WIND TRAVELIN’ IN THE NORTH COUNTRY

"If you're travelin' in the north country fair,
where the winds hit heavy on the borderline..."
B. Dylan

Massachusetts is stuck in a classic dilemma: It wants New Energy but it has no place to put it.

It is a densely populated state with few open areas that will accommodate New Energy installations and most of those open areas have advocates who refuse to allow installations.

Case in point: Cape Wind. The nation’s groundbreaking first offshore wind installation COULD have been far off Cape Cod in Nantucket Sound if the wealthy, liberal residents on the beaches there had not blocked the project with aesthetic objections.

Now the state is beginning to make arrangements to import New Energy-generated electricity from Canada. Some of the same folks who blocked wind projects also object to creating a dependency on "foreign" New Energy supplies.

Though things may be changing.

Maine has certainly seen the light and is developing its own onshore wind projects and offshore wind initiatives.

Massachusetts this year passed a ground-breaking law to make it easier to build and buy New Energy, provisions that will be necessary if the state is to meet the law’s requirement to obtain 15% of its power from New Energy sources by 2020.

These new developments are driven by 2 very important regional policy initiatives that will accelerate New England's need for New Energy:

(1) The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) began auctioning emissions credits in September. It will cap greenhouse gas emissions (GhGs) from power plants in 10 Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states. Those power plants will need New Energy sources to meet their caps.

(2) New England region Renewable Electricity Standards (RESs) require 7-to-17% power production from New Energy sources by 2020. These will also require New Energy.

An interesting question lurks behind the push against NIMBYism in New England's New Energy dilemma: Would it be wiser for New England to have a cooperative arrangement with Canada, considering how much space and potential the eastern provinces like New Brunswick and Quebec have?

Stephen R. Connors, director, Analysis Group for Regional Energy Alternatives at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT): "It's not a bad thing, but you don't want it to be the only thing…You'd like to see this activity closer to home."

Well, yeah, but it's not exactly like New England and Canada can’t get along. What’s wrong with a fair exchange that benefits both regions? This could be a really equitable 2-state solution.

Let the NIMBYs in Massachusetts pay $1 million a mile for adequate, new, high-voltage, underground transmission while Canada develops its abundant winds and rivers. Yes, the cost of the transmission will add up to billions and it sounds like a lot of money.

Robert Rio, senior vice president for government affairs, Associated Industries of Massachusetts: "These transmission lines could cost tens of billions of dollars. That is going to add a lot of money to ratepayers' bills…"

But MIT’s Professor Connors says it will likely only add a token to rate payers’ bills when spread out over large populations and extended time periods.

There would certainly be some economic details to work out, but this could be a precedent-setting cooperative arrangement. It could point the way toward logjam-breaking cooperation in other U.S. regions.

Example: In the southeast, conservative objections have prevented passage of a national RES. The southeasterners' objections are based on doubts about their New Energy resources. Why not allot credit toward meeting the standard for building transmission that facilitates higher levels of New Energy production in resource-rich regions?

The objective is to shift to the USE of New Energy. Where the New Energy gets generated is, right now, secondary.

If one region has resources and another has demand, why not do what facilitates both and increases the use of New Energy?

Sean Whittaker, vice president of policy, Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA): "If there are two things Canada has, it is land and wind…And there is a lot of interest if we can bring the resource to New England."

click to enlarge

Wind from the north; Canada has clean energy aplenty for the Bay State, but can't we provide our own?
Beth Daley, November 17, 2008 (Boston Globe)

WHO
New England states; Independent System Operator New England Inc. (ISO New England); The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI); Stephen R. Connors, director, Analysis Group for Regional Energy Alternatives at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT); Robert Rio, senior vice president for government affairs, Associated Industries of Massachusetts; Sean Whittaker, vice president of policy, Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA); Ian Bowles, Massachusetts secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs; Michael Stoddard, researcher/advocate, Environment Northeast

WHAT
Massachusetts in particular and New England in general have the options of developing their own New Energy resources or developing more and better transmission so as to utilize Canada’s wind riches.

click to enlarge

WHEN
- 2008: 16% of Massachusetts’ New Energy came from Canada.
- 48 wind and hydroelectric projects are scheduled to come on line by the end of 2012 to provide power to New England.
- September 2008: The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) kicked off its auctioning of emissions credits.

WHERE
- Massachusetts is 32nd in the U.S. in installed wind capacity.
- A wind installation at West Cape on Canada’s Prince Edward Island is generating electricity that is being delivered 650 miles south to Massachusetts.
- Canadian wind installations and hydroelectric projects are being developed from the Maritime Provinces to Lake Ontario to generated electricity for New England rate payers.

WHY
- Scientists say an 80% cut in GhGs worldwide by 2050 is needed to avoid the worst consequences of global climate change.
- Objections: (1) Relying on Canadian New Energy costs U.S. green collar jobs; (2) Relying on Canadian generation might allow U.S. utilities to avoid cutting GhGs; (3) Building the new transmission to deliver Canadian electricity could be prohibitively expensive and increase utility rates.
- ISO New England runs the region's power grid.
- Canada is also the single biggest foreign supplier of oil to the U.S.

click to enlarge

QUOTES
- Ian Bowles, Massachusetts secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs: "If we are building a bunch of wind [projects] outside of Massachusetts but maintaining our fossil plants . . . that isn't the answer…Our first priority is to exploit [Massachusetts’ potential…"
- Michael Stoddard, researcher/advocate, Environment Northeast: "We don't have the luxury of excluding many clean energy options…If electric supply from Canada is affordable, reliable, and environmentally sound, we should consider it."