Difference between revisions of "Merrimack Station"

From SourceWatch
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (SW: typo)
(SW: added link to Power Past Coal blog post)
Line 54: Line 54:
 
* [http://www.oca.nh.gov/08-103.htm DE 08-103 Investigation into Merrimack Station Scrubber Project,] New Hampshire Office of Consumer Advocate
 
* [http://www.oca.nh.gov/08-103.htm DE 08-103 Investigation into Merrimack Station Scrubber Project,] New Hampshire Office of Consumer Advocate
 
* Gary Hirshberg, [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-hirshberg/do-we-really-want-to-give_b_174809.html "Do we really want to give Big Coal a blank check with our money?"] Huffington Post, 3/13/09
 
* Gary Hirshberg, [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-hirshberg/do-we-really-want-to-give_b_174809.html "Do we really want to give Big Coal a blank check with our money?"] Huffington Post, 3/13/09
 +
* [http://powerpastcoal.org/article.php?id=116 "Power Past Coal: Citizens look to revamp New Hamp,"] 3/13/09
  
 
[[Category:United States]]
 
[[Category:United States]]

Revision as of 20:41, 24 March 2009

{{#badges: CoalSwarm| Climate change}} Merrimack Station is a coal-fired power station owned and operated by Public Service Company of New Hampshire (PSCNH), a subsidiary of Northeast Utilities, near Bow, New Hampshire. One unit of the plant was built in 1960, the other in 1968. In 2008, the future of the plant became the subject of controversy when PSCNH revealed in August that the projected cost of new mercury-control scrubbers had increased from $250 million to $457 million.[1] The scrubbers would reduce mercury emissions by 80 percent.[1]

An ad hoc group of 24 businesses, led by Stonyfield Farms CEO Gary Hirshberg and including inventor Dean Kammen and Timberland President Jeffrey Schwartz, petitioned the state to reconsider the scrubbers.[1] The group adopted the name 21st Century New Hampshire.

Energy analyst Symbiotic Strategies LLC made an assessment of the future costs to comply with increased greenhouse gas, mercury and other requirements. It came up with an additional cost of between $864 million and $2.5 billion. The impact on ratepayers would be three to six times higher than PSNH's estimated increase of one-third of a cent per kWh for the scrubber project, according to the analysis.[1]

On March 13, 2009, the New Hampshire Senate Energy, Environment and Economic Development Committee held a hearing on SB-152, the "Mercury Reduction and Ratepayer Protection Act." The bill that would order a review of the scrubbers.[1] About 150 trade union members attended the hearing wearing T-Shirts that said “Don’t scrub my job.”[2] Environmentalists supported the study, as did Hirschberg's businesses coalition. Several speakers said Merrimack Station should be closed. Representatitives of the Concord and Nashua chambers of commerce testified against the bill, as did labor groups and officials from Bow, Hooksett and Manchester.[2]

<googlemap version="0.9.4" zoom="15" lat="43.141833" lon="-71.46877" type="satellite"> </googlemap>

Plant Data

  • Owner: Public Service Company of New Hampshire
  • Parent Company: Northeast Utilities
  • Plant Nameplate Capacity: 459 MW (Megawatts)
  • Units and In-Service Dates: 114 MW (1960), 346 MW (1968)
  • Location: 97 River Rd., Bow, NH 03304
  • GPS Coordinates: 43.140833, -71.46777
  • Coal Consumption:
  • Coal Source:
  • Number of Employees:

Emissions Data

  • 2006 CO2 Emissions: 3,530,530 tons
  • 2006 SO2 Emissions: 32,726 tons
  • 2006 SO2 Emissions per MWh:
  • 2006 NOx Emissions: 4,966 tons
  • 2005 Mercury Emissions: 130 lb.

Citizen Groups

Articles and Resources

Sources

  1. Jump up to: 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Stacy Morford, "Survival Strategy for an Aging Coal Plant," Climate Progress, 3/5/09
  2. Jump up to: 2.0 2.1 Gary Rayno, "Power plant study plan fuels scrubber debate," Union Leader, 3/14/09


Related SourceWatch Articles

External Articles