Merrimack Station power plant in Bow, NH. (Photo credit: John Moses)

Today CLF filed a federal Clean Air Act citizen suit in New Hampshire federal district court against Public Service Company of New Hampshire (PSNH), the owner of Merrimack Station power plant for the plant’s repeated failures to obtain required air permits. CLF’s citizen suit also cites numerous violations of Merrimack Station’s current permits and the resulting illegal emissions from the plant.

Merrimack Station  is among the most polluting coal-fired power plants in New England and is the single largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in New Hampshire, releasing over 2 million pounds of toxic chemicals every year. In addition, the plant is causing PSNH’s energy rates (already the highest in New Hampshire) to steadily climb as ratepayers are forced to foot the bill for the above-market cost of keeping PSNH’s old coal plants in operation.

CLF’s complaint contends that the plant, which is more than a half-century old and is in the midst of a major, multi-faceted life extension project, never obtained required permits authorizing renovations to major components of Merrimack Station, including much of an electric-generating turbine, even though the changes increased pollution from the plant.  As predicted by PSNH’s own projections, the changes led to more emissions of pollutants, including smog-causing nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, or soot, which causes respiratory problems when inhaled and is linked to increased hospitalizations, lung damage in infants and children, and premature death.

“In the course of this project, PSNH has repeatedly violated the Clean Air Act, putting the health of the public, especially children and senior citizens, at risk,” said Christophe Courchesne, CLF staff attorney. “PSNH is not above the law and CLF is committed to holding them accountable. With PSNH trumpeting the supposed ‘clean air’ benefits of the Northern Pass project with full-page ads in newspapers across New Hampshire, it is imperative to shine a light on PSNH’s coal plants, which easily cancel out the purported benefits of Northern Pass.” Read more >

Map of Northeast Energy Link (potential route in yellow)

Earlier this week, National Grid, Emera, and First Wind announced preliminary plans for a major new transmission project between northeastern Maine and Massachusetts – the Northeast Energy Link (NEL).  The financing structure for the project, known as “participant funding,” is similar to the structure that federal regulators approved for the Northern Pass project in 2009.  NEL would consist of 220 miles of underground, high voltage direct current (HVDC) transmission lines, apparently to be sited in existing rights of way and transportation corridors, that would deliver 1,100 megawatts of power from future wind projects in northern Maine, as well as additional imports from Canada, to southern New England. National Grid and its partners have apparently found a way to make the economics of burying lines in already disturbed corridors work.  This development deeply undermines the continued refusal of the proponents of the Northern Pass project, despite CLF’s and others’ repeated requests, to consider the same approach.

NEL is an intriguing proposal, particularly because it emphasizes New England-based wind resources. As with Northern Pass, the proposal warrants thorough review through robust, comprehensive permitting processes.

More immediately, the proposal underscores the urgent need for the regional energy study CLF and others are requesting within the Northern Pass permitting process.  There simply is no comprehensive plan in place addressing the best approaches for facilitating imports of Canadian power, if needed, and for adequately connecting homegrown renewable resources in remote areas to customers in southern New England.  With no plan, all we can do is react, piecemeal, to each private proposal that comes along.  Our energy and environmental agencies should be assessing the need for new transmission projects and then should consider only the best approaches that prioritize energy efficiency, minimize environmental impacts, reduce our reliance on the dirtiest power plants, and provide real public benefits. 

The recent delays in the Northern Pass review mean that the U.S. Department of Energy has a golden opportunity to help develop a regional plan, along with other stakeholders in the New England states and elsewhere in the Northeast.  CLF-NH Director Tom Irwin and a number of the other organizations that joined our motion to DOE seeking such a study make the case on the op-ed page of today’s Concord Monitor.  You can access the op-ed here.

On Monday, June 27, the National Ocean Council (NOC) held a listening session in Exeter, NH for New Englanders to learn about and comment on the NOC’s Strategic Action Plans to achieve the nine priority objectives of the National Ocean Policy (NOP). Panels of speakers from diverse backgrounds and organizations, including the NOC, discussed the strategic action plans . However, it was a listening session, and many panelists urged that their intent was not to lecture, but to listen.

Panelists (including our own Sean Cosgrove) at the listening session. (CLF Photo)

Members of an assembled panel and most public comments held great support for the National Ocean Policy and urged its implementation. It’s not lost on ocean users that ecosystem-based management (EBM) and coastal and marine spatial planning (CMSP) are the foundation of the NOP and have overarching effects and influence over the other seven objectives. While discussing EBM, several speakers voiced the importance of focusing on the health of our oceans, making the case that all other objectives of the NOP could be achieved as long as the ultimate goal was a healthy ocean, which would result in both economic and environmental benefits.

