As Mainers, Americans, and people on earth, we need to act systemically and swiftly to address our climate crisis. As we make extremely important, difficult decisions that will impact future generations, we must get this right. Siting considerations for renewable energy will be one of the most contentious tasks of our time, requiring thoughtful planning and community engagement. We will need new infrastructure to offset fossil fuel infrastructure plus more as we electrify everything.
Thus, we need to adjust our mentality to infrastructure for our renewable energy future. It will require some visual impacts to the landscape, some construction noise, etc. in some places. But, much can and should be avoided or mitigated. We do not need to concede intact habitat or critical recreational/cultural areas to future infrastructure, especially if viable, practicable alternatives exist.1
While Sierra Club strongly supports the development of substantial wind resources for electricity generation, we have also been staunch advocates to protect and preserve Sears Island. As we build a robust and just renewable energy economy, we will face difficult choices that force us to balance speed, equity, and long-term impacts. We must also minimize effects on wildlife and ecosystems to the greatest extent possible to avoid accelerating the ongoing biodiversity crisis. Environmentally-responsible offshore wind energy projects can spur economic development, create jobs in coastal communities, improve energy security, and dramatically cut pollution. We believe the best precedent for this transition is to construct the new wind port on the industrial site, Mack Point, while fully utilizing all federal funds available to offset the financial costs.
We want to remind folks of Sierra Club’s involvement in preserving Sears Island, alongside many other community activists over the years. See more: sierraclub.org/maine/blog/2023/02/updates-sears-island
Maine’s offshore wind development must follow the policy outlined by the Maine Climate Council and develop renewable energy with minimal disruption to the natural systems. Part of the plan focuses on conservation and enhancement of coastal ecosystems for adaptation and mitigation in keeping with conserving 30% of lands and coastal waters by the year 2030, or “30x30.” A haven for migratory birds and waterfowl, Sears Island is surrounded by eelgrass beds, essential habitat for juvenile lobster, flounder, crab, cod, etc. Only 15% of coastal ecosystems remain nationwide. They are essential carbon sinks and provide important sea level rise mitigation ecosystems as highlighted by Maine Won’t Wait.
By comparison, Mack Point is already developed. It has an essential rail line, shuttered oil tanks, and adjacent available acreage on site and along the rail spur at the former GAC plant. It also has a very willing landowner. As Maine continues to experience development pressure, more use of natural resources, and an intensifying climate crisis, it is incumbent upon us to value all undeveloped land and protect intact habitats whenever possible, even if they are owned by MDOT.
The 2007 Sears Island Planning Initiative Consensus Agreement and the subsequent executive order in 2009 stated that ‘Mack Point shall be given preference as an alternative port to development on Sears Island.’ Considering it is one thing, but preference means “the act, fact, or principle of giving advantages to some over others.” Environmental law requires that the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative does not prioritize financial cost. Even if Mack Point were more expensive, we should try to make it work.2 Particularly, we suspect there are federal funds available that might make the cost issue mute. We need to fully vet all potential mitigation, funding opportunities, and more to fully evaluate Mack Point as the preferred alternative.
For next steps, we will mobilize public comments for the federal permitting process once a site is identified, so stay tuned for action through our AddUp campaign.
- Climate resilient development is enabled when governments, civil society and the private sector make inclusive development choices that prioritize risk reduction, equity and justice, and when decision-making processes, finance and actions are integrated across governance levels, sectors, and timeframes (very high confidence). https://www.google.com/url?q=https://report.ipcc.ch/ar6syr/pdf/IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM.pdf&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1687711092835033&usg=AOvVaw1j6ffOPvqhMlvCy8Kp_6-o
- There is of course a line of what is feasible, even in relation to the consensus agreement, but the availability of federal funds should allow for a more even weight for monetary cost. Additionally, the cost benefit analysis formula is currently being rewritten at the federal level that could more accurately reflect loss of habitat/lands. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/DraftCircularA-4.pdf