Letters submitted by BDN readers are verified by BDN Opinion Page staff. Send your letters to [email protected]
Optimistically, Maine is a billion dollars short and a decade behind in building an offshore wind port. I am speaking plainly as a former power plant engineer who actively supports renewables: I believe the offshore wind market has collapsed. When this industry comes back, several existing ports in southern New England will already be chomping at the bit.
If a facility is ever built in Searsport, practically, I believe, it must be at Mack Point — not Sears Island — for a host of political, legal, and environmental reasons. The owner already handles wind turbine components and has provided workable development plans. Unfortunately, the state and their consultants compared costs in what I see as misleading ways to prop up their case for Sears Island.
I’ll see 1,000-foot turbines and 800-foot cranes from my kitchen either way, so please spare the worn-out NIMBY labels. My neighbors and I welcome responsible development in our backyard, as would most. The difference is whether we keep Sears Island natural and accessible for all.
Fortunately, we can take a massive step in this direction. LD 226 and LD 735 would protect Sears Island and restore sand dune protections that were stripped in a failed rush for port funding.
Despite fundamental differences with my representative on most issues, I know her two bills ensure we make the highest and best use of Sears Island — forever. I am proudly reaching across the aisle to support LD 226 and LD 735, and hope you will too.
Kevin Jerram
Stockton Springs
