Committee Summary for House Science, Technology and Energy (01/29/2026)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB1539 00:04:38.000 - 8:33:05 AM	Public Hearing	authorizing electric utilities to issue AAA-rated bonds for the purpose of storm cost recovery and infrastructure resilience.	Vose, Michael(R)[A-]2025
HB1567 01:20:37.199 - 9:49:04 AM	Public Hearing	relative to the valuation of telecommunications use of public rights-of-way.	Durkin, Sean(R)[B+]2025
HB1475 03:32:32.319 - 12:00:59 PM	Public Hearing	directing the department of energy to study the portion of electric distribution costs attributable to fixed versus usage-based charges.	Harrington, Michael(R)[A]2025
HB1475 03:35:05.200 - 12:03:32 PM	Executive Session	directing the department of energy to study the portion of electric distribution costs attributable to fixed versus usage-based charges.	Harrington, Michael(R)[A]2025
HB1539 2026-049H 04:33:11.760 - 1:01:38 PM	Executive Session	authorizing electric utilities to issue AAA-rated bonds for the purpose of storm cost recovery and infrastructure resilience.	Vose, Michael(R)[A-]2025
HB1718 04:38:20.879 - 1:06:47 PM	Public Hearing	relative to authorizing energy storage in connection with net metering.	Vose, Michael(R)[A-]2025
HB1718 05:25:52.638 - 1:54:19 PM	Public Hearing	relative to authorizing energy storage in connection with net metering.	Vose, Michael(R)[A-]2025
HB1455 05:33:05.680 - 2:01:32 PM	Public Hearing	relative to the criteria for reliable energy sources.	Notter, Jeanine(R)[A-]2025

HB1539: Representative Michael Vose, Rockingham 5, town of Epping Support00:04:38.000 - 8:33:05 AM; Representative Vose introduces HB1539-FN, explaining its purpose to authorize electric utilities to issue AAA-rated bonds for securitizing storm recovery costs and infrastructure resilience. He references the 2015 legislation (RSA 369B) that allowed securitization of stranded costs from utility restructuring, which he helped pass. The bill adds storm recovery costs to the list of securitizable expenses, enabling utilities to borrow money via bonds and repay over extended periods (e.g., 5-20 years), spreading the financial burden to minimize annual impacts on ratepayers. This complies with the US Constitution's takings clause and is subject to PUC approval, ensuring costs are prudently incurred. Vose emphasizes that it provides lower-cost financing options, reduces bill burdens for customers, and extends existing securitization authorities without mandating its use or altering PUC oversight. Other parties like the Department of Energy and Consumer Advocate can participate in proceedings.
HB1539: Representative Michael Vose, Rockingham 5, Epping Support00:04:38.000 - 8:33:05 AM; Chairman Vose continues answering committee questions on HB1539. He explains that storms occur annually but major impactful storms requiring out-of-state crews are occasional, occurring every 3-10 years or more. Securitization would allow spreading costs of these big storms over years, reducing immediate bill impacts. He notes it's not an annual process but for significant events. On administrative costs, he suggests utilities would present strong cases to PUC to show savings, as rejection would lead to higher immediate costs. Regarding increasing storm frequency due to climate change, he states ratepayers will pay for infrastructure repairs regardless, but securitization spreads occasional big costs. He defines 'prudent' as justified expenditures per utility law. He compares it to capitalizing storm costs like a mortgage over 20 years, on a per-storm basis. No risk of bond rating downgrade as it's AAA-backed by ratepayers. Defers specifics on storm amounts to utilities but supports broad application for multiple storms to avoid repeated legislation. Likens it to municipal bonding for big items like fire trucks or wastewater plants to avoid lumpy taxes.
HB1539: Mark Brown, Consumer Energy Alliance Support00:28:03.279 - 8:56:30 AM; Mark Brown represents the Consumer Energy Alliance, advocating for affordable, reliable energy. He provides examples of securitization benefits in other states: $50M savings in New Orleans from Hurricane Ida ($150M securitized); $95M in Texas from Hurricane Ike; $2B savings in Louisiana from 2020-2021 storms; $35M savings in South Carolina from Duke Energy's $177M bonds; over $100M expected in Virginia from $1.2B. He notes securitization is common in utility regulation and lowers rates, a bipartisan issue amid high energy costs nationwide.
