|
"Voting Energy" - An Outreach Campaign & Voter's Guide
In August 2006, a survey was issued to candidates seeking
to represent Cape & Islands voters at the county, state, and federal levels.
Initial results were compiled based on responses received in advance
of the Massachusetts primary in September. In total, 15 candidates responded in advance of the general election in
November, spanning all parties and the races for governor, attorney general, federal representative, state senate,
state representative, and county commissioner.
Though the candidates expressed divergent opinions on the wind project proposed for Nantucket Sound and other project
proposals, consensus was apparent on a number of key issues relating to energy efficiency, renewables, climate change,
and sustainable development in the Cape & Islands region. Agreement on the following points was nearly universal:
- Fossil fuel reliance threatens national security and is changing global climate. It harms the economy, damages
the environment, and poses threats to the future of the Cape & Islands region. Local communities should be "working
aggressively" toward energy independence.
- Community-based processes should guide siting and installation of large-scale offshore wind, wave, and/or tidal
projects not visible from land. Offshore renewables projects sited in local waters should offer local communities
specific and substantive benefits.
- A Cape & Islands renewable energy cooperative should be created with potential to buy green power at wholesale
rates, own and operate energy projects and systems, and give residents and businesses direct control over its decisions.
Also, there was much agreement about the types of benefits that local communities should receive from large-scale
renewable energy projects sited in the region. For detailed information on survey results, contact Chris Powicki,
774.487.4613,
chrisp@weeinfo.com
Unfortunately, not all candidates in contested races completed surveys. Differences in opinion among opposing candidates
in the 2006 general election are summarized below, in the form of a "Voting Energy" Guide:
4th Barnstable District: Maloy vs. Peake
Barnstable, Dukes & Nantucket District: Powell vs. Turkington
10th Congressional District of Massachusetts: Delahunt vs. White
4th Barnstable District: Maloy vs. Peake
Regardless of whether Aaron Maloy (R) or Sarah Peake (D) wins, communities from Provincetown to Harwich will be represented
by someone with very progressive views on energy issues. Both candidates agreed to the consensus points detailed above,
they categorized current and possible future adverse local impacts associated with continued reliance on fossil fuels
as "extreme," and they indicated that the region 'could become electricity independent within the next 10 to 15 years."
Further, both candidates offered conditional support for the offshore wind project in Nantucket Sound.
The candidates differed on the following questions:
- What'sthe best way to increase reliance on renewable energy? (Respondents were asked to pick
only two options among the four provided.) Maloy offered support for policies designed to accelerate the Massachusetts
Renewable Portfolio Standard and to increase subsides for renewable energy technologies. Peake offered support
for policies designed to reduce subsidies for fossil fuel technologies and to increase subsidies for renewable
energy technologies.
- Do you support the pending extension of the operating license for the Pilgrim Nuclear Plant?
Maloy answered no; Peake answered "unsure."
- To meet growing regional demand for natural gas, which of the following do you support? (Respondents
were asked to select among seven options, including projects proposed for Fall River, for an island in Boston Harbor,
and off Gloucester.) Maloy only offered support for "constructing LNG capacity elsewhere in New England" and "exploring
and possibly developing resources off the coast of Massachusetts." Peake only offered support for "expanding existing
pipelines to increase imports from elsewhere."
Barnstable, Dukes & Nantucket District: Powell vs. Turkington
Falmouth, Martha'sVineyard, and Nantucket residents can choose among candidates with differences in opinion on numerous
energy issues:
- Jim Powell (R) agreed to each of the consensus points defined above, whereas Eric Turkington (D) affirmed all
but one, opting to not express an opinion on whether or not to form an energy cooperative offering institutional
capabilities required to maximize local benefits from renewables development.
- Powell characterized current and possible future adverse impacts associated with fossil fuel reliance as "extreme,"
while Turkington is the only survey respondent viewing adverse impacts as "moderate."
- Both don"t believe the region can become electricity independent within 10 to 15 years, and both oppose the
Cape Wind project. However, Powell offered support for the proposed wind energy project in Buzzards Bay.
- Turkington is the only survey respondent who did not concur with the statement, "I support immediate action
to increase investment in renewable energy."
Turkington filled out the entire survey, but he declined to make positive statements about renewable energy in several
other areas. The two candidates offered differing opinions in response to the following questions:
- What'sthe best way to increase reliance on renewable energy? (Respondents were asked to pick
only two options among the four provided.) Powell offered support for policies to increase subsidies for renewables
and to "increase the cost of fossil fuels to reflect environmental, health, security, and climate considerations."
Turkington supported only one option, reduced subsidies for fossil fuels.
- To meet growing electricity demand, what kinds of new, large-scale power plants should be constructed
in Massachusetts? Powell offered support for natural gas, land-based wind, offshore wind, and bioenergy
facilities. Turkington did not support the construction of anything.
- To meet growing regional demand for natural gas, which of the following do you support? (Respondents
were asked to select among seven options, including projects proposed for Fall River, for an island in Boston Harbor,
and off Gloucester.) Powell offered support for a range of options, including building an LNG terminal in Fall
River and exploring and possibly developing resources off the coast of Massachusetts. Turkington only offered support
for expanded pipelines and for siting LNG capacity and resource development elsewhere.
Finally, Powell expressed interest in learning more about cleaner transportation options, cleaner/green heating
options, green power purchasing, and solar/wind energy options for home or office use. Turkington did not want to be
bothered.
10th Congressional District of Massachusetts: Delahunt vs. White
If Bill Delahunt (D) returns to the U.S. Congress or Peter White (I) storms Capitol Hill, the Cape & Islands region
will be represented by someone with a progressive perspective on energy issues (no response was received from the Republican
candidate, Jeff Beatty). Both candidates agreed to the consensus points detailed above, they categorized current and
possible future adverse local impacts associated with continued reliance on fossil fuels as "serious" and "extreme,"
respectively, and they agreed that the region "could become electricity independent within the next 10 to 15 years."
They voiced differing opinions on individual projects, with Delahunt opposing Cape Wind, offering the prospect of
support for the Buzzards Bay wind project, and offering conditional support for relicensing of the Pilgrim plant. White
supports the first two and opposes the latter. The candidates also offered differing opinions on the following questions:
- What'sthe best way to increase energy efficiency? (Respondents were asked to pick only two
options among the four provided.) Delahunt offered support for policies that increase standards and subsidies for
efficiency measures, while White offered support for increased standards and reduced subsidies for fossil fuels.
- To meet growing electricity demand, what kinds of new, large-scale power plants should be constructed
in Massachusetts? Delahunt offered support for natural gas, land-based wind, offshore wind, bioenergy,
wave, and tidal facilities. White limited his endorsement to only green options.
- To meet growing regional demand for natural gas, which of the following do you support? (Respondents
were asked to select among seven options, including projects proposed for Fall River, for an island in Boston Harbor,
and off Gloucester.) White did not endorse any options, while Delahunt supported expanding pipelines to increase
imports and constructing LNG terminals off Gloucester and elsewhere in New England.
Next Steps
Consensus findings from the survey will applied by participants in the Cape & Islands Renewable Energy Collaborative
(CIREC) to support coordinated community planning activities being conducted under grant funding from the Massachusetts
Technology Collaborative. Consistent with CIREC'sorganizational objectives, these activities are intended to maximize
benefits and minimize adverse impacts associated with energy supply and use in the Cape & Islands region.
For more information, contact Chris Powicki, 774.487.4613, chrisp@weeinfo.com
This page was last updated Saturday February 21, 2009
|
