University of Maine Cooperative Extension                   www.mainesolutions.org

 

 

Draft – April 30, 2008          For more information, see http://tedec.mma.edu

 

Initial Community Assessment of Plans to establish a tidal energy device evaluation center in the vicinity of Castine Harbor and the Bagaduce Narrows 

 

Ronald E. Beard, Coordinator, Maine Solutions

and Professor, University of Maine Cooperative Extension

 

Introduction

 

In November of 2007, Maine Maritime Academy and its Tidal Energy Device Evaluation Center (TEDEC) were granted a preliminary permit by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for further, exclusive investigation of two sites (in Castine Harbor and the Narrows of the Bagaduce River), to determine suitability for generating electricity from tidal energy.   TEDEC now has three years (from the date of preliminary permit) to assess environmental and other impacts of its proposed activities prior to seeking a permanent license for power generation as part of testing facilities.  For more detailed information about TEDEC, see http://tedec.mma.edu/

 

The stated mission of TEDEC is to

  • promote the development of tidal energy technology and to provide a platform for the demonstration and evaluation of tidal energy devices;
  • advance the development of tidal energy devices and help bringing technology innovations from concept to realization;
  • promote teaching and research of renewable energy technologies at MMA and to improve understanding of the unique characteristics of the Bagaduce estuary and the potential impact of tidal energy devises on the environment;
  • and further, that the corporation is organized exclusively for charitable, educational and scientific purposes, including for such purposes, the making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations under Section 501(c) (3) of the International Revenue Service code, or the corresponding section of any future federal tax code

 

TEDEC’s early work will be aimed at private and public sector collaboration in establishing tidal energy as a significant alternative energy source without significant environmental or other impacts.

 

For that collaboration to happen, officials at Maine Maritime Academy and TEDEC have chosen to engage stakeholders and the public to determine concerns and identify avenues of collaboration, in preparation for application for a full license from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in 2010/2011.

  

In order to increase the effectiveness of these engagement efforts, TEDEC requested assistance through Maine Solutions, a program of University of Maine Cooperative Extension (www.mainesolutions.org ).  The role of Maine Solutions in this project is initially to assess community interest, and then, with stakeholder involvement, to establish a “working group” that will:

·         To summarize community concerns and interests identified during community assessment and April 30 community forum

·         To summarize the kind of information that is needed to respond to community concerns;

·         To suggest community resources (local, state, and beyond) that can assist in collecting that information

·         To create a declaration of cooperation that outlines roles and responsibilities of any collaborative efforts to collect, summarize and report that information

·         To facilitate two-way communication between the community and TEDEC

This working group will be convened by State Senator Dennis Damon.  In addition to the above purposes, this working group will identify initial and potential forms of collaboration, as the work of TEDEC goes forward.  Although it will include representation from TEDEC and Maine Maritime Academy, it will be independent from these entities.

 

In February and early March of 2008, the coordinator of Maine Solutions, Ron Beard, conducted interviews concerning possible impacts and opportunities that the proposed tidal energy device evaluation center and its activities might bring to the environment and the community.  The assessment included interviews with over thirty individuals and members of groups, including face to face conversations with:

·         Peter Vogell and David Unger, Selectmen, Castine

·         Sarah O’ Malley and Margery Read, Conservation Trust

·         Dale Abernethy, Town Manager, Castine

·         Mike Coughlin, Lee Wylie, Sue Hatch, Gil Tenney, Don Mordecai

                        interested Castine citizens

·         Veronica Young, Marine Environmental Research Institute, Blue Hill

·         Jim Dow, Blue Hill Heritage Trust

·         Bente Hartmann, Bette Norris, David Wyman, Mike Mainen,

Castine Harbor Committee

·         Nonny and John Ferriday, Bagaduce Watershed Association

·         Sarah Cox, Brooksville Harbormaster

·         Karen and Fred Motycka, marina owners, Penobscot

·         Ken Cline and Chris Peterson, faculty, College of the Atlantic

 

and phone conversations with:

·         Robin Alden, Penobscot East Resource Center

·         Robin Mass, Comprehensive Plan Committee

·         Jeff Romano and Jane Arbuckle, Maine Coast Heritage Trust

·         Jesse Leach, maineoysters@yahoo.com

·         Paul Venno, Harborside, Lobster Zone Council

·         Richard Parke, Lobster fisherman

·         Walter Foster, Lobster fisherman

·         Will Hopkins, Cobscook Fisheries Resource Center, Eastport

·         John Kerry and Jennifer Puser, Maine Office of Energy Independence and Security

·         Don Perkins, Gulf of Maine Research Institute

·         Bob Peacock, Harbor Pilot, MMA Graduate and Board member

·         Jay Clement, US Army Corps of Engineers, Augusta

·         Caren Plank, Owner of Sparks and Little Mollie Islands in Bagaduce

 

NOTE:  Inclusion of these names in this assessment does not imply their endorsement of TEDEC or its proposed activities. 

 

Each conversation followed a similar format, as shown by seven questions denoted in bold type below.  Because the responses to the question about potential impacts (Question 3) were so varied, we have grouped those responses into the following categories of potential impact or concern:

  • Environmental Impacts (including marine water quality, plants, fish, shellfish, birds, marine mammals)
  • Impacts to Navigation, Boating and Moorings
  • Impacts on Fishing Interests
  • Impacts on other Economic Interests
  • Impacts on community, including adjacent land owners and other residents, including visual impacts, noise and other concerns
  • Impacts on community facilities
  • Concerns about permitting process
  • Concerns about TEDEC

 

  1. First, what/how have you heard about the Tidal Energy Development Evaluation Center at Maine Maritime Academy?
    • President of MMA met with town manager prior to press release
    • TEDEC officials met with selectmen to answer questions
    • Mark Cote spoke at recent Town-Gown meeting
    • Rep of MMA met with MCHT after article on application (spring 07)
    • Ellie Cortemanche on conference call with MCHT staff
    • Jarleth McEntee responded to newspaper article seeming to indicate MCHT support at the outset
    • Ellie C. and Mark C. met with Jim Dow of BHHT
    • Attended early meeting of Bagaduce Watershed Association, no-one from MMA was present, lots of concerns raised
    • Later meeting of Bagaduce Watershed association, many questions answered
    • Jarleth talked to board of Conservation Trust
    • Jarleth presented information to board of selectmen at regular meeting
    • John Kerry briefed by Susan Mitchell and others
    • Jarleth and Laurie Flood reported to watershed association
    • Jarlath met with harbor committee
    • Read an article a year ago
    • Dribs and drabs of information, but very incomplete so far

 

  1. What is your understanding about what TEDEC is being set up to do?
    • Primarily to test equipment
    • Fears about whether longer term is to actually generate commercially significant power to the grid…
    • Are there other test sites under consideration by TEDEC?
    • Confusion over what the next three years is about… is it to test equipment or to test sites and currents to determine potential for generating electricity
    • If various forms of tidal energy are to provide significant contribution to our overall electricity supply, we need the kind of research and development that TEDEC is preparing to undertake

 

  1.  What do you think the impacts of such testing might be?  What concerns do you have about such testing or generation of electricity from tidal energy at these sites? 

 

Environmental Impacts

·         Concerns about marine life in general, spawning areas, habitat, seal pupping areas (at and above the Narrows -May and June is prime time)

·         Sites on Bagaduce are mapped as essential habitat for bald eagles by Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife

·         Impact on marine plant life, including eel grass (note recent re-vegetation of up-river sites)

·         The Bagaduce is habitat for diverse shore and other bird populations: Greater and Lesser Yellowlegs, plovers, pipers, kingfisher, osprey

·         Bagaduce is incredibly rich wildlife and fisheries area (otter, harbor porpoise, seals, pilot whales, waterfowl, horseshoe crab, sea worms, stripers, eagles, pygmy alewives (fish ladder at Walker Pond- is it working?)

·         The Bagaduce is one of four Maine rivers where horseshoe crabs breed. What do we know about breeding sites, routes and distribution patterns? Do horseshoe crabs over-winter in deep spots in river, harbor?

·         Are there seasonal differences (summer to winter) in ecology, usage of area by fish and other critters

·         How will the test equipment affect water flow and currents?  Will the turbulence attract fish and other species to tangle with gear underwater?  Will fish or other species be cut up by whirling turbines?

