Alliance for Sears Island

John Krueger submitted the following to the October 25 Maine Department of Transportation Open House regarding the agency’s process for selecting a site for a port to make and launch floating offshore wind turbines.
Thank you for the opportunity to learn more about the Searsport wind shore development options.

My comments can be divided into two parts:

1. Marshaling Port Location: In regard to the marshaling port location options, I favor Mack Point. It already possesses the necessary infrastructure, including a rail line, and is accepted for
   industrial use. While the dredging poses challenges, it seems feasible. Given the uncertainties and risks associated with this project, we should avoid compromising the Sears Island habitat if a viable
   alternative with similar costs exists. Constructing the wind facility on Sears Island essentially transforms it into a major cargo port due to the extensive infrastructure required. The hybrid option combines the drawbacks of both alternatives, while Mack Point, as an established commercial port, is a more secure choice in case of project setbacks.
   
2. Project Concerns: There are several aspects of this project that remain “to be determined” and could jeopardize its success or purpose. This project introduces unproven, large-scale floating wind
   technology in the Americas, with floating turbines reaching unprecedented heights and weights. Public-private partnerships in Maine often prioritize attracting private investor funds over project
   success, potentially leaving the public with unpredictable power costs. Competition in the wind energy sector from other states and projects within Maine adds uncertainty to the project’s viability. The need for a corridor to connect offshore power to the grid raises questions about community acceptance, costs, and locations. Legal battles associated with the Sears Island option remain unresolved. Sourcing concrete for the project becomes uncertain with the closure of Dragon Cement.
   
   In conclusion, I recommend that:
   Before any construction or environmental impact occurs at a potential wind shore marshaling port, the numerous “to be determined” risks must be thoroughly addressed, with a clear understanding of
   costs and assurances. The state should develop a comprehensive plan for providing and transmitting non-fossil fuel electricity to ensure energy stability. A more complete assessment of environmental justice in a relatively economically disadvantaged area and a better understanding of the project’s true beneficiaries are essential.