Ammon: Who Pays For The Next Power Plant?

By Keith Ammon, NH Journal

In 1996, New Hampshire became the first state in the nation to pass electric restructuring legislation, ending the model in which utilities built plants and passed overruns to ratepayers.

Every major plant built since was financed at private risk. That was the point. But it created a problem nobody solved for 30 years: In a market where no utility can build and no ratepayer is on the hook, who finances the next power plant?

We have been living with the consequences. New Hampshire families pay some of the highest electricity rates in the country because New England lacks enough generation to keep prices down. Every winter, when natural gas gets tight, prices spike and families feel it. Short on supply, long on price, year after year.

I chaired a commission that spent 18 months studying whether advanced nuclear could work here. Our conclusion: Yes, but only with a long-term contract from a private buyer willing to take the risk.

The companies building artificial intelligence need data centers and reliable, carbon-free power. A Department of Energy report projects U.S. data center electricity use could double or triple by 2028.

That has produced the buyer our grid has been waiting for. Microsoft signed a 20-year deal to restart Three Mile Island Unit 1. Amazon committed to 1,920 megawatts at Susquehanna through 2042. Meta committed to 6.6 gigawatts of nuclear capacity, including deals with TerraPower and Oklo for advanced designs. Google signed with Kairos Power. In March 2026, seven of these companies signed the White House Ratepayer Protection Pledge, committing to build, bring or buy their own generation rather than pass costs to families. These contracts make new plants bankable, with the buyer bearing the risk, not the ratepayer. More generation means more supply in the wholesale market, pushing prices down for everyone.

No New Hampshire deal yet. But we have something no other New England state has.

Five of the six New England states — Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maine, Vermont and Rhode Island — have moratoriums or statutory restrictions that limit new nuclear power plant construction. New Hampshire is the only state on the ISO New England grid where an advanced reactor can actually be permitted and built.

The legislature has been building the framework for this moment. The House declared advanced nuclear power in the state’s interest, 258-83. HB 672, signed in August 2025, allows an off-grid power plant to serve a customer directly, with no rate case and no costs on anyone else’s bill. Gov. Kelly Ayotte’s first executive order of 2026, EO 2026-01, directed a statewide nuclear roadmap. The federal ADVANCE Act cut review fees for advanced reactor applicants by more than half.

Private capital looking for a home, a market that protects ratepayers, the only nuclear-ready state in a six-state grid, and a legislative framework nearly complete. That is a genuine first-mover advantage.

In March 2026, all six New England governors, Republican and Democrat, signed a joint statement supporting next-generation nuclear. That is good news for the region. It is also the clearest signal that our advantage has an expiration date.

When Massachusetts lifts its moratorium, it brings a larger labor market, deeper capital pools and proximity to Boