As the 45th Annual New England and Eastern Canadian Premiers (NEG-ECP) conference commences in Boston this week, and a coalition of taxpayer watchdog non-profit organizations from across New England is urging the Governors to address taxpayer concerns regarding energy affordability and the real impacts of the renewable energy transition on the economy.
The coalition consists of the following groups: Americans for Prosperity, Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity, Josiah Bartlett Center for Public Policy, Maine Policy Institute, Yankee Institute, and Wind Action of New Hampshire.
The NEG-ECP Conference announced it will specifically focus on energy and the renewable energy transition, including offshore wind and decarbonization at this year’s closed-door summit, and will hold a press conference on Tuesday, September 10 to address the media.
Immediately following the Governors’ press conference on September 10, the energy coalition will host a virtual press conference at 2:30pm ET to lay out the ways in which renewable policies are harming New Englanders by decreasing reliability and increasing prices.
Meanwhile, the coalition is providing the media with a list of questions prior to the Governor's press events at the NEG-ECP Conference.
1) Orsted, the developer of the Revolution Wind and Southfork offshore wind projects reported in their literature that turbines located 15-miles offshore could result in a 15% drop in tourism.[1] For Nantucket Island, this would translate into a financial loss of $815 million over the next 30 years.[2] Have the New England states, especially MA, RI, ME, and NH accounted for these types of losses when assessing the financial benefits of building offshore wind?
2) Staff for the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council (CRMC) stated that changes to benthic habitat through construction, operation, and maintenance activities related to offshore wind and the presence of structures will have negative impacts on Rhode Island’s marine economic sector and that overall, there would likely be a net loss to the state’s marine businesses which either directly or indirectly profit from fishery resources. Have these losses been quantified and are they considered in claims that offshore wind will benefit the region?
3) New England has experienced precipitous declines in NOX, SO2 and CO2 over the last 15 years through the transition to natural gas without ratepayers incurring significant costs. Coal has largely been eliminated from our resource mix and the use of oil is generally reserved for our coldest days. Now BOEM states in the environmental impact statements for both the Vineyard Wind 1 and Revolution Wind offshore wind projects, that any net decrease in GHG emissions will not be measurable on a global scale and that the climate change trends in the area will occur with or without these projects. Given BOEM’s position, how do the states justify the significant environmental and economic risks of building 9000+ MW of offshore wind?
4) In a preliminary study released by the ISO-NE in 2022,[3] the ISO found that for New England to be powered under a 100% wind/solar/battery scenario, the region would need to triple its installed power plant capacity from 30,000 MW to 90,000 MW. Thousands of wind turbines, millions of solar panels, and many more new and costly miles of transmission would be needed to generate and deliver this power. Are the states prepared to mandate this development and have they considered the effect of this development on the environment and economics of the region?
5) The states often insist that wind and solar generation reduces electricity bills, when in fact, New Englanders suffer the highest retail residential rates in the country. In 2021, Massachusetts ratepayers paid over $1billion in added costs to pay for renewable energy mandates.[4] These costs do not include the high-price of subsidizing behind the meter solar. While some of the renewable energy policies may help reduce wholesale market prices for energy, the costs are not eliminated but shifted to the retail side of the electricity bill. When will the policy debate surrounding energy in the region take note of the enormous costs already borne by ratepayers? Will the states commit to releasing the full costs of their policies for ratepayers to examine and debate?
“Affordable, reliable energy is a key driver of prosperity and economic opportunity. It drives our economy and increases the quality of life for all Americans. The Governors and Premiers should be focused on the well-being of their citizens, not ideology. The question that should be asked of all of our elected officials should be, ‘how will these policies make life more affordable and increase prosperity for your constituents?’” Americans for Prosperity Northeast Region Director, Ross Connolly
“The taxpayers of Massachusetts are paying a premium to subsidize renewable energy from solar and these offshore wind factories, despite the major increase expected in cost to ratepayers and the major decline in reliability that will result. That’s on top of the massive, negative environmental footprint they leave behind and negligible effects to the overall climate. It should be obvious to anyone paying an electrical bill that Governor Healey is gaslighting them. Every quarter, the cost of electricity continues to increase and people's bills continue to go up. That is a direct result of the policies pushed by Governor Healey and Beacon Hill leaders that are simply expensive virtue signaling on the backs of the taxpayers and ratepayers. It’s time for people to wake up and hold the Governor accountable to her rhetoric,” said Paul Diego Craney, a spokesman for the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance.” Paul Diego Craney, Spokesperson, Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance
"With the environmental, marine, and beach-goer dangers of offshore wind farms now clearly evident; and with both US Presidential candidates disavowing strict federal EV mandates ... it is time for our governor to withdraw Rhode Island from its commitment to California's even more oppressive EV mandates. Further, it is time for state lawmakers to repeal the 2021 "Act on Climate", which requires RI to reach net-zero emissions by 2050, in favor of a more realistic and less costly state energy policy." Mike Stenhouse, CEO RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity
“The transition to cleaner energy production in New England is already underway. From 2001-2022, carbon dioxide emissions from New England power generators fell by 37%, nitrogen oxide fell by 79%, and sulfur dioxide fell by 98%, according to ISO New England data. The region’s political leaders have not made a compelling case that massive and costly government interventions are necessary to speed this transition, or that they will even make a significant impact.” Drew Cline, President, Josiah Bartlett Center for Public Policy
"Offshore wind development in the Gulf of Maine threatens the livelihoods of Maine's heritage fishing and lobstering industries, and stands to undermine our state's multi-billion dollar tourism economy. Maine must stop propping up expensive, unreliable and intermittent energy sources at the expense of electricity ratepayers, who Maine's energy public advocate says will pay $220 million more per year for the next 20 years due to the state's green energy giveaways. Offshore wind is poised to become Maine's next big energy boondoggle." Jacob Posik, Director of Legislative Affairs, Maine Policy Institute
“At a time when Connecticut households are grappling with sky-high electricity prices, we ask Governor Lamont to be mindful of how decarbonization policies could drive electricity prices even higher. Any such policy change discussed by the Governors and Premiers will have a miniscule impact on climate change, but has an enormous potential to make Connecticut more unaffordable than it already is.” David Flemming, Director of Policy & Research, Yankee Institute
“Renewable energy mandates in the New England region are already costing its residents billions in higher electricity prices. As these policies force aggressive annual increases in subsidized wind and solar generation, these costs will only go up. This is especially true when the offshore wind projects come online and utilities pass the above market contract rates onto their customers. We are reaching a point where businesses and homeowners are being forced to leave New England in search of more reasonable electricity prices.” Lisa Linowes, Executive Director, Wind Action of New Hampshire