Maine voters reject hydropower transmission line
November 3, 2021 3:29 PM Subscribe
Maine voters reject transmission line: Bangor Daily News, CTV. Hydro Quebec has a deal to supply Massachusetts with hydropower, and the transmission line would run through Maine - but a combination of environmentalists and energy competitors campaigned against it, and in a referendum, close to 60% of voters opposed it.
Matthew Yglesias on the need for long-distance transmission lines. America needs more interregional electric lines. "Sheldon Whitehouse and Mike Quigley have a plan to get it done."
George Hoberg recently published a book on the subject of resistance to both fossil-fuel and clean-energy infrastructure. The Resistance Dilemma: Place-Based Movements and the Climate Crisis. Free online. Video from a 2018 lecture by Hoberg.
Matthew Yglesias on the need for long-distance transmission lines. America needs more interregional electric lines. "Sheldon Whitehouse and Mike Quigley have a plan to get it done."
George Hoberg recently published a book on the subject of resistance to both fossil-fuel and clean-energy infrastructure. The Resistance Dilemma: Place-Based Movements and the Climate Crisis. Free online. Video from a 2018 lecture by Hoberg.
If CMP is anything like PG&E, I could understand why voters would do anything in their power to punish CMP at all costs, even if they suffer in the short-term. That's human nature when it comes to making evildoers pay, and while I have no local experience with CMP, the Bangor article hints that they have definitely made an enemy of the people in Maine.
posted by Callisto Prime at 3:46 PM on November 3, 2021 [6 favorites]
posted by Callisto Prime at 3:46 PM on November 3, 2021 [6 favorites]
(nitpick: the link's CTV, not CBC)
HQ has infinite patience and more money than God. This line will happen. There will be a lot of very happy legal firms in Maine.
posted by scruss at 3:50 PM on November 3, 2021 [1 favorite]
HQ has infinite patience and more money than God. This line will happen. There will be a lot of very happy legal firms in Maine.
posted by scruss at 3:50 PM on November 3, 2021 [1 favorite]
Mefi’s own Rusty from K5, a Mainer, wrote about this on the Twitter. He says it’s not how it looks.
posted by chrchr at 3:51 PM on November 3, 2021 [27 favorites]
posted by chrchr at 3:51 PM on November 3, 2021 [27 favorites]
Almost $200 spent on campaigning per person who voted ($91 million / 500,000 voters). Impressive. Looks like that's more than twice as much per voter as the 2020 presidential campaign.
posted by clawsoon at 4:01 PM on November 3, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by clawsoon at 4:01 PM on November 3, 2021 [3 favorites]
Add another Mainer here, I can second Rusty’s take. This was a fight between energy companies, and Maine was just kinda where it ended up. CMP is universally hated, for lots of good reasons. They completely messed up a new metering system a few years ago, overcharged a lot of people, and completely denied any wrongdoing until the end of a lengthy external investigation. We have a large number of outages every time the wind blows, thanks to our aging infrastructure and, well, large number of trees. And they’re owned by Iberdola, a Spanish company whose primary investor is Qatar. There’s been a recent push to create a public electric utility for all of Maine, this is one positive step toward an energy future governed by Mainers.
posted by Artazil at 4:19 PM on November 3, 2021 [25 favorites]
posted by Artazil at 4:19 PM on November 3, 2021 [25 favorites]
That's a lot. Here in Austin we just had a proposition to re-fund the police (to require 2 cops for every 1,000 people). They spent $70/vote. Failed by 40 points.
posted by spikeleemajortomdickandharryconnickjrmints at 4:22 PM on November 3, 2021 [5 favorites]
posted by spikeleemajortomdickandharryconnickjrmints at 4:22 PM on November 3, 2021 [5 favorites]
Yup. Here’s another, more complete description of the issues. There has been a fair amount of debate in Canada about the environmental and social justice impacts of Hydro Quebec’s various mega dam projects, whether this transmission line would reduce greenhouse gas emissions or promote green energy is unclear, and it did seem likely to forestall more local green energy production to some extent (despite the majority of money on both sides of the campaign coming from out-of-state interests). In addition to distrust of CMP, there have been quite a few different proposals over the decades for routing things through Maine (pipelines, nonstop highways for transport trucks, etc.) that invariably would not benefit Maine residents and would cause localized harms, so folks in Maine are inclined to be quite wary of such projects. And those outside the region are likely unfamiliar with the semi-existant/semi-aspirational idea of the North Woods, but the fact that the sections of the transmission corridor that this vote forestalls would cut a scar through the region is a pretty big deal. Environmental and conservation groups in the state have already spent decades fighting against clearcutting and for more sustainable (both environmentally and economically) forestry practices. That they haven’t always been successful and that large swaths of the state are still owned by paper companies doesn’t negate the fact that this project falls on the wrong side of those ongoing struggles.
posted by eviemath at 4:27 PM on November 3, 2021 [11 favorites]
posted by eviemath at 4:27 PM on November 3, 2021 [11 favorites]
Mod note: Fixed that CTV link text.
posted by cortex (staff) at 4:31 PM on November 3, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by cortex (staff) at 4:31 PM on November 3, 2021 [1 favorite]
I’m not convinced by the argument eg. in the Yglesias link that greater inter regional connectivity is needed for a transition to cleaner energy. I can see where he’s coming from if one labors under the assumptions that our energy demand is going to continue along its current trajectory, and given current economic incentives and regulatory structure making it really hard and expensive for small, local green energy initiatives to start up (especially publicly owned ones, like the proposals for a Maine public energy utility that Artazil mentioned). But the vulnerability of centralized power grids to climate change impacts (not to mention ransomware attacks) is becoming a serious issue as well. What we really need is to change the ground rules to promote smaller, more local (and publicly owned!), green energy production while reducing energy consumption overall. Then inter-connections between more locally focused energy grids would be a useful backup. But that doesn’t necessarily mean long distance high transmission corridors. The one thing I definitely agree with from the Yglesias article is the need for better transportation infrastructure along the lines of a national network of electric trains, sufficient to replace a lot of long distance transport trucking* and individual transportation by personal vehicles. But if the federal government can get such a network built, it seems to me that simply over-designing the electric grid for that network would suffice to provide the needed inter-regional energy grid links.
(* Though, again, we really need to reduce demand for long distance transport overall, through reducing consumption, and through re-localizing production in cases where that is possible.)
posted by eviemath at 5:00 PM on November 3, 2021 [4 favorites]
(* Though, again, we really need to reduce demand for long distance transport overall, through reducing consumption, and through re-localizing production in cases where that is possible.)
posted by eviemath at 5:00 PM on November 3, 2021 [4 favorites]
Along with unclear costs/benefits and CMP's terrible track record, for me, a third mark against it was that it appears to be a problematic agreement that was orchestrated under the auspices of then Gov Lepage...who is a certified turd burger.
posted by Reasonably Everything Happens at 5:12 PM on November 3, 2021 [5 favorites]
posted by Reasonably Everything Happens at 5:12 PM on November 3, 2021 [5 favorites]
All of the reasonably detailed plans for getting to 80% renewable electricity, let alone beyond, rely on long range transmission and a huge amount of storage. Continent scale grids are necessary. The US has to get better at this.
posted by rhamphorhynchus at 5:18 PM on November 3, 2021 [25 favorites]
posted by rhamphorhynchus at 5:18 PM on November 3, 2021 [25 favorites]
Yeah, when I first heard about this project my kneejerk response was, "What are these assholes up to now?" And then I had the dubious pleasure of being bombarded for two years with incredibly condescending pro-corridor ads with the approximate message of "you maine rubes are too ignorant to know what's good for you." My favorite (anti-favorite?) was an amazing one that went "ACTUALLY, hydropower IS clean energy"--like we know dudes, we have hydro here too (30% of the state's power), and also we know there's a lot of complicated environmental factor with these dams and also also that doesn't actually address any of the legit arguments against the corridor? Do you just not have any good responses to your detractors or what?
