CONCORD, N.H. – It's lofty goal for some states – a reduction of carbon pollution of 32 percent by 2030 under the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan, but the Granite State is already ahead of the curve.
State Rep. Bob Backus of Manchester says New Hampshire had a head start on meeting the new requirements because of its cap and trade system with nine other Northeastern states as part of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), which goes by the nickname Reggie.
"Because of that, we are achieving emissions reductions already through a market-based system – and that will be a credit for us in meeting the requirements of the new regulations," he states.
Backus says even though RGGI has achieved many of its goals, including health and economic benefits at a very low cost, it is being challenged by a measure that comes up for a hearing in Concord this week.
The Republican backed bill (HB208) would repeal New Hampshire's participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.
Backus is a member of the New Hampshire House Committee on Science, Technology and Energy, which will hold a hearing on the proposed repeal Thursday morning.
Backus says the political equation has changed with Republicans now in control, but he believes RGGI will survive.
"The benefits have been tremendous,” he stresses. “We've achieved emissions reductions, we've managed to acquire substantial funds for energy efficiency programs that we wouldn't ever get through raising taxes to do it – so, this has been a great success, and I am hoping that the majority of my colleagues will agree. "
Backers of the measure have said that repealing RGGI would reduce the cost of doing business in the state.
RGGI supporters say it's a false choice to suggest Granite Staters have to choose between public health and the economy, noting that the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) estimates that withdrawing from REGGI would mean a loss of $8 million a year and $20 million less state revenue for fiscal years 2016 and 2017.
get more stories like this via email
Wet weather this spring has improved drought conditions in Minnesota and southern Canada. However, experts remain on alert for increased wildfire activity and other climate changes affecting people's health.
Poor air quality was a frequent topic last year in the upper Midwest, as smoke pushed down from Canadian wildfires. Researchers said climate change is fueling hotter and drier summers, making forests more susceptible to large fires.
Dr. Bruce Snyder, co-founder of Health Professionals for a Healthy Climate, worries about a repeat summer of thick, hazy smoke in the air creating unhealthy conditions.
"When that happens, people have more respiratory disease; people who have chronic lung disease tend to get sicker," Snyder explained. "There's a lot of downstream consequences for people all over the world, but certainly here in Minnesota."
Snyder noted the transition to cleaner energy sources is complex, but acknowledged pollution events place more emphasis on the need for less reliance on fossil fuels, due to their contributions to a warming planet. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency said the state has had 46 air quality alerts since 2015, and 34 of those were because of wildfire smoke.
Snyder emphasized it is not just air pollution from wildfire smoke to worry about. He pointed out there are other ways a person's health can suffer from climate change.
"We've got many more dangerous insects -- ticks, mosquitoes, and so forth," Snyder stressed. "This is having a profound effect on our wildlife. But also, we're seeing a lot more progressively rising rates of Lyme disease, of West Nile virus."
Year-over-year statistics may vary, but state health officials say the median number of Lyme disease cases has risen in the past decade. Snyder added adverse health effects of climate change can be much harder for populations lacking stable housing.
get more stories like this via email
Conservationists in Maine said reinstated protections of the Endangered Species Act could help wildlife already struggling to adapt to climate change.
Economic impacts will no longer be considered when listing certain species as threatened or endangered but the threat of climate change will be a factor.
Anya Fetcher, federal policy advocate for the Natural Resources Council of Maine, said so-called "blanket rule" protections will also be revived.
"This is basically, while they are considering whether they should become endangered, they're going to continue to protect those species as if they were," Fetcher explained.
The Trump administration removed protections for threatened species along with other key aspects of the law. Fetcher acknowledged the new rules are likely to be challenged by Congress similar to other climate and environmental regulations.
Conservation powers will also be extended to federally recognized tribes, allowing them the same opportunities to protect wildlife, including some of Maine's most iconic species such as the piping plover and Canada lynx, which are losing critical habitat to development and a changing climate.
Fetcher pointed out one-third of Maine's species are vulnerable to climate change, including more than half the state's birds.
"Our wildlife is part of what makes Maine so special," Fetcher asserted. "Protecting critical habitat and the incredible wildlife that we have here is vital to our economy as well."
Fetcher added the Endangered Species Act has been helpful in protecting species such as the bald eagle, once on the brink of extinction but now a common sight in Maine. Nearly 500,000 public comments were considered in the new rule-making process.
get more stories like this via email
PacifiCorp's updated energy roadmap throws a lifeline to Wyoming's coal industry but critics said the new Integrated Resource Plan is a major setback for community health and the climate.
Rob Joyce, director of the Wyoming Chapter of the Sierra Club, said the plan would add 100 million metric tons of climate pollution by 2042. It also slashes near-term investments in cheaper wind and solar, and makes a huge bet on behalf of ratepayers to install unproven and expensive carbon capture devices on existing coal-fired power plants.
"To be increasing emissions, increasing investment in fossil fuels, and putting hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars towards carbon capture when we're not 100 % sure if that is actually even going to work is really dubious," Joyce argued.
PacifiCorp, the parent company of Rocky Mountain Power, plans to extend the life of the Jim Bridger coal-fired power plant in southwestern Wyoming until 2039. The plan also pushes back the retirements of Utah's Hunter plant by at least 10 years, and the Huntington plant by at least four years. PacifiCorp said it should deliver significant near-term cost savings to ratepayers.
The plan also added more natural gas to PacifiCorp's energy portfolio. Joyce worries Wyoming ratepayers, already tapped by state lawmakers to pay millions for a carbon capture compliance surcharge, will end up on the hook.
"We're going to have to cover the costs of the volatility of new gas resources," Joyce pointed out. "The company is saying between $500 million and $1 billion per unit that they put carbon capture on. Those are all things that they pass on to the ratepayers."
Joyce noted with a looming 2030 deadline to significantly reduce fossil fuel pollution in order to avoid the worst effects of climate change, now is the time to invest big in wind and solar. He added by delaying the expansion of clean energy resources, PacifiCorp is leaving billions of dollars in Inflation Reduction Act incentives on the table.
"Right now we know that solar and wind and even battery storage are cheap and getting cheaper," Joyce emphasized. "Those are investments that the rest of the country is making to save ratepayers money."
Disclosure: The Sierra Club contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Energy Policy, Environment, and Environmental Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email