Imagine a future where Massachusetts could power nearly one million homes with clean, Canadian hydropower—a bold move to slash energy bills and combat climate change. That future is here, or so we thought. But here’s where it gets controversial: despite the fanfare, the reality of Hydro-Quebec’s new power line to Massachusetts, known as NECEC, isn’t quite living up to the hype—at least not yet.
The promise was grand: deliver enough electricity to cover up to one-fifth of Massachusetts’ energy needs, all while reducing annual energy costs by $50 million (https://www.mass.gov/news/governor-healey-commends-upcoming-completion-of-the-necec-transmission-line-will-lower-energy-bills-by-50-million-per-year). Yet, as the dust settles on this decade-long saga, the question lingers: how much extra power will New England actually gain? The answer, surprisingly, is maybe not as much as we hoped.
And this is the part most people miss: New England already has a major power line to Quebec, the “Phase II” line, which has been operational since the early 1990s (https://www.hydroquebec.com/clean-energy-provider/markets/new-england.html). According to grid overseer ISO New England, Phase II is the region’s single largest electricity source—bigger than any power plant. But there’s a twist: lately, power has been flowing north to Quebec, not south to New England. Why? Three years of drought have shrunk Canada’s reservoirs, forcing Hydro-Quebec to prioritize its own customers while preparing for new contractual obligations, including the NECEC line and a parallel project in New York (https://www.hydroquebec.com/projects/hertel-new-york-interconnection/).
On many days, nearly as much electricity flows north via Phase II as will flow south via NECEC. Think 1,000+ megawatts coming our way through NECEC, compared to 800–900 megawatts heading to Quebec via Phase II. It’s a far cry from the one-way flood of clean energy we were promised.
Rewind to 2016, when Hydro-Quebec was practically giving away its hydropower. With reservoirs brimming, selling surplus power to the U.S. seemed like a no-brainer. Massachusetts passed a clean-energy bill (https://www.mintz.com/insights-center/viewpoints/2016-08-02-massachusetts-legislature-passes-clean-energy-legislation), urging utilities like Eversource, National Grid, and Unitil to sign long-term contracts with Hydro-Quebec. The goal? A steady supply of climate-friendly power to curb inflation and boost grid reliability.
Eversource’s Northern Pass proposal was initially chosen but later scrapped in favor of Avangrid’s NECEC. Meanwhile, the same legislation jump-started offshore wind projects like Vineyard Wind, which has faced its own rocky, decade-long journey (https://www.wbur.org/news/2026/01/15/vineyard-wind-sues-trump-administration-construction-halt), complicated by political headwinds (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-trumps-attack-on-wind-power-is-impacting-the-energy-industry).
Here’s the bold truth: the New England Power Generators Association (NEPGA) warned this could happen. President Dan Dolan noted that Quebec might one day become stingier with its electricity—a prediction that’s now come true. Imported Canadian power peaked in 2017 and has since declined, especially during the recent drought. In the past three months, Phase II has effectively become an export line, keeping Quebec’s lights on.
NECEC changes the game—sort of. Unlike Phase II, which Hydro-Quebec uses to sell power opportunistically, NECEC comes with contractual obligations to send electricity south. But will it be enough? Hydro-Quebec’s U.S. COO, Serge Abergel, insists the drought is temporary and that NECEC will provide reliable baseload power 24/7. Yet, ISO New England’s CEO, Vamsi Chadalavada, admits that on extreme weather days, New England’s spot-market prices will need to be enticing enough for Hydro-Quebec to sell to us.
The project’s cost has ballooned from $950 million to over $1.4 billion (https://www.avangrid.com/w/avangrid-s-new-england-clean-energy-connect-receives-final-major-permit-and-announces-start-of-construction), thanks in part to delays caused by a referendum in Maine (https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/maine-voters-reject-quebec-hydropower-transmission-line-2021-11-03/). Massachusetts ratepayers will save just $15–$20 annually (https://www.mass.gov/news/dpu-approves-settlement-for-new-england-clean-energy-connect)—hardly a windfall.
So, is NECEC a success? Absolutely—it’s a step forward for clean energy and grid resilience. But the dream of a massive influx of Canadian hydropower? That’s still up in the air. Here’s the question for you: Is NECEC a victory for clean energy, or a cautionary tale about over-reliance on external power sources? Let’s discuss in the comments.
