How is it possible that Hydro-Quebec and CMP, who have spent millions on slick advertising, have not been required to submit clear, scientific evidence on their project’s true impact on global warming, instead of just vague, unsupported claims?
Hydro-Quebec has already flooded millions of acres of boreal forest, thus releasing huge amounts of carbon dioxide and methane into the atmosphere, and putting highly poisonous methylmercury into the food chain. Without more solid research, how do we know that Quebec’s hydro power is part of the solution, rather than part of the problem, when it comes to climate change?
So I’ve decided. I’m voting “Yes” on Question 1 to stop this project in its tracks. If further research should show Quebec hydro power to be anywhere near the unmitigated good its proponents claim, there’s plenty of room for them to sell their power within Canada or to energy hungry New York. The planet would still benefit.
Question 1 is not about short-term economic benefits or protecting brook trout. It’s about what’s good for Maine, and the planet, in the long run.
Jonathan Wright–Gray
Old Orchard Beach
Copy the Story Link
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Success. Please wait for the page to reload. If the page does not reload within 5 seconds, please refresh the page.
Enter your email and password to access comments.
Hi, to comment on stories you must . This profile is in addition to your subscription and website login.
Already have a commenting profile? .
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.