HB1539: Mike Lacatus, Eversource Support00:38:54.560 - 9:07:21 AM; Mike Lacatus, Director of Government and Community Relations for Eversource, supports HB1539, which adds storm costs to securitizable assets under RSA 369B. Securitization bundles costs into AAA-rated bonds at lower rates than utility capital costs, spreading payments over longer terms for customer savings. It's used 95 times in 25 states since 1997; in NH, three times for specific assets. The bill enables PUC approval only for prudent storm costs post-review, with no mandates. Eversource faced 23 major storms (2022-2024) costing $450M, including a record $113M April 2024 event affecting 332K customers. Suggests flexibility on the 60-day PUC decision timeline to address fiscal note concerns (e.g., no need for two full-time positions). Bond terms decided with experts for optimal savings. They have a $19M annual storm fund (recently increased from $12M), but it's insufficient for major years (e.g., $220M in 2022-23). Historical storm costs vary; recent years spiked. Non-major storms are absorbed by utilities. Securitization is for large costs only, not routine; alternative is higher immediate recovery via reconciling mechanism. Did not request the bill but supports it. Explains bill language: 'premium if any' covers bond costs; 'credit enhancement' TBD; sales forecasts compare securitization vs. traditional recovery for public interest.
HB1539: Meg Stone, New Hampshire Department of Energy Information Only01:04:36.079 - 9:33:03 AM; Meg Stone from the Department of Energy stated neutrality on the bill. She emphasized the importance of recognizing storm costs prudently incurred by utilities for preparation, restoration, and response to storm damage. She explained that rate reduction bonds could lower carrying charges for customers and spread recovery costs over a longer period, smoothing out repair charges. Without knowing the interest rates or bond terms, long-term savings cannot be calculated. The department would need consultants for reviewing utility filings for PUC approval, costing $250,000 to $650,000, assessed to the utility. If the application is rejected, costs are still assessed. She noted concerns about the 60-day timeline for consultant procurement, suggesting collaboration to adjust it.
HB1539: Joe Casey, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 104, 1837 Support01:09:22.400 - 9:37:49 AM; Joe Casey, representing IBEW locals and the international office, expressed support for HB1539. The union represents 4,000 skilled tradespeople in New Hampshire, including electrical workers for utilities and contractors who serve as first responders in storm outages. They have seen the increased frequency and impact of storms. The bill protects utilities, customers (especially of smaller utilities), and working families from financial impacts of catastrophic events while maintaining regulatory oversight. It allows structuring storm costs to maintain affordability through favorable bond terms. Given ongoing storm risks, New Hampshire needs effective mechanisms for cost recovery. He provided a letter from the international vice president supporting the bill.
HB1539: N Graves, Business Industry Association Support01:12:45.520 - 9:41:12 AM; N Graves from the Business Industry Association supported the legislation. Limiting testimony to new items, he endorsed previous points and added that the broader business community sees potential to lower and smooth out electrical costs, important for planning, especially for large energy users.
HB1539: John Gage, representing himself Oppose01:12:45.520 - 9:41:12 AM; John Gage distinguished between prudently and imprudently incurred storm recovery costs, attributing the latter to climate change from fossil fuel pollution, which increases storm severity. He urged contacting the state climatologist for confirmation. He criticized Mark Brown's organization for fossil fuel funding and noted the bill's open-ended nature could lead to ever-increasing loans for damages. While agreeing utilities should spread costs for 50-year storms, he opposed letting utilities off the hook for imprudently incurred costs. He recommended amending the bill to require Eversource to address climate pollution reduction, invite the state climate expert, and implement policies like carbon pricing with rebates and border adjustments. As a Citizens Climate Lobby coordinator, he emphasized the need for businesses and legislators to push for federal policies to curb global emissions and reduce local damages. He loses sleep over climate change due to its scientific consensus and irresponsibility in inaction.
HB1567: Sean Durkin, Representative Information Only01:20:37.199 - 9:49:04 AM; Representative Sean Durkin introduced himself as representing Coos County 1 (Lancaster, Dalton, Stark, Northumberland). He presented House Bill 1567, relative to RSA 728-C on valuation of telecommunication rights of way. He introduced Jim Wheeler, a civil engineer from the Sansui group in Lancaster, as a subject expert.
