In response to a rise in climate anxiety, particularly among young voters, politicians have made numerous “climate pledges” to transition entire networks to carbon-free energy sources. These goals are noble. Whether they are realistic remains to be seen, but Maine’s legislature has a chance to make these intentions a reality — without breaking the bank for consumers.
Since Maine Gov. Janet Mills pledged to make the state carbon-neutral by 2045, consumers have seen a massive uptick in energy costs, with Mainers paying 23% more than the national average electric bill. State Rep. Reagan Paul has introduced LD 1549 in the legislature to examine whether small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) have a role to play in the state’s energy mix. Rep. Paul commented that, “There is growing interest in SMRs around the world, including from our neighbors in New Brunswick, who are investing in the technology today. [SMRs] are good for Maine ratepayers, taxpayers, grid reliability, and will protect the natural beauty of our state.” If Maine environmentalists are serious about tackling climate change and meeting the Governor’s goals, they should support it.
Maine used to host a nuclear power plant that generated 119 billion kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity — enough for the entire state’s energy needs. The Maine Yankee Atomic Power plant in Wiscasset provided good jobs and massive tax revenue for the town, with the plant contributing 91% of the town’s tax base in 1996. Plant employees who lived locally did not have to pay for their utilities, a great perk for many Wiscasset residents. After several referendums against the plant and maintenance that became too expensive to fix, Maine Yankee was closed in 1996. Today, almost 20 percent of Wiscasset residents live below the poverty line.
A single small modular reactor (SMR) could bring Wiscasset’s prosperity back and drive down energy costs across the state. SMRs advantages allow them to be installed at locations where sprawling nuclear plants would not be feasible, while still producing carbon-free power. A single SMR is capable of producing 300 megawatts (MW) of power and can be easily transported to the most suitable area.
Currently, Maine relies heavily on importing energy sources from outside the state with fossil fuels making up the highest percent of demand met by purchases from entities outside the state in 2023. In rural Maine, SMRs could be integrated into the existing power grid and provide consistent power through existing transmission lines. The controversial New England Clean Energy Connect (NECEC) transmission line triggered a referendum from Mainers concerned about the environmental impact from building the transmission lines. Due to SMRs being easily integrated into existing energy infrastructure, there would be no need to level forests to build transmission lines.
Critics of nuclear energy will point to the danger of nuclear waste. While the nuclear waste from Maine Yankee is still stored on site, the 542 tons of waste has never leaked into the surrounding environment or contaminated the area. Mainers have also rejected several renewable energy projects.
Mainers have already rejected offshore wind power due to the impact it will have on the lobster industry, with residents in the state’s rural interior concerned about the windmill’s impact on the natural beauty of Maine’s forests. Windmills also require transmission lines, and are bound to attract the same opposition that the NECEC did. Even solar power has its drawbacks. Efficient energy storage technology for solar energy is not feasible yet and Maine does not receive adequate amounts of sunlight year round. Wind and solar may play a role in meeting Maine’s climate goals, but in support of nuclear power.
Mainers have an opportunity to produce their own energy at home instead of relying on imports of fossil fuels and electricity from out of state. Rep. Paul’s bill is a common sense step towards addressing the state’s climate goals while reducing electricity rates for Mainers. Climate advocates should lend their full support.
Nuclear power is the only option left. Mainers are a stubborn bunch- I hope they see this as an opportunity to solve a major problem for their state. Energy costs are a limiting factor for the economy and growth. Please support this new idea.
I have a better idea. We need to build a “factory” filled with fixed bicycles that turn generators and produce power. We have thousands of ILLEGAL migrants to put to work pedaling and we can also sentence Chinese communist pot growers to life working there to give back all the power they steal daily.
“juicetheseries.com”
Mainers aren’t that stubborn. Don’t mess with our fishing, farming, and timber industries. It’s the enviro-wackos that influence the dem rats in the state house we need to get rid of.
Man made global warming is a lie. The solutions of this non problem are a nightmare scenario. Nuclear bing the only sound idea proposed, but no doubt nucleur will cause another kind of anxiety for these neurotic young people. Then what ?
The climate always changes you pathetic fools. The people pushing this lie about everything. Latest example, those over inflated mileage range projections ratings for electric card. Off by 30to 40 percent
Wake up idiots.
