[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6357110,"mediaKeyId","2215444-0847e41460d1c319a007b3ec8731276c","parentId",2215444,"title","Committee hears economic and environmental arguments on bills to scale back New Hampshire's renewable portfolio standard","audioSeconds",11367,"startMs",16629000,"endMs",27996000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2215444-0847e41460d1c319a007b3ec8731276c&start=16629&end=27996","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2215444-0847e41460d1c319a007b3ec8731276c/thumbnail_16629000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6357110/New-Hampshire/Committee-hears-economic-and-environmental-arguments-on-bills-to-scale-back-New-Hampshires-renewable-portfolio-standard","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6357110-31c9e8b1f87e3188af61b82b746d0830/orig.mp4?Expires=1775706699&Signature=i4PhAgb~9PNoPhAdtsXpUZVrY~Hrq1LiFpFQn6UyaVwN~R0nal4p4iC~Gxb7gX6RYJvEszkGT3a9POiSgQWggZ59ZIrvOKsSmoSCKq2KBhOdReb4R-UEjz6GdhGQQeOTjL-H4zYbK8ZbtDw4YvHSQms~k64RRsjT8QBBGws64uee3WRzwJaHMvGtFY2o9kvAnCjV0bnCoa0czDGZT6rRd3LWncKVbA~KzGyfztGYc3O-qPYbZX9ww2uD-ihSjAdPslA0~05zIN3m61uoqZ9fL56viQFbqeKhvxqwGlBUgXWWIwk1jhiDWu5Kkq1gtmPYy~sGYRHvRR543btULvqlvg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","NH House of Representatives Committee","date","2025-02-03T00:00:00Z","article","Representative Michael Harrington told the House Science, Technology and Energy Committee that House Bill 219 would let consumer choice replace mandatory support for renewable generation. “We started out some years ago with the idea that we had to subsidize renewable energy to get it up on its feet and running,” Harrington said, arguing the statute should be phased out so households are not compelled to fund programs they do not use.

Opponents across the north country and the forestry and hydropower sectors urged the committee to retain the RPS in its current form, saying it supports local jobs, municipal revenue and infrastructure. Michael O’Leary, asset manager for Bridgewater Power Company, told members that his small biomass facility requires sales of renewable energy certificates (RECs) to remain solvent. “We will be out of business without the ability to sell RECs into a viable New Hampshire Class 3 market,” he said.

Why it matters: The RPS is a state tool that requires utilities to buy a rising share of electricity as certified renewable — and it creates a REC market that supports a mix of technologies, including small hydropower, biomass thermal and distributed solar. Changes to the RPS would reallocate incentives and could shift where new renewable investment occurs.

What speakers said: Supporters of the RPS argued changes would damage long-standing New Hampshire industries. Speakers told the panel that biomass and small hydro projects sustain logging jobs, help manage forest health, and provide tax revenue to towns; municipal water suppliers said chip markets fund important watershed management activities. Madeleine Monod of Essex Power Services explained that small hydro projects often rely on New Hampshire Class 4 and Class 1 REC revenue to stay economically viable and that their average cost to ratepayers has historically been small relative to system-wide bills.

Conservation groups and energy advocates urged caution about wholesale rollbacks. Sam Evans Brown of Clean Energy New Hampshire and Nick Krakoff of the Conservation Law Foundation urged retaining the RPS to support a diverse resource mix and to avoid shifting costs back to consumers through greater reliance on fossil fuels.

Technical and fiscal points: Department of Energy staff told the committee the department is neutral on the bill but noted that removing classes and altering REC markets could make it difficult for the state to protect its interests in regional energy markets. Witnesses pointed to the complicated interplay between wholesale energy markets, capacity payments and out‑of‑market procurement, and said unintended consequences are possible if REC demand is changed quickly.

Process and next steps: No committee votes were taken. Several industry representatives and municipal officials asked the committee to consider the downstream effects for towns that depend on taxable infrastructure such as biomass plants and hydropower stations. The department agreed to provide additional analysis if the committee requests it.