HB1567: Jim Wheeler, Sansui Group Information Only01:21:55.360 - 9:50:22 AM; Jim Wheeler explained that HB1567 establishes a statutory formula to assess the value of telecommunication companies' use of public rights of way, recognized as a property right by the Supreme Court and treated as real property. Numerous tax abatements have occurred due to valuation disputes; a standardized formula reduces them. In 2019, RSA 728D for electric, gas, and water was modified with a simple 3% formula of real property valuation, which has worked well. RSA 728C for telecommunications was overlooked at the time. The bill proposes a simple formula: length (miles of road) times width (1 foot) times average land value, as most telecom assets are exempt or on power company poles, making the 3% of assets approach yield zero valuation.
HB1567: Jim Wheeler, Sansui Group Information Only01:26:13.360 - 9:54:40 AM; Jim Wheeler continues his testimony, discussing a formula for valuing the use of public rights-of-way for telecommunications infrastructure. He explains that the formula converts linear footage along roads into acreage using a one-foot width assumption, multiplied by the average assessed value of adjacent land, and divided by 43,560 (square feet in an acre). He suggests the one-foot width is reasonable but flexible, and responds to committee questions on its application to utilities, normalization, road classes, agreements with providers, and whether it constitutes a tax increase. He clarifies it's a standardized method for existing taxation, not a new tax.
HB1567: Jim Misho, Chief Assessor, Town of Hudson Support01:37:18.880 - 10:05:45 AM; Jim Misho supports HB1567 to standardize the valuation of rights-of-way used by telecoms, reducing lawsuits and providing consistency across municipalities. He notes the lack of a universal methodology leads to legal disputes and varying settlements, wasting taxpayer money. He agrees with Wheeler's formula as a solution and welcomes industry input for compromises. He addresses questions on past litigation costs in Hudson, alternative approaches, potential lawsuits from overriding contracts (noting standard clauses allow statutory overrides), language sufficiency, and benefits to assessors by simplifying work and reducing abatements.
HB1567: Mara Weston, New England Connectivity and Telecommunications Association (NECTA) Oppose01:45:33.920 - 10:14:00 AM; Mara Weston opposes HB1567, arguing it imposes a new, duplicative tax on rights-of-way use despite existing franchise fees (over $12 million paid last year) that already compensate municipalities. She criticizes the formula as flawed, creating progressive taxation based on adjacent land values (leading to inequities, e.g., higher taxes near expensive properties), administrative complexity, disputes over adjacency and road mileage proxies, and market volatility from reassessments. She highlights NECTA members' investments ($1B in 3 years, 1,500 jobs) and urges ITL, stating the current system works without disputes. She responds to questions on varying assessments, franchise fees covering rights-of-way, proxy inaccuracies, and potential impacts on agreements.
HB1475: Representative Harrington (sponsor) Information Only03:32:32.319 - 12:00:59 PM; Sponsor Rep. Harrington introduces HB1475-FN briefly, stating it's unnecessary because the Department of Energy has already initiated a docket to investigate fixed vs. variable costs in electric distribution. He requests ITL as the quickest way to dispose of the bill.
HB1475: Committee Discussion Vote03:35:05.200 - 12:03:32 PM; The committee moves into executive session and votes unanimously (12-0) to ITL HB1475-FN, agreeing the bill is moot due to the existing PUC docket on fixed vs. variable costs. Discussion includes context from Rep. Harrington on fixed costs (e.g., infrastructure, storms) not tied to usage, and the need for investigation into proper allocation, similar to school funding arguments. The motion is adopted and sent to the consent calendar.
HB1539 2026-049H: Chair Vote04:33:11.760 - 1:01:38 PM; The chair opens executive session on HB 1539-FN and moves ought to pass as amended with amendment 2026-049H. The amendment extends a period from 60 days to not exceed 180 days, as mentioned in the public hearing. The chair urges adoption of the amendment.
HB1539 2026-049H: Vice Chair Thomas Vote04:33:11.760 - 1:01:38 PM; Seconds the motion to open executive session on HB 1539-FN. Seconds the motion to adopt ought to pass as amended with amendment 2026-049H. Votes yes on the amendment. Votes yes on ought to pass as amended.
HB1539 2026-049H: Representative McGee Vote04:33:11.760 - 1:01:38 PM; Seconds the motion to open executive session on HB 1539-FN. Votes yes on the amendment. Votes yes on ought to pass as amended.
HB1539 2026-049H: Representative N. Vote04:34:45.119 - 1:03:12 PM; Votes yes on the amendment. Votes yes on ought to pass as amended.
