The Maine energy bill L.D. 1400 should emphasize developing renewable energy instead of cost containment because the switch to clean, renewable energy is the best way to contain costs in the long run.

Wind, solar, hydro and other renewable technologies are bargains compared to fossil fuel-generated power when the effects of global warming and related air pollution are included. Some examples of the added cost of fossil-fuel generation caused by global warming are:

• A warmer ocean is causing a decline in the Maine lobster and shrimp industries.

• A warmer climate is causing an increase in the tick population, leading to a decline in the moose population.

• A warmer climate is causing an increase in pollen, leading to an increase in respiratory problems.

• Mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants are polluting the air and seas, leading to increasing levels of mercury in the fish we eat.

• A warmer climate is causing more severe storms, hurricanes and tornadoes, leading to increased flooding and devastation.

And there are many more examples of added cost factors.

We are facing a choice: We can continue our reliance on fossil fuels and live with the problems they cause, or we can roll up our sleeves and start fixing the problems by developing an alternate approach with clean, renewable energy.

The Legislature should change the priorities in L.D. 1400 to the development of clean, renewable energy solutions as an investment that will save money in the long run.

Peter Konieczko

Scarborough

Copy the Story Link