Anyway, with the way CMP and co. were absolutely chucking money at the PR campaign for this project it was pretty clear that they expected it to make them absolutely obscene amounts of cash, which of course made me very opposed to it on principle. I didn't vote against it in the end, but I can't be mad the vote went the way it did.
And now we get to be called ignorant rubes who don't know what's good for us by a whole different set of folks! A change is as good as a rest, I guess.
posted by radiogreentea at 5:20 PM on November 3, 2021 [18 favorites]
Anyway, with the way CMP and co. were absolutely chucking money at the PR campaign for this project it was pretty clear that they expected it to make them absolutely obscene amounts of cash, which of course made me very opposed to it on principle. I didn't vote against it in the end, but I can't be mad the vote went the way it did.
And now we get to be called ignorant rubes who don't know what's good for us by a whole different set of folks! A change is as good as a rest, I guess.
posted by radiogreentea at 5:20 PM on November 3, 2021 [18 favorites]
Sorry about the CTV/CBC mixup! Here's the CBC story.
posted by russilwvong at 5:59 PM on November 3, 2021
posted by russilwvong at 5:59 PM on November 3, 2021
All of the reasonably detailed plans for getting to 80% renewable electricity, let alone beyond, rely on long range transmission and a huge amount of storage. Continent scale grids are necessary. The US has to get better at this.
This. Base load power has to come from somewhere. Hydro is an effective base load power to replace coal and gas. If we needed to do this with purely wind/solar we'd be looking at massive battery installations which will require a fuckton of lithium and other resources. Yes, MA is going to pay more for the power because of aggressively higher renewable targets forcing National Grid and Eversource to search further afield for renewable energy.
This also makes more room in markets that have been traditionally dominated by hydro like Ontario and Quebec for things like solar and wind from other locations to take up the day demand and/or shoulders where renewables can put out a fair amount of demand matching. The Gulf of St Lawrence has some of the highest quality wind energy in the world. How is that supposed to develop if local hydro already does all of the heavy lifting for that one small region and can price out any competitors in all but the most extreme demand?
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 6:07 PM on November 3, 2021 [5 favorites]
This. Base load power has to come from somewhere. Hydro is an effective base load power to replace coal and gas. If we needed to do this with purely wind/solar we'd be looking at massive battery installations which will require a fuckton of lithium and other resources. Yes, MA is going to pay more for the power because of aggressively higher renewable targets forcing National Grid and Eversource to search further afield for renewable energy.
This also makes more room in markets that have been traditionally dominated by hydro like Ontario and Quebec for things like solar and wind from other locations to take up the day demand and/or shoulders where renewables can put out a fair amount of demand matching. The Gulf of St Lawrence has some of the highest quality wind energy in the world. How is that supposed to develop if local hydro already does all of the heavy lifting for that one small region and can price out any competitors in all but the most extreme demand?
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 6:07 PM on November 3, 2021 [5 favorites]
f we needed to do this with purely wind/solar we'd be looking at massive battery installations which will require a fuckton of lithium and other resources.
Or, options like pump storage... which get you right back into some of the same ecological tradeoffs as hydropower does.
posted by Dip Flash at 6:58 PM on November 3, 2021 [1 favorite]
Or, options like pump storage... which get you right back into some of the same ecological tradeoffs as hydropower does.
posted by Dip Flash at 6:58 PM on November 3, 2021 [1 favorite]
What we really need is to change the ground rules to promote smaller, more local (and publicly owned!), green energy production while reducing energy consumption overall
I'm all for local and publicly owned green electricity generation, but we desperately need more electricity, not less. We need to reduce overall energy consumption, but if we're going to be at all successful in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, we need to shift home heating, hot water and cooking away from natural gas to electricity. We also need to replace gas and diesel powered vehicles with electric vehicles. There's a lot we can do to improve efficiency in homes and our transportation system (and using renewable electricity is already inherently more efficient in these cases), but the bottom line is we are going to need a lot more electricity in the coming years.
I think we need to be cautious with large hydropower projects, but we're going to have to make some environmental tradeoffs. Hydropower is not just good because it is more reliable than wind and solar, but also because it can provide more or less power as needed, within reason, by changing flow through the dam. Right now, we actually often have the problem of having too much hydropower at night (because you can't just turn off the dams without killing whatever lives downstream), which helps when you start installing a lot of solar, for obvious reasons.
And fundamentally, if we're going to be able to balance out poor generation days for solar and wind, we're going to need transmission to import power from wherever it is available. That means long-distance transmission lines. Transmitting power over long distance through smaller, lower voltage, more local transmission systems will result in too much power loss. This project may or may not be a good idea, but in general we definitely need more large-scale inter-regional transmission if we're going to have any hope of our energy mix moving away from gas and coal.
posted by ssg at 7:35 PM on November 3, 2021 [19 favorites]
I'm all for local and publicly owned green electricity generation, but we desperately need more electricity, not less. We need to reduce overall energy consumption, but if we're going to be at all successful in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, we need to shift home heating, hot water and cooking away from natural gas to electricity. We also need to replace gas and diesel powered vehicles with electric vehicles. There's a lot we can do to improve efficiency in homes and our transportation system (and using renewable electricity is already inherently more efficient in these cases), but the bottom line is we are going to need a lot more electricity in the coming years.
I think we need to be cautious with large hydropower projects, but we're going to have to make some environmental tradeoffs. Hydropower is not just good because it is more reliable than wind and solar, but also because it can provide more or less power as needed, within reason, by changing flow through the dam. Right now, we actually often have the problem of having too much hydropower at night (because you can't just turn off the dams without killing whatever lives downstream), which helps when you start installing a lot of solar, for obvious reasons.
And fundamentally, if we're going to be able to balance out poor generation days for solar and wind, we're going to need transmission to import power from wherever it is available. That means long-distance transmission lines. Transmitting power over long distance through smaller, lower voltage, more local transmission systems will result in too much power loss. This project may or may not be a good idea, but in general we definitely need more large-scale inter-regional transmission if we're going to have any hope of our energy mix moving away from gas and coal.
posted by ssg at 7:35 PM on November 3, 2021 [19 favorites]
Or, options like pump storage... which get you right back into some of the same ecological tradeoffs as hydropower does.
Pumped storage has way fewer tradeoffs than a typical large hydropower project. The scale is way smaller, because you're looking at storing enough water for hours rather than the better part of a year and there are no downstream effects because you're running a nearly closed loop. At the wrong site, pumped storage could certainly be a problem, but it's nothing like the kind of dams and reservoirs that Hydro Quebec builds.
posted by ssg at 7:38 PM on November 3, 2021 [2 favorites]
Pumped storage has way fewer tradeoffs than a typical large hydropower project. The scale is way smaller, because you're looking at storing enough water for hours rather than the better part of a year and there are no downstream effects because you're running a nearly closed loop. At the wrong site, pumped storage could certainly be a problem, but it's nothing like the kind of dams and reservoirs that Hydro Quebec builds.
posted by ssg at 7:38 PM on November 3, 2021 [2 favorites]
I guess to clarify my "we've got to get better at this" comment; that doesn't mean I think the people who voted against this are ignorant rubes, or anything like that! It should mean things like figuring out how to put together non-scumbag groups to build stuff like this when people vote against it being done by scumbags. MA runs a solid chunk of its winter-time electricity generation on actual bunker fuel, so a project like this would be pretty nice to get done.
posted by rhamphorhynchus at 8:49 PM on November 3, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by rhamphorhynchus at 8:49 PM on November 3, 2021 [2 favorites]
→
Baseload is generally getting smaller. Where there used to be huge solid unchanging industrial loads, they've been replaced by many thousands of smaller loads with less predictable profiles. While this still means there's a minimum load or demand that's exceeded 95% of the time, that minimum load is less. With distributed renewables and forecasting, little to no storage is needed.