HB1539 2026-049H: Representative Harrington Vote04:34:45.119 - 1:03:12 PM; Votes yes on the amendment. Votes yes on ought to pass as amended.
HB1539 2026-049H: Representative Pier Vote04:34:45.119 - 1:03:12 PM; Votes yes on the amendment. Votes yes on ought to pass as amended.
HB1539 2026-049H: Representative Bernardi Vote04:34:45.119 - 1:03:12 PM; Votes yes on the amendment. Votes yes on ought to pass as amended.
HB1539 2026-049H: Representative Matson Vote04:34:45.119 - 1:03:12 PM; Votes yes on the amendment. Votes yes on ought to pass as amended.
HB1539 2026-049H: Representative Schneller Vote04:34:45.119 - 1:03:12 PM; Votes yes on the amendment. Votes yes on ought to pass as amended.
HB1539 2026-049H: Representative Parall Vote04:34:45.119 - 1:03:12 PM; Votes yes on the amendment. Votes yes on ought to pass as amended.
HB1539 2026-049H: Representative Kapla Vote04:34:45.119 - 1:03:12 PM; Votes yes on the amendment. Votes yes on ought to pass as amended.
HB1539 2026-049H: Representative Thomas Vote04:34:45.119 - 1:03:12 PM; Votes yes on the amendment. Votes yes on ought to pass as amended.
HB1539 2026-049H: Representative Corman Vote04:34:45.119 - 1:03:12 PM; Votes yes on the amendment. Votes yes on ought to pass as amended.
HB1539 2026-049H: Representative Reynolds Vote04:34:45.119 - 1:03:12 PM; Votes yes on the amendment. Votes yes on ought to pass as amended.
HB1539 2026-049H: Representative Laell Vote04:34:45.119 - 1:03:12 PM; Votes yes on the amendment. Votes yes on ought to pass as amended.
HB1539 2026-049H: Chair Vote04:35:48.959 - 1:04:15 PM; Votes yes on the amendment. Votes yes on ought to pass as amended. Announces adoption of amendment 2026-049H by 15-0 vote and ought to pass as amended by 15-0 vote. Notes the bill goes on the regular calendar due to fiscal note and early status. Closes executive session.
HB1718: Representative Michael Vose, Town of Epping, representing Rockingham District 5 Support04:38:20.879 - 1:06:47 PM; Introduces HB 1718-FN, a simple bill allowing net metering customers to add battery storage and choose to net meter electricity from original generation or store it in a battery for later export to the grid. It defines requirements, size determinations, and adjusts roles of the Public Utilities Commission and Department of Energy in net metering regulation.
HB1718: Michael Lata, Eversource Support04:43:00.878 - 1:11:27 PM; Michael Lata from Eversource expressed support for the bill, noting it provides helpful clarifications on treating storage in net metering eligibility and roles of the Department of Energy and PUC in interconnection and compensation. He emphasized the bill's straightforward nature.
HB1718: Meg Stone, New Hampshire Department of Energy Information Only04:52:28.878 - 1:20:55 PM; Meg Stone, legislative liaison for the Department of Energy, stated neutrality on the bill but noted it addresses a gray area on energy storage permissibility, legitimizing battery systems. She sought clarification on the 60-day effective date timeline for rulemaking, as it might be tight.
HB1718: Malino, Granite State Hydropower Association Information Only04:53:36.320 - 1:22:03 PM; Malino from the Granite State Hydropower Association was neutral but recommended removing 'or maximum name plate rating' for consistency with statute's use of 'total peak generating capacity' and to avoid ambiguity. She also suggested creating a separate statute for energy storage programs rather than integrating into net metering, to allow charging from the grid and maximize flexibility tied to time-of-use rates.
HB1718: Sam Evans Brown, Clean Energy New Hampshire Support04:56:39.680 - 1:25:06 PM; Sam Evans Brown supported the bill, explaining it clears confusion from prior net metering dockets on including storage in tariffs. He agreed on potential for standalone storage programs but noted this bill enables both. He highlighted the solar industry's view that future arrays will include batteries, making this an important step.
HB1718: Clifton Belo, Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire Support04:58:51.120 - 1:27:18 PM; Clifton Belo supported the bill, explaining the 'maximum name plate rating' aligns with proposed DOE rules and industry standards. He addressed PUC rulemaking shifts to DOE, concerns on 'solely from renewables' charging needing amendment for pilots like Liberty's, and broad storage definitions. He noted incentives like time-of-use rates and demand response programs add value, potentially lowering peak costs for all.