·         Will any turbulence change patterns of erosion and deposition of sediments?

·         Does increased turbulence change how filter-feeders get food?

·         This is a great opportunity to see the harbor and Bagaduce as a system, not just physical characteristics… to achieve this systems view, the impact analysis needs to go beyond those elements called for by the FERC regulatory process

·         Will tidal energy devices have to be “painted” with toxic anti-fouling materials? Will there be any leaching of substances during construction or operation, and what effect would this have?

·         Will there be any slowing of current due to tidal energy devices, will this impact wetlands in the upper Bagaduce?

·         Are there both local (site specific) and systems (estuary/watershed) impacts?

 

Impacts on Navigation, Boating and Moorings

·         Potential for interference with navigation, boat passage, moorings (Will there also be a security perimeter around equipment? How will they be marked? Will these sites show up on charts? How will boats and others be notified something is in the water?)

·         Will the test sites affect current moorings for boats or prevent expansion of moorings where town might like to expand?

·         There is a navigational channel recognized by the Coast Guard

·         Effect on navigation in main harbor and local coves (Smith’s and Hatch)… “the ledges are hungry in these parts”

·         The Narrows are very narrow… one lobsterman fishes above them (off Young’s Island, Mills Point) and needs to get through that channel)

·         How might a freeze-over affect the tidal energy equipment? 

·         How will the facilities be sited to avoid damage by ice movement (as is the case for many docks/floats that have to be hauled out)

·         Will installation phase and operations phase of tidal energy facilities have any direct or indirect affects on navigation?

·         There is a cumulative effect of increased use and development of these shared public resources—tidal energy, aquaculture, kayaking, pleasure boating, fishing, etc

 

Impacts on Fishing Interests

·         Will the sites in any way disrupt current or historical fishing practices?

·         Curiosity expressed about impact on lobster, lobster fishing, crabs, scallops (historical fishery), mackerel, sea urchins

·         Will there be vertical lines that will endanger fish and marine mammals?

·         How will they keep equipment from fouling… lots of rockweed, tree branches and other flotsam comes down river… Screens would quickly foul

·         Will traps, trap-lines get caught on any cables on bottom or suspended

·         Overboard discharge has limited clam harvests to depuration digging… if those sources of pollution are cleaned up, will tidal energy devices likely to impact clam fishery?

·         Will siting of equipment and cables create mini-no-drag zones that will serve as interesting study sites? (in effect very small marine protected areas?)

 

Impacts on other current economic interests

·         Will TEDEC bring jobs and let contracts to local people/companies resulting from this activity; is there an economic multiplier effect for Castine and region?

·         Will kayaking, cruiseboats be affected?

·         Impacts on electrical rates? Will the local community benefit in some way?

·         We may learn more about how tides can generate electricity, for benefit of Maine and nation

·         What will we learn about the economics of tidal energy at various scales?

·         What direct/indirect impacts will installation and operation of these facilities have on tourism and local boating, marina use, etc?

 

Impacts on community, including adjacent land owners and other residents

·         The Bagaduce estuary has very high scenic values for adjacent land parcels… what objections will there be from landowners?

·         What will the various testing facilities and sites look like?

·         Aesthetics (visual impacts) will be of concern during initial installation and operation of test areas, and of getting power from test turbines to land and hooking into power lines

·         As we have seen with development of wind farms, some of the concerns are subjective, about the appearance of facilities… we should expect similar concerns with tidal energy

·         Noise associated with installation, turbines and maintenance

·         If access to the grid from tidal energy devices is to be over town or private

      land, how will TEDEC gain permissions?

·         Will eminent domain be used to site current or future facilities?

·         What will “barge” look like when used to replace underwater equipment, turbines?

·         Any change is a change, increased use of the “commons” and traditional users may be impacted

·         There is a larger concern that Maine, as other rural areas, is being asked to serve as source of energy for the larger grid, where there are no incentives to conserve…  

·         Will local towns or businesses receive any reduced power rates in return for

·         Will any kind of electrolysis impact other underwater equipment?  Will there be any impacts due to frequency of energy generated? What happens when cables “leak” electricity?

