HB690

I oppose this bill ,

I don't understand how pulling out of ISO-New England would benefit the consumer since it is responsible for managing the power supply. It could adversely affect the cost of electricity, lead to more power outages, and create instability in the grid. Coordinating with our neighbors makes sense!

I oppose this bill.

Why in Heavens name would you want to take this regressive step toward energy use in the state? Why do you want to be the only NE state not participating in this project for the efficient use of electrical energy. This is ridiculous.

ISO-NE is responsible for overseeing the operation of the electricity grid in New England. It ensures that electricity generation and distribution are balanced and that supply meets demand in real time. Pulling out could disrupt this coordination, leading to potential power outages, grid instability, or inefficiencies in managing the power supply. ISO-New England also helps to manage the overall cost of electricity in the region by pooling resources and optimizing energy dispatch. New Hampshire will remain part of New England whether or not we remain a part of ISO New England, and withdrawing would mean that we would likely face higher energy costs.

withdrawing would mean that we would likely face higher energy costs.

A REALLY BAD SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF A PROBLEM. This bill is a complete abdication of responsibility for all of us in this state. We do not live in a bubble.

Energy consumption impacts all of us and cooperation/dialogue with other states through these agreements gives us more power, more information, and allows us to cut costs. I strongly opposed any withdrawals!

There is no need to investigate the state's withdrawal from ISO-New England and other strategy decisions that impact ratepayers in relation to New England's environmental policy. ISO-NE is responsible for overseeing the operation of the electricity grid in New England. It ensures that electricity generation and distribution are balanced and that supply meets demand in real time. Pulling out could disrupt this coordination, leading to potential power outages, grid instability, or inefficiencies in managing the power supply. ISO-New England also helps to manage the overall cost of electricity in the region by pooling resources and optimizing energy dispatch. Withdrawing would mean that we would likely face higher energy costs which is obviously a bad outcome.

I prefer there is no direction to the department of energy to investigate the state's withdrawal from ISO-New England and other strategy decisions that impact ratepayers in relation to New England's environmental policy. ISO-NE does some good work. It is responsible for overseeing the operation of the electricity grid in New England. It ensures that electricity generation and distribution are balanced and that supply meets demand in real time. Pulling out could disrupt this coordination, leading to potential power outages, grid instability, or inefficiencies in managing the power supply. ISO-New England also helps to manage the overall cost of electricity in the region by pooling resources and optimizing energy dispatch. Withdrawing would mean that we would likely face higher energy costs, and nobody wants that.

I oppose HB 690 because it would negatively affect NH as we would probably face higher energy costs. ISO-NE is responsible for overseeing the operation of the electricity grid in New England. It ensures that electricity generation and distribution are balanced and that supply meets demand in real time. Pulling out could disrupt this coordination, leading to potential power outages, grid instability, or inefficiencies in managing the power supply. ISO-New England also helps to manage the overall cost of electricity in the region by pooling resources and optimizing energy dispatch. New Hampshire will remain part of New England whether or not we remain a part of ISO New England, and withdrawing would mean that we would likely face higher energy costs.

HB 690 would discombobulate our energy system. ISO-New England coordinates needs, suppliers and costs, and ensures the energy is available when we need it.

Energy markets are very complex. I happen to be an energy nerd and I have attended the quarterly meetings of ISO-NE (which are open to any ratepayer) for the past 2 years. https://www.iso-ne.com/ Being part of ISO-NE gives New Hampshire big buying power. If we were to withdraw from ISO-NE, we'd be a tiny customer. Not only would our energy prices go up -- but we might even face shortages because we're such a small market that some energy vendors would not want to deal with us. You might think we can just have the "Merrimack Generating facility" in Bow NH (A coal plant) fire up and burn coal -- but the company that owns the coal plant has sued its supplier for not providing good enough coal. NH has no coal, natural gas or oil as a resource on/under its own soil. So this would be a huge risk to have to negotiate pricing and bidding compared to the rest of New England, New York, etc. It would be a different story if we were self-sufficient with wind, offshore wind, solar, biofuels, and hydro. But we're not. And we are a very long way from it. My suggestion to the person introducing this bill would be to work to get NH self-sufficient on energy, and then reintroduce this bill when we won't need to buy any fossil fuels.

ISO-NE is responsible for overseeing the operation of the electricity grid in New England. It ensures that electricity generation and distribution are balanced and that supply meets demand in real time. Pulling out could disrupt this coordination, leading to potential power outages, grid instability, or inefficiencies in managing the power supply. ISO-New England also helps to manage the overall cost of electricity in the region by pooling resources and optimizing energy dispatch. New Hampshire will remain part of New England whether or not we remain a part of ISO New England, and withdrawing would mean that we would likely face higher energy costs. NH citizens cannot afford higher energy costs. Please OPPOSE HB690.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.