With Tuesday’s announcement that the state intends to locate a port on Sears Island to support offshore wind construction, the Mills administration provides hope that, at long last, Maine can build something big.

The recent track record has not been encouraging. Voters in a 2021 referendum canceled a $1 billion power line to Canada for hydroelectricity that while later reinstated in court has yet to resume construction due largely to rising costs. A similarly ambitious line to connect the proposed King Pine wind project in Aroostook County also fell by the wayside when the developer pulled out, citing municipal and landowner opposition.

The Searsport fabrication, maintenance and shipping terminal represents the next best chance to position Maine firmly toward putting substantial amounts of renewable energy into homes, businesses and industry — and powering larger fleets of electric vehicles.

It’s about time. Maine, like the world, has been long on pledges to “decarbonize” the grid by eliminating fossil fuel use, but short on results.

And there’s little question Gov. Mills made the right decision about the site. Local conservation interests insist the entire island should remain undeveloped, but this flies in the face of the state’s long-term interests, and the island’s history.

In the 1960s, Maine adopted a three-port strategy aimed at supporting sustained economic growth, encompassing Portland, Searsport and Eastport. Each port has unique strengths and weaknesses.

Portland has shifted away from fisheries and toward a booming container business, with the Icelandic company Eimskip growing traffic by leaps and bounds. But Portland has shallow water access and little room to expand.

Eastport has plenty of deep water, but also a challenging landward location limiting cargo movement.

Searsport is deep enough for most vessels, and Sears Island has plenty of room for the windport to expand, as well as good land-level rail access. Among the three ports, it’s best positioned for this project.

The putative alternative, the Mack Point operation on the Searsport mainland, is clearly inferior. It’s privately owned, has limited docking space, and building there would have a much greater impact on historic Searsport village, which lies along Route 1 just a couple of hundred of feet inland.

Sears Island was acquired by the state for just this kind of project with funding from two voter-approved bond issues in 1980 and 1982. The Brennan administration pushed ahead with port construction, building a causeway and clearing for a port.

Unfortunately, it gambled that the recently enacted National Environmental Policy Act would not require a federal permit. An appeals court disagreed, delays ensued, and the McKernan administration had other priorities.

The King administration tried to revive the cargo port project, but was shut down by a ruling from the EPA administrator in Boston, citing rather vague environmental concerns.

No public access had been allowed despite the causeway, and the Baldacci administration changed that policy to designate two-thirds of the 941-acre island as a preserve under the Maine Coast Heritage Trust. The remaining acreage was reserved for a port.

Development was always envisioned, and remains a desirable use as Maine tries to help stave off the worst effects of global warming. By present estimates, it could be functioning by 2029.

There’s still a long way to go. The port would service a fleet of floating offshore wind towers, an alternative likely more expensive and as yet still unproven compared with fixed-based projects such as those common in Europe and being developed elsewhere off the coast.

Fast-rising interest rates have led to delays or cancelation of projects, putting a crimp in the Biden administration’s ambitious plans to build more off-shore wind.

And the Maine initiative, conceived and designed at the University of Maine more than a decade ago, has yet to be funded, though the prospect of a local port should boost its chances.

Most turbines and related hardware come from Europe, where the industry has a far longer track record and many more operating projects. Maine sourcing could make a big difference, both short- and long-term.

Maine has always presented a conundrum for economic development, despite its relatively low incomes and preponderance of low-wage jobs.

Its long coastline and vast undeveloped land base present opportunities, but opposition from wealthy out-of-state interests who see the state as a summer playground often stymies projects large and small.

And a well-developed sense of “don’t tread on me, not in my backyard” among many landowners provides additional obstacles.

The urgency of the climate emergency may alter those calculations, at least for Sears Island. It’s far from a sure thing, but at least it has a sporting chance.

Copy the Story Link

« Previous

Opinion: Strengthen assistance for needy families in Maine

Next »

Opinion: School-based therapy not financially sustainable without state support