Ending: Committee members did not set a date for further action. Testimony showed broad local concern about changes to the RPS, and multiple municipal officials urged the committee to weigh the fiscal effects on town budgets and local employers.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Science, Technology and Energy (02/03/2025)","oneSentenceSummary","Representative Michael Harrington told the committee that House Bill 219 would let consumer choice replace mandatory support for renewable generation; opponents said removing REC support would collapse local biomass and small-hydro operations.","taxTitle","Science, Technology and Energy, House of Representatives, Committees\t, Legislative, New Hampshire","taxId",17762,"location","New Hampshire","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6357115,"NH energy committee hears competing views on offshore wind bills; fishermen, conservationists and state staff spar",14006,0,14006000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2215444-0847e41460d1c319a007b3ec8731276c&start=0&end=14006","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2215444-0847e41460d1c319a007b3ec8731276c/thumbnail_0.jpg","/articles/6357115/New-Hampshire/NH-energy-committee-hears-competing-views-on-offshore-wind-bills-fishermen-conservationists-and-state-staff-spar","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6357115-52182db697050a6da0d148f372f03c08/orig.mp4?Expires=1775706699&Signature=OZvQP0gwL0ebPC3PyjoLRzDu3ikHJMb9X0yjlIYqpWATX43AbC-sTev92taF89U1BnZTU09ybWOuJBN1VCWY87dZRo~KO6SrXMQqhyrutXz~ri3xHww9RtnCLAN3N28QHk4T-AQZGEkP0Z60Hcvw3YKRQHy1N4-9YBqUKr8NrGngIY9qI~QXobBbx1Hc~fBF4mEvn0tYqVJrkn~ZFxlqgtSlIV0WPq6Z~Arb4VhtYDKoo7tIaLXOZ0SzPpdHpvAi~uHPuww0NmjRaqLe7lMC6n7KsfTNxNPcI1SCOOYIYsWyBaFaK4w75i88COPXGOi8oydpO8mqB6t-HylHAu0Nzg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Michael Harrington urged the Science, Technology and Energy Committee to scale back state involvement in offshore wind on the grounds that the industry currently relies on government mandates and subsidies rather than private investment. “If people aren't willing to invest their own money in an idea, it's probably not a very good idea,” Harrington told the panel while introducing House Bill 682, which would remove offshore-wind duties from a state office and reorganize related advisory panels.

The hearing drew sharply divided testimony from commercial fishermen, conservation and industry groups, and state energy staff. Fishermen and coastal-town officials said the projects risked their livelihoods and the marine ecosystem, while conservation groups and renewable-energy advocates urged the state not to withdraw from regional planning.

Why it matters: The bills before the committee would change how New Hampshire participates in regional planning for offshore wind in the Gulf of Maine. Supporters of state withdrawal said the projects were expensive, unproven in local waters and could harm fishing and tourism. Opponents said stepping away would forfeit economic and planning influence, and that federal and neighboring-state actions mean development may proceed with or without New Hampshire at the table.

What speakers said: Harrington, the lead sponsor of HB 682, described offshore wind development as driven in other states “by an edict — the government's making the decision, not private enterprises,” and said New Hampshire should not fund an office dedicated to promoting development now. Megan Stone, legislative liaison for the New Hampshire Department of Energy, told the committee the department was neutral on HB 682 but warned the broader bill language could make it difficult for the state to defend its interests in regional matters. “The Department is neutral on House Bill 682,” Stone said.

Commercial fishermen and coastal representatives gave prolonged testimony opposing either state promotion of or local onshoring of transmission for offshore wind. Rob Werner of the League of Conservation Voters and New England for Offshore Wind urged caution but opposed removing the state from discussions: “The elimination of the offshore wind industry workforce training committee is particularly troublesome,” he said, adding that leasing and auction activity in the Gulf of Maine is progressing at the federal level.

Technical concerns and fiscal questions surfaced repeatedly. Representative Harrington summarized one ISO New England analysis cited during the hearing, saying the region’s modeling showed that adding large amounts of offshore wind could change capacity markets and require more dispatchable backup, which would have cost implications for consumers.

Process and policy: Testimony ranged from calls to pause any state development activity until more study is completed, to assertions that New Hampshire should remain at the table to shape lease mitigation, workforce and port investments. Several speakers urged that federal siting and Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) processes be followed and that the state use consistency review authority if lease areas would affect New Hampshire viewsheds or shorelines.

Next steps: Committee members did not take votes on the bills during the hearing. Several witnesses said the federal process and regional contracting already in place mean projects may proceed regardless of New Hampshire’s posture, increasing the consequence of whether the state chooses to engage.

Ending: The committee heard more than two dozen public remarks across both sides of the issue and received written materials from state and regional groups. Committee members did not announce a date for any votes; sponsors and agency staff said they would return with additional detail if requested.","Representative Michael Harrington urged the Science, Technology and Energy Committee to scale back state involvement in offshore wind on the grounds that the industry currently relies on government mandates and subsidies rather than private investment.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee hears economic and environmental arguments on bills to scale back New Hampshire's renewable portfolio standard

NH energy committee hears competing views on offshore wind bills; fishermen, conservationists and state staff spar