In response to the editorial “Price of Power” (BDN, Nov. 10), although the concern expressed for the impact on Maine electricity consumers of implementation in New England of a “forward capacity market” is valid, the statement of the severity and cause of the problem is not.

First, this latest evolution of regional power market rules will be more painful on consumers than stated. The impact during the next few years will likely be at least $300 million. After this phase-in period, the market price will be determined by auction, where the clearing price will be set by new capacity only. Even if but a single new generator bids in the auction, all existing generators in New England will receive the same price for its capacity. This will expose Mainers to increased costs of several times more than implied by the interim $300 million bill.

Second, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission did not, as stated, require Maine to restructure its electric industry by selling off the electric utilities’ generation. Their initiatives targeted wholesale competition, not retail competition, which was implemented in Maine. Options considered at the time by the Maine Public Utilities Commission and the Legislature included implementing wholesale competition only, and allowing utilities to keep their generation. These, of course, were rejected and the Legislature unanimously passed laws implementing deregulation in Maine. Most states, including Vermont, in New England, did not follow Maine’s course, and their electricity consumers benefit greatly from their decision.

Finally, as stated in the editorial, “if the public power companies still held generation, the cost wouldn’t matter nearly as much.” True, because these companies could provide all the capacity that Maine consumers need, and avoid the impact of irrational rules imposed by the regional market. Those now in charge could consider this as a solution to this new crisis.

Carroll R. Lee

Brewer