Maine has an abundance of clean power sources, a well-educated work force, and a culture that values self-reliance.
People in Maine understand that we can save money, create jobs, prevent pollution and safeguard our quality of life by developing a clean energy economy under local control. But we need better public policies to make it happen.
As the owner of a sustainable goods store in downtown Brunswick, I helped customers increase efficiency and switch to clean energy. I’ve seen firsthand the need for better policy. To put our clean energy resources to work for all of us, we need better access to essential knowledge, quality equipment, competent professionals and affordable financing.
Recent commentaries by state Rep. Alex Cornell du Houx, D-Brunswick, intended to showcase his record, actually reveal a lack of effective political leadership. Our efficiency programs are mired in partisan bickering and our continued dependence on heating oil leaves us at the mercy of global markets.
A Republican bill that Cornell du Houx stewarded through the Legislature reflects our political shortcomings. The goal of LD 1895 was to protect consumers who prepay for heating oil, but it provides no financial compensation in cases of fraud or inability to deliver fuel.
As reported in the Bangor Daily News, oil dealers “resisted efforts to require bonding or a mandated line of credit.” Anne L. Head, commissioner of the state Department of Professional and Financial Regulation, writes, “It’s hoped that this new law will discourage inappropriate behavior by the few unscrupulous dealers, but there’s no guarantee.”
We can do better to protect our vulnerable consumers. A good start would be to require bonding so financial compensation can be made when fuel isn’t delivered as promised.
But the larger issue is that none of our oil dealers — no matter how scrupulous — can guarantee their commitments. Maine has no fossil fuel deposits. We buy all of our oil and gas from out of state, subject to forces beyond our control. The dramatic price increase of 2008 and this year’s high prices were warning shots across our bow.
The good news is that we can change course. State policy could help us switch to local clean energy sources by providing: 1) reliable and objective information about the performance of renewable energy systems in Maine’s climate, 2) more rigorous workforce training programs to certify and upgrade the skills of engineers and installers, and 3) most importantly, better financing programs that expand access to capital beyond those who can already obtain home equity loans.
If you believe the spin from incumbent politicians, you might think we are already pursuing effective energy policies in Maine. We are not.
In 2008, I was one of the small business owners and concerned citizens who met with local charities to consider how our communities would respond to the skyrocketing price of oil. Luckily oil retreated from its high of almost $150 per barrel, sparing us from disaster.
We caught another lucky break when the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 sent millions of federal dollars to the states, including Maine, giving us the chance to develop effective programs and policies to wean ourselves from oil dependence.
In hindsight, it’s clear that we missed opportunities. Rather than giving businesses and homeowners an economic incentive both to conserve and generate clean renewable energy for our grid, we simply continued our renewable energy portfolio mandates. Rather than building demonstration centers at places like Brunswick Landing, where contractors and home buyers could actually see and experience best practices in energy-efficient construction, we tried to force new and unfamiliar standards on a struggling industry just as the housing market was crashing.
The guiding principle for Maine’s energy policy should be to accelerate a smooth and productive transition away from an economy based on limited supplies of dirty fossil fuels to an economy based on perpetual supplies of clean renewable energy.
Scientists and economists agree that the most efficient and effective way to align our economic, environmental, and social goals is a carbon dividend. Under this policy, people who pollute our atmosphere (e.g. by burning heating oil, etc.) would pay a fee for this privilege. This fee would then be distributed equally to all residents.
Here in Maine we could implement this plan by creating a Maine Permanent Fund modeled after the Alaska Permanent Fund. Not only would we be taking meaningful steps toward energy independence, but we would provide a small measure of income stability to every Maine resident.
We expect our elected officials to propose effective policy, serve on committees for which they are qualified, and work together for our longterm benefit. The reasons our Legislature has proven inept at energy policy are a combination of policy proposals being inadequate, people lacking relevant experience serving on our Energy, Utilities and Technology Committee, and structural problems pervading our two-party, winnertake all system.
The question is, will voters start fixing the system by demanding more than empty rhetoric from politicians running for re-election?
Please join me in advocating for better leadership and demanding better energy policies, so we can enjoy a better future.
Fred Horch of Brunswick announced that he plans to run as a Green Independent Party candidate for District 66 in the Maine House of Representatives.
letters@timesrecord.com
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less