Tim Faulkner: More hurdles for plans to import Quebec electricity
Proposed New England Clean Energy Connect project.
Via ecoRI News (ecori.org)
News continues to get worse for the Northern Pass project and efforts to deliver Canadian hydropower to southern New England.
On May 24, the New Hampshire Site Evaluation Committee denied an appeal by Northern Pass to overturn the decision that rejected the 192-mile-long high-voltage transmission line though the state.
The siting committee initially rejected the $1.6 billion project on Feb. 1 because of concern that the network of unsightly power lines and towers would harm tourism, local businesses and the environment.
According to the siting board, the appeal failed because there was no new information to review. And despite objections by Northern Pass, the positive elements of the application had been considered in the initial decision, committee members said.
"If there were conditions they could meet to approve it, we would have approved it with those conditions," said Bill Oldenburg of the Site Evaluation Committee in a video of the meeting taken by WMUR-TV, of Manchester, N.H.
In an online statement, Northern Pass, a joint venture between Eversource and Hydro-Québec, said it remains committed to the project and is considering taking the siting committee’s decision to court.
“We intend to pursue all options for making this critical clean energy project a reality, along with the many economic and environmental benefits for New Hampshire and the region. This opportunity to significantly lower energy costs for customers should be given great weight,” said Eversource New Hampshire president Bill Quinlan. “Large infrastructure projects of this scale often face challenges during the siting process, and we will continue to work with all of the stakeholders to present a project that receives New Hampshire’s approval.”
Meanwhile, Massachusetts, which has agreed to a 20-year power-purchase agreement for Northern Pass energy, has shifted its focus from Northern Pass to New England Clean Energy Connect (NECEC), a power-line transmission project that delivers Québec hydropower through western Maine to Lewiston, Maine, and on to Massachusetts.
The 145-mile project has broad community support, including from Maine Gov. Paul LePage.
The transmission system is opposed by the environmental group (NRCM), which says the project will damage 53 miles of forest. The conservation group worries that NECEC won’t receive the same vetting as Northern Pass.
“Rather than allowing Maine regulators to go through the same thoughtful process that led New Hampshire to reject that project, Gov. Paul LePage, through a spokesperson, has vowed to ram the project through Maine’s Department of Environmental Protection,” according to a March 19 NRCM statement.
The Boston Globe editorial board criticized opponents of NECEC for overlooking the 1,200 megawatts of low-emission-creating electricity and the tax revenue it will bring to communities along the route.
The financial benefits are far less than the $200 million in tourism funding and $30 million in annual tax revenue promised by Northern Pass. So far, local taxes are the only revenue promised by NECEC.
State and local lawmakers are now rethinking their initial support for the project, in hopes of increasing the financial benefits to the state. There is also concern over the fact that none of the hydropower will be available for in-state use. Local renewable-energy projects will also be unable to connect to the power lines.
NECEC is being developed by Hydro-Québec and the utility Central Maine Power, a subsidiary of the multinational corporation Avangrid.
The Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources and state utilities are negotiating a power-purchase contract with Central Maine Power for the project. The agreement must be approved by the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities. State permits are expected by the end of 2018. Federal permits are expected in 2019.
Tim Faulkner is a journalist with ecoRI News.
Tim Faulkner: Northern Pass decision delayed again
-- Pro-Northern Pass map
Via ecoRI News (ecori.org)
The Northern Pass hydropower transmission-line project isn't dead yet, but time is running short for the $1.6 billion project.
On March 12, the New Hampshire Site Evaluation Committee (SEC) voted, 5-0, to defer a request to reopen the deliberation process. The committee did agree to suspend its Feb. 1 oral vote to deny the project but only until the written decision is released later this month. A decision on whether to restart hearings won’t be made until May.
The March 12 meeting was held at the request of Northern Pass in an effort to somehow convince the SEC to rehear and reverse its Feb. 1 decision to reject the project. Soon after that vote, Massachusetts, the primary buyer of the electricity, gave the developer, Eversource Energy, until March 27 to salvage the proposal.