I can guarantee, as someone who spent ~20 years prospecting, designing and permitting wind farms, that there will be a bigger fight against those in Maine than this power line. It'll be horrid.
→
Do you know how much of Iberdrola is owned by the Qatar Investment Authority? 8.7% (p.35; Sustainability Report 2020). They're the biggest single investor, sure, but BlackRock and Norges Bank (the next two largest) when combined, own more. Is the problem that they're Spanish? Or is the problem that there's Qatari oil money involved? I saw lots of tweets when this vote defeat hit that said "they're a Spanish company owned by Qatar", and frankly, it came across racist AF.
If this line can get MA off bunker fuel in winter, then it's going to do a lot more for the Maine environment than anything else.
posted by scruss at 10:08 PM on November 3, 2021 [10 favorites]
Base load power has to come from somewhere
Baseload is generally getting smaller. Where there used to be huge solid unchanging industrial loads, they've been replaced by many thousands of smaller loads with less predictable profiles. While this still means there's a minimum load or demand that's exceeded 95% of the time, that minimum load is less. With distributed renewables and forecasting, little to no storage is needed.
I can guarantee, as someone who spent ~20 years prospecting, designing and permitting wind farms, that there will be a bigger fight against those in Maine than this power line. It'll be horrid.
→
And they’re owned by Iberdola, a Spanish company whose primary investor is Qatar
Do you know how much of Iberdrola is owned by the Qatar Investment Authority? 8.7% (p.35; Sustainability Report 2020). They're the biggest single investor, sure, but BlackRock and Norges Bank (the next two largest) when combined, own more. Is the problem that they're Spanish? Or is the problem that there's Qatari oil money involved? I saw lots of tweets when this vote defeat hit that said "they're a Spanish company owned by Qatar", and frankly, it came across racist AF.
If this line can get MA off bunker fuel in winter, then it's going to do a lot more for the Maine environment than anything else.
posted by scruss at 10:08 PM on November 3, 2021 [10 favorites]
You think it's racist af against Spain? Or Qatar? Both?
posted by viborg at 2:43 AM on November 4, 2021
posted by viborg at 2:43 AM on November 4, 2021
Qatari obviously.
I find this line of attack pretty hilarious when you consider the old canard amongst Spanish industrialists was that Iberdrola was a structural beneficiary of the PSOEs efforts to build support amongst the Basque Region. I don't actually believe that was true btw.
posted by JPD at 4:08 AM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
I find this line of attack pretty hilarious when you consider the old canard amongst Spanish industrialists was that Iberdrola was a structural beneficiary of the PSOEs efforts to build support amongst the Basque Region. I don't actually believe that was true btw.
posted by JPD at 4:08 AM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
Is the problem that they're Spanish? Or is the problem that there's Qatari oil money involved? I saw lots of tweets when this vote defeat hit that said "they're a Spanish company owned by Qatar", and frankly, it came across racist AF.
Or, y'know, people not comfortable with their energy needs being run by mega-corporations half a world away. Kneejerking to teh racist is lazy AF, frankly.
posted by Thorzdad at 4:35 AM on November 4, 2021 [6 favorites]
Or, y'know, people not comfortable with their energy needs being run by mega-corporations half a world away. Kneejerking to teh racist is lazy AF, frankly.
posted by Thorzdad at 4:35 AM on November 4, 2021 [6 favorites]
"Baseload" is not really a first order concept in electricity systems, it's an artefact of the unit economics of traditional generation where you had plants that had higher efficiency but very slow ramping times and plants with lower efficiency but faster ramping times and had to optimise the mix. "Baseload" is then the load which you can always count on to be there and that's how much of the former type you build in an optimised system.
What we really need to complement variable renewables is dispatchable power. Load can then be served using the output of the renewables plus dispatchables as balancing elements.
When people in the energy systems modelling world talk about getting to net-zero, we always say that getting all the way to zero (especially if we want to get to gross rather than net zero) gives us really hard problems to solve... except in those blessed places with a lot of hydro. This is why Denmark can have such a clean grid: wind power attached to the big Norwegian hydro battery.
I know nothing about Maine politics or the company in question, I don't doubt that they're not a great bunch of dudes, but the idea that substantial grid interconnection between areas with substantial hydro generation and areas without isn't in the long term a good thing for reducing grid carbon intensity is wrong.
I also think that the idea that smaller-scale and local generation is good in and of itself and even more the idea that energy use reduction is inherently good is odd. It strikes me as twee, bourgeois, and reactionary. All the improvements in material standard of living we have achieved as a society are due to scaling things up and centralising. Even renewables, the most decentralised of our electricity generation technologies, have achieved their lowest costs by being manufactured in large numbers in massive factories and then being installed on large utility scale projects.
Even if you wanted to reduce total energy consumption by end-users (and I don't, I accept that it might be necessary to prevent global warming or other environmental damage but I certainly don't view it as desirable inherently), the electrification of heat and transport mean that we will need more electricity than we currently do and will need it at precisely the time when hydro reservoirs are relatively full, PV production is at its minimum, and wind can be affected by either severe winter storms or prolonged high pressure wind-still periods.
posted by atrazine at 4:43 AM on November 4, 2021 [10 favorites]
What we really need to complement variable renewables is dispatchable power. Load can then be served using the output of the renewables plus dispatchables as balancing elements.
When people in the energy systems modelling world talk about getting to net-zero, we always say that getting all the way to zero (especially if we want to get to gross rather than net zero) gives us really hard problems to solve... except in those blessed places with a lot of hydro. This is why Denmark can have such a clean grid: wind power attached to the big Norwegian hydro battery.
I know nothing about Maine politics or the company in question, I don't doubt that they're not a great bunch of dudes, but the idea that substantial grid interconnection between areas with substantial hydro generation and areas without isn't in the long term a good thing for reducing grid carbon intensity is wrong.
I also think that the idea that smaller-scale and local generation is good in and of itself and even more the idea that energy use reduction is inherently good is odd. It strikes me as twee, bourgeois, and reactionary. All the improvements in material standard of living we have achieved as a society are due to scaling things up and centralising. Even renewables, the most decentralised of our electricity generation technologies, have achieved their lowest costs by being manufactured in large numbers in massive factories and then being installed on large utility scale projects.
Even if you wanted to reduce total energy consumption by end-users (and I don't, I accept that it might be necessary to prevent global warming or other environmental damage but I certainly don't view it as desirable inherently), the electrification of heat and transport mean that we will need more electricity than we currently do and will need it at precisely the time when hydro reservoirs are relatively full, PV production is at its minimum, and wind can be affected by either severe winter storms or prolonged high pressure wind-still periods.
posted by atrazine at 4:43 AM on November 4, 2021 [10 favorites]
So what I am hearing is that even bad people sometimes have good ideas? But no one trusts them to implement wisely.
posted by seanmpuckett at 4:59 AM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by seanmpuckett at 4:59 AM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
even if net energy usage declines, net electricity usage has to go up if you want to actually reduce CO2 emissions. Something like 90% of Maine's emissions come from fossil fuel use in Transportation and Heating. If you want to substitute those 2 things for cleaner lower energy usage formats like EVs and Heat Pumps, you could have a massive shrinkage in economic activity and still need massively more electricity.
posted by JPD at 5:45 AM on November 4, 2021 [5 favorites]
posted by JPD at 5:45 AM on November 4, 2021 [5 favorites]
I’m guessing you pro-massive and total centralization folks haven’t spent a lot of time in winter storm-induced power outages, which are pretty regular in the region under discussion? The diesel or whatever people are running their household generators on when the central power is out, or the wood burned to keep warm then, also isn’t exactly clean energy.
