Atlantic cod

CLF has been working for twenty years to end overfishing in New England and to rebuild the imperiled fish populations that are the foundation of our regional fishing future. The New England fishing industry was subsidized to grow so big that its capacity to catch fish exceeded the capacity of the ocean to produce fish, and historic lows of fish populations (determined using data that span many generations) were reached in the mid-1990s. Since that time, the struggle to re-balance fishing effort with natural reproduction levels has been economically painful, and with few viable, options many fishermen have been forced out of the business or into other fisheries.

We at CLF see some light at the end of the rebuilding tunnel now. Fish populations are coming back, and in some cases, like haddock, they are fully rebuilt. Others, such as Atlantic cod, won’t be fully rebuilt until 2026, but they are gaining ground. The most recent fishery management plan, Amendment 16, helps ensure the continuation of this rebuilding trend. This plan is being legally challenged by New Bedford and Gloucester and some others. CLF is for the first time intervening in a court action on behalf of the government to defend this management plan, which ends overfishing, establishes enforceable quotas on fishing, and offers new flexibility to fishermen in how and when they fish.

CLF is not alone in our optimism that Amendment 16 finally is creating a future for the fishing industry. For an interesting perspective from one of Congress’s great ocean champions, former Representative Tom Allen, read this op-ed he authored in the Portland Press Herald. In his writing, Tom displays the vision, the compassion, and the judgment that convinced his constituents to send him back to Congress time after time. He offers a different perspective on the doom-and-gloom that occupies much of the slanted reporting that some local papers have been carrying.

As reported in the Concord Monitor and the Manchester Union-Leader and on WMUR, the public was out in force last night at the first of seven public scoping meetings kicking off the Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) environmental review of the Northern Pass project. More than 400 attended, and about 50 people expressed their views on the project and the issues that should be addressed in DOE’s environmental impact statement (EIS).  It was a testament to the value of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which requires that federal agencies encourage and consider public input on the environmental and other effects of agency decisions and potential alternatives to those decisions.  It was also clear that the proposal, as currently presented and described by the developer Northern Pass Transmission, LLC, has very little public support; dozens of speakers from up and down the proposed route expressed opposition to the current proposal.

During the formal commenting session, I made brief remarks to insist that DOE conduct a wide-ranging and rigorous NEPA process, and I also requested that DOE provide more opportunities for public input by (1) extending the period for public comments on the scope of the EIS to May 3, and (2) releasing a proposed EIS scope and outline for public review and comment, before major efforts are undertaken to draft the EIS, to ensure that DOE is considering all relevant impacts and alternatives.  CLF’s press release about the meeting is here, and my prepared remarks are here.  CLF will be following up my remarks at the meeting last night with written comments as well.

If you have concerns about the project, know of environmental and community impacts that you think DOE should consider, or alternatives to the project that DOE should analyze, you can participate in the scoping process by speaking at one of the remaining meetings, or by submitting written comments to DOE by the deadline (currently April 12).  All the details you need are in CLF’s one-page handout on the scoping process.

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.

This week, the United States Department of Energy (DOE) is conducting seven “public scoping meetings” in different communities in New Hampshire as part of the scoping process for the Northern Pass Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).  A one-page summary of the scoping process, suitable for printing, is here, and more detailed context is here.

This is a critical, early part of the review process, and an important opportunity to explain your concerns about the project to DOE officials. If you did not reserve a spot in advance, you should be able to sign up to speak when you arrive at the meetings. I’ll be presenting brief remarks at tonight’s meeting in Pembroke. The schedule is:

• Monday, March 14 (TONIGHT), 6-9 pm, Pembroke, Pembroke Academy cafeteria, 209 Academy Road  (map | directions)
• Tuesday, March 15, 6-9 pm, Franklin, Franklin Opera House, 316 Central Street (map | directions)
• Wednesday, March 16, 6-9 pm, Lincoln, The Mountain Club on Loon, Hancock Room, 90 Loon Mountain Road  (map | directions)
• Thursday, March 17, 6-9 pm, Whitefield, Mountain View Grand Hotel and Resort, Presidential Room, 101 Mountain View Road (map | directions)
• Friday, March 18, 6-9 pm, Plymouth, Plymouth State University, Silver Center, 114 Maine St. (map | directions)
• Saturday, March 19, 1-4 pm, Colebrook, Colebrook Elementary School, 27 Dumont Street  (map | directions)
• Sunday, March 20, 1-4 pm, North Haverhill, Haverhill Cooperative Middle School, 175 Morrill Drive (map | directions)

Each meeting will include both an “informal workshop” and a more formal session for the public to present information regarding the potential environmental impacts of the project.  The formal portion of the meeting will be transcribed by a stenographer, and all public testimony will be included in the official administrative record of DOE’s review of the project.

