Paying Forward -- The Road To New England -- January 26, 2016

For the archives.

I assume every state manages its utilities and how ratepayers pay for new construction through multiple twists and turns, well beyond what I could ever track. However, this is what is being considered up in New Hampshire.

A big "thank you" to a read for sending me this note. Again, it seems the article is a bit hard to understand, especially if one has not been following the story. It looks like the "nut" of the story is in the fifth paragraph below, as reported by The Union Leader:

The idea of charging electric ratepayers for new natural gas pipelines has moved one step closer to reality, even as state lawmakers debate a bill that would prevent such arrangements.

New Hampshire’s Public Utilities Commission has decided it will take applications from Eversource or any other electric distribution company that wants to purchase long-term contracts for space on natural gas pipelines and blend the cost into electric rates.

Proponents of that approach argue that electric ratepayers will be better off in the long run because the new pipeline capacity will result in lower costs for electricity. Most of the state’s electricity is generated by natural gas-fired power plants.

Those power plant owners aren’t signing up for space on any of the proposed pipelines, so the New England governors have proposed a fee on electricity customers to get the job done. Opponents of that idea, including many in the state Legislature, say the pipelines shouldn’t be built at ratepayer expense.

Consumers of natural gas and electricity eventually pay for pipelines and transmission lines when they buy electricity or natural gas, but the up-front cost of building infrastructure has not been blended into electric rates since the state abolished laws allowing charges for “construction work in progress.”

For the archives. I have no dog in this fight. But we will probably be reading more about this is in the future. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. My hunch is we're not talking about a lot of money per ratepayer per month -- at least compared to what these same ratepayers are willing to pay for intermittent energy.