There’s nothing straightforward about Maine’s Question 1, which challenges the electric utility corridor being built in western Maine. For starters, a yes vote means you don’t support the corridor and a no vote means you do.

Then there’s the odd combination of supporters on each side. On the yes (shut down the corridor) side is the Sierra Club, Natural Resources Council of Maine (NRCM) and NextEra, the world’s largest utility company. NextEra doesn’t want hydro to compete with nuclear and oil fired energy plants they own in the region. Environmental groups are concerned about the impact of a clear-cut through the Maine forest and the flooding of native lands from the dams.

On the no (we need to build this) side you have Hydro Quebec, Central Maine Power, two gas energy companies, the Conservation Law Foundation and a number of individuals that I have known and respected for years. Nothing straightforward here.

The project all comes down to money. A lot of money. According to Maine Public’s Fred Bever, Hydro-Quebec will rake in $200 million a year for the 40 year life of the project. CMP $60 million a year. The combined benefits to the state of Maine, negotiated by Governor Mills amount to about $6 million a year, not considering the fact that these benefits will be worth less in 40 years than they are now. From the economics, the project doesn’t look like a win for Maine.

But if we are to vote from our hearts, here’s the pivotal question: Does the project actually reduce carbon emissions? State Senator Brownie Carson introduced a bill to answer this question in 2020. The bill mandated a an environmental analysis to be done by the Maine DEP. Almost instantly, the state house was filled pro-hydro lobbyists claiming that we didn’t need or want this study. The bill was killed quickly.

A few months later I was listening to Maine Calling, a talk show on Maine Public Radio. Host Jennifer Rooks was interviewing the CEO of Hydro Quebec. He claimed that hydro power is renewable energy, which it is, in the sense that it is continuous and doesn’t burn fossil fuels. Dylan Vorhees, then a lobbyist with NRCM, called into the show. Vorhees asked the CEO if he would be willing to come to Maine and speak about the environmental benefits of the project under oath. The CEO answered, “No I would not”.

It is interesting is that the “No on Question one” campaign is focused on the message “We don’t want retroactive laws.”  Why not talk about environmental benefits? After all, a vast majority of Mainers care deeply about preserving Maine’s natural environment—as seen in the over 60% of Maine voters who support funding Land for Maine’s Future. A strong message about the environmental benefits of the project would be well received.

The substantial profits, the lack of transparency, and lack of information about environmental benefits, leads me to conclude that there are no environmental benefits. The corridor is just an opportunity to sell power at a high rate of return to Massachusetts. The power sold there will be replaced. Maybe by building more dams, maybe by plants fueled by tar sands oil, maybe by renewables. But we don’t know which, because neither Hydro Quebec nor CMP have told us.

Unless I can see or hear more reason than profits to tear up the woods and flood native lands, I will have to vote yes to stop the project.

Sources:
Profits and Costs: https://www.mainepublic.org/business-and-economy/2019-03-25/cmp-powerline-facts-and-documents

Campaign Funders: https://www.pressherald.com/2021/10/17/qa-on-question-1-will-transmission-line-be-clean-energy-link-or-scar-on-maines-landscape/