For the November 1996 issue, Mainebiz asked readers for their input on when to close Maine Yankee, the Wiscasset nuclear plant. Readers’ views were divided, and the eventual decommissioning was in 2005.
Updated: April 29, 2019
Energy
In the past 25 years, renewable energy in Maine moved into the mainstream
File Photo / Nuclear Regulatory Commission
An aerial view of Maine Yankee, the Wiscasset nuclear plant whose dismantling and decommissioning was completed in 2005.
Photo / Jeff Kirlin
Gov. Janet Mills announced that Maine had joined the U.S. Climate Alliance, a bipartisan coalition of 21 states committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions consistent with the goals of the Paris Agreement.
Photo / Courtesy of Maine Aqua Ventus
The University of Maine and Cianbro had a pilot program to test floating wind turbines, like the one shown here on Penobscot Bay.
Photo / Peter Van Allen
Maine Beer Co. in Freeport incorporated a solar array into its expansion.
By James McCarthy
The energy mix of Maine’s power supply has undergone a substantial shift since 1994, when 33% of the state’s net electricity generation came from the Maine Yankee nuclear power station in Wiscasset and another 20% from petroleum-fueled generation.
Maine Yankee’s prominence began to change as the aging nuclear plant, in service since 1972, became increasingly more difficult and expensive to run. In response to allegations of safety problems at the plant, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission started a lengthy investigation in 1995. NRC identified so many problems, Maine Yankee’s owners determined it would be too costly to fix them and decided to permanently shut the plant down in August 1997. The eight-year $500 million decommissioning process was completed in 2005.
Maine’s energy profile underwent a sea-change in the new millennium, spurred by several major drivers:
- Slow-but-steady advances in renewable energy sources and market incentives such as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (2007) encouraging greater use of clean (i.e. non-fossil-fuel) energy;
- The 2000 deregulation of the two major electric utilities, Central Maine Power and Bangor Hydro, forcing them to sell their power-generation assets;
- The 2008 Wind Energy Act, which set ambitious goals of installing 2,000 megawatts of wind capacity in the state by 2015, 3,000 megawatts by 2020 (with at least 300 megawatts coming from offshore turbines) and 8,000 megawatts by 2030 (with at least 5,000 megawatts offshore).
Although those wind energy goals haven’t been met — Maine had roughly 925 megawatts and 19 operating wind farms by 2018 — wind turbines produce 20% of the state’s net electricity and account for two-thirds of all wind-powered generation in New England.
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s most recently updated profile (based on June 2018 data), almost 85% of Maine’s net electricity generation came from renewable sources, with almost 33% from hydroelectric dams, 25% from biomass generators using mainly wood waste products, and 20% from wind turbines. In addition, almost 20% of net generation came from natural gas. The rest of Maine’s net electricity generation came from petroleum, coal, and solar power, according to the Maine State Energy Profile.
Maine’s largest electricity generating plant, the 827-megawatt William F. Wyman station in Yarmouth, burns No. 2 fuel oil and in recent years has been used only to meet peak power demand in the winter.
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the industrial sector accounts for about one-fifth of Maine’s net electricity generation, the highest proportion of any New England state and one of the highest among all the states. Maine’s industrial sector primarily uses biomass, hydroelectric and natural gas turbines to generate power.
With its limited use of coal and petroleum for electricity generation, Maine is among the 10 states with the lowest carbon emissions, USEIA added.
Looking forward, Gov. Janet Mills announced that Maine had joined the U.S. Climate Alliance, a bipartisan coalition of 21 states committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions consistent with the goals of the Paris Agreement. Mills said her office would seek to reduce Maine’s greenhouse gas emissions by 26% to 28% by the year 2025 and by 80% by 2050. She also pledged that 80% of the state’s electricity would come from renewable energy by 2030 and 100% by 2050.
“A change is gonna come,” she said in a nod to the 1964 Civil Rights-era song by singer-songwriter Sam Cooke.
Most Recent
Most Recent
Related Content
Anonymous
May 7, 2019
As the article above noted, Maine is among the 10 states with the least carbon emissions. Given our ranking, and our per-capita income, why in the world are Democrats always seeking to pursue the moral high ground when it comes to climate initiatives in Maine? Remember the California emissions laws we signed up to mirror (not 49-state cars, but matching California-only stringent standards) that we still have to conform to? Remember the wasted money on the motor vehicle inspection station program that that also brought us, which wasted a lot of taxpayer dollars? Remember that this initiative also brought us MBTE as an alternative? Currently, 28 states have shown MBTE water contamination, which will require costly work to clean up. Brilliant knee-jerk reaction on that one... The leadership on the Democratic side in Maine has seemingly always been willing to increase both the first cost of everything we need to purchase in Maine to gain the moral high ground, from more expensive cars and maintenance on this emission systems, to higher energy prices due to both high first cost, extensive and costly maintenance on wind turbines and high manufacturing indirect costs due to energy use and rare metals required for solar panel manufacture. When can we just be normal people, maintaining our lifestyle based on conservative, prudent choices, not be subjected to a wish-list from wannabe climate leaders that want the media exposure and recognition for solving a problem that does not exist in Maine? Now, we are being pushed to this transmission line to solve a regional problem that Massachusetts caused due to their inability to generate electricity within their own borders. They wrote the law, let them solve the problems that this short-sighted legislation caused by reducing demand and not just look to import power with a "green" label from elsewhere. I'm more than frustrated with this "buy a solution" or "cap-and-trade" mentality that simply transfers the problem to someone else or worse, allows a third-party cap-and-trade broker to skim pass-through profits off without physically helping solve the greenhouse gas problem in the first place. Take care of you own first, Maine Legislature and Governor, and be a leader in solving problems within our borders. Show Maine's technical prowess and abilities by creating projects that serve as examples of good practice, not by facilitating avoidance by the rest of New England for promises of jobs for a select few transmission line workers from out-of-state companies (Iberdrola, anyone?) for a limited time period. Remember "shovel-ready"? How many of those jobs did us average Joes get? We're still paying the bill for that, yet not a single project came to Maine that was not union-based and available for mortal men to work on... So many challenges, so few people in Maine politics willing to buckle down and generate technical solutions...Let's lead for once instead of following!
1 Comments