NH HB 694: Tidal power for the Seacoast?
State Representative Thomas Fargo of Dover (D) has introduced a bill in the New Hampshire House of Representatives to conduct a feasibility study of tidal power generation under the Little Bay and General Sullivan bridges in Dover. Known as House Bill 694, the measure is sponsored by Mr. Fargo, a hydrogeologist, and is co-sponsored by representatives Judith Spang (D) of Durham, Roland Hofemann (D) of Dover, and Sarah Hutz (D), also of Dover.
Mr. Fargo discussed the bill in a recent meeting at the offices of the New Hampshire Coastal Program. The Coastal Program, administered by the NH Department of Environmental Services, creates and sustains partnerships with local, state and federal agencies as well as businesses and nonprofit groups to complete planning, restoration and education projects. At that meeting, Mr. Fargo correctly pointed out that tidal power has a distinct advantage over wind and solar power: it’s predictable. As stated by Mr. Fargo, “We know when the tidal currents will flow; we know how big they will be on an hourly or even minute-by-minute basis. I feel that tidal energy is beyond renewable–it’s limitless, never ending. The tides will run until the earth fails to spin.”
The Seacoast area does seem to be a very promising location for the development of tidal energy. The Piscataqua river, in particular, seems to have great potential as a hydro power site, as it is the third fastest navigable river in the world.
According to the Portsmouth Herald, there are currently two permit applications in process for developing tidal energy on the Piscataqua River, one by The New Hampshire Tidal Company, and the other by the Underwater Electric Kite Company. The permit application by the New Hampshire Tidal Company created some controversy when the application was announced in June [correction: May] of last year. The company seems to exist on paper only, and appears to be one of a series of tidal energy companies created solely to secure similar permits in New Hampshire and other states, including New York, Massachusetts, California, Oregon, Washington and Maine. The Underwater Electric Kite Company, in contrast, has a history of developing and installing underwater turbines for power generation.
HB 694 is currently in review with the Science, Technolog and Energy Committee of the NH House. The next working session on this bill is scheduled for March 14.
You can make your opinion known on this or any other matter by contacting your NH Senators and Representatives via email. Email directories exist for both the House and Senate.
Posted: Saturday, Feb 24, 2007 4:38 pm by adam
File as: Energy; NH and Seacoast Area; Wind, Solar and Hydro
Comments
Comment from Janice Brown
Time: Saturday, Feb 24, 2007, 8:41 pm
Why would someone create a company on paper only and apply for this type of permit? Is New Hampshire going to limit the number of permits given out? Or is there another reason?
J
Comment from Adam
Time: Sunday, Feb 25, 2007, 8:41 am
Good questions. The permitting process starts at the Federal level, with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). I don’t know if the permits are limited, but I suspect they may be. There is very little hard information available on NH Tidal. There is some speculation that they may be applying for these permits at prime locations simply to sell them later when the demand for developing tidal power increases. But again, that is only speculation.
Some additional background can be found here: http://www.seacoastonline.com/news/06042006/news/106164.htm
Pingback from Atlantic Ave.
Time: Tuesday, Feb 27, 2007, 1:12 pm
Graying Granite State By 2030 the average age of a New Hampshire resident will be 42 — five years older than it is now, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Seacoast NRG blog: Tidal power for the Seacoast?
Pingback from GraniteGeek
Time: Thursday, Mar 8, 2007, 2:08 pm
Tidal power for the Seacoast? DavidBrooks | 03 March, 2007 07:52 Adam’s SeacoastNRG blog has a report on a bill urging study of tidal power generation around our tiny ocean coastline. He notes there is some question about the legitimacy of one company seeking state permits for tidal power - it may be a
Comment from Carolyn Elefant
Time: Thursday, Mar 8, 2007, 11:56 pm
What a preliminary permit does is allow a developer to study a site for three years in anticipation of filing for a long term license to actually build the project. Under FERC rules, the permit holder has a preference over others who may compete for the license, so the permit is especially valuable as a means to lock up a site and retain preference. The problem for the industry however is that when developers file multiple permits and can’t conduct studies on all sites, the sites are tied up for three years and other companies cannot access them, thereby leading to a delay in development of the resource. For more information, you can visit this link - http://carolynelefant1.typepad.com/renewablesoffshore/2007/02/ferc_issues_not.html
Comment from adam
Time: Friday, Mar 9, 2007, 4:40 pm
Carolyn, thanks for your informative comment. It seems then that if nothing productive comes from the current permits, three years will have passed before any other companies can have a chance at the same sites.
Thanks again, and good luck with your work.
Comment from Valintino
Time: Thursday, Jul 26, 2007, 2:27 am
Hello, Your site is great. Regards, Valintino Guxxi
Write a comment