Can’t existing rights-of-way be used for new power lines?

I found The Baltimore Sun’s recent editorial addressing the next steps in the Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project mildly interesting, as it attempted to highlight the personal and environmental hardships while acknowledging the alleged reality that Maryland is facing a power crisis and reliable power is in question later in this decade (“Maryland faces powerfully tough choices on electricity,” Jan. 3).

It bothers me, however, that this article and the many others written since details of this project emerged are quickly narrowing the focus to property owner hardship versus power calamity. There is an obvious and important question that needs to be seriously asked and answered: Can existing rights-of-way be used to transmit power from A to B, and thereby avoid the emotional confrontation on the doorstep?

Maryland is crisscrossed with dozens of existing high voltage power line rights-of-way. Yet I have yet to see a comprehensive analysis that either rules this idea in or out and why. For example, I’m sure it would introduce inefficiencies by increasing the distance between the desired terminals. Got it. Is it so inefficient that it, say, triples the cost, or would the savings in legal bills, land acquisition, and reduced environmental impact make it viable?

What about a route that mostly uses existing rights-of-way? Another challenge might be that the existing towers are too “full” to accommodate the additional high voltage lines needed for this project. Could a firm be commissioned to design a new and improved tower to accommodate both existing and new lines?

I fear the end result of an emotional battle between the grassroots Stop MPRP group (of which I am a member) and our elected officials. I believe the argument that “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few” will ultimately prevail. I confess I’m cynical, as I don’t trust our leaders to make an informed decision.

The case for the alleged “rolling blackouts” still needs to be made, but for the moment, let’s say the case is compelling. I suggest that those like me who are flat out against the proposed route pivot the argument into a proposal for a route that makes use of what we have in place with help from Baltimore Gas and Electric. It won’t be perfect and will come with its own challenges I’m sure, but it sure feels like a potential win-win to me.

— Scott Rippey, New Market

Michael Pierce is a Baltimore Ravens treasure

Michael Pierce made a phenomenal interception against the Cleveland Browns this past Saturday (“Ravens players shocked and thrilled after DT Michael Pierce’s first interception,” Jan 4).

His accomplishment cleared the bench as teammates congratulated him. Everybody was smiling and literally jumping with joy. He even got pats on the back from the Browns.

In a postgame interview, the defensive tackle was smiling from ear to ear and his eyes lit up the room.

But even more notable was what he told an interviewer about how he felt at the time of the interception — that he thought about saying, “Oh, s***, word” on television, decided that would be wrong and so he replaced that with a big “Wow!”

Pierce is all class. He is my favorite NFL player. I am going to Robbie’s First Base in Lutherville (a sports memorabilia dealer) to see if there is a Michael Pierce autographed picture available.

— William Alcarese Sr., Baltimore

The stain of Jan. 6 will always be on Trump

The fact that the Congressional certification of the 2024 election proceeded so smoothly on Monday stands in stark contrast to Donald Trump’s refusal to accept the 2020 results and his firing-up of thousands to interfere and storm the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 (“Trump’s election win certified in a quiet Capitol 4 years after violent Jan. 6 attack,” Jan. 6).

Despite his supporters’ efforts to downplay and forget it, Trump was directly responsible for inciting the 2020 Insurrection which is now part of American history and will continue to be a stain on his presidency.

— Don Stanton, Bethesda