·         Is there danger of Electromagnetic Fields from electrical lines

·         Where, exactly, will test equipment go, or is the next two years of study to determine optimal locations? 

 

 

 

 

Impacts on community facilities

·         What are the shore-side impacts from all initial installation, staging areas and then from on-going operations?

·         What impacts will the proposed testing facility have on town facilities (including water and sewer), services, zoning, noise, pollution, traffic, parking (town currently doing a study)

·         Will Central Maine Power need to upgrade the capacity of its lines to accommodate the anticipated electrical loads?

 

Concerns about Permitting Process

·         FERC process not geared to small sites, so on the surface, the application process may make it seem grander in scale and impact that is actual situation

·         Since this is among first of many applications to follow in Maine, we need top notch science applied to determine baseline and impacts (it is not enough that undergraduate students and their teachers, good as they are, might be involved)

·         We need peer review of all science protocols and findings, final impact analysis should be done by those without vested interests—those who do the research should be neither pro nor con as far as TEDEC or tidal energy is concerned

·         What is the largest conceivable equipment that could be tested…or will all equipment be scale models?

·         Will different generating equipment have different impacts and how to know in advance?

·         Is this the first step in eventually licensing these sites for commercial power generation?

·         Is this a permanent facility designed to test tidal equipment well into the future, or just testing these sites to determine potential for electrical generation by tidal flow?

·         What is the length of time the FERC license is good for?  Can the initial purpose and technology “morph” into something else without oversight, and further licensing? What size (how large?) operation/facilities would be permitted under the application?  Are there limits to growth of these operations?

·         How much power will be generated, and who benefits from this use of a public resource? What happens to the money from sales of electricity?

·         Is FERC “fast tracking” this application, and if so, how does that impact the ability of local people and others to comment?

·         In addition to FERC, the Army Corps of Engineers needs to review and grant permits for some of TEDEC facilities… they have concurrent reviews with all other federal and state agencies… how will local people be made aware of these and make input to these reviews?

·         Will state just decide that we are a prime power generating location and override local ordinances and concerns, like they did with aquaculture?

·         How will the community, state and federal government adapt policies that “learn from” the experience of TEDEC and others developing new technologies?

 

 

Concerns about TEDEC as an Organization

·         Why here, why now?  What is the rationale?

·         How did TEDEC come into being, and who benefits directly from its existence? What are the roles and benefits to the non-MMA partners? Who holds the power to make decisions, how are MMA trustees involved? What are the by-laws of TEDEC? Who are the employees and what are their salaries?

·         Where does/will funding come from?  If there are federal funds, will they come directly to TEDEC, to MMA, or to University of Maine?

·         Lack of clear picture of what is being proposed (some say that different audiences get different presentations about what is being proposed)

·         How will local people continue to have a role in monitoring the project and providing input?

·         Where did the seed of this TEDEC idea start and how did it become a full proposal?

·         What is the business model and what will happen to any “profit”?

·         If supported by public funds, but some research is proprietary, how transparent and open will TEDEC be with both the initial environmental impact and studies of tidal energy generating devices?  How can the great bulk of information be shared so society benefits? Or will this be more like a private research and development initiative?

·         Suggest that TEDEC take lessons from LURC review of Plum Creek proposal for Moosehead Lake… virtually everything that the applicants submitted was easily accessible through the LURC website.

 

  1. What information or data should be collected now, so that we will be able to measure any impacts from the use of these sites by TEDEC after 2011?  What organizations or individuals might be helpful to TEDEC as they undertake their full environmental assessment and write an impact statement?