Concern for stakeholder engagement was a common theme, with many noting the lack of representation of specific interest groups. Many stressed that an informed and engaged public  and communication and collaboration among a diverse array of interest groups and governmental bodies were vital to the NOP’s success. These are all points on which we certainly agree.

The event provided an opportunity for the public to voice opinions on the National Ocean Policy. (CLF Photo)

New England is already a national leader in ocean planning, and has many organizations, institutions and policies already in place to assist in the creation of New England’s regional ocean plan. We recognize the necessity of a national, comprehensive policy, but also the importance of recognizing the differences between regions and using different approaches to solve region-specific needs. Without a doubt, New England should be a priority region for the implementation of the National Ocean Policy.

Public speakers also stressed the fundamental need for fiscal resources to implement the plan. CLF’s Sean Cosgrove highlighted the need to recognize the Gulf of Maine as a nationally significant water body in the NOP and various action plans. He urged specific recognition to be written into the policy – an idea that was reiterated throughout the public comments. (Watch the video here.)

Most notably, the importance of swift and steady implementation of the NOP was of primary concern. The public didn’t want another “plan to plan.”  With ocean conservation a time-sensitive area of strong interest, constituents demanded a plan to act.

PSNH's Merrimack Station (photo credit: flickr/Jim Richmond)

I appeared on NHPR’s The Exchange with Laura Knoy this morning, and the topic was the potential energy and economic impacts of the Northern Pass project. The show provided a good opportunity to explain why the project is inspiring so much opposition, why CLF has been skeptical of the current proposal, and how Canadian hydropower could play a role in the New England electric system if pursued appropriately. There was also a segment on the project’s potential impact on property values. You can catch the replay here if you’re interested.

Joining me on the show was Julia Frayer, an economist hired by the Public Service Company of New Hampshire (PSNH) to tout the energy and economic benefits of the project. Recently, she penned a widely-reprinted op-ed and provided testimony to the New Hampshire legislature, suggesting the project will be a boon to consumers and the reliability of the electric system.

Unfortunately, and as I made an effort to point out on the show, the arguments for the current proposal are pleasant talking points without much to back them up. All the cited benefits are speculative, rather than firm commitments, and are not forthrightly presented alongside the proposal’s potential costs. As any student of economics can attest, an intelligent discussion about the economics of a project requires that we at least try to describe and compare the costs and benefits.  We know that the project may have significant negative impacts, ranging from the environmental impacts of generating the power in Canada to the potential effects of major new transmission lines on New Hampshire’s tourism and recreation industries. PSNH and the project developer, Northern Pass Transmission, LLC, have stubbornly failed to acknowledge these impacts, and there is no evidence they were taken seriously in the planning of the current proposal.

One point worth highlighting – the current plan calls for all of the supposed clean energy benefits and electric rate reductions to be delivered through the wholesale market, where Hydro-Quebec intends to sell the power delivered by the project.  But these benefits would mostly bypass the very residential ratepayers in New Hampshire who pay PSNH for electricity – because PSNH acquires very little power from the wholesale market. Instead, as customers of PSNH’s retail power, PSNH residential customers have been left to shoulder the uneconomic costs of PSNH operating several coal-fired generating units – and to pay the highest electric rates in New Hampshire as a result. Northern Pass does nothing to change this situation.  Many commercial ratepayers in PSNH territory have “migrated” in increasing numbers to other utilities that – unlike PSNH – do buy substantial power from the wholesale market to supply their customers. Residential ratepayers don’t have this choice – which means they’re saddled with PSNH’s higher costs, as PSNH loses more and more of its commercial rate base.  Again, Northern Pass does nothing to change this situation.  On closer inspection, the claimed benefits for New Hampshire consumers look more like phantom benefits than anything real.

The proposal promises to send huge profits to Hydro-Quebec, as it bids power into the wholesale market (easily paying back its investment in the transmission lines), and to provide a revenue stream of transmission payments to Northeast Utilities, PSNH’s parent company. But this structure makes very little sense because it means New Hampshire residents will continue to bear the burden of high cost power and dirty air from PSNH’s coal plants and will also face the environmental and economic impacts of a massive transmission project, while the power would only displace relatively less-polluting natural gas generation and may undermine the development of local renewable energy projects in the state. If it does indeed lower costs on the New England market, the effect will be to increase costs for PSNH’s residential customers as more large customers migrate to the competitive market and fewer customers are left to pay the costs of PSNH’s expensive coal plants.

