The Supreme Court ruled that the retroactive nature of last year’s referendum violated the constitutional rights of the project’s developer, sending it back to a lower court for further proceedings. The court did not rule on a separate case centering on a lease for a 1.6 kilometer section of the proposed power line that crosses state land. Central Maine Power’s parent company and Hydro-Québec partnered on the project that would supply up to 1,200 megawatts of Canadian hydropower. That’s enough electricity for a million homes. Most of the proposed 233km power transmission line would be built along existing corridors, but a new 85km section was needed to reach the Canadian border.
Work has been suspended since November
Workers were already clearing trees and erecting poles when the governor called for a moratorium on the work after a referendum in November 2021. The Maine Department of Environmental Protection later suspended its permit, but that could be overturned depending on the outcome of the legal process. . The high court was asked to hear two separate lawsuits. The developers sought to declare the referendum unconstitutional, while another lawsuit focused on a lease that allows transmission lines to cross a small section of state land. Proponents say bold projects like this one, funded by ratepayers in Massachusetts, are necessary to fight climate change and bring additional electricity to a region heavily dependent on natural gas, which can cause spikes in energy costs. Critics say the project’s environmental benefits are overstated — and that it would damage forested lands in western Maine. It was the second time the Supreme Court was asked to weigh in on a referendum aimed at killing the project. The first referendum proposal never made it onto the ballot after the court raised constitutional concerns. Although the project is funded by Massachusetts ratepayers, putting so much electricity on the grid will serve to stabilize or lower electricity prices for all consumers, proponents argue. The referendum on the project was the costliest in Maine history, topping $90 million and highlighting deep divisions. The high-stakes campaign pitted environmental and conservation groups against each other and pitted utilities that support the project against operators of fossil-fueled stations that stand to lose money.
title: “Overturning Statewide Vote Maine Court Enables Hydro Qu Bec S Push To Export Power Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-11-16” author: “Julie Lafoe”
The Supreme Court ruled that the retroactive nature of last year’s referendum violated the constitutional rights of the project’s developer, sending it back to a lower court for further proceedings. The court did not rule on a separate case centering on a lease for a 1.6 kilometer section of the proposed power line that crosses state land. Central Maine Power’s parent company and Hydro-Québec partnered on the project that would supply up to 1,200 megawatts of Canadian hydropower. That’s enough electricity for a million homes. Most of the proposed 233km power transmission line would be built along existing corridors, but a new 85km section was needed to reach the Canadian border.
Work has been suspended since November
Workers were already clearing trees and erecting poles when the governor called for a moratorium on the work after a referendum in November 2021. The Maine Department of Environmental Protection later suspended its permit, but that could be overturned depending on the outcome of the legal process. . The high court was asked to hear two separate lawsuits. The developers sought to declare the referendum unconstitutional, while another lawsuit focused on a lease that allows transmission lines to cross a small section of state land. Proponents say bold projects like this one, funded by ratepayers in Massachusetts, are necessary to fight climate change and bring additional electricity to a region heavily dependent on natural gas, which can cause spikes in energy costs. Critics say the project’s environmental benefits are overstated — and that it would damage forested lands in western Maine. It was the second time the Supreme Court was asked to weigh in on a referendum aimed at killing the project. The first referendum proposal never made it onto the ballot after the court raised constitutional concerns. Although the project is funded by Massachusetts ratepayers, putting so much electricity on the grid will serve to stabilize or lower electricity prices for all consumers, proponents argue. The referendum on the project was the costliest in Maine history, topping $90 million and highlighting deep divisions. The high-stakes campaign pitted environmental and conservation groups against each other and pitted utilities that support the project against operators of fossil-fueled stations that stand to lose money.
title: “Overturning Statewide Vote Maine Court Enables Hydro Qu Bec S Push To Export Power Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-12-02” author: “Jodi Byassee”
The Supreme Court ruled that the retroactive nature of last year’s referendum violated the constitutional rights of the project’s developer, sending it back to a lower court for further proceedings. The court did not rule on a separate case centering on a lease for a 1.6 kilometer section of the proposed power line that crosses state land. Central Maine Power’s parent company and Hydro-Québec partnered on the project that would supply up to 1,200 megawatts of Canadian hydropower. That’s enough electricity for a million homes. Most of the proposed 233km power transmission line would be built along existing corridors, but a new 85km section was needed to reach the Canadian border.
Work has been suspended since November
Workers were already clearing trees and erecting poles when the governor called for a moratorium on the work after a referendum in November 2021. The Maine Department of Environmental Protection later suspended its permit, but that could be overturned depending on the outcome of the legal process. . The high court was asked to hear two separate lawsuits. The developers sought to declare the referendum unconstitutional, while another lawsuit focused on a lease that allows transmission lines to cross a small section of state land. Proponents say bold projects like this one, funded by ratepayers in Massachusetts, are necessary to fight climate change and bring additional electricity to a region heavily dependent on natural gas, which can cause spikes in energy costs. Critics say the project’s environmental benefits are overstated — and that it would damage forested lands in western Maine. It was the second time the Supreme Court was asked to weigh in on a referendum aimed at killing the project. The first referendum proposal never made it onto the ballot after the court raised constitutional concerns. Although the project is funded by Massachusetts ratepayers, putting so much electricity on the grid will serve to stabilize or lower electricity prices for all consumers, proponents argue. The referendum on the project was the costliest in Maine history, topping $90 million and highlighting deep divisions. The high-stakes campaign pitted environmental and conservation groups against each other and pitted utilities that support the project against operators of fossil-fueled stations that stand to lose money.
title: “Overturning Statewide Vote Maine Court Enables Hydro Qu Bec S Push To Export Power Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-12-05” author: “Patrick Bey”
The Supreme Court ruled that the retroactive nature of last year’s referendum violated the constitutional rights of the project’s developer, sending it back to a lower court for further proceedings. The court did not rule on a separate case centering on a lease for a 1.6 kilometer section of the proposed power line that crosses state land. Central Maine Power’s parent company and Hydro-Québec partnered on the project that would supply up to 1,200 megawatts of Canadian hydropower. That’s enough electricity for a million homes. Most of the proposed 233km power transmission line would be built along existing corridors, but a new 85km section was needed to reach the Canadian border.
Work has been suspended since November
Workers were already clearing trees and erecting poles when the governor called for a moratorium on the work after a referendum in November 2021. The Maine Department of Environmental Protection later suspended its permit, but that could be overturned depending on the outcome of the legal process. . The high court was asked to hear two separate lawsuits. The developers sought to declare the referendum unconstitutional, while another lawsuit focused on a lease that allows transmission lines to cross a small section of state land. Proponents say bold projects like this one, funded by ratepayers in Massachusetts, are necessary to fight climate change and bring additional electricity to a region heavily dependent on natural gas, which can cause spikes in energy costs. Critics say the project’s environmental benefits are overstated — and that it would damage forested lands in western Maine. It was the second time the Supreme Court was asked to weigh in on a referendum aimed at killing the project. The first referendum proposal never made it onto the ballot after the court raised constitutional concerns. Although the project is funded by Massachusetts ratepayers, putting so much electricity on the grid will serve to stabilize or lower electricity prices for all consumers, proponents argue. The referendum on the project was the costliest in Maine history, topping $90 million and highlighting deep divisions. The high-stakes campaign pitted environmental and conservation groups against each other and pitted utilities that support the project against operators of fossil-fueled stations that stand to lose money.
