New Hampshire lawmakers are advancing a bill that would initiate a study into withdrawing from ISO-New England, the organization that operates the region’s electricity grid.
A Senate committee is considering the legislation after the state’s House of Representatives voted along party lines in support last week. The bill would create a committee to look into, among other things, what New Hampshire would need to do to remove itself from ISO-New England, the benefits and costs of withdrawal, and alternative structures the state could use.
But actually withdrawing from the regional grid operator, if New Hampshire were to decide to pursue that route, could involve complex policymaking and major changes to the way our electric system works.
ISO-New England oversees daily operations for the high-voltage lines that carry power throughout the region, acting like an air traffic controller. The ISO also operates a wholesale electricity marketplace and plans for the future of the electric grid.
State’s aren’t technically members of ISO-New England, so if New Hampshire were to withdraw, the state would need to direct utility companies and the owners of transmission lines in the state to exit.
No state has joined or left the ISO since it was formed in 1997, said Matt Kakley, a spokesperson for the grid operator. Maine and Connecticut have both looked into withdrawing, but decided against it.
“A lot of this would need to be worked out,” Kakley said.
For example: Would the state begin running its own electricity marketplace, and leave the regional marketplace entirely? Would New Hampshire still import and export electricity to neighboring states? The state does export more power than it uses, but that’s on a yearly basis – when Seabrook is down for maintenance, power is coming from other places to keep the lights on.
“The wires themselves, they don’t stop at state borders,” Kakley said. “We’re connected in New England, we’re connected all the way out to the Rocky Mountains.”
ISO-New England hasn’t taken a position on the bill, and Kakley said the organization would help the state with a study if asked. But, he said, there is value in regionally shared markets and resources.
“By being part of a larger system, you're having access to more generation, which potentially has the ability to reduce costs if there is less expensive generation in different states at a given time,” he said.
Plus, states pay for the transmission system based on how much energy they consume, with Massachusetts paying about 40% of regional costs.
New England residents do pay a fee to the grid operator – a charge on a customer’s electric bill that the organization estimates will amount to $1.71 per month for the average person in 2025.
New Hampshire lawmakers in favor of studying a withdrawal from ISO-New England have argued that it’s time to iron out the costs and benefits of staying part of the regional grid system, and that the costs could outweigh the benefits.
The bill also takes aim at other New England states’ policies to curb the pollution that fuels climate change, instructing the state’s Department of Energy to study “strategies to insulate ratepayers from costs associated with New England’s environmental policy.”
It includes questions about whether the regional market currently shifts costs from some consumers onto others, and how those shifts could be limited.
Rep. James Summers, a Newton Republican, said neighboring states’ climate policies have narrowed New Hampshire’s options, particularly when it comes to importing more fossil fuels.
“Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island continue to pass outrageous climate bills that do naught but raise electric rates,” he said.
Summers said the competitive wholesale market that ISO-New England runs, as well as regional transmission projects, could lead to higher prices.
“Since ISO-New England governs the grid and wholesale electricity markets, New Hampshire has limited control over its energy policies and pricing. Decisions made at the [regional] level might not always align with the state's priority needs, due to pipeline constraints and policy restrictions,” he said.
Rep. Wendy Thomas, a Merrimack Democrat, said the study itself could be a costly exercise, and said it seemed “designed to justify a predetermined outcome.” She argued that withdrawing from the grid operator would have costs too, including reliability.
“We rely on the grid's ability to draw power from neighboring states. Abandoning that safety net would leave us incredibly vulnerable,” she said.
Dennis Wamsted, an energy analyst with the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, said whether the regional grid system shifts costs from some customers onto others is difficult to assess. But the financial impact of a state leaving ISO-New England is clear:
“Not being in a regional grid is bound to increase costs for the customers that are on the outside,” he said.
Additionally, he argued, the move to renewable energy that other New England states are pursuing will ultimately decrease costs.
But for right now, the regional grid is reliant on natural gas – New England currently makes about 55% of its electricity using that fossil fuel. Wamstead says that means costs can be volatile because of global markets.