Something like 90% of Maine’s emissions come from fossil fuel use in Transportation and Heating.
Insulating houses (and commercial buildings) properly, and building standards for new construction that require more passive heating and cooling features, to reduce heating and cooling needs would certainly help reduce overall energy usage - nation-wide, in fact. As would better public transportation infrastructure. Switching to lower emissions options for building climate control and transportation is absolutely necessary in the short run to deal with climate change, but not sufficient.
posted by eviemath at 5:57 AM on November 4, 2021 [2 favorites]
Something like 90% of Maine’s emissions come from fossil fuel use in Transportation and Heating.
Insulating houses (and commercial buildings) properly, and building standards for new construction that require more passive heating and cooling features, to reduce heating and cooling needs would certainly help reduce overall energy usage - nation-wide, in fact. As would better public transportation infrastructure. Switching to lower emissions options for building climate control and transportation is absolutely necessary in the short run to deal with climate change, but not sufficient.
posted by eviemath at 5:57 AM on November 4, 2021 [2 favorites]
I’m guessing you pro-massive and total centralization folks haven’t spent a lot of time in winter storm-induced power outages, which are pretty regular in the region under discussion?
I have, in Ontario, where it's a fair bit colder. We've historically experienced long-duration network failures during winter a couple of times in the past twenty years because of ice storms. In the past 4 years we've experienced weather-related grid drop-outs several times a winter, some lasting as much as 8-12 hours.
Ontario used to be diesel fuel oil heat, as much of Maine appears to use right now. In cities, where it's possible to do so, most Ontarians are served by natural gas as a utility. In the rural areas, there are installations of electric, but most homes use truck-supplied propane. A significant proportion also use wood in some form, either as split logs, or increasingly as pellets. Both the propane and the pelletized wood systems are drop in replacements for diesel fuel oil with similar costs and fuel delivery mechanisms (i.e. a truck comes to your house periodically with more fuel).
Those on electric have either slowly added a secondary heat source, often a wood stove, to supplement when necessary and lower operating costs, or installed a backup generator system. Many of those run on propane, but some run on liquid fuels too.
Ontario switched away from diesel fuel oil largely because it causes headaches for storage tank leaks and properties with it became uninsurable for mortgages. There's real incentive to switch when the banks won't offer loans on properties with diesel heat. This happened through the mid 1990s mostly as new groundwater contamination laws came into effect in the province.
In the past 10 years, there's been a considerable undercurrent of domestic solar electrification, particularly on farms like dairy operations where moving away from grid electric is economically advantageous. Early on, really large (and politically debatable) subsidies were offered, but people are continuing to put in new solar installs even now when those price supports have been greatly cut back. I expect to see this trend continue as well. Ontario isn't a great place for solar, at 40N to 50N and having a lot of cloud cover, but it's good enough to make sense in many rural situations even without a lot of government incentives.
Diesel home heat is carbon intensive and really a major issue from a groundwater/spills perspective. There are many good reasons to want to switch off of it. There are many economically depressed regions in Ontario too, some of the poorest rural areas in the country are in the upper Ottawa Valley. Even there, all these factors are at work and diesel heat continues shrink year-on-year. It's almost gone in industrial applications, at less than 5% now in residential.
posted by bonehead at 6:23 AM on November 4, 2021 [4 favorites]
I have, in Ontario, where it's a fair bit colder. We've historically experienced long-duration network failures during winter a couple of times in the past twenty years because of ice storms. In the past 4 years we've experienced weather-related grid drop-outs several times a winter, some lasting as much as 8-12 hours.
Ontario used to be diesel fuel oil heat, as much of Maine appears to use right now. In cities, where it's possible to do so, most Ontarians are served by natural gas as a utility. In the rural areas, there are installations of electric, but most homes use truck-supplied propane. A significant proportion also use wood in some form, either as split logs, or increasingly as pellets. Both the propane and the pelletized wood systems are drop in replacements for diesel fuel oil with similar costs and fuel delivery mechanisms (i.e. a truck comes to your house periodically with more fuel).
Those on electric have either slowly added a secondary heat source, often a wood stove, to supplement when necessary and lower operating costs, or installed a backup generator system. Many of those run on propane, but some run on liquid fuels too.
Ontario switched away from diesel fuel oil largely because it causes headaches for storage tank leaks and properties with it became uninsurable for mortgages. There's real incentive to switch when the banks won't offer loans on properties with diesel heat. This happened through the mid 1990s mostly as new groundwater contamination laws came into effect in the province.
In the past 10 years, there's been a considerable undercurrent of domestic solar electrification, particularly on farms like dairy operations where moving away from grid electric is economically advantageous. Early on, really large (and politically debatable) subsidies were offered, but people are continuing to put in new solar installs even now when those price supports have been greatly cut back. I expect to see this trend continue as well. Ontario isn't a great place for solar, at 40N to 50N and having a lot of cloud cover, but it's good enough to make sense in many rural situations even without a lot of government incentives.
Diesel home heat is carbon intensive and really a major issue from a groundwater/spills perspective. There are many good reasons to want to switch off of it. There are many economically depressed regions in Ontario too, some of the poorest rural areas in the country are in the upper Ottawa Valley. Even there, all these factors are at work and diesel heat continues shrink year-on-year. It's almost gone in industrial applications, at less than 5% now in residential.
posted by bonehead at 6:23 AM on November 4, 2021 [4 favorites]
people not comfortable with their energy needs being run by mega-corporations half a world away
Ontario switched
Everyone in the reality based community understands the need for the transition. But it's more complicated than that. Process counts.
I'm the furthest thing from a NIMBY, and per Thorzad, I have no issue with Middle Eastern/Spanish corporations running the utilities. But there's plenty on the table still not to like.
(1) It's nice that Quebec organized this and pulled it off for you. Maine is being disintermediated by multiple private interests and a different state for minimal benefit (maybe even net cost, hard to say)
(2) What about the needs of Maine to transition? Sure, the demand is greater in MA, but the overall infrastructure of the state of ME is pretty abysmal, especially for renewable power generation. It also has much more problematic economic, demographic and land use patterns that means there's less 'fat' on the negotiating table for getting big projects like this done.
(3) This really is a regional and national issue. Why is it being done piecemeal for profit when it should be getting done in a more systematic way.
...We all know the answer to #3 and it's also why I trust Iberdola ever so slightly more than CMP, PNG or our own congress.
Obviously we need private investment and obviously partnerships like this are feasible. I just don't like the way this one looks.
posted by Reasonably Everything Happens at 6:47 AM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
Canadian Renewable Hydropower Is Heading To New York City
The Champlain Hudson Power Express project will send hydropower hundreds of miles from Quebec via transmission cables to a converter station in Queens.posted by 1970s Antihero at 6:57 AM on November 4, 2021
“This cable will be running down through the length of the [Hudson] river, hitting whatever is there, whether it's PCBs or coal tar, or other contaminants that are in the mud,”
We already had this fight in New Hampshire (Northern Pass project, which would've put the lines right through the White Mountains) which was defeated after a few years of legal back and forth. NHPR did a short podcast series on the Hydro Quebec side of things, link here, specifically focusing on issues of indigenous rights.
posted by damayanti at 7:03 AM on November 4, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by damayanti at 7:03 AM on November 4, 2021 [2 favorites]
I swear environmentalists can be their worst ennemies sometimes. The best is the enemy of the good.
Is a big freaking high voltage power line the ‘best thing ever without consequences’ ? Of course no.
Is it very much better than a bunch of fossil fuel power generation, seems like an easy yes. Problem is that it’s for the neighboring state.
