Kurt Adams, chairman of the Maine Public Utilities Commission, spoke carefully. His agency had just released a study about options for the state’s electricity future, given uncertainties with ISO-New England, and he was asked – point-blank – which the agency favored.

If the MPUC is asked to make a recommendation, Adams said, it will. Well, let’s save it the trouble – the agency’s 76-page report says Maine’s electricity shouldn’t continue to come through the ISO-NE grid.

It should come through Canada.

The MPUC has laid out three options: reforming the natural gas-dependent ISO-NE; returning to an in-state system, which may require utility re-regulation, or joining the Canadian Maritime provinces in a new, regional grid, which has risks, but definite rewards.

None is the worst scenario: status quo.

The report is clear that Maine’s electricity through ISO-NE is dangerously reliant on fiscally volatile natural gas, unable to meet environmental benchmarks, and would cost ratepayers $500 million to $600 million through 2012.

For a state burdened by electricity costs (seventh-highest in America, according to the Milliken Institute), this makes change unavoidable. The MPUC has done yeoman’s work to give three cogent options to consider, but the realistic course takes Maine north, to join New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

This, according to the report, holds the most promise for diversifying and developing alternative energies like wind and hydropower, and reducing dependence on natural gas. From an economic and consumer perspective, this makes sense.

And environmental sense, too.

Maine’s renewable energy goals, plus the carbon dioxide caps of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, are expected to be unattainable unless ISO-NE is reformed. Aligning with the Canadian provinces instead would breathe life into alternative energy development within Maine, and help achieve these laudable environmental goals.

Having an energy partnership is critical; developing energy alternatives while ensuring reliable delivery as a solo entity would be formidable. This would mean eliminating a Maine-managed system as an option.

It doesn’t rule out reforming ISO-NE to help meet Maine’s needs – the grid is a reliable source of energy – but convincing the grid to support alternative energy projects promises to be challenging.

ISO-NE prefers to alleviate congestion, not build for the future, which puts the northern transmission lines needed for wind power into question.

Maine has great potential for developing alternative energy, an issue with decided economic, social and environmental benefits. The report is clear: achieving this potential is more likely with Canada, than the grid.

With this study, the MPUC has outlined a convincing, serious case for an unprecedented energy partnership with the provinces. Given the crises in the petroleum market, securing Maine’s energy future – based on this report – has become an instant legislative priority.

MPUC doesn’t need to make a recommendation on what to do. The report speaks for itself.