HB1718: Alec Omera, Unitil Support05:20:56.080 - 1:49:23 PM; Alec Omera from Unitil supported the bill for clarifying storage's role in net metering facilities, emphasizing charging solely from on-site generation preserves net metering's renewable focus. He distinguished this from broader storage applications, supporting amendments for narrow exceptions like pilots, and noted value in separate storage policies alongside net metering provisions.
HB1718: David Hemway, Webster, NH Support05:25:52.638 - 1:54:19 PM; David Hemway, an engineer and ENF authorized energy system designer, testified in strong support of HB 1718-FN, emphasizing the importance of battery storage for grid resiliency, efficiency, rate stability, and enabling various generation technologies. He highlighted his personal experience with a solar and battery system enrolled in Eversource's Clean Energy Fund Battery Demand Response Program. Hemway addressed concerns about grid charging by providing examples like NPhase's Storm Guard feature, which charges batteries during weather alerts, and other cases such as battery-only systems and AI optimization. He urged support for the bill with amendments to allow grid charging outside peak periods, arguing it would enhance grid stabilization, lower rates, and support an all-of-the-above energy strategy without burdening ratepayers.
HB1455: Representative Jeanine Notter, Hillsborough - District 12, Marham, Hillsborough 12 Support05:33:05.680 - 2:01:32 PM; As the prime sponsor, Representative Janine Nter introduced HB 1455, stressing New Hampshire's need for reliable, affordable energy amid a push away from hydrocarbons like natural gas, oil, and coal toward intermittent sources such as solar, wind, hydro, and biomass. She argued that these renewables cannot meet peak demands or harsh winters, using personal anecdotes from California and her home in Marham to illustrate the reliability of natural gas. Nter emphasized energy security for businesses and families, advocating a balanced approach that includes hydrocarbons without abandoning renewables. She suggested an amendment to page two, line seven, adding 'if they are available' to address utility concerns.
HB1455: Meg Stone, NH Department of Energy Information Only05:38:18.798 - 2:06:45 PM; Meg Stone, legislative liaison for the New Hampshire Department of Energy, stated neutrality on HB 1455 but raised concerns about its language, noting it assumes regulatory authority over generation that the department and PUC lack in New Hampshire's deregulated market. She detailed issues on specific lines, such as promoting U.S.-produced fuels, nuclear fuel sourcing regulated by the NRC, definitions of affordability and reliability that could prohibit certain generation, and unclear cost calculations excluding subsidies. Stone recommended treating it as a policy statement via the state energy strategy or RSA 378:37, and committed to emailing detailed edits.
HB1455: Kyle Haynes, Marham, NH Support05:49:06.558 - 2:17:33 PM; Kyle Haynes spoke in broad support of HB 1455 for addressing reliability, security, and full system costs, citing recent events like Winter Storm Fern where oil peakers were needed due to Hydro Quebec's shutdown. He praised the bill's focus on downstream costs but recommended amendments: changing 'shall' to 'may' in subsection 2 paragraph E to avoid mandating hydrocarbons, and revising definitions of natural gas as clean energy based on the Clean Air Act, which ignores climate impacts. Using UN ECE data, he compared emissions, arguing natural gas is less clean than nuclear, and urged striking mandates for flexibility.
HB1455: Griffin Roberge, Eversource Energy Oppose05:57:51.520 - 2:26:18 PM; Griffin Roberge opposed HB 1455, particularly language requiring energy sources to meet specific criteria like dispatchability and U.S. production, which he viewed as tailored to vertically integrated states, not New Hampshire's restructured market where Eversource is a wires-only company procuring power via competitive markets overseen by ISO New England and PUC. He explained default service processes, noting the bill would complicate solicitations, hinder new generation incentives amid rising demand, and lack verification mechanisms, potentially conflicting with ISO roles. Roberge anticipated administrative challenges and higher costs.
HB1455: Samantha Vic, Heartland Impact, Chicago, IL Support06:10:58.958 - 2:39:25 PM; Samantha Vic strongly supported HB 1455 for prioritizing affordable, reliable, clean energy amid rising demands from technology, providing regulatory clarity and domestic production to reduce geopolitical risks. She advocated full life cycle cost assessments excluding subsidies, including supply chain and environmental impacts, and an 80% performance standard for dispatchability. Vic argued hydrocarbons like natural gas and nuclear are environmentally preferable when considering mining harms of renewables (e.g., rare earths from unethical sources, land use per Harvard study), citing recent storm reliance on oil/coal due to pipeline blocks. She noted similar laws in Ohio and Louisiana as policy statements fostering realism over intermittent sources.
