A contentious debate is expected in Representative’s Hall Wednesday when the full House votes on a Republican-backed bill to repeal New Hampshire’s participation in the 10-state Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.
By a party line, 13-5 vote, the House Science, Energy and Technology Committee gave House Bill 519 an “ought to pass” recommendation last week. The proposal, sponsored by Rep. Richard Barry (R-Merrimack) has moved quickly from its public hearing on Feb. 10 to an executive session on Feb. 15 to this Wednesday’s full House vote, with no further subcommittee or committee work sessions in between.
RGGI is the cap-and-trade program for Northeastern electricity power generation companies such as Public Service — New Hampshire’s largest power generator. These utilities can either reduce their carbon dioxide emissions or purchase pollution allowances at quarterly auctions. New Hampshire joined RGGI, which is the only cap-and-trade program of its kind in the nation, completely in 2009.
The program is believed to cost ratepayers somewhere between 36 to 40 cents per month. Money made from the sale of pollution “allowances” is funneled through the state Public Utilities Commission (PUC) for grants toward energy efficiency and alternative energy projects, which in turn are designed to cut energy demand and, theoretically, cut carbon dioxide emissions in the New England region.
The competing majority and minority reports from the committee offer ideologically opposite views on climate change science, the scope of government, regional solutions, whether the bill has been properly vetted, and the role of public investments.
First, the majority report to repeal RGGI:
“It was clear to us that RGGI was really all about the money and not about the climate. It is not the role of state government to subsidize or prop up private businesses; RGGI created the illusion of free money to those who were fortunate enough to receive funding, and many think that funding should continue indefinitely,” wrote Rep. Frank Holden, R-Lyndeborough.
“The majority believes it is not the proper role of government to create burdensome mandates which take a small amount of money from the many (electric ratepayers), funnel that money through multiple levels of bureaucracy (RGGI, Inc. and NH PUC), and redistribute a large amount of money to the few. The majority believes that RGGI was a stealth tax, hidden in the electric rates of our constituents. RGGI also has added to the size and scope of New Hampshire’s state bureaucracy; we need to shrink the size of government. Finally, the majority believes that New Hampshire does not need a complex and expensive multi-state scheme to find solutions to our environmental and energy challenges. New Hampshire has the ability to control emissions and protect our environment by developing uniquely New Hampshire solutions.”
The minority report was written by Rep. Naida Kaen, D-Lee, who was the prime sponsor of the original RGGI authorization bill (House Bill 1434) in 2008.
“The minority believes that this bill should have been retained in committee for a proper vetting, and to provide a better understanding of the potential consequences of its passage. Some of the possible outcomes of the passage of this legislation, as amended, are likely to be that New Hampshire electric rate-payers will continue to pay at least $5 million on their electric bills while the State of NH gives up $13 million annually in proceeds from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative auction. To date more than $28 million has gone largely to help local municipalities weatherize municipal buildings, thereby reducing local taxes, and to assist families and businesses save money by becoming more energy efficient, all of which reduces our dependence on foreign oil and ultimately reduces all ratepayers’ electric rates. The minority believes that modification of the program may be warranted, but that the decision to repeal should be properly reviewed so as to avoid potential damage to NH’s economy and to many citizens of the state.”
In the fiscal analysis of the bill, the Public Utilities Commission estimated if the state withdraws from RGGI, it would lose between $9.8 million and $18 million in funding from the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Fund in the next budget year. The final funding figures would depend on the auction price for allowances and the rate of economic recovery. Ratepayers would still pay a surcharge because the state belongs to the regional power grid, which charges RGGI fees regardless of participation.
If the Republican majority in the House votes to repeal RGGI, the measure would then move to the Senate. Current Senate President Peter Bragdon (R-Milford) and Sen. Bob Odell (R-Lempster) were co-sponsors of the original RGGI bill three years ago.
>> Wednesday, Feb. 23, full House session scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. Representatives Hall.