Reliance on natural gas, not greed, driving up electricity costs in NH: Letters

Reliance on natural gas, not greed, driving up electricity costs in NH

Aug. 2 — To the Editor:

In his Aug. 2 guest column (“Ratepayers get shocked while electric utility CEOs rake in millions”), Tony McManus suggested that it’s time for the PUC, the Consumer Advocate, and the Legislature to “get a better understanding of where the money goes” with respect to the soaring price of default energy service for most electric customers in New Hampshire.  Since I’m the Consumer Advocate, tasked with representing the interests of residential customers, I thought it might be useful if I explained why I disagree with almost everything Mr. McManus wrote.

First, electric rates in New Hampshire have not doubled.  Default energy service rates for customers of Eversource and Liberty have just doubled, to about 22 cents per kilowatt-hour.  But default energy service is not the only charge on customer bills, which are, most regrettably, increasing for a typical customer by something like 60 percent.  In any event, no customer is obliged to buy that 22-cent default energy service; everyone has the right to buy from a competitive supplier and several of them are offering rates these days that are well south of 22 cents.  Even better would be if municipalities looked into community power aggregation, which is a way to pool the electricity buying power of residential customers and small businesses.

Second, it is misleading to suggest, as Mr. McManus does, that “one factor” driving the soaring price of default energy service is “to maintain at the very least the existing levels of compensation for the people at the top” of public utilities and other energy companies.  The utilities and their executive make no money off default energy service.  Yes, executive salaries at big companies throughout the economy are obscenely high, and so are default energy service rates here in New Hampshire.  But correlation is not causation; what has driven the price of electricity through the roof is our over-reliance on natural gas to produce electricity.

Guest columnists who rage against the machine of Big Energy are entertaining, I suppose. But I would rather see your publication offer columns that offer reasoned analysis and thoughtful ideas for how to make our electricity grid more diversified, reliable, responsive, and affordable.

Donald M. Kreis

Consumer Advocate

Office of the Consumer Advocate

Concord

Write a letter to the editor: Submit by email to opinion@seacoastonline.com

Period poverty is real. So is the lack of urinals at Dover High School

Aug. 1 — To the Editor:

The 22-year-old McKnight twins who are combating period poverty with a video series and cross-country trip are to be commended. No girl should be required to attend school without adequate access to personal hygiene products. The struggle for some is real.

However, the claim in the accompanying article that urinals are funded for boys' bathrooms is incorrect. The new Dover High School is without urinals in the boys' bathrooms, much to the disappointment of the janitorial service which has to attend to the resulting maintenance.

I spoke eye-to-eye with the school principal and expressed my concern, advocating for their installation. He smiled and replied that it would never happen. In any case, urinals have been shown to be more environmentally friendly and to use less water than traditional  commodes.

Advocates for the Green New Deal need to stand up and let their voices be heard...fix this! Let common sense prevail.

Randal Heller

Barrington

More: YouTubers 'Brooklyn and Bailey' shine light on period poverty for young women in NH

Portsmouth should assess impact fees on developers

Aug. 2 — To the Editor:

Recently letter writer Richard Smith raised concerns about the potential for problems with Portsmouth's finite water supply and the danger of overburdening our city's infrastructure and various departments due to the volume of ongoing building as well as the number of future projects in the approval and planning stages. I would certainly hope that our city's elected and appointed officials routinely consult with experts regarding water supply and other similar issues before planning and approving development.

In the past, both former Mayor Rick Becksted and current City Councilor Beth Moreau have recommended assessing impact fees on developers.  Is this being explored?  If not, why not?

Christina Lusky

Portsmouth

Portsmouth's efforts to undermine audit committee make me suspicious

July 29 — To the Editor:

Last year, after arduous deliberations, the City Council created by ordinance an Audit Committee; the purposes being to bring volunteer financial expertise from among the citizenry and to provide guidance in the selection of an audit firm. The current audit firm has audited our books for the last 28 years.

Recently, the Governance Committee, a subcommittee of the City Council, forwarded a recommendation to the Council to change the makeup of the Audit Committee by replacing them with City Councilors only.  However, since most councilors do not have an accounting background, the change would also allow for hiring outside financial consultants at taxpayer expense. 

I have spoken at Council meetings in favor of an Audit Committee many times, believing that having a firm auditing the city for 28 years is in direct contradiction to basic financial accountability best practices which require changing auditors at least every five years. 

Oddly enough, neither the Governance Committee nor the City Council seems to be responsive to this common-sense approach. The Audit Committee is there to bring financial expertise to the Council and yet, they would rather pay outside consultants than allow the appointees from the previous Council to be involved in the process. 

Many of us here in the public would like to know why.  Enough already, please, with the obstruction and political maneuvering. The more they obstruct, the more I want to see a different company audit our books.

Sue Polidura

Portsmouth

Oil company greed is a major driver of inflation; Congress must take action

July 30 — To the Editor:

Recent partisan ads blame Biden for the current inflation. In truth, over the past 3 months, Exxon made $17.9 billion last quarter, up 273% from the same time last year, while Chevron made $11.6 billion. Together, BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, Shell, and TotalEnergies are expected to announce $60 billion in profits for the past three months. High gas prices, which Biden is powerless to regulate, made up almost half of the increase in inflation of the past few months.

While America has been attempting to sanction Putin for his unprovoked aggression, American oil companies exploited this moment in history to extract maximum profits, to the peril of the American economy and citizenry. We must petition Congress to regulate this unfettered greed and empower the president to contain inflation.

Ken Cohen

Kensington

This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: Reliance on natural gas driving up electricity costs in NH: Letters