I found last Sunday’s editorial, “Perfection is the enemy of our environment,” to be misleading. All of the major environmental and conservation entities in Maine favor the development of offshore wind energy in the Gulf of Maine. While there is unanimity on that, some groups have serious doubts that Sears Island must be the place to support this development.
A viable alternative, called Mack Point, exists onshore just a short distance from Sears Island. This was not even mentioned in the editorial. The record suggests that the state has not been transparent in its selection of Sears Island over Mack Point. Mack Point is an already developed port that has supported various fossil fuel energy facilities for decades and has even been active recently as a port for onshore wind turbine parts to be transported to inland Maine.
I simply do not accept that we must disrupt a functioning ecosystem and recreational destination on Sears Island while a suitable alternative exists. I say this because keeping ecosystems unperturbed is part of the solution to the climate crisis.
David VonSeggern
Westbrook
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.