Jon Reisman
On Sept. 10th, I attended a zoom meeting/briefing/webinar put on by the Department of Energy Resources, Maine’s newest cabinet level agency. The DOER (https://www.maine.gov/energy/home) is a legacy of eight years of Janet Mills, Hannah Pingree, and Democratic control of Maine. During their tenure, energy costs, particularly electricity, have skyrocketed as a consequence of opaque climate policies subsidizing solar and wind, and obstructing natural gas. As a consequence, Maine’s electric grid is both more expensive and less reliable. That increased cost and unreliability has averted exactly no climate change whatsoever, although it has enriched climate alarmist NGOs and Democratic campaign coffers.
The arsonists who have engineered this disaster are now preparing an updated energy plan to be unveiled and presented after the election in January (https://www.maine.gov/energy/plan). The DOER is gathering input and public comment and has issued the following agitprop:
Maine's 2027 Energy Plan will address several priorities to ensure energy is:
• Affordable – Maine's over reliance on fossil fuels is burdening residents and businesses with volatile energy costs. The Maine Energy Plan will document the energy spending that occurs today, exploring how that spending impacts Maine people, and identifying strategies to lower total energy costs over time.
• Reliable – In order to be useful, energy must be available where and when it is needed most – such as through a resilient electric grid that can withstand and recover quickly from major storms, and through adequate heating fuel supply. The Maine Energy Plan will identify and compare reliability trends and explore ways to increase reliability in the face of new challenges.
• Secure – Maine relies on energy that travels into and throughout the state through an interconnected system of physical infrastructure, transportation, and communications. This system must be appropriately maintained and secure.
• Clean – Maine is required by law to increase the portion of electricity sold in the state that comes from renewable and clean sources until that share reaches 100 percent by 2040. These laws help to reduce volatility of electricity costs, lower Maine’s reliance on expensive imported fuels, and drive job creation and investment across the state.
If you delve into the fine print, you will find that although affordability and reliability are listed first and second, the Department is not ranking one goal over any other, and in fact is committed to continued climate alarmist opacity. The Democrats and climate industrial NGO complex will oppose any and all efforts to make the tradeoffs between climate and energy goals transparent. Any effort to actually document how much climate change has actually been averted will be opposed, and the green gravy train will continue on the backs of Maine ratepayers.
I spent 90 minutes attempting to get some small element of honesty and accountability into the plan, probably to no effect. I asked what would happen if a new administration/governor did not agree with the plan. The DOER staffers and Democratic NGO sycophants had no answers, which is unsurprising as they are all Mills/Pingree loyalists.
In 1994, a similar environmental policy conundrum roiled Maine and the gubernatorial election. Congress, led by Maine Senator George Mitchell, had passed the 1990 Clean Air Act’s amendments. As part of that effort to improve air quality, states were required to fashion plans to clear the air. Maine had passed a plan for car testing to reduce emissions. The car testing plan did not apply across all of Maine, was costly, hard to understand, and was perceived as unfair (equity, or lack thereof). Democrat Joseph Brennan, Republican Susan Collins, and Green Jonathan Carter all supported car testing, while independent Angus King opposed it. King eked out a narrow victory, besting Brennan by less than 8,000 votes out of a total 500,000 cast.
I was the analyst who advised Angus to oppose car testing, and my reward was spearheading the process to replace car testing with a less toxic alternative.
Unlike car testing in 1994, Maine’s new energy plan won’t be an issue in the 2026 election because the Democrats have learned that transparency in climate and energy policy is an electoral no-no. Hannah Pingree will not have to defend her plan to continue the climate/energy swindle/con, because the plan won’t be unveiled till after the election. Independent/former Republican Rick Bennett, with deep family ties to the Natural Resources Council of Maine, won’t make it an issue, and the legacy press certainly won’t. Bobby Charles and the GOP can certainly try, but it is unclear they’ll have enough money and energy to do so.
The climate/energy con continues unabated.
Jon Reisman is an economist and policy analyst who retired from the University of Maine at Machias after 38 years. He resides on Cathance Lake in Cooper, where he is a Statler and Waldorf intern. Mr. Reisman’s views are his own, and he welcomes comments as letters to the editor here or to him directly via email at jreisman@maine.edu.