“This is just really a Hail Mary effort on Northern Pass’s part,” said Melissa Birchard, staff attorney for the Conservation Law Foundation. “It was a long shot and they knew it. But they just wanted to make an effort to satisfy the Massachusetts’ ultimatum.”
Opponents say the project threatens 95,000 acres of forestland and could harm scenic tourist areas. Small towns fear the project would hurt business and disrupt their communities.
New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu endorsed the 192-mille high-voltage system for the jobs and the promise of lower electric bills for ratepayers. He was disappointed that the siting board rejectedthe project on Feb. 1.
Massachusetts agreed to buy a portion of the 1.09 gigawatts of so-called "low-carbon energy" to meet its Clean Energy and Climate Plan for 2020.
In the meantime, the Bay State selected a backup plan, the New England Clean Energy Connect, developed by the Central Maine Power Co., to bring Canadian hydropower to Massachusetts.
There has been no response from the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources regarding the recent SEC decision to postpone any action on the Northern Pass until May.
On Feb. 28, Eversource Energy filed a request to vacate the SEC's decision saying it wanted to elaborate on efforts to address the objections to the project. According to Eversource, the impacts on tourism and property values would be offset through payments from a $200 million state fund. Also, Eversource says alternative construction methods would be used lessen impacts on businesses.
Eversource claims the project will create 2,600 jobs during constriction, save New Hampshire ratepayers $62 million annually, add $30 million to state and local tax revenue annually, and reduce regional carbon emissions by more than 3 million tons a year.
The project received good news March 6 when the Canadian National Energy Board approved the proposal, thereby completing the last of the permits for the construction between Eversource Energy and Hydo-Quebec, a Canadian government-run utility.
Eversource issued the following statement after the March 12 decision by the SEC:
“We hope it is an indication that the SEC will evaluate the required statutory criteria, as well as thoroughly consider all of the conditions that could provide the basis for granting approval. At a time when the region needs new and diverse sources of clean energy, it is vitally important that projects like Northern Pass are considered fully and efficiently and without unnecessary delay.”
Tim Faulkner is a reporter and writer for ecoRI News.
Tim Faulkner: Mass. may get electricity from Hydro-Quebec another way
The spillway at Hydro-Quebec's Robert-Bourassa generating station can deal with a water flow twice as large as the Saint Lawrence River.
Via ecoRI News (ecori.org)
The Northern Pass power-line project may be on life support, but controversial Canadian hydropower might yet reach southern New England if Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker gets his way.
The New Hampshire Site Evaluation Committee rejected the 192-mil-long Northern Pass project on Feb. 1. While Eversource Energy has until March 27 to salvage its $1.6 billion transmission plan, Massachusetts has announced negotiations with a Maine utility for a backup plan to deliver imported hydropower to the Bay State.
The New England Clean Energy Connect, developed by the Central Maine Power Co., proposes a 145-mile power-line network to transmit 1,200 megawatts of hydropower from the Canadian border to Lewiston, Maine, where it will connect to the New England power grid. The $950 million cost for the project would be spilt by ratepayers and Hydro-Québec, an energy company run by the Canadian government.
Baker is banking on Canadian hydropower to fulfill his goal of 1,200 megawatts of new renewable energy under contract by April 1. The terms of the deal, as set by state law, have been criticized for excessively benefiting the utility, which in this case is Eversource or Central Maine Power. The terms for a hydropower-transmission project allows the utility to collect an annual payment, as well as receive a fully funded, high-voltage transmission system.
New Hampshire Republican Gov. Chris Sununu supports the Northern Pass proposal, but there was overwhelming opposition from local politicians, environmentalists and the public. In a unanimous vote, the state siting board ultimately rejected the proposal 7-0 because of concern that it would damage scenic areas, tourism and local businesses.
In Massachusetts, the bidding process has been accused of favoring the utilities, who make up a majority of the selection committee. Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey is reviewing the bidding process for any violations.
Less publicized is the threat hydropower inflicts on the environment and indigenous communities in Québec. Hydro dams require massive reservoirs that swamp dry land and low-lying wetlands while distressing fish and their habitat.