I understand there’s not much in it for Maine, other than letting this power line pass does help actions that’ll lower CO2 emissions and that should be enough right now. This problem is not solvable if we don’t make some sacrifices.
And Maine, do nationalize your power company MCP seems terrible, everything around power is too important to leave in the hands of private enterprise, but be aware it’ll still suck a lot of times.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 7:26 AM on November 4, 2021 [4 favorites]
Is a big freaking high voltage power line the ‘best thing ever without consequences’ ? Of course no.
Is it very much better than a bunch of fossil fuel power generation, seems like an easy yes. Problem is that it’s for the neighboring state.
I understand there’s not much in it for Maine, other than letting this power line pass does help actions that’ll lower CO2 emissions and that should be enough right now. This problem is not solvable if we don’t make some sacrifices.
And Maine, do nationalize your power company MCP seems terrible, everything around power is too important to leave in the hands of private enterprise, but be aware it’ll still suck a lot of times.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 7:26 AM on November 4, 2021 [4 favorites]
I have, in Ontario, where it's a fair bit colder. We've historically experienced long-duration network failures during winter a couple of times in the past twenty years because of ice storms. In the past 4 years we've experienced weather-related grid drop-outs several times a winter, some lasting as much as 8-12 hours.
1. Ontario is not significantly colder than Maine.
2. Multi-day power outages happen in rural parts of the state on a regular basis.
3. CMP is literally ranked last out of 50 states in customer satisfaction with power companies. Nobody here trusts them to do anything.
posted by mneekadon at 8:13 AM on November 4, 2021 [3 favorites]
1. Ontario is not significantly colder than Maine.
2. Multi-day power outages happen in rural parts of the state on a regular basis.
3. CMP is literally ranked last out of 50 states in customer satisfaction with power companies. Nobody here trusts them to do anything.
posted by mneekadon at 8:13 AM on November 4, 2021 [3 favorites]
1. Ontario is not significantly colder than Maine.
Toronto has slightly warmer winters and slightly cooler summers than Bangor. By 1-3 degrees. Very comparable.
But that's Toronto. Somewhere like Thunder Bay or Sudbury is going to be 3-5 degrees colder than Maine on average in the winter.
posted by thecjm at 8:36 AM on November 4, 2021
Toronto has slightly warmer winters and slightly cooler summers than Bangor. By 1-3 degrees. Very comparable.
But that's Toronto. Somewhere like Thunder Bay or Sudbury is going to be 3-5 degrees colder than Maine on average in the winter.
posted by thecjm at 8:36 AM on November 4, 2021
I think the pivotal question here is what exact do the people who voted against this want instead?
Do they want to also have a delivery contract for hydro power from Quebec? Or is this about sticking it to both CMP and anyone who lives in MA?
posted by thecjm at 8:40 AM on November 4, 2021
Do they want to also have a delivery contract for hydro power from Quebec? Or is this about sticking it to both CMP and anyone who lives in MA?
posted by thecjm at 8:40 AM on November 4, 2021
thecjm, have you checked average temps in Jackman or Presque Isle? Maine is pretty big.
posted by mneekadon at 8:57 AM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by mneekadon at 8:57 AM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
Mod note: Brief rewind deletion of a couple comments with a misunderstanding. Carry on!
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 9:03 AM on November 4, 2021
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 9:03 AM on November 4, 2021
I think the pivotal question here is what exact do the people who voted against this want instead?
I think they want to get some good out of it, personally, rather than for all the positives to go to Hydro Quebec and to Massachusetts and to the world in general due to a potential drop in carbon emissions.
I don't think anyone has offered them incentive to have the power lines run through their backyards. They have just badgered them to accept it on the grounds that they are a minority and a whole lot of people want them to do it because while it's bad for Maine it's good for everybody who has invested in Hydro Quebec and who lives in Massachusetts so they need to be good sports and agree. I have no trust that running the power lines will result in cheaper, more reliable power for Maine, and I have no trust that the people of Maine will be adequately compensated for the environmental damage done to their state.
NIMBY and PIBBY are all ways people play hot potato over whose life will be wrecked. And often with projects that end up in that territory, some communities get destroyed and the only benefit goes to the corporations because in the end the savings that were promised to the greater community never materialize.
I think the fair thing to do would be to calculate a dollar value on the minimum amount of damage that will be done to Maine by running those lines and then invite Hydro Quebec to make offers of how much more than that they are willing to pay and how they will guarantee that the payments go to the individuals most directly affected.
But I strongly suspect that the people in Maine would happily settle for cents on the dollar for the damage that would be done in the State, but would prefer something like 35c on the dollar instead of what is probably closer to 5c being offered in compensation currently.
posted by Jane the Brown at 9:13 AM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
I think they want to get some good out of it, personally, rather than for all the positives to go to Hydro Quebec and to Massachusetts and to the world in general due to a potential drop in carbon emissions.
I don't think anyone has offered them incentive to have the power lines run through their backyards. They have just badgered them to accept it on the grounds that they are a minority and a whole lot of people want them to do it because while it's bad for Maine it's good for everybody who has invested in Hydro Quebec and who lives in Massachusetts so they need to be good sports and agree. I have no trust that running the power lines will result in cheaper, more reliable power for Maine, and I have no trust that the people of Maine will be adequately compensated for the environmental damage done to their state.
NIMBY and PIBBY are all ways people play hot potato over whose life will be wrecked. And often with projects that end up in that territory, some communities get destroyed and the only benefit goes to the corporations because in the end the savings that were promised to the greater community never materialize.
I think the fair thing to do would be to calculate a dollar value on the minimum amount of damage that will be done to Maine by running those lines and then invite Hydro Quebec to make offers of how much more than that they are willing to pay and how they will guarantee that the payments go to the individuals most directly affected.
But I strongly suspect that the people in Maine would happily settle for cents on the dollar for the damage that would be done in the State, but would prefer something like 35c on the dollar instead of what is probably closer to 5c being offered in compensation currently.
posted by Jane the Brown at 9:13 AM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
I think the pivotal question here is what exact do the people who voted against this want instead?
As one of those people, I am in favor of eminent-domaining CMP itself instead of allowing this extractive multinational to eminent-domain unspoiled woodland. A bit of an exaggeration, but... I signed the petition to create a publicly held power utility. If that happens, I'd be more likely to consider that decisions made by such an entity were actually in the public interest.
I've been seeing a ton of local energy generation being set up right now. If this could be done on a wider scale then it might, if not eliminate, at least lessen the need to build massive transmission lines from Away to the north to Away to the south
Also, nobody has yet made a heat pump that will adequately heat a house in subzero (F) temps.
posted by mneekadon at 9:23 AM on November 4, 2021
As one of those people, I am in favor of eminent-domaining CMP itself instead of allowing this extractive multinational to eminent-domain unspoiled woodland. A bit of an exaggeration, but... I signed the petition to create a publicly held power utility. If that happens, I'd be more likely to consider that decisions made by such an entity were actually in the public interest.
I've been seeing a ton of local energy generation being set up right now. If this could be done on a wider scale then it might, if not eliminate, at least lessen the need to build massive transmission lines from Away to the north to Away to the south
Also, nobody has yet made a heat pump that will adequately heat a house in subzero (F) temps.
posted by mneekadon at 9:23 AM on November 4, 2021
Bangor is south of the geographical center of Maine (i.e. more of the state is north of Bangor than south of it). Winter conditions vary highly from southern and coastal areas to northern and inland ones--storms that disrupt Bangor or Portland (major metro areas) for a day can bury Jackman or Caribou for a week. Or vice-versa.
And yeah, the fact that this power was going to MA was definitely not a point in its favor--Maine has had a complicated relationship with MA ever since we ditched them to become our own state. My grandmother used to tell a joke about the kind of men her grandmother always said not to marry: the punchline was "a Massachusetts bum."
