The big question for Mainers in the Nov. 7 election will be whether to create an entity called Pine Tree Power, charged with routing all the electrons that make up our increasingly vital supply of electricity.

It could be that our very survival depends on “electrifying” our system — replacing fossil fuel burning that has put us on the verge of a potentially terminal case of global warming, hostile to humans and many other forms of life.

Question 3 is a really big deal. Unfortunately, it’s the wrong question.

The problems start with the new entity itself, described, according to the Secretary of State’s court-approved wording, as “a privately operated, nonprofit, consumer-owned utility.”

It is easier to describe what it’s not than what it is.

It’s not the familiar Central Maine Power and Versant (formerly Bangor Hydroelectric) that serve Maine now. The referendum’s backers are counting on their vast unpopularity, only some of which is their fault.

The biggest structural problem is the — sorry — witless 2000 law, passed by the Legislature and signed by then-Gov. Angus King to “deregulate” electric providers.

It’s never produced any benefits for residential customers, but did permanently split generation and transmission functions, leading directly to the sale of both Maine-based companies to out-of-state interests.

This, in turn, produced customer service failures that fueled the referendum against CMP’s power line to Canada, temporarily shutting down Hydro-Quebec’s massive infusion into the New England grid — power we’d love to have right now.

Instead, we await a construction restart, with greater costs than if built on schedule.

Pine Tree Power is certainly unique — there is nothing like it on the utility landscape. Its backers struggle to explain how it would work.

They point to Nebraska, where private utilities were banned in the 1930s — the dawn of time for public utilities. It’s hardly pertinent when considering scrapping a century of utility management in the hope something new will, somehow, be better.

They’ve also talked up Long Island Power in New York, a public entity that succeeded a private utility in 1989. But that utility was bankrupt when taken over by the state.

It’s very different in Maine. However much you may dislike CMP and Versant, they’re financially robust, and will fight in court to prevent expropriation of their assets.

Then there’s a takeover’s cost — between $7 billion and $13 billion, we’re told. Even the lowest figure is twice the state of Maine’s total bonded debt.

Though a nonprofit can potentially borrow more cheaply, that’s a huge upfront cost to be accounted for in rates. These utilities won’t come cheap.

It’s when we get into management that things really go haywire. The 13-member board would be made up by seven members, elected from districts statewide, who then pick six “experts” to do technical work.

Can we imagine, given our political divisions, this board working smoothly? It’s much easier to foresee 4-3 splits among elected commissioners on everything from where to run new lines to how much to invest in maintenance.

It’s a lot to ask voters to decide, yes or no, a question that can’t possibly involve a clear understanding of how Pine Tree Power would work.

We should have learned by now. This is another abstract exercise from the half-baked left, not a serious proposal to improve Maine’s utilities.

Similar sentiments led to adoption of ranked-choice voting, which unfortunately doesn’t apply to the one race where “splitting the vote” regularly occurs — for governor.

Then there were two unconstitutional attempts, in 2020 and 2021, to block Hydro-Quebec, the second passed by 59% before courts nullified it.

Now we have a pig-in-a-poke called Pine Tree Power, reminiscent of the three — yes, three — failed referendums to close the Maine Yankee nuclear plant, a carbon-free power source we’d like to have back. It shut down in 1996 due to mounting repair costs on the non-nuclear side.

If the sole opinion poll to date is accurate, voters will reject Question 3. If they do, we can focus on the real need: a public power authority to govern generation.

States with notably lower generating costs, including New York, Washington and Oregon, have public power authorities based around now-obsolescent hydro facilities; Hydro-Quebec is the last of the breed.

A Maine public power authority can guide the transition to renewables — how much solar, how much wind, and where? Is tidal power viable? Battery storage?

These questions are a stretch for the Public Utilities Commission now running the show; it’s a regulatory, not a planning, agency.

There’s a huge canvas to be filled. The Legislature must do its job, by introducing and debating a public power bill — whatever happens on Nov. 7.

Copy the Story Link

« Previous

Commentary: We can create housing while protecting what we love about Maine

Next »

Commentary: Massacre of Israelis cannot open the door to antisemitism