‘Wyoming A Finalist For Factory To Build Portable Micro-Nuclear Plants‘
Mar 15, 2024
Cowboy State Daily
“One megawatt of electricity equals 1 million watts or 1,000 kilowatts, roughly enough power for the instantaneous demand of 750 homes at once. That’s the amount of power the company’s portable micro-nuclear plants would produce…The portable plants measure about 10-feet high, 10-feet wide, and about 30-feet long, weighing a few tons more than a German Tiger tank from World War II, Bernauer said. They’ll weigh in at 60 tons and can be moved on a flatbed semitrailer.”
That Reagan Paul is a rising star, I can see her being governor one day.!
It is very hard to control people if we have a reliable source of power. And no way near enough “free” money to enrich the politicians compared to “renewable” energy.
I would endorse a nuclear power plant in Maine. It would outlast any wind, solar and battery storage project. It would also eradicate current wind, solar and battery developments in the state once their power purchase agreements terminated.
Connecticut and Massachusetts qualify nuclear as “renewable” now. Connecticut leans on it’s instate Millstone Nuclear Plant and Massachusetts leans on Seabrook, Millstone and Canadian nuclear for renewable compliance.
So, if the rules of renewables are subject to change per state whims, consider these facts:
Production from Maine qualified renewable developments, as written in statue, sited on Maine land, is presently averaging a total of 11,317,790 megawatt-hours per year.
11,875,708 megawatt – hours is what Maine presently consumes, annually.
Add the 500,000 megawatt-hours soon to be delivered to Maine from NECEC, a deal that Janet Mills negotiated, the question remains, why the hell is the Maine government considering more transmission projects and renewable energy projects to attain what Maine already, lawfully, has?
“Abundance” is a conservative notion.
“Scarcity” is the liberal equivalent.
Is Maine conservative or is it liberal?
Yes! I’d support one of these micro nuclear plants for sure! Tesla had figured out free power from the magnetism in the earth ! Hence why the government killed him and stole all of his work, which they now use!
Katrina of maine, propose a quick and fast study of putting these in Maine now!
I remember Hill Clinton selling the Russians a bit of uranium. Where did that end up? That stuff dangerous? Power plants of nukes? I get sick just wondering about it. We can’t use it though she can sell it to those who will. Remember, duck and cover kids.
I would be surprised if this passed. It’s obviously put forth by a Republican. What often happens is the Democrats reject a Republican bill and then reintroduce it in the next legislative session as a Democrat bill. It’s all about taking credit as what’s good for the people is usually not good for special interest.
It’s astounding how all the environmental groups that are so vocal about protecting the environment are stone quiet on environmentally destructive inefficient solar and wind. Doesn’t that make anyone wonder?
Will we destroy the natural beauty and way of life that makes Maine a desirable place to live and raise families. Given how we are being led, It certainly seems like we are well on our way to doing that.
Voting or not voting has severe Consequences.
I requested information from CMP on what percentage solar and wind contribute to our electric grid. Never got an answer. God provided fossil fuels for us to use. He also set in place various air currents, ocean currents, plants and trees to clean the air, He knew we would use them and provided the natural ways to keep the air clean.
Remember the nuclear plant Biddeford wanted to build on Wood Island? These new plants are much safer. They just may bring the Peperall in Biddeford.
An excellent opinion piece. If we are to go electric, there is no other option than nuclear. For those “green-only” naysayers who lie awake at night fearful of even the presence of a nuclear reactor, and foolishly advocate a nuclear-free Maine, it might be pointed out that on any given day, there are (and have been for decades) three or four nuclear reactors sitting in drydock in Kittery.
“Maine used to host a nuclear power plant that generated 119 billion kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity — enough for the entire state’s energy needs.” This kid is dangerously ignorant. I once worked in Maine Yankee and there is no way that it produced all the e power in Maine. Since he is dead wrong on this, I now question everything else in the article.
Climate change-what a hoax. Hard to believe so many fall for the lie. SMR’s – sure bring em on!
Nuclear costs $12k~ per kWh.
Solar PV costs $1.2k per kWh.
Onshore wind costs $2k per kWh.
Offshore costs $4.5k per kWh.
This article is absolute bovine scat.
In any given day there are about 100,000 US sailors riding the ocean waves while sitting on a nuke plant.
Anyone who is truly serious about addressing the need for affordable, abundant clean energy will factor nuclear power into the power generation mix.
The professional climate alarmists will never approve nuclear power. The last thing the greedy control freaks want is any form of societal independence. The climate alarmist aka leftists, despise the very notion of a free, prosperous, educated and informed populace. It is the only way they can maintain the power grab and grift.