The New Hampshire House Science, Technology and Energy Committee convened on February 10, 2025, to discuss House Bill 567, which proposes significant changes to the state's renewable energy credit (REC) system, particularly concerning thermal energy and biomass. The meeting highlighted a contentious debate over the implications of the bill for local energy production, economic stability, and environmental sustainability.

Representative Harrington voiced strong opposition to the bill, arguing that it unfairly burdens electric ratepayers to subsidize wood chip manufacturers. He emphasized that the conversion from fossil fuels to wood chips does not justify the hidden costs embedded in electric bills, suggesting that the public remains largely unaware of these financial impacts. Harrington called for transparency and accountability, proposing that any subsidies for wood chips should be funded through direct taxation rather than concealed within electric rates.

In contrast, supporters of the bill, including representatives from the timber and biomass industries, defended the necessity of thermal RECs as a means to promote local energy sources and reduce reliance on fossil fuels. They argued that the bill's changes could jeopardize existing biomass plants and the jobs they support, as well as undermine efforts to manage forest health and sustainability. Testimonies highlighted the economic benefits of biomass energy, including job creation and local investment, as well as its role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions through sustainable forest management practices.

The discussion also touched on the technical aspects of biomass energy production, with some representatives questioning the efficiency of wood chip boilers compared to natural gas systems. Proponents countered that advancements in technology have improved the efficiency of biomass systems, making them a viable alternative to fossil fuels.

As the committee deliberated, concerns were raised about the potential consequences of reducing thermal RECs, including increased dependency on imported fossil fuels and higher costs for consumers. The meeting concluded with a call for further study on the implications of the proposed changes, reflecting the complexity of balancing energy needs, economic interests, and environmental responsibilities in New Hampshire's energy landscape.

The committee's next steps will likely involve continued discussions and potential amendments to the bill, as stakeholders from various sectors weigh in on the future of renewable energy in the state.