HB1455: Sam Evans Brown, Clean Energy New Hampshire Oppose06:25:00.878 - 2:53:27 PM; Sam Evans Brown urged recommending HB 1455 ITL or a substantial rewrite, calling it unimplementable and likely to raise costs and reduce reliability. He interpreted the 80% performance standard as a capacity factor banning most New England generation, including natural gas at ~45%, leaving only nuclear viable. Analogizing the grid to a baseball team needing diverse roles, he argued the bill overlooks renewables' strengths and correlated outages in gas fleets during cold snaps, where dual-fuel oil use is common per ISO reforms.
HB1455: Kennard Soulen (Ken Solen), resident of Londonderry Oppose06:29:08.160 - 2:57:35 PM; Kennard Soulen, a retiree and former General Electric product manager in instrumentation and controls, opposes HB 1455. He argues that the bill is incomplete as it promotes fossil fuel and nuclear energy while excluding renewables, mandating fossil fuels with potential rate increases for ratepayers and no safeguards. He highlights renewables' benefits: economical, zero emissions, quick deployment (e.g., Kingston solar facility in six months vs. three years for gas turbines), and resistance to natural gas price volatility (e.g., prices spiking from $3.37 to $14.62 per commodity unit). He notes natural gas requires large volumes, processing (sweetening, dehydrating, compressing, consuming 15% of harvested gas), and discusses job growth in renewables (8.5 million US energy workers, renewables fastest growing; NH has 32,000 energy workers at $65,000 median salary; 2024 US added 12 GW solar, 2025 plan 21 GW solar). He advocates for local energy harvesting in NH (e.g., 167 watts per square meter solar potential) and a diversified energy mix, not all-in on one source. During Q&A, he addresses solar's winter limitations but emphasizes diversification, potential for snow-clearing systems, albedo effect increasing output with snow, and double-sided panels.
HB1455: Maline Mano and Heidi Croll, Green State Hydro Power Association Oppose06:37:01.360 - 3:05:28 PM; Maline Mano and Heidi Croll from Green State Hydro Power Association oppose HB 1455 due to problematic definitions of dispatchable, reliable, and green energy. For dispatchability, the bill requires adjustment by grid operators, but ISO New England does not dispatch generators under 5 MW, excluding all their members despite hydro's potential dispatchability, which is limited by FERC licenses mandating run-of-river operation for environmental reasons. For reliability, the 80% capacity factor standard only nuclear meets (run-of-river hydro at 45%, similar to combined cycle gas at 55-65%), risking insufficient supply if applied universally. For green energy, existing hydro is excluded under cited USC section (only new hydro qualifies), while other renewables, fossil fuels, and nuclear do, potentially overlooking hydro. Heidi adds that last year's legislation defined 'clean energy' inclusively (minimal greenhouse gas emitters like nuclear and renewables), and recent amendments to RSA 378:37 promote affordable, reliable, diverse, secure energy sources. During Q&A, they note unawareness of the bill as a model from other states but it appears so.
HB1455: Sarah Thorne, resident of Holderness Oppose06:43:48.558 - 3:12:15 PM; Sarah Thorne, a retired science teacher and volunteer helping her church, town, and family business transition to efficient, renewable energy from fossil fuels, opposes HB 1455. She criticizes the bill for recasting fossil fuels as green and failing to prioritize keeping the planet livable amid climate challenges, beyond just affordability, dispatchability, and reliability. She suggests inviting the state climatologist for expert input on climate, solar, and related questions, and expresses surprise at testimony from the Heartland Institute.
HB1455: Sarah Thorne, Holderness Oppose06:45:57.520 - 3:14:24 PM; Sarah Thorne criticizes the Heartland Institute for its historical ties to the tobacco industry in discrediting smoking's health risks. She emphasizes the bill's definition of affordable energy, which includes full life cycle costs, arguing that fossil fuels' true costs, including greenhouse gas effects making the planet unlivable for millennia due to climate feedback cycles, would end the debate on their viability. She urges the committee to take life cycle cost assessments seriously to achieve planetary livability. In response to questions, she compares the bill's 'clean and green' labeling of fossil fuels to tobacco industry tactics in 'Merchants of Doubt,' noting how seeding doubt undermines opposition to harmful practices.
