The RGGI program should work for everyone


In the nine years that New Hampshire has been a member of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, the state has seen an increase in jobs and state revenue, benefits to small businesses and a robust and growing clean energy economy coupled with a decline in toxic carbon pollution emitted by fossil fuel plants. But, if we look to other states in the program, New Hampshire could be doing more.

According to RGGI’s State Investment Pages, since 2014 the state’s energy consumers have received $14.4 million in direct electricity bill assistance, 337 businesses and municipalities were upgraded to high energy-efficiency equipment and in their lifetime electricity customers are expected to save $92 million in energy costs that can be reinvested back into the New Hampshire economy. Not to mention, from 2008 and 2014, the RGGI program has kept 1.7 million tons of carbon dioxide from polluting the region’s air, which is the equivalent of taking over 325,000 cars off the road.

I am the owner of a family-run, local small business. We were able to take advantage of the RGGI energy improvement program in 2013 and invested in our aging building by upgrading the light fixtures, performing upgrades to the buildings insulation and sealing air leaks in the building’s outer shell. The overall cost of the upgrades was approximately $25,000, of which the grants covered about $15,000. We were able to upgrade our building by paying a little over a third of the actual price of the renovations and saving us on average about $50 a month or more in heating and electric costs.

Conversely, the Department of Environmental Services and the Public Utilities Commission states energy consumers and small businesses would lose about $12 million in electricity rebates and the state would lose $20 million in annual revenue if New Hampshire dropped out of the RGGI program. With numbers that clearly prove RGGI’s success, it’s time the House Science, Energy and Technology Committee hosts a work session to revisit the way RGGI operates in the state so it can benefit all, not just some.

One way to improve RGGI in New Hampshire is to include all energy users in the program. Right now, the large corporate businesses that pollute the most are allowed to bypass RGGI for a full refund. They are not required to invest in energy savings in their facilities or in their communities. It is these same corporate interests that are crying over the high energy costs and want expensive pipelines, power plants and transmission wires to be built and paid for by ratepayers. Let’s hold the line.

Currently $1 out of every $3 in a carbon credit goes to RGGI funding programs, while $2 goes to businesses that use the most energy and don’t pay to participate in the program. Low-income residents who qualify for home weatherization programs in Rockingham County are on a 20-year wait list because there aren’t enough funds going into Community Action Programs. And with New Hampshire stakeholders reviewing new modeling scenarios which could decrease pollution, now is the perfect time to increase the carbon pollution limit to 5 percent annually, bringing more economic and health benefits into the state.

In a recent bipartisan study conducted by Hart Research Associates and Chesapeake Beach Consulting, 68 percent of Granite Staters support a stronger carbon pollution limit of 5 percent and over 70 percent agree RGGI has a positive effect on people’s health and air quality. A stronger carbon pollution limit means more money for the RGGI region, and more money for programs within New Hampshire.

It’s time for equal treatment without loopholes for corporate interests. Everyone should pay their fair share for energy improvements. We all benefit. The House Science, Energy and Technology Committee should reconsider RGGI’s implementation in the state and eliminate the $1 threshold, put more money into Community Action Programs and urge Governor Sununu to support a carbon pollution limit of 5 percent annually.

Dan Weed is owner of Weed Family Automotive in Concord.

Edit ModuleShow Tags

More >> Opinion

Why Secretary of State Gardner should resign

It’s clear that the Voter Integrity Commission is pursuing an undisclosed and dangerous agenda

Where’s the public in the ‘public health crisis’?

Let’s protect hospital workers

New Hampshire can do more to address violence at facilities

The 24-cent difference

Why do New Hampshire women lose almost $3 billion every year? Because of the gender wage gap.

The case for discretion in small business lending

What do business tax cuts mean for NH business owners?

What does Plaistow have to do with Paris?

10 years ago, 164 New Hampshire towns foreshadowed the climate accord

Government-sanctioned pay inequality

Clean Tech Corner: Electric vehicles are on the move

Clean Tech Corner: Electric vehicles are on the move

The rapid change toward EV’s raises the need for charging infrastructure
Edit ModuleShow Tags