Relative to funding of the NHsaves program
The proposed legislative changes are expected to maintain the revenue collected from RGGI auctions at a stable rate, estimated at around $33 million annually. However, the redistribution of this revenue could lead to a short-term decrease in rebates to electric ratepayers, potentially increasing costs for state, county, and local governments while they adjust to the new rebates system. On the flip side, the bill advocates that long-term investment in energy efficiency projects could lead to financial savings down the line, emphasizing that this approach supports greater funding flexibility in response to fluctuating auction prices.
House Bill 1601 aims to amend the funding provisions of the NHsaves program by modifying the rebate mechanism associated with the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) allowance revenues. This bill proposes to adjust the current system where rebate funding is capped at $1 per allowance sold, transitioning instead to a model where 15% of RGGI allowance revenue or the equivalent amount from 2020, whichever is higher, will be dedicated to the rebate process. The intention behind this adjustment is to align funding for energy efficiency measures with rising auction prices while ensuring that the NHsaves program does not receive less funding than in previous years.
The sentiment surrounding HB 1601 displays a blend of cautious optimism and concern. Supporters argue that refining the funding structure for the NHsaves program in relation to RGGI revenues is a necessary step to ensure adequate financing for energy efficiency projects, especially as demand appears to exceed available funding. Conversely, opponents highlight the potential near-term financial strain this amendment might place on electric ratepayers, raising concerns about the immediate affordability of electricity while longer-term savings are anticipated.
Notable points of contention include the bill's shift from a fixed dollar rebate to a percentage-based rebate structure, which may create uncertainty regarding future rebate amounts as RGGI prices fluctuate. Also, there is contention about whether this bill will indeed safeguard against funding losses since it ties the fundingfloor to prior year revenues. As discussions progress, it remains to be seen how effective the changes will be in balancing immediate fiscal impacts against long-term energy efficiency benefits.