BANGOR, Maine — The projected cost of constructing a low dam in the Washington County community of Pembroke to harness tidal energy flowing into and out of Pennamaquan River is now estimated at $120 million, not $70 million as indicated by the developer in an overview of the project initially filed in 2010 with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
The third of three public meetings on the proposal by Utah physicist Ramez Atiya and his Pennamaquan Tidal Power LLC was held Friday afternoon at the Maine Department of Environmental Protection’s regional office in Bangor. Two similar meetings were held Thursday in Pembroke, each attended by three FERC fact-finders flown in from Washington, D.C.
Atiya said the new higher-cost estimate is largely the result of bids for the turbines coming in significantly above original projections. Even at $120 million, Atiya said, the new cost estimate is “conservative.”
Ted Verrill, chief financial officer of project partner Halcyon Tidal Power LLC, told the 25 people attending Friday’s hearing that most of the project’s costs would be financed through debt.
“Typically, 70 percent would be debt-funded and 30 percent with equity, but that could go 60/40,” he said. “We would typically approach investor groups that have been involved in energy development projects. With the recession, banks aren’t making long-term investments, so we might look at insurance companies or private equity funds.”
In its 2010 filings with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the company estimates the facility would generate 80,000 megawatt hours of electricity annually. That would represent about eight-tenths of one percent of Maine’s annual energy requirements. Atiya estimates that’s enough electricity to meet the needs of a minimum of 13,000 homes.
Nick Palso, a FERC environmental specialist who coordinated this week’s public meetings, said Friday the federal review process is a long one. “We’re very early in the process.”
Palso said FERC will be soliciting public comment through Nov. 13, although that deadline may be extended.
This ought to jump our rates real good.
At least it’s private debt — if investors go along with it.
Our rates jumped a long time ago when the legislature required as a matter of law that a large portion of power be provided by more expensive politically correct “alternate” means.
Wow! The cost almost doubles in a couple days!! Not sure if these guys are very good at planning or math. But, if it’s a private deal and not any tax payer funded grants are thown into this money pit, let them go for it if they can find enough moonbats to finance the thing. If it doesn’t work they can always turn it into the worlds largest lobster pound or sumthin’.
From the massive jump in dollars needed now up to $120 million in just a few days
it makes me wonder if some of our “leaders” from Wash DC
have a heavy, uninformed hand in this scheme.
Doesnt look like quite the bargain as it once did.
I wonder what the real numbers really are ?
I worry about the elvers, an important economic marine product since they navigate to fresh water by following the coast line. What will happen when they run into the Atita dam? I think that they will look for another fresh water source further into Cobscook Bay. It seems that a project has to include more tangible economic benefits to the neighboring communities in order to overcome high capital costs. The future of renewable energy will depend greatly on the results of the upcoming election which will pit immediate solutions versus long-term salvations. In any event, it seems that natural gas will serve as the short term solution and a more stable economy might result in more investments into future and cleaner supplies. I was disappointed that the four debates did not not include any discussions on global warming or environmental quality or cap-and-trade initiatives.
Yesterdays article, with a projected cost of only 70 million, said:
“Atiya said he expects the project to generate electricity at 8 cents per
kilowatt hour during the first 30 years of its anticipated 120-year
life.” AND “Maine’s electric rates in 2011 averaged 15.4 cents.””
Wrong, the average 15.4 cents per kilowatt hour quoted is actually a
combination of two prices. The actual cost of the electricity and the
distribution charge. As stated this comparison is completely
misleading. The actual cost per kilowatt hour is about 8 cents now.
The price of the project just went up 70% And that doesn’t add in the added interest expense of borrowing that more money. Something tells me that the cost per kilowatt hour just went UP. Maybe even double.
So, how much of the energy produced is going to stay in Maine?
That is not a meaningful question. Electric power is not carted out in trucks, it is added to and flows through a homogeneous international transmission grid as an alternating voltage is applied at the different sources. There is no meaning to the idea of from what point-source power comes when it is consumed at a particular point somewhere else. There is only the economic question of the cost of different sources and how they are averaged into consumer rates. Maine currently requires by law a relatively high proportion of “alternate” energy sources that are generally more expensive and raise consumer prices.
Plenty of other tidal dams up and down the coast that could be restored at a fraction of the cost; try Parker Head which is almost a half mile long and breached in two places.
UTAH ???