[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

when your community is targeted

Get weekly updates

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

Bill would undermine public’s ability to participate in energy siting 

Credit:  By Matt Leahy | The Keene Sentinel | March 9, 2018 | www.sentinelsource.com ~~

Unquestionably, the siting of large energy projects can be controversial. Proposals to construct commercial scale wind farms, transmission lines and gas and oil pipelines may at times result in disputes between groups who view such projects as either essential pieces of a strong economy or harmful blights on the environment and communities which play host to them.

Resolving these clashes of opinion requires a venue where all parties are provided the chance to present their views. It is here where the conflicting and often complex documentation can be objectively analyzed and thoughtfully considered. This is the essence of due process.

The N.H. Site Evaluation Committee, statutorily charged with determining whether an energy facility is in the best interests of our state, is there to ensure that all members of the public, opponents and supporters alike, are given due process in these matters. House Bill 1358, under debate in the N.H. House of Representatives, would undermine the SEC’s ability to carry out this fundamentally important role. If passed into law, the bill would require the SEC to issue a certificate for an energy facility within 365 days of accepting an energy facility application – too short a time frame in which to adequately scrutinize all issues that may arise regarding a large-scale project.

While HB 1358 gives the SEC the authority to extend the deadline for up to an additional 120 days, that would only occur if no party objects. Because it is hard to envision a scenario where an energy developer would willingly or easily agree to such an extension, this automatic approval process is really designed to restrict the public’s participation in the SEC’s deliberations.

Furthermore, the SEC’s rules and laws are designed to give the SEC, intervenors and the public a road map to determine the benefits and impacts a specific energy facility proposal may have on our state. They are not there, as this bill apparently has concluded, to automatically assume such a project will have no unreasonable adverse impacts. The SEC must give “due consideration” to all the relevant information an applicant and intervenors present before it can make the four statutorily required findings. Again, HB 1358 undermines this central purpose.

We would note that only four years ago, the Legislature approved major changes to the Site Evaluation Committee’s governing statute. The goal then, as it should continue to be today, is to increase the public’s ability to participate in the SEC process. House Bill 1358 backtracks on that promise. Instead, it ignores that the burden of proof is on the energy project developer to demonstrate its project is beneficial – not on the public to show that it isn’t. A project that truly is in the public’s interest should be able to withstand such scrutiny.

On March 15, the N.H. House of Representatives will vote on the bill. If you share these concerns, please let your elected representative in the House know you oppose HB 1358. Tell them you are against any attempts to limit the ability of citizens and communities to engage in a process where the outcome could have significant impacts on the well-being of our state.

Matt Leahy is public policy manager for the Society for the Protection of N.H. Forests.

Source:  By Matt Leahy | The Keene Sentinel | March 9, 2018 | www.sentinelsource.com

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Contributions
   Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)
Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)


e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share

News Watch Home

Get the Facts
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.


Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab Wind Watch on Bluesky