 

    • It will be useful to have underwater maps, maps of currents and flows and data for harbor and other narrows test site
    • Are there maps of existing physical channels as well as maps of any customary “travel ways” or navigational channels used by boats (Sewall Company maps? Coast Guard)
    • What fish species use the Bagaduce, when do they migrate?  What parts of the water column do they use?
    • Will changes to the flow created by the tidal energy devices change how sediments are deposited nearby or in the upper watershed?  What do we know about current sediment distribution?
    • What are the key, easily observable conditions for water quality or physical oceanography that we could observe now, and monitor for any change as tidal energy equipment is tested?  (salinity, dissolved oxygen, etc)
    • What do we know about historical distribution of fish species and habitat in this estuary?  Can we find out more from historical society records, interviews with older fisherman?
    • Welcome collaborative efforts at documenting base line and monitoring any changes
    • Will Maine Marine Research Council or other peer group have a role in setting up protocols for baseline study and future monitoring?
    • A really good baseline study will be a very valuable asset to many in the community
    • Important to determine existing water quality and any toxics as baseline for any changes by TEDEC activities or any source in the future
    • Most of existing research and citizen-science on Bagaduce has been on the river above the narrows—environmental assessment by TEDEC has a potential for developing a picture of the river, the watershed and the harbor as a full system
    • Suggest a follow-up informational meeting in summer, after the working group has completed its initial work, to outline next steps
    • Encourage greater coverage in the press, so local people will have a sense of what is going on

 

  1. Who else should we be sure to talk to about community concerns regarding MMA/TEDEC’s full application? (*some of whom have been interviewed)
    • Rep Jim Schatz
    • MCHT staff on the ground (Ciona Ulbrich)
    • Frank Hatch- landowner and conservation leader
    • *Karen and Fred Motycka, land owner, marina owner
    • George Motycka and Joceline Boucher, landowners/resident
    • *Bente Hartmann, chair of harbor committee
    • Bill McWeeney, Adams School 7th and 8th grade science teacher
    • Ed Wardwell, fisherman
    • Peter Vogell
    • Brad Tenney, Endicott Agency (will know who in Yacht Club will be interested)
    • Kenny Eaton, boat yard owner
    • John Gardiner, boat model maker
    • Scott Vogell
    • Dick Stark, Planning Board
    • Lee Wylie, Comprehensive Plan Committee
    • Karen Francoer, Castine Kayak
    • Randy Flood, Lance Burton-- ARGO Maine
    • Bob and Bundy Boit, landowners upper Bagaduce
    • Kathleen Leyden, Coastal Program, State Planning Office
    • Guide for striped bass fishermen (Sedgwick, Castine)
    • *Jesse Leach ( maineoysters@yahoo.com )
    • Windjammers and cruise ships
    • Town of Penobscot officials
    • Local lobster zone council members
    • Steve Perrin – knows about horseshoe crabs
    • Vivian Newman, Maine Sierra Club ( newviv@roadrunner.com )

 

  1. Is there anything else about this project that you think I ought to know?
    • Concern- because Cianbro and other private interests are involved, is there ultimately a plan to use sites for commercial power generation?
    • This could be good for the town, if employment opportunities expanded
    • We could imagine this as a national center of excellence, especially if MMA and TEDEC choose to really collaborate with local community, the state and other partners
    • Landowners need to be invited to meetings and the scope, design and        ultimate visual impact shown
    • Important that an independent person/entity provide oversight to collection and analysis of data, both baseline and monitoring of impacts during operation
    • Have the convener and facilitator received any kind of assurances from MMA board or president that they have more than a white-washing role?
    • Brooksville recently bought access site to river to encourage recreational and other boating use
    • Conservation Law Foundation has suggested that status as scenic river be sought for Bagaduce

 

  1. How would you like to be involved in this process as the environmental assessment is conducted over the next three years, and prior to TEDEC’s full application to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission?

 

  • MERI may be able to assist with marine mammal baseline and monitoring and with monitoring for toxics in water (Veronica will check with Dr. Susan Shaw)
  • MCHT wishes to be involved, through Jeff Romano
  • Board of Selectmen or town manager (selectman see town manager as representing them)
  • BHHT willing to assist (Jim Dow)
  • Mike Coughlin interested in participating
  • Penobscot East willing to be involved, but not as substitute for direct fishing interests
  • Bagaduce Watershed Association and others may be interested but do not want involvement on working group to be seen as an endorsement of the proposal
  • Suggestions for peers to review environmental and fisheries assessment:

                  Rick Wahle, Bob Steneck, John Sowles, Carl Wilson,

  • Office of Energy Independence and Security will participate
  • College of the Atlantic may have interns available through recent grant to help with ethnographic and historical records searches to determine distribution of fish species and habitat