The current proposal is coming into focus as a bad energy and economic deal for New Hampshire, and regionally the benefits seem less than impressive – especially because the emissions reductions made possible could be so much greater if there was a firm commitment to pair the new imports with the retirement of coal-fired units. As the project continues to wind its way through the federal and state permitting process, CLF will keep pushing for the project to make sense for New Hampshire and for the energy future of the region as a whole.

For more information about Northern Pass, visit CLF’s Northern Pass Information Center (http://www.clf.org/northernpass) and take a look at our prior Northern Pass posts on CLF Scoop.

Hands Across the Sands 2010, Salisbury Beach, MA. (Photo credit: William Scofield)

With the arrival of summer, many New Englanders’ thoughts turn to the ocean. Whether you enjoy surfing the waves at Hampton beach, sailing the Narragansett Bay, camping on Cape Cod’s National Seashore, picnicking with your family at Revere Beach or simply enjoying the ocean’s bounty in the form of a Maine lobster roll, our ocean gives us so much to be thankful for.

But the ocean means so much more to New Englanders then a day at the beach, it plays a critical role in growing our economy and supporting jobs and businesses.  In fact, healthy oceans bring tens of billions of dollars to our economy every year and support thousands of jobs and businesses in our region—fishermen, surf-shop owners, shipping companies and dock workers, bed and breakfast owners, restaurants and ice-cream shacks all depend on a healthy ocean.

Yet while we enjoy some sun at the beach after a long winter, New England’s ocean is at risk.

34 years ago oil companies drilled several test wells off New England’s coast and were preparing to launch full scale drilling operations when CLF, along with our allies in the fishing and tourism industry, stepped in to protect our coast. Despite the small amount of oil estimated to lie beneath our waters, the oil companies haven’t forgotten about that day, and now they, and their allies in Congress, are making a big push to re-open our coast to new drilling—and they’re closer than ever before.

Last month, less than a year after BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil disaster unleashed our nation’s worst environmental disaster, the US House of Representatives passed legislation that would expand drilling in New England and across the country. Thankfully that legislation was defeated in the Senate, but we know the oil companies and their allies will be back.

While most of New England’s congressional delegation—Republicans and Democrats alike—joined together to protect our coast, a few sided with the oil industry.  Congressmen Charlie Bass and Frank Guinta of New Hampshire and Senators Brown of Massachusetts and Ayotte of New Hampshire all voted with big oil to expand drilling off our coast, while limiting environmental review.

New England’s ocean is far too valuable to drill, and it is important that all of us from local business owners, to fishermen, to the casual beachgoer, send that message to our representatives in Congress.

That is why I hope you can join CLF and our allies in supporting a wonderful event called Hands Across the Sands.  On Saturday, June 25^th people from around the world will meet at their local beach to join hands and issue a simple call to governments around the world—Stop offshore drilling and promote the development of clean renewable energy.

So join us (and bring your kids, friends, neighbors, and anyone else you can think of ) at a Hands Across the Sands event near you. Then stick around afterwards and enjoy a day at the beach with the people you love. Click here to find an event near you.

There will be hundreds of events around the world, but if there is no event scheduled near you, it is very easy to organize your own event (and a great way to meet new people who share your love of the ocean). Click here to learn how, or call Winston Vaughan at (617) 850-1750 and he’ll walk you through it.

Photo: Matthew Trump

CLF spoke out today regarding Green Mountain Power of Vermont’s newly-inked deal to purchase power from Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant, even as the state faces ongoing battles over Vermont Yankee. In a statement, Christopher Kilian, vice president and director of CLF Vermont, questioned the wisdom of betting on nuclear power as a long-term energy source for Vermont. The statement is below:

“Vermonters are rightly concerned about their energy sources,” said Christopher Kilian, vice president and director of CLF Vermont. “Striking the appropriate balance between cost, safety and environmental concerns associated with energy generation is an ongoing challenge, and we appreciate the state’s efforts to make energy-related decisions that are in the best interest of its citizens. However, we remain concerned about the state’s bet on nuclear energy over such a long time horizon. While Seabrook is a newer facility than Vermont Yankee, it shares the ongoing problems that all nuclear facilities have in common, like the absence of any proven solution for long-term waste storage and disposal. Adding to that the issues of Seabrook’s location right on the coast, which is especially troubling given the rising sea levels caused by global warming and recent sobering events in Japan, and continued lax federal oversight regarding relicensing of these older plants, CLF continues to believe that nuclear power is a poor choice for Vermont and New England and doesn’t belong in our energy future.”