Indigenous groups such as the Pessamit Innu, Cree and Inuit claim that hydropower causes permanent damage to their land, food supply and the salmon population, one of the primary sources of revenue in the Betsiamites River. The Pessamit Innu tribe says exporting additional Hydro-Quebec electricity would cause greater changes in the water level of the reservoirs and further damage the environment.
The New Hampshire energy siting board denied the Pessamit Innu a request to intervene in the Northern Pass application review. The Pessamit grievances date back to the 1950s, when the first dams were built on their tribal land without approval, by Hydro-Quebec, which runs 62 hydro projects in the region. The company maintains that it has worked with the indigenous groups to protect and restore the salmon population while paying the Pessamit $80 million over 20 years. Hydro-Quebec notes that the company has signed 30 agreements with indigenous groups, known as first nations, since 1975.
Hydro-Quebec chasticed the Pessamit for partnering with Sierra Club to advance its opposition to exporting hydropower. The power company also criticized the environmental group for arguing that hydropower doesn't reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.
Yet, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists, large-scale hydropower contributes to global warming, as flooded land releases carbon dioxide and methane from decaying vegetation and erosion caused by runoff.
A 2016 study by Washington State University suggests that methane and CO2 emissions released as the water level fluctuates in hydropower reservoirs should be considered in the lifecycle emissions of an energy facility. A 2016 study published by PLOS One reaches a similar conclusion, but suggests that the emissions can be offset by generating biogas electricity and timely management of power generation.
Tim Faulkner is a reporter and writer for ecoRI News, where this article first appeared.
Tim Faulkner: N.H. panel's rejection of Northern Pass hydro-energy project upends Mass. plans
Via ecoRI News (ecori.org)
By all accounts, the rejection of the Northern Pass energy project was a major surprise. The plan to deliver 1.09 gigawatts of hydropower from Quebec through New Hampshire to southern New England via high-voltage transmission lines was all but assured by the developer and energy officials in Massachusetts. The Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources was counting on the electricity for its Clean Energy and Climate Plan for 2020.
A Massachusetts Clean Energy power-purchase contract was recently awarded to Eversource and Hydro-Quebec for hydro electricity to help meet the state's goal of 1,200 megawatt of new land-based power by 2022. Eversource intended to start construction in April and complete the project by 2020.
On Feb. 1, however, the New Hampshire Site Evaluation Committee rejected the proposal, 7-0. The board worried that the 192-mile power-line system, including hulking towers, would disrupt main streets and harm tourism, particularly in the scenic northern portion of the state that is home to the White Mountain National Forest and Franconia Notch.
Eversource made concessions by promising to bury 52 miles of the route and set aside 5,000 acres of preservation and recreation land. But it wasn't enough. The decision was celebrated by small towns and environmental groups that vigorously opposed the project since it was announced in 2010. Thousands of New Hampshire residents submitted comments objecting to the project.
Eversource said it was “shocked and outraged” by the vote and plans to appeal the decision in New Hampshire Supreme Court. It has 30 days to appeal the vote by the site evaluation committee.
“The process failed to comply with New Hampshire law and did not reflect the substantial evidence on the record,” Eversource said in a prepared statement.
The utility referred to the economic benefits of the $1.6 billion project, including $30 million in annual tax revenue, as well as the renewable-energy goals it would be fulfilling. The process, Eversource said, “is broken and this decision sends a chilling message to any energy project contemplating development in the Granite State.”
Eversource had invested some $250 million in the project and received approval from the U.S. Department of Energy for a portion of the power lines last November, but still requires a permit from Quebec.
In Massachusetts, the office of the attorney general and the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) said they would reevaluate the energy procurement decision, while remaining committed to acquiring imported hydropower.
Peter Lorenz, EEA communications director, said a new proposal for renewable energy would be considered if existing contracts can't meet the terms of the agreement.
Rhode Island has also shown interest in imported hydropower. Former Gov. Lincoln Chafee advocated for a deal with Hydro-Quebec after touring the company. In recent years the state discussed buying a portion of Quebec hydropower in a deal with Massachusetts but an agreement was never reached.
On Feb. 5, Gov. Gina Raimondo announced a goal of acquiring 400 megawatts of utility-scale renewable energy from the Northeast, but only small-scale hydro projects qualify for the program.