CLF is working to secure a clean energy future for New Hampshire and New England – one in which our energy system (1) is cleaner and less carbon-intensive, (2) provides reliable power with minimal environmental impact and at reasonable cost, and (3) is supported by a robust, local clean-energy economy built on energy efficiency and renewables.  CLF is working to ensure that the Northern Pass project moves us toward – and not away from – this future.  We are dedicated to promoting fair, well-informed, and rigorous environmental permitting processes to achieve:

• A solution with minimal impact on the environment and communities;
• Equitable sharing of benefits and burdens;
• Displacement of dirty power; and
• A market that encourages energy efficiency and provides a level playing field for local renewable energy.

Read the full news release >>

UPDATE:  Check out my post on the first meeting in Pembroke.

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.

(image credit: flickr, cannuckshutterer, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

CLF and all stakeholders concerned about the fairness and objectivity of the environmental review process for the proposed Northern Pass electric transmission project scored an important victory today.  Responding to concerns raised by CLF and others, Northern Pass Transmission, LLC has today formally requested termination of an agreement with the Department of Energy that tasked Northern Pass’s contractor, Normandeau Associates, with preparing the federal Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed project.  Northern Pass Transmission, LLC has requested that the Department of Energy, which is administering the environmental review as part of its Presidential Permit process, select a new contractor to prepare the Environmental Impact Statement.

In filings with the Department of Energy last month, CLF and other parties sounded the alarm about the Department of Energy’s choice of Normandeau on the grounds that Normandeau was also working for the project applicant, Northern Pass Transmission, LLC and demanded that the Department of Energy retain a different contractor without a conflict of interest.  More recently, New Hampshire’s two U.S. Senators added their voices to the chorus questioning the selection of Normandeau to prepare the EIS.  With the pressure mounting and scoping meetings for the EIS scheduled to take place next week, Northern Pass’s action today means that the Department of Energy should now move forward with the environmental review of the Northern Pass project with the objectivity and independence that federal law requires.

As the process gets underway and a new contractor is selected, CLF will continue to advocate for an open, fair and rigorous environmental review of this transmission project, its many significant potential impacts and all possible alternatives to the current proposal.

CLF has intervened in proceedings regarding the proposed merger of Northeast Utilities (NU) and NSTAR, which combined would create the third largest utility in the country and the largest in New England. CLF has intervened in the proceedings before the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (DPU) to ensure that the merger will only be allowed to go forward if it is “consistent with the public interest.”  This will require a thoughtful analysis of the merged utility’s long-term strategies for delivering energy while fully meeting the greenhouse gas emission reductions, renewable energy and energy efficiency requirements of the MA Global Warming Solutions Act and Green Communities Act.  It also will require a close look at the economic and environmental risks posed by the energy generation assets that would be owned by the merged utility.

One of CLF’s concerns is that NU subsidiary Public Service of New Hampshire (PSNH) owns and depends upon outdated, inefficient coal- and oil-fired power plants. These plants – which are obsolete and increasingly more expensive and less economic to operate – present risks and liabilities that would be spread to NSTAR’s ratepayers if the merger goes forward.  Another concern is that the merged utility might seek to weaken Massachusetts’ renewable energy standards, as suggested in some of the utilities’ public statements, allowing large hydropower to “flood” the market (pun intended!) and chill development of other renewable energy sources such as small wind and solar facilities.

Currently, the procedural schedule for the merger proceeding pending before the Massachusetts DPU has been suspended while the DPU considers whether to modernize the legal standard it will apply.  CLF and other parties have asked that the legal standard be adapted to account for changes in relevant laws, including the Global Warming Solutions Act and Green Communities Act.

Stay tuned as we await the DPU’s ruling and further action in the merger proceeding!

One of the easiest ways to make bad decisions is to allow ourselves to be drawn into a false choice – to see two options as an “either/or” where seeking one goal means stepping away from another. This can be a false choice because, fortunately, sometimes making the right decision will yield a double benefit.

When we have an opportunity to reduce energy use and harmful emissions while building jobs and the economy we encounter that kind of golden moment: when the right choice yields double, triple and even quadruple benefits.

There are people who will reject this formulation – who will present that most fundamental of false choices: the flawed argument that making the right choice for our environment and the public health is bad for the economic health of our communities and building jobs.

