With rising utility rates and Maine’s voice clearly drowned out by more populous and powerful New England states, it makes sense to investigate the benefits and drawbacks of withdrawing from the regional power grid.

With some changes, a bill before the Legislature’s Utilities and Energy Committee could begin the process by asking the Public Utilities Commission to analyze several alternatives. Although the answers may not be definitive, such a review will help lawmakers, as well as power customers, better understand what the state’s options are.

Concerns about Maine’s interests being ignored were heightened recently when ISO New England, the regional independent system operator, refused to back away from a plan to impose a large rate increase to encourage more electricity generation for southern New England. Maine utility regulators earlier this month withdrew from settlement talks on the new rate plan.

They said a large rate increase was not justified at a time of record high electricity prices and, hence large energy company profits. Worse, the new rate system would give companies money without requiring that they actually generate more electricity.

Utility regulators from Maine and other states favor an approach that relies on three- to five-year contracts that would specify a set amount of power to be generated, which would require companies to take into consideration the possibility of having to build new generation facilities to meet the contract requirements.

Because of this battle, the governor has called for a task force to look at the pros and cons of Maine withdrawing from ISO New England. Rather than such a broad study, the PUC should analyze specific scenarios. For example, what are the costs and benefits of Maine operating its own system? How about Maine and the Canadian Maritimes? This is more in line with what is envisioned by Rep. John Brautigam of Falmouth, the sponsor of LD 1897. He rightly says he wants the state to be aggressive for two reasons.

One is to lay the groundwork for withdrawing from the regional grid if that appears to be the best option. The second and more immediate reason is to show other members of ISO New England that Maine is serious about withdrawing from the grid if a rate plan that is more advantageous to its residents and businesses is not adopted.

Socializing the costs of the region’s electricity infrastructure cuts both ways. Maine ratepayers are now paying for upgrading power lines in southern Connecticut. But, ratepayers in other states will share the cost of building Bangor Hydro-Electric Co.’s new transmission line from Orrington to Baileyville, where it will tie in with the New Brunswick system.

Because Maine is more rural than southern New England states, it is easier to build new power-generating facilities and transmission lines here. As a result, the state generates more power than it consumes, making it an important contributor to the regional power grid. However, because Maine uses only about 10 percent of the region’s power, its voice is muted by more populous states.

Withdrawing from the grid will give Maine more control over its own power decisions. It may or may not save Maine customers money. Analyzing the possible scenarios will help regulators and lawmakers decide how far to go down the withdrawal path.