Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House approves bill to define 'clean energy' to include nuclear and low‑emission sources
Summary
The House adopted a committee amendment that adds a statutory definition of 'clean energy' to include nuclear and low‑emitting technologies; a floor amendment that would have limited the definition to non‑emitting sources failed on roll call.
The New Hampshire House on Thursday approved a panel report and committee amendment to House Bill 189 defining "clean energy" in the state’s 10‑year energy strategy to include small‑scale nuclear and low‑emitting technologies and to remove references to a defunct state board.
Representative Doug Thomas, speaking for the committee, urged adoption of a definition that includes “low emitting” sources alongside renewable technologies, arguing some renewables incorporate transient emitting equipment (for example, diesel start motors on wind turbines) or that fuel‑production pathways may use emitting processes.
Representative McGee offered a floor amendment that would have adopted a stricter definition — using the American Association for the Advancement of Science wording that clean energy does not release pollutants or greenhouse gases during use. The McGee amendment was defeated on a roll‑call vote; the House then approved the committee report as amended, sending HB 189 forward.
Representative Vos argued the floor amendment would exclude nuclear power because periodic diesel generator testing at nuclear plants would disqualify them under a strict "non‑emitting" definition; Representative Harrington asked a question about exactly that point on the floor. Representative McGee argued for adhering to a widely accepted non‑emitting definition.
The House recorded the committee report as adopted after the roll‑call tally (206 in the affirmative, 148 in the negative reported on the floor). The action clears the way to revise statutory language in the Department of Energy’s 10‑year state energy strategy and related code references.
The debate focused on definitions rather than immediate policy changes: members emphasized whether the state should explicitly include nuclear among its clean‑energy options and whether a statutory definition should be broad enough to include low‑emitting transitional technologies.