Jane the Brown is right--this project originally came with zero benefit to ME at all; after a bit of furore there were some concessions made, but those were limited and perhaps too little too late.
Worth noting too that the Penobscot Nation opposed the corridor both in their own right with concerns about their heritage watersheds and also in solidarity with the Innu of Labrador whose lands have been flooded by Hydro-Quebec dams.
posted by radiogreentea at 10:25 AM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
And yeah, the fact that this power was going to MA was definitely not a point in its favor--Maine has had a complicated relationship with MA ever since we ditched them to become our own state. My grandmother used to tell a joke about the kind of men her grandmother always said not to marry: the punchline was "a Massachusetts bum."
Jane the Brown is right--this project originally came with zero benefit to ME at all; after a bit of furore there were some concessions made, but those were limited and perhaps too little too late.
Worth noting too that the Penobscot Nation opposed the corridor both in their own right with concerns about their heritage watersheds and also in solidarity with the Innu of Labrador whose lands have been flooded by Hydro-Quebec dams.
posted by radiogreentea at 10:25 AM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
The only heat pump system that works below freezing is really a geothermal one. In my part of the world they're a high upfront cost, but historically roughly competitive with propane at about a 20-25 year replacement cycle.
They're not terribly popular in Canada because of high upfront costs, and the uncertainty that the units will last long enough to play for themselves. Thirty-year lifespans are possible with geothermal systems, but that's pushing the edge of reliability, ime.
posted by bonehead at 10:27 AM on November 4, 2021
They're not terribly popular in Canada because of high upfront costs, and the uncertainty that the units will last long enough to play for themselves. Thirty-year lifespans are possible with geothermal systems, but that's pushing the edge of reliability, ime.
posted by bonehead at 10:27 AM on November 4, 2021
bonehead, I think you misunderstood my comment about people’s home generators that they use for individual home heating and power generation when the regular power is out due to storms.
For more general info on Maine’s energy sources:
overall state energy profile
state electricity profile
posted by eviemath at 10:41 AM on November 4, 2021
For more general info on Maine’s energy sources:
overall state energy profile
state electricity profile
posted by eviemath at 10:41 AM on November 4, 2021
Another important factor here: The ballot initiative was written terribly.
In terms of readability, it scores in the worst band on both metrics used by Ballotpedia.
I know many people, including one in my own household, who couldn't parse the language, nor figure out the consequences of a Yes vs. No vote.
posted by yellowcandy at 11:15 AM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
In terms of readability, it scores in the worst band on both metrics used by Ballotpedia.
I know many people, including one in my own household, who couldn't parse the language, nor figure out the consequences of a Yes vs. No vote.
posted by yellowcandy at 11:15 AM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
"Quick Facts" from the first link in my preceeding comment:
Meanwhile, 50% of air pollution in Maine comes from vehicles. In terms of contributions from power generation to poor air quality in the state, Maine's acid rain comes from farther away than Massachusetts:
In contrast, Massachusetts imports around 3/4 of its electricity, and primarily generates in-state electricity from natural gas. To understand the environmental impact of MA importing electricity from Hydro Quebec on Maine's environment, one would need to know what proportion of each source the Hydro Quebec electricity would be replacing, and where else MA was sourcing its out-of-state generated power from. If MA is importing electricity from coal fired power plants in the Midwest, and if the Hydro Quebec electricity replaced that source, that would be a positive benefit to Maine. But, again, one would need to look into the economics to guess what would happen. It could be that the Hydro Quebec electricity would replace natural gas generation within Massachusetts (better globally, but otherwise neutral impact on Maine's environment). If non-hydro renewable electricity sources within Massachusetts are more expensive, however, it could be that the Hydro Quebec electricity would replace that instead, which would end up being a net negative impact overall and also otherwise neutral for Maine in particular.
posted by eviemath at 11:20 AM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
- Three-fifths of Maine's households use fuel oil as their primary energy source for home heating, a larger share than any other state.
- In 2020, 79% of Maine's electricity net generation came from renewable energy, and hydroelectric power provided the largest share at 34%.
- Maine ranks sixth in the nation in the share of its electricity generated from wind. In 2020, wind provided about 24% of Maine's in-state net generation.
- Maine forests cover about nine-tenths of its land, the largest share of any state, and wood and wood waste-derived fuels supply most of the biomass Maine uses for electricity generation. In 2020, biomass supplied one-fifth of Maine’s net generation, the largest share of any state.
- Maine’s largest electricity-generating plant by capacity is petroleum-fired, but it is used only intermittently to meet peak electricity demand in the winter.
Meanwhile, 50% of air pollution in Maine comes from vehicles. In terms of contributions from power generation to poor air quality in the state, Maine's acid rain comes from farther away than Massachusetts:
The acid rain that fell on the White Mountains and Maine and the Adirondack Park in New York State mostly originated in the car-clogged big cities to the south and the stacks of the big coal-fired power plants of the Midwest. The pollution rode the prevailing winds to more remote parts of the Northeast. The effects were felt far downwind.(Note that vehicular air pollution from Massachusetts also contributes, but that's unrelated to the Hydro Quebec transmission line issue.)
In contrast, Massachusetts imports around 3/4 of its electricity, and primarily generates in-state electricity from natural gas. To understand the environmental impact of MA importing electricity from Hydro Quebec on Maine's environment, one would need to know what proportion of each source the Hydro Quebec electricity would be replacing, and where else MA was sourcing its out-of-state generated power from. If MA is importing electricity from coal fired power plants in the Midwest, and if the Hydro Quebec electricity replaced that source, that would be a positive benefit to Maine. But, again, one would need to look into the economics to guess what would happen. It could be that the Hydro Quebec electricity would replace natural gas generation within Massachusetts (better globally, but otherwise neutral impact on Maine's environment). If non-hydro renewable electricity sources within Massachusetts are more expensive, however, it could be that the Hydro Quebec electricity would replace that instead, which would end up being a net negative impact overall and also otherwise neutral for Maine in particular.
posted by eviemath at 11:20 AM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
Interconnection (not just in electricity, but in food production and other things as well) changes failure locations from local point failures (my town's solar panel has a broken invertor, hail destroys our crops) to network failures (an ice storm knocks down the power lines, a global pandemic causes shipping problems).
How particular kinds of connection actually ends up affecting individual experience of reliability is obviously complicated, but if we take a few possible scenarios:
1) Many dispersed gas plants connected together by a grid
2) Wind, solar, and battery dispersed and not connected together by a grid
3) as (2) but connected
4) as (3) but also with hydro connected
Then we can say that probably scenario 1 is the most reliable since it is protected from both failures of the network and individual point failures of the plants. (2) is effectively incompatible with modern civilisation. (3) probably doesn't work either unless the connections are *really* long and (4), while less reliable than (1) is still pretty good and is low emissions.
Sure, if you're at the end of a spur connection in a wooded area, you will always be vulnerable to an interruption to the grid supply regardless of the source of energy. So what do you do? At the moment, you have a diesel or fuel oil generator system if you can afford it. You probably wouldn't go for a solar system as a backup on either the individual or the town level because likely grid failures will happen at a time when that array won't produce much.
To understand the environmental impact of MA importing electricity from Hydro Quebec on Maine's environment, one would need to know what proportion of each source the Hydro Quebec electricity would be replacing, and where else MA was sourcing its out-of-state generated power from.
Given the very long life of transmission rights of way, you also need to forecast these for the future. If 3/4 of Massachusetts electricity is currently natural gas then there is likely a lot of wind and solar capacity that could go up without causing any system issues but what about 15 years from now when you start reaching the capacity limits? At that point reducing gas generation even more will require a connection like this one.
