Expect federal laws to fuel energy boon for Maine
guest column

Expect federal laws to fuel energy boon for Maine


In 2008 alone, Maine spent almost $5 billion on fossil fuel imports
Daniel L. Sosland

Our nation faces an urgent need to wean itself from the fossil fuels that are changing the climate and risking our economic future. The benefits of taking strong and immediate action will be considerable for the country — and especially for the people and industries of Maine. As the U.S. Senate takes up legislation this autumn, Maine’s senators are well positioned to lead the way to an effective federal strategy to help deliver these benefits.

According to analysis by Environment Northeast (ENE), the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) passed by the House of Representatives in June could direct as much as $878 million to Maine for energy efficiency projects in the next eight years alone. This would translate to more than $2.6 billion in savings for Maine consumers and 7,800 jobs directly attributable to programs weatherizing homes and installing and maintaining energy efficient products across the state. ACES also includes important upgrades to appliance standards and building energy codes. The combination of these policies will help Maine households and industries achieve greater energy independence.

These energy efficiency policies will curtail the waste of millions of dollars, keeping hard-earned money in the local economy and make Maine buildings cheaper to heat and cool. In 2008 alone, Maine spent almost $5 billion on fossil fuel imports. Incentives in ACES would help redirect this flow of precious dollars out of state to cleaner, local resources like wind and solar energy. Maine is endowed with abundant wind power sites, both off- and on-shore. Maine companies like Bath Iron Works are already researching how to manufacture wind turbines or otherwise seize the abundant opportunities of the new clean energy economy. Our state is also in the running to become home to a National Deepwater Offshore Wind Research Center, and federal climate legislation will open even more economic opportunities for our businesses.

Maine is the most forested state in the country, and our forest economy will also benefit from federal climate legislation. ACES allows regulated industries to meet required emissions reductions in part through purchasing approved alternative emissions reductions — carbon “offsets” or credits — from forestland owners who manage their lands to increase the amount of carbon stored in trees and soils. Maine’s delegation is pushing to expand this opportunity to help forestland owners who do not meet the rigorous standards of the offsets program. Rep. Chellie Pingree introduced such legislation in the House, co-sponsored by Rep. Michael Michaud, and a similar bill is being proposed in the Senate by Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. As Mainers have long known, forests also offer a local and renewable fuel supply (cordwood, wood pellets and other biomass) that will be rewarded in federal climate legislation and increase employment in the forestry sector. These new and expanded markets, driven by carbon regulation, will provide forestland owners a welcome new revenue stream and opportunity to join the low carbon economy.

Maine’s elected officials, at both the federal and state level, understand these potential benefits. They also appreciate that their influence is enhanced when they take a leadership role in designing and fighting for the innovative energy and climate policies that can deliver these benefits. For example, Maine was among the first of 10 states to adopt legislation establishing the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), the first mandatory and bipartisan “cap and trade” emissions reduction program in the country. As they work to meet the emissions goals, Maine energy consumers large and small are aided by more than $11.6 million for energy efficiency programs that has come from the sale of RGGI carbon allowances in just the first nine months of the program. Some of these funds were spent last winter to weatherize low income homes and the rest are supporting residential, business and industrial projects that will start lowering energy consumption and bills this year.

Thanks to the support of interests as diverse as environmental groups to paper mills, RGGI is giving Maine a competitive edge in the emerging low carbon economy. Now the state stands to gain even more, economically and ecologically, with federal climate legislation.

We are counting on Sens. Collins and Snowe to lead the fight for this legislation and shape its provisions. We look forward to seeing energy efficiency and forestry benefits delivered to the Maine economy and to the establishment of a sound federal climate strategy to reduce global warming and ensure a brighter economic future for us all.

Daniel L. Sosland is the executive director of Environment Northeast in Rockport.

Not registered? Click here
E-mail this
Print this
Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

Bangordailynews.com is pleased to offer a forum for readers to react to our stories, discuss them and provide additional information. We are reluctant to delete comments, but do reserve that right for those who abuse our forum. For more on using this site, please see our terms of service.

The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. What does that mean specifically? Here are some guidelines (see more):

Comments
5 comments on this item

You are counting on" Sens. Collins and Snowe to lead the fight for this legislation and shape its provisions"......Unfortunately , I'm sure that you will not be dissappointed.

Weaning the US, as in other countries, from fossil fuels does bring on a big problem. It's called energy pricing. Those OPEC countries which produce oil exports have plans already in effect when certain countries reach "unacceptable" levels of oil imports and oil-use. There will be disappointment, believe me. If one thinks that just because homes go 'green', automobiles go 'green', fixes the problem, think again!

The US is not taking steps in all avenues of eliminating oil-use products, and really never could, unless research in all fields for most products used today which require oil-based products from paint through to home and building construction plastics, are eliminated by 90% or better. Each President in the long line we have enjoyed in recent years; all have advocated some type of energy-efficiency and the elimination of fossil fuel vehicles. So far what has been done? Obama has re-adjusted the energy suspense date for the US another ten years ahead. It's like 'kick the can' down the street. Everybody has a turn at kicking the can down the street, and it just keeps getting kicked further and further down all the while. Politics as usual, and I don't really care much for what Senator Collins or Senator Snowe dictates, a major problem is heading your way.

Already the Mideastern countries are fast becoming, if not already, the financial capitol of the world, and many countries already have their headquarters and financial establishments there - all working under the kind governmental policies and mandates of Mideastern rule. And its working. Dubai, from where my wife came from and has family, has it's own complete world financial center. You may locate it on the web if you like. I'm a-'tellin 'ya, the US best get with the program! Fast!

We could get rid of the entire population on earth. The climate would still evolve and change. Again, god we're stupid. Study the sun. Don't ya think that might have something to do with temps on earth? Duh.

You are correct, 'commonsense'. Study historical climate alterations on earth and it may give these folks a chance to awaken their minds that climates here have changed since the beginning of time. The earth does not rotate in a full circle. The earth 'tips' on its axis. The sun controls weather, moon controls tidals and weather, and the earth itself holds management on the weather as well. Thanks for breaking the ice! Hehehehe.

We solved the dilema of clean energy long ago, but the real goal is not clean energy. If clean, reliable energy were the real goal of the "green" movement, then we'd be building hydroelectric dams as fast as possible instead of tearing out as many as we can because of psuedo-science that pretends that stocked salmon are somehow genetically pure. The real goal is control. "Green energy" is just the means to and end.

You must be logged in to post a comment. click here to log in.

Powered by: Creative Circle Advertising Solutions, Inc.