HB1455: Megan Hoskins, Laconia Oppose06:50:04.798 - 3:18:31 PM; Megan Hoskins opposes HB 1455 as a private citizen, arguing it effectively kills solar and wind energy in New Hampshire at a critical time to shift from fossil fuels contributing to climate change and environmental degradation. She counters wildlife impact concerns by noting fossil fuels cause 500,000 to 1 million migratory bird deaths annually from oil pits, plus harm to marine life from drilling, and stresses that renewables account for environmental impacts. The bill limits personal freedom in energy choices for families, businesses, and communities, increases energy bills amid inflation and volatility, and removes local control where communities favor renewables like solar, wind, geothermal, and hydro. Fossil fuels and climate change exacerbate public health issues like asthma, heat stroke, and intensified weather events, including the current polar vortex shift. Locally, the maple industry faces unreliable seasons, winter sports require more snowmaking costs, fisheries are impacted, and global coral bleaching worsens ocean acidity. She objects to forcing nuclear energy into green categories due to nuclear waste storage issues, such as at Seabrook or on Native lands. She highlights the Heartland Institute's out-of-state involvement as evidence benefiting fossil fuel executives via increased pipelines and exports, not New Hampshire ratepayers or producers. She recommends inexpedient to legislate, echoing Sam Evans Brown.
HB1455: Megan Hoskins, Laconia Oppose06:56:25.680 - 3:24:52 PM; Megan Hoskins responds to questions from committee members about her background and expertise on energy issues. She holds a master's in environmental studies and works as a field organizer for the League of Conservation Voters Climate Action New Hampshire program, assisting communities statewide. She discusses bird deaths from various sources, including windmills, cats, and windows, and suggests focusing on environmental threats like keeping cats indoors rather than opposing renewables.
HB1455: Nick Kraoff, Conservation Law Foundation Oppose06:58:55.120 - 3:27:22 PM; Nick Kraoff urges the committee to reject HB 1455, arguing it is unnecessary due to the prior adoption of HB 504, which already promotes affordable, reliable, and secure energy. He criticizes the bill for redundantly promoting U.S.-produced fuels while inconsistently excluding renewables like wind, solar, and water, which are locally produced. The bill sets unrealistic standards, such as an 80% capacity factor met only by one source, and vaguely mandates dispatchable hydrocarbon energy, potentially prohibiting renewables. He opposes redefining green energy to include natural gas, which produces harmful pollutants. During questioning, he agrees the bill imposes unworkable mandates that would increase costs by excluding certain energy sources.
HB1455: John Gage, self-represented Oppose07:03:36.160 - 3:32:03 PM; John Gage identifies HB 1455 as a model bill from ALEC's Affordable, Reliable, and Clean Energy Security Act, used in states like Louisiana and Ohio with unreliable grids, benefiting the fossil fuel industry. He criticizes ALEC as a conservative think tank funded by fossil fuels that influences legislators. He argues the bill promotes gas as clean energy to access clean energy programs, but fossil fuels are finite and polluting, unlike renewables. He discusses climate change impacts on birds and the need for all energy options with pollution costs included, advocating for a carbon dividend. He presents a graph showing natural gas causes 2.8 deaths per terawatt hour and high emissions, comparable to coal when including methane leaks. He notes federal subsidies to fossil fuels exceed $600 billion annually, including pollution externalities, and highlights human health impacts from fossil fuel pollution.

Vose, Michael(Chairman)(R)[A-]2025	Bernardy, JD(Clerk)(R)[B+]2025	Thomas, Douglas(V Chairman)(R)[A-]2025
Notter, Jeanine(R)[A-]2025	Schneller, John(R)[B+]2025	Harrington, Michael(R)[A]2025
McGhee, Kat(D)[CT]2025	Ploszaj, Tom(R)[A-]2025	Mattson, Rita(R)[B+]2025
Raynolds, Ned(D)[D-]2025	Thomas, Wendy(D)[CT]2025	Parshall, Lucius(D)[F]2025
Caplan, Tony(D)[D-]2025	Summers, James(R)[B]2025	Cormen, Thomas(D)[F]2025
Swanson, Dale(D)[D-]2025	Larochelle, John(D)[F]2025	Sabourin dit Choinière, Matt(R)[A-]2025