Kilian continued, “Experience in Vermont shows the legal risks of betting on nuclear power. The state is now facing massive legal battles because the owners of Vermont Yankee are going back on their promises.”

CLF is a proud founding member of Renewable Energy New England (RENEW) – a group that brings together renewable energy developers and technology companies with environmental advocates.

In a major milestone in the life of RENEW (a relatively new organization) ISO New England (ISO-NE), the operator of the region’s “bulk” power system and wholesale electricity markets, has elected to perform a regional economic study requested by RENEW.

The RENEW economic study will evaluate how much of the approximately 4,000 megawatts of wind energy projects that have applied to connect to the New England system (the technical phrase is, “in the interconnection queue”) could be developed over the next five years without significant transmission upgrades (that is, building new power lines or supporting hardware) and what the economic impact of making those upgrades would be in order to develop the remaining wind power projects.

ISO-NE performs annual economic studies drawing from requests submitted by stakeholders.  In recent years ISO-NE has undertaken studies at the request of the Governors of the New England states that looked at long-term scenarios for building wind energy resources and transmission for supporting such resources. In the past two years ISO-NE has studied high penetration renewable resource scenarios for the year 2030 in the course of doing a New England Wind Integration Study (NEWIS). RENEW hopes the 2011 study will inform development and transmission upgrade decisions over the next few years as the states work to meet their renewable portfolio standard requirements, address the climate imperative to reduce emissions from the power sector and work to build a new clean economy.

More information on NEWIS and the economy study can be found at the ISO-NE section on the RENEW website.

Special mention and recognition is due to Abigail Krich, the President of Boreas Renewables, transmission consultant to RENEW who was the primary representative of RENEW in the NEWIS process and in the development of the economic study request (and whose material I have shamelessly borrowed from in crafting this blog post).

Major voices in the New England Fishing community speak up in support of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) in this letter to SeafoodSource (a fishing industry website):

The oceans provide food for the world. As fishermen, growers, employers, and participants in the seafood industry, we are gravely concerned about the silent toll that ocean acidification has begun to take on marine resources. Seafood supplies, and our jobs and businesses, depend on healthy oceans.

That’s why we support continuation of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). RGGI helps to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from large power plants in the 10 states from Maryland to Maine.

These emissions don’t just foul the air. They mix into the oceans and increase the acidity of seawater. More than 30 billion tons of CO2 poured from the world’s tailpipes, smokestacks and cleared lands in 2009, mostly from burning coal, oil, and gas. In seawater the CO2 forms carbonic acid. The acid depletes the ocean’s rich soup of nutrients that support shellfish, corals, many plankton species and the marine food webs that underpin the world’s seafood supply.

(more…)

Today, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) released the Interim Report for Fishing Year 2010 on the Performance of the Northeast Multispecies (Groundfish) Fishery (May 2010-January 2011), which examines gross revenues, fishing effort, average vessel performance, distribution of revenues, and employment for the first nine months of the 2007 through 2010 fishing years. As expected under the new sector management system, which went into effect last May, the report shows an increase in gross revenues in 2010 compared to previous years. However, since the report does not take into account expenses such as vessel operating costs or the costs associated with joining a sector, the effect of sectors on net revenues in the fishery still remains to be seen.

Haddock, one of the species managed as part of the Northeast multispecies groundfish fishery (Photo credit: NOAA)

Still, NOAA’s statement on the release of the report expressed optimism.  “The report provides welcome news about Northeast groundfish revenues,” said Eric Schwaab, NOAA assistant administrator for fisheries. “For example, the higher revenues occurred without exceeding this year’s groundfish catch quotas. And while many fishermen are doing better, we also know that some fishermen and businesses are not doing as well.”

The report noted that many trends observed in 2010 were continuations of trends that had been apparent since 2007 or even earlier, including declining landings, a declining number of active vessels, and increasing concentration of groundfish revenue among the top-earning vessels. Some other trends observed this year are new, and these trends are of a more positive nature, including increases in gross revenues, increases in prices of both groundfish and non-groundfish species, and increased economic performance in terms of revenue per unit effort.

As mentioned above, data from the final three months of the fishing year and data on the costs associated with the new system have yet to be incorporated into NEFSC’s analysis, so a final assessment of the first year of sectors is not currently possible. The interim report will be updated in August 2011 to take into account this additional information.

To read more about the Northeast multispecies groundfish fishery and the sector system, please visit Talking Fish, a new blog created by CLF and other like-minded organizations and individuals to foster informed and productive discussion about New England’s fisheries and coastal communities.