If Northern Pass did not pass the aesthetics test in New Hampshire, I don’t see why a longer, less direct utility corridor in Maine would be any different.

Several years ago, on top of Speckled Mountain, I debated, in my mind, the aesthetic of wind turbine farms in the Rumford area. I had to admit that the sight of clean energy was better than invisible carbon dioxide. And, whatever grid this source fed into, a good deal of it went to Mainers.

However, I don’t like the fact that a mega-utility (Hydro-Quebec) wants a mega-corridor through Maine to supply megawatts solely to power-hungry southern New England. In return, Maine gets about $6 million per year – that will look more like $1.5 million at the end of a 40-year contract.

It’s too bad our previous governor chose to spurn a serious offshore wind turbine project. I was hoping our present governor would have a primary attitude about energy other than “Turn on the spigot.” The enduring lesson is: Conservation first and foremost. If so, we wouldn’t have asinine accusations about which industries are bankrolling which side of the issue with their ad money. This state should be focused on self-sustaining clean-energy production, not corporate welfare passing through.

I’ve hiked some of the locations that were planned for Northern Pass. The loss is no less for a corridor in Maine. The question is: How much do we lose before we start changing our energy habits? I’d like to think headway can be made while the sun is still shining and the wind is still blowing in Vacationland.

Douglas Yohman

East Waterboro

Copy the Story Link

« Previous

Letter to the editor: Food insecurity is a widespread but hidden Maine problem

Next »

Letter to the editor: Without data, vivid mental picture develops of Russian election tactics