Tim Faulkner writes for ecoRI News.
Jane A. Difley/John D. Judge: Time to bury the huge Northern Pass power project
In the White Mountain National Forest.
It’s time for the out-of-state and out-of-country interests pushing the current Northern Pass proposal to bury the private transmission line along appropriately designated transportation corridors. A similar project in Vermont shows that it can be done.
The fast-track toward approval of the 154-mile New England Clean Power Link, which recently received a Presidential Permit from the U.S. Department of Energy, highlights the benefits of burying transmission lines along state highways. That project has leapfrogged Northern Pass in the quest for permitting by using 56 miles of existing road rights-of-way and running along the floor of Lake Champlain. It would serve the same purpose as Northern Pass by enabling Canadian hydropower generators to market more energy to southern New England.
In terms of scenic degradation, vulnerability to catastrophic weather events and alteration of prized public lands, Northern Pass has it all wrong. Perhaps that’s why, six years since its proposal went public, the opposition to Northern Pass among New Hampshire residents is stronger than ever.
New Hampshire’s citizens know that Northern Pass as proposed is a wrong-headed project and that its more than 1,000 steel towers across 192 miles would destroy the state’s lifeblood: the iconic scenic views that draw millions of visitors to the state’s mountains and forests, feeding our tourism-dependent economy. Furthermore, Northern Pass is wholly incompatible with such conservation gems as the White Mountain National Forest and the Appalachian National Scenic Trail, both of which would be hurt.
New Hampshire’s people know that it is wrong to have our scenic beauty and environmental legacy sacrificed for the money-making interests of private power producers.
At public meetings and hearings, and in written testimony, the public has spoken out against this damaging and unnecessary project. Thirty-one towns that would be affected have voted to oppose it.
The U.S. Department of Energy has received more than 7,500 comments, largely negative, about Northern Pass. Given that public push-back, the DOE is studying no fewer than 24 alternatives to the project.
By comparison, things on the Vermont side of the border look very different. The Clean Power Link project has generated just 12 written comments. Two alternatives were reviewed in its Draft Environmental Impact Statement, which was released in May, just one year after the application was submitted.
The environmental impact of the Vermont project appears to be far less than the impact of the Northern Pass proposal. Using modern technology, the Vermont cables would rest in a 4-foot-deep-by-4-foot-wide trench alongside public rights of way, or submerged in Lake Champlain. TDI, the transmission developer, will pay the State of Vermont $21 million annually for its use of road rights-of-way and will create an additional $298 million Public Good Benefit Fund.
In contrast, what would New Hampshire get? Steel towers 155-feet high looming over the tree canopy and scarring scenic views. Negative impacts on resources of regional and national significance. The danger of power outages due to wind, snow and ice storms due to vulnerable, overhead lines. Damage to the state’s tourism economy, and no lease payments to support the state budget.
The Appalachian Mountain Club, the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests and our respective members have long defended New Hampshire’s scenic landscapes. As we contemplate the Northern Pass vision, we are reminded of another wrong-headed proposal.
In the 1950s, the Feds proposed blasting a four-lane superhighway through Franconia Notch. We objected. Ultimately, a compromise was reached and the two-lane Franconia Notch Parkway was built.
The Northern Pass proposal is mired in a contentious state permitting process with a very uncertain outcome. We believe that it’s time that the executives at Eversource and Hydro-Quebec recognize that their own interests may be best served by respecting the wishes of New Hampshire people and the landscapes we cherish. We call on Eversource and Hydro-Quebec to look at the benefits of the Vermont model and put forward a proposal that buries Northern Pass for its entire length.
There are many who point to the downsides of importing more power from Quebec and call for no new transmission lines. We see no need for the Northern Pass project. But burying the Northern Pass would prevent at least the selling out of New Hampshire and the natural resources of regional and national significance on which the livelihoods of Granite State citizens depend.
For more information on the status of unprecedented fight against the Northern Pass proposal, visit https://www.forestsociety.org/advocacy-issue/northern-pass or http://www.outdoors.org/conservation/hot-issues/northern-pass.cfm
Jane Difley is president/forester for the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests. John D. Judge is president of the Appalachian Mountain Club.