None of that means that the people of Maine would benefit from it of course, most likely hydro would push the biomass and oil fired out of merit and those would be used less but if they already have that much renewable generation the benefit in local power prices might be quite marginal. (Whether biomass from forestry is really renewable is a complicated question, I'm not such a sceptic on that as some are and for obvious reasons many Mainers will see the benefit of using forestry products regardless of carbon neutrality).
posted by atrazine at 2:17 PM on November 4, 2021
How particular kinds of connection actually ends up affecting individual experience of reliability is obviously complicated, but if we take a few possible scenarios:
1) Many dispersed gas plants connected together by a grid
2) Wind, solar, and battery dispersed and not connected together by a grid
3) as (2) but connected
4) as (3) but also with hydro connected
Then we can say that probably scenario 1 is the most reliable since it is protected from both failures of the network and individual point failures of the plants. (2) is effectively incompatible with modern civilisation. (3) probably doesn't work either unless the connections are *really* long and (4), while less reliable than (1) is still pretty good and is low emissions.
Sure, if you're at the end of a spur connection in a wooded area, you will always be vulnerable to an interruption to the grid supply regardless of the source of energy. So what do you do? At the moment, you have a diesel or fuel oil generator system if you can afford it. You probably wouldn't go for a solar system as a backup on either the individual or the town level because likely grid failures will happen at a time when that array won't produce much.
To understand the environmental impact of MA importing electricity from Hydro Quebec on Maine's environment, one would need to know what proportion of each source the Hydro Quebec electricity would be replacing, and where else MA was sourcing its out-of-state generated power from.
Given the very long life of transmission rights of way, you also need to forecast these for the future. If 3/4 of Massachusetts electricity is currently natural gas then there is likely a lot of wind and solar capacity that could go up without causing any system issues but what about 15 years from now when you start reaching the capacity limits? At that point reducing gas generation even more will require a connection like this one.
None of that means that the people of Maine would benefit from it of course, most likely hydro would push the biomass and oil fired out of merit and those would be used less but if they already have that much renewable generation the benefit in local power prices might be quite marginal. (Whether biomass from forestry is really renewable is a complicated question, I'm not such a sceptic on that as some are and for obvious reasons many Mainers will see the benefit of using forestry products regardless of carbon neutrality).
posted by atrazine at 2:17 PM on November 4, 2021
I think they want to get some good out of it, personally, rather than for all the positives to go to Hydro Quebec and to Massachusetts and to the world in general due to a potential drop in carbon emissions.
Perfectly understandable. This is what makes it hard to act on climate: the costs are borne by the individual, the benefits are spread out over the entire world. Cooperation is surprisingly difficult, even when we're confronted by a threat like climate change.
To quote George Washington:
Perfectly understandable. This is what makes it hard to act on climate: the costs are borne by the individual, the benefits are spread out over the entire world. Cooperation is surprisingly difficult, even when we're confronted by a threat like climate change.
To quote George Washington:
A small knowledge of human nature will convince us, that, with far the greatest part of mankind, interest is the governing principle; and that, almost, every man is more or less, under its influence. Motives of public virtue may for a time, or in particular instances, actuate men to the observance of a conduct purely disinterested; but they are not of themselves sufficient to produce persevering conformity to the refined dictates and obligations of social duty. Few men are capable of making a continual sacrifice of all views of private interest, or advantage, to the common good. It is vain to exclaim against the depravity of human nature on this account; the fact is so, the experience of every age and nation has proved it and we must in a great measure, change the constitution of man, before we can make it otherwise. No institution, not built on the presumptive truth of these maxims can succeed.posted by russilwvong at 2:36 PM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
Also, nobody has yet made a heat pump that will adequately heat a house in subzero (F) temps.
Both Mitsubishi and Fujitsu make heat pumps that work well below 0F and have for years. They are in fact in use in homes in New England and have been for a decade or more. But realistically, any heat pump installation is going to include backup resistance heat and that works just fine at any temperature.
posted by ssg at 2:58 PM on November 4, 2021 [4 favorites]
Both Mitsubishi and Fujitsu make heat pumps that work well below 0F and have for years. They are in fact in use in homes in New England and have been for a decade or more. But realistically, any heat pump installation is going to include backup resistance heat and that works just fine at any temperature.
posted by ssg at 2:58 PM on November 4, 2021 [4 favorites]
The hate for CMP (owned by Iberdrola) is hate for a public utility that does a barely-adequate job, does little to support non-fossil-fuel power in Maine. They've developed a reputation for incompetence. Mainers tried to fight this and most feel that there have been shenanigans. The other hate, which is less vituperative, is for Massachusetts. Sure, carve up our nice woods to send power from Quebec to Massachusetts. I don't fuckin' think so! was what I heard.
CMP says they'll continue to build the corridor, fight the referendum in court. We hates them even more, now.
posted by theora55 at 3:10 PM on November 4, 2021 [5 favorites]
CMP says they'll continue to build the corridor, fight the referendum in court. We hates them even more, now.
posted by theora55 at 3:10 PM on November 4, 2021 [5 favorites]
The Bangor Daily News had a good Yes on 1 opinion piece that explained some things. it's been one of the sorriest campaigns in a while, and the competition hasn't been slacking.
posted by theora55 at 3:18 PM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by theora55 at 3:18 PM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
ssg, that's great news! Last time I researched this was a decade ago, so I'm glad to see the tech has improved.
posted by mneekadon at 3:20 PM on November 4, 2021
posted by mneekadon at 3:20 PM on November 4, 2021
So to summarize, we have the following case study:
Maine:
This certainly seems to provide a counterexample to Yglesias’ argument that greater inter-regional connectivity is necessary for a transition to cleaner energy, strengthening my original assessment. (Note, as a point of logic, that a counterexample doesn’t have to be - and often isn’t - a typical case. No doubt the differences in population size and density between the two states in our case study, among other issues, affect this situation; and such details would be relevant if we were to try to claim that these examples gave us sufficient information to draw conclusions about other states or regions.)
posted by eviemath at 3:32 PM on November 4, 2021
Maine:
- Majority renewables electricity production
- Majority local electricity production
- Unreliability issues, but these seem to stem from mismanagement by the energy company rather than being an inherent feature of the mode of production
- Majority fossil fuels for local electricity production
- Majority imported/non-local electricity production
- Power company has a better reliability history than CMP, but there was that small issue of natural gas leaks and explosions a couple years ago, and their difficulty in finding a route for the transmission line for the electricity they want to purchase and import can be thought of as a bit of a reliability weakness as well.
This certainly seems to provide a counterexample to Yglesias’ argument that greater inter-regional connectivity is necessary for a transition to cleaner energy, strengthening my original assessment. (Note, as a point of logic, that a counterexample doesn’t have to be - and often isn’t - a typical case. No doubt the differences in population size and density between the two states in our case study, among other issues, affect this situation; and such details would be relevant if we were to try to claim that these examples gave us sufficient information to draw conclusions about other states or regions.)
posted by eviemath at 3:32 PM on November 4, 2021
No worries, i'm sure this will only result in three more gas pipelines being built through wetlands and native American sites in Texas....
posted by eustatic at 4:24 PM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by eustatic at 4:24 PM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
I apologize for the misspelling; it's fucken'.
posted by theora55 at 5:17 PM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by theora55 at 5:17 PM on November 4, 2021 [1 favorite]
eustatic, do you know we have native people in the northeast too? They've been pretty clear about their stance on this project.
