the don’t distribute they don’t get the money.
      We are building infrastructure to handle a 20th century scheme. The future is in distributed production of electricity. Make it near where you use it. Keep the money in Maine. Create the jobs in Maine.

  • Why is Norway so interested in building floating turbines in Maine waters?  Are they getting our tax dollars to help build their project?  Are they receiving US grant monies?  Why aren’t they focusing on their own country’s needs???

  • Anonymous

    When one is in bed with one industry, why would one support another?  It works both ways and we need diversity and cooperation not name-calling in addressing our needs.

  • Anonymous

    Consideration of cost for Maine’s foray into alternative energy (in this case offshore wind power) is, of course, necessary, but so is consideration of Maine’s reputation as being a place open to the exploration of new technologies and, perhaps, greater investment in the future.  Whether or not offshore wind or tidal power can become a viable source of future energy is only one consideration, and maybe in the long run, not even the most important consideration for Maine’s economic future.  Perhaps showing the world that Maine is willing to lead the way in new kinds of energy technology is the more valuable achievement.  Is it worth the risk?  I think so.  One thing that is for sure, fossil fuels are a finite source which will eventually run out, and this cannot be argued – more drilling in the Gulf, pipelines of tar sands and the rest are only temporary solutions that leave the real work of solving the energy problems to future generations.  Why not at least try to be part of the solution?

  • Anonymous

    Regarding LePage:  Make sure he is a ONE Term Gov…!!!

  • Anonymous

    I voted for Paul LePage. I am okay with wind power, especially developing offshore wind power. This is a pilot project that is committed to spending about$40 million with Maine vendors and suppliers. Maine could lead the nation in developing offhore wind. As technology improves, costs are driven down and efficiency increases. Offshore wind in the US is sort of like the oil industry in 1895.
    If this project gets built, my electric bill goes up about 3-4 cents per month, OMG! I may go broke…gimme a break!
    And for my friends on the left, I am okay with LNG, solar, nuclear, hydro and natural gas pipelines…the jury is still out on coal, for me, anyway…
    Yes, electricity goes into the grid, we send our lobsters and potatoes out of state, too…same with our lumber…
    Let’s all study this proposal objectively before beating it to death for the sake of political posturing. Thank you!

  • Anonymous

    This debate is not about Democrats or Republicans, Greens or
    Independents.  This is about science,
    economics and integrity.  Reasonable
    people don’t throw out insults to people they don’t know (hiding behind screen
    names makes it easier to do, of course) 
    Reasonable people look at the facts. 
    Look at the sources of their information.  Look at each other and say ‘We disagree, but
    surely, we share common ground…’

     

    If grid-scale industrial wind was a viable energy source– dependable,
    able to support itself, able to be easily integrated into our grid, able to be
    stored, able to be built with more positive benefits than negative impacts,
    able to co-exist in harmony with nature and human beings without causing harm—then
    this conversation wouldn’t be necessary.  But it is—because for years citizens have been
    led to believe that ‘wind’ will reduce carbon by a significant amount, that it
    will reduce our dependence on the Middle East, that it will counter the effects
    of global warming, and that (because the ‘fuel’ is free) it will reduce energy
    prices.

     

    I once believed the mantras told us by the wind industry—but
    that was because I never looked beyond the rhetoric. I wanted to believe that
    wind was a panacea and that it held the key to solving some of these critical
    issues.

     

    Over the years, I’ve heard every argument and every ‘reasoning’
    that exists for the massive build-out of industrial wind.  I’ve read the information and the reasoning (and invective)
    on these online blogs. I’ve stood face-to-face with many representatives of the
    wind industry and asked them hard questions…and watched them vacillate, hedge
    and change the subject when they are made to answer those questions
    directly.  They’ve changed their
    tune.  No longer do they talk about ‘getting
    us off foreign oil’ (because wind won’t unless and until we are driving dependable, long-range electric cars and heating our homes with affordable and dependable electricity) or about ‘energy security’ (which it
    won’t provide…because it’s not dependable or reliable or constant or affordable)
    or about ‘countering global warming’ (because the carbon off-set from mining,
    manufacturing, transporting and building the projects is almost non-existent,
    and because the base-load and spinning reserve power needed to support the
    vagaries of wind burns fuel inefficiently [meaning it pollutes more] while waiting to kick-in).  Now, all the industry talks about is ‘jobs’.  Jobs that are ephemeral and only exist
    because the American tax-payer allows its representatives at the state and
    national level to commit our hard-earned dollars for this energy source which
    was abandoned 100 years ago for good reason.

     

    Let’s have an honest, civilized debate.  Let’s leave politics out of the conversation.  We’re all in this together, and we all have
    different levels of knowledge, different reasons for supporting or opposing
    this ‘wind’ initiative and different ideologies.  I think there are things we have in
    common.  We love our country and our
    planet.  We don’t want to cause harm to
    our environment or to our neighbors.  We
    want to be able to afford to live with some level of comfort.  We don’t want wars, we don’t want large
    multi-national corporations setting policies and running the show and we want
    to leave something good and decent –and worth saving—for our descendents.

     

    There may come a time when grid-scale wind can support
    itself, when it can be stored, when it can be built without making people sick
    and without harming our last remaining undeveloped regions.  Until that time, I will support research and
    development, but I do not support our current policy of moving forward with a
    high-impact, high-cost, low-benefit energy plan.

     

    Respectfully,

    Karen Pease

    Lexington Township, Maine 
      

    • Anonymous

      Very well put, Karen

  • Anonymous

    Mr.  Lepage,
    It  is time to stop the scamming of Maine citizens by the wind cartel.
    Place a Moratorium now,please establish  Strict cost benefit analysis now.
    Rein in the PUC Now.
    Kill the Emera/First Wind/ Algonquin farce now, for your citizems benefit  please.
    Remember your “citizens first” pledge please…and act!

  • Lord Whiteman

      Maine made energy BADDDDD, foreign imports GooDDDDDDDDD..  

  • Ken Fletcher opposes renewable energy period. He voted against a feed-in
    tariff bill as a member of the Energy and Utilities Committee while
    serving as a state representative.

    Feed in tariff laws are in effect in more than 60 countries and are
    considered to be the most effective market based strategy to introduce
    technologies like wind and solar to produce electricity.

    Ken is very short sighted. The cost of producing electricity from
    solar has dropped 60% over the past 6 years. In the same period the cost
    of energy produced from fossil fuels has averaged a yearly 7%
    increase.  As our economy recovers the cost of dirty energy will rise at
    a faster pace.

    The question I have is: Who is Ken Fletcher looking out for?

  • Anonymous

    How Angus King’s Independence Wind helped shape Maine’s expedited wind law

    http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/4401701:BlogPost:42002 

Similar Articles