We are surrounded by proof that economic benefit flows from the same actions that reduce dirty energy use and emissions. The nation-leading energy efficiency programs funded by the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) which have created jobs while slashing the energy bills of families and businesses of the Northeast is a prime example.  A recent report issued by the states participating in RGGI (described here) provides hard numbers documenting this happy phenomena.

But we can do far better – and we need to if we are going to address the fundamental challenge of global warming and if we are going build the new economic base that can provide jobs and financial security for the future. Building that cleaner and more secure future will mean building on the successes of RGGI, making it more effective in reducing emissions and creating even more investment in energy efficiency so it slashes even more customer bills and creates even more jobs.

On Wednesday, CLF received some welcome, high-profile help in its effort to ensure that the Department of Energy’s environmental review of the Northern Pass electric transmission project is unbiased, objective, and legitimate.

As noted in the Concord Monitor, Senators Shaheen and Ayotte joined CLF, its partners the Appalachian Mountain Club and Coos Community Benefits Alliance, and others, in questioning the Department of Energy’s selection of Normandeau Associates, the same consulting firm that project proponent Northern Pass Transmission, LLC has engaged to obtain other permits for the project, to prepare the Environmental Impact Statement or “EIS” for the project.

Both New Hampshire Senators sent letters to Secretary Chu (Senator Shaheen’s is here and Senator Ayotte’s should be posted here soon) demanding an explanation for Normandeau’s selection.  As Senator Shaheen put it:

In order for the public and those affected by the proposed transmission project to have confidence in the DOE permitting process, it is essential that there be no conflict of interest in the approval process. While DOE, Normandeau and Northern Pass LLC have sought to address the potential conflict of interest by separating the employees and teams working on their respective aspects of the project, even the perception of a conflict is problematic given the significance of this project.

Senator Shaheen attached CLF’s and its partners’ formal objection filed with the Department of Energy to her letter.  As our objection made clear, Normandeau’s conflict of interest is both clear as a matter of common sense and forbidden by the federal regulations governing the environmental review process.

The Department of Energy has not said when (or even if) it will rule on CLF’s and others’ objections to Normandeau’s selection. It is critical that it do so soon, as the EIS “scoping” process is about to kick off with a series of scheduled public meetings throughout New Hampshire in mid-March.

CLF will be an active participant throughout the environmental review process for the Northern Pass project, and an overview of the project and CLF’s concerns is here.  As the process moves forward, we will be posting additional resources on the project, its impacts, and the permitting process on CLF’s website.

CLF, with the Appalachian Mountain Club and Coos Community Benefits Alliance, has filed an objection with the US Department of Energy (DOE) challenging the DOE’s selection of a contractor to prepare the Environmental Impact Statement for the Northern Pass electric transmission project. The objection comes out of concern that the contractor chosen will not be able to provide an objective, unbiased analysis, in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

“The preparation of an objective Environmental Impact Statement is a core requirement of the public review and fully-informed decision making mandated by NEPA,” said Tom Irwin, director of CLF New Hampshire.  “DOE’s selection of a contractor—one that simultaneously owes a duty to the project applicant to help obtain state-level permits—flies in the face of this objectivity requirement and will undermine the legitimacy of the NEPA review process from day one.” More >

Among the many questions CLF is asking about Northern Pass — the 180-mile transmission line proposed to transport 1,200 megawatts of hydro-generated power from HydroQuebec into New England — is what the project would mean for the development of local renewable energy in New Hampshire and New England.  With the recent introduction of HB 302 in the New Hampshire legislature — to be heard by the House Science, Technology & Energy Committee on February 8 — we soon may learn at least part of the answer to that question.

In 2007, New Hampshire passed its Renewable Portfolio Standards statute, or “RPS” — an important law to encourage the development of low-emission renewable energy sources in New Hampshire and New England.  The law requires that by 2025  nearly 25 percent of the electricity to be provided in New Hampshire must be generated by qualifying low-emission renewable sources — sources such as wind and small-scale hydro.

HB 302 seeks to change this important law by allowing large-scale hydropower — including large-scale hydropower from outside the region – to qualify as renewable.  Clearly intended to tilt the playing field in favor of the Northern Pass, HB 302 will greatly undermine one of the core purposes of New Hampshire’s RPS law: the stimulation of investment in renewable energy technologies in New England and, in particular, in New Hampshire.

The Northern Pass project developers have repeatedly claimed that they do not need and will not seek to change New Hampshire’s RPS law to benefit their project.  We intend to hold them to those claims.  The development of local renewable energy in New England is essential to building a clean energy economy for the region.  Join us in supporting a clean energy future for New Hampshire and New England by contacting members of the House Science, Technology & Environment Committee and voicing your opposition to HB 302.