"These are the people disproportionately impacted by the extreme energy extraction that is happening across Canada while pushed as green, renewable energy. These industrial-scale hydro developments are producing levels of destruction akin to Canada’s massive tar sands and mining operations,” [said John Gonzalez, a Canadian representing Pimicikamak Cree Nation], “Canadian hydro-power consumers consumes the most land per megawatt of any type of energy. We ask the Army Corps of Engineers to deny this permit and to stop a corridor that will perpetuate the cultural genocide of indigenous people and environmental destruction of Canada and New England."
posted by radiogreentea at 7:43 AM on November 5, 2021 [3 favorites]
"These are the people disproportionately impacted by the extreme energy extraction that is happening across Canada while pushed as green, renewable energy. These industrial-scale hydro developments are producing levels of destruction akin to Canada’s massive tar sands and mining operations,” [said John Gonzalez, a Canadian representing Pimicikamak Cree Nation], “Canadian hydro-power consumers consumes the most land per megawatt of any type of energy. We ask the Army Corps of Engineers to deny this permit and to stop a corridor that will perpetuate the cultural genocide of indigenous people and environmental destruction of Canada and New England."
posted by radiogreentea at 7:43 AM on November 5, 2021 [3 favorites]
The dams built in the James Bay area of the province ended up leading to an agreement with the Cree that was liked enough by the Cree that one of the leader who signed it ended up as a pallbearer at the funeral of the minister in charge of the agreement, so those things don't always have to end badly for the indigenous people. But there are still issues to resolve around the latest dams.
The dams are built already so all the impacts (concrete + deforestation) are already baked in and there are no refunnds on those impacts unlike with coal/gas, and there are surplus so we might as well use them. Building more.... it's something that needs to be reevaluated and compared with current state of the art in wind (solar is a bit bleh that far up north). I also call bullshit on comparing this to tar sands, this is clearly hyperbole, but this is a negotiation, no party is gonna come in white flag raised, asking "just for a little bit".
Also all the millions HQ collects go back to the province and help pay for the social net. Mind you if you're in the US that doesn't really make a difference.
Again I get that if you're in Maine there isn't much for you with this project, but we need power where people are, and not all US metropolitan centers are close to big enough renewable power sources, so there will be lines somewhere.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 10:14 AM on November 5, 2021
The dams are built already so all the impacts (concrete + deforestation) are already baked in and there are no refunnds on those impacts unlike with coal/gas, and there are surplus so we might as well use them. Building more.... it's something that needs to be reevaluated and compared with current state of the art in wind (solar is a bit bleh that far up north). I also call bullshit on comparing this to tar sands, this is clearly hyperbole, but this is a negotiation, no party is gonna come in white flag raised, asking "just for a little bit".
Also all the millions HQ collects go back to the province and help pay for the social net. Mind you if you're in the US that doesn't really make a difference.
Again I get that if you're in Maine there isn't much for you with this project, but we need power where people are, and not all US metropolitan centers are close to big enough renewable power sources, so there will be lines somewhere.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 10:14 AM on November 5, 2021
The dams are built already so all the impacts (concrete + deforestation) are already baked in and there are no refunnds on those impacts
Study: Rivers Recover Faster Than Expected After Dam Removal
posted by eviemath at 10:25 AM on November 5, 2021
Study: Rivers Recover Faster Than Expected After Dam Removal
posted by eviemath at 10:25 AM on November 5, 2021
Again I get that if you're in Maine there isn't much for you with this project, but we need power where people are, and not all US metropolitan centers are close to big enough renewable power sources, so there will be lines somewhere.
If you read some of the more detailed links about this particular transmission line, you will see that there are still other options for locations, that wouldn’t have the same down sides as this particular one. There’s an interesting parallel with pipeline projects in that respect, that the siting that gets pushed seems to follow predictably racist and/or classist patterns, in addition to not particularly trying to minimize environmental impacts from the choice of route.
posted by eviemath at 10:39 AM on November 5, 2021 [1 favorite]
If you read some of the more detailed links about this particular transmission line, you will see that there are still other options for locations, that wouldn’t have the same down sides as this particular one. There’s an interesting parallel with pipeline projects in that respect, that the siting that gets pushed seems to follow predictably racist and/or classist patterns, in addition to not particularly trying to minimize environmental impacts from the choice of route.
posted by eviemath at 10:39 AM on November 5, 2021 [1 favorite]
Eviemath, we both know that thing isn’t going away until it reaches its end of life, if the power doesn’t go to MA it’ll go elsewhere or sit unused while they keep burning fossil fuel.
I won’t argue that the location is the best/only one, but it seems that everybody is trying to push those lines elsewhere, very similarly to wind.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 11:04 AM on November 5, 2021
I won’t argue that the location is the best/only one, but it seems that everybody is trying to push those lines elsewhere, very similarly to wind.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 11:04 AM on November 5, 2021
I've done more than my share of (non-US) pipeline/utility corridor assessments---route design is extraordinarily, nakedly political. They're often decided by only legal or commercial reasons rather than environmental best practices.
posted by bonehead at 11:34 AM on November 5, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by bonehead at 11:34 AM on November 5, 2021 [2 favorites]
This certainly seems to provide a counterexample to Yglesias’ argument that greater inter-regional connectivity is necessary for a transition to cleaner energy, strengthening my original assessment. (Note, as a point of logic, that a counterexample doesn’t have to be - and often isn’t - a typical case. No doubt the differences in population size and density between the two states in our case study, among other issues, affect this situation; and such details would be relevant if we were to try to claim that these examples gave us sufficient information to draw conclusions about other states or regions.)
What those case studies seem to indicate (as does the experience of Denmark) is that connection to hydropower (as Maine already has) leads to cleaner grids because it becomes easier to incorporate variable output generation into the mix.
posted by atrazine at 5:19 AM on November 6, 2021
What those case studies seem to indicate (as does the experience of Denmark) is that connection to hydropower (as Maine already has) leads to cleaner grids because it becomes easier to incorporate variable output generation into the mix.
posted by atrazine at 5:19 AM on November 6, 2021
WaterAndPixels, I’ve flagged your comment for putting words into other people’s mouths. I have no idea what you are referring to by “that thing”, let alone whether I “know” whatever it is you are claiming. Perhaps you might want to pay more attention to the unfounded assumptions you make on topics before commenting?
posted by eviemath at 5:24 AM on November 6, 2021
posted by eviemath at 5:24 AM on November 6, 2021
Eviemath, I meant the dam(s).
In the sense that they are there and barring some unforeseen major issue they won’t be removed.
Not trying to put words into your mouth, just forgot to add them necessary context.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 2:14 PM on November 6, 2021
In the sense that they are there and barring some unforeseen major issue they won’t be removed.
Not trying to put words into your mouth, just forgot to add them necessary context.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 2:14 PM on November 6, 2021
Vaguely related: Indigenous Renewable Energy Microgrids in Canada’s far North (communities that can’t hook up to wider power grids).
posted by eviemath at 9:03 AM on November 11, 2021
posted by eviemath at 9:03 AM on November 11, 2021
More related: Renovations Are a Massive Missed Opportunity to Address Climate Change
Buildings generate nearly 40% of annual global CO2 emissions. About two-thirds of the global building stock will still exist in 2040 and, if left as they are, these buildings will continue to generate unsustainable levels of carbon emissions.posted by eviemath at 9:15 AM on November 11, 2021
For existing buildings, mounting evidence is pointing to retrofitting as a realistic solution. When compared to tearing them down and building anew, improving the efficiency of the buildings we have is also a less carbon-intensive alternative.
But persuading home and business owners to make major building upgrades just for the sake of energy savings can be an uphill battle. The good news is that there’s a less disruptive and more cost-effective option that can not only help slow the pace of climate change, but also make buildings more comfortable, durable and valuable at the same time. We call it opportunistic retrofitting.
« Older "All that alchemy of tree and climate, genius and... | The Posthuman Dog Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by ocschwar at 3:33 PM on November 3, 2021 [21 favorites]