One of the elements being used in advertisements opposing the New England Clean Energy Connect corridor I find troubling is the objection that the recipient of this cleaner energy will be Massachusetts — the implication being that they are an oppositional state — a neighbor to be hindered somehow, and a lesser part of our union.

Then this unyielding mindset is accompanied by the claim that Maine will receive next to nothing in return.

But Maine, and specifically Lewiston, is projected to receive $6 million in tax revenue from this project, which is not “almost nothing.” It is property tax relief; it is funding for much-needed road, bridge and school improvements; it is help for the most needful in our midst and not “nothing.”

Most importantly for New England and globally, the overall impact of introducing this cleaner energy into New England’s power grid is that it will reduce the carbon footprint into our atmosphere by 3 million metric tons, equivalent to that released by 700,000 cars per year. This, too, is not “nothing.”

And when, relating to this, we learn from televised ads that 95% of the funding for “Yes on 1” comes from out-of-state oil and natural gas industries, what are we to think? Who is behind this effort to push fossil fuel production deeper into our future?

Along with a few other conservation-minded friends who’ve researched this issue, I’ll be supporting the imperfect greater good the NECEC corridor presents, and say “No on 1” and to these fossil fuel interests and alliances.

Paul Baribault Lewiston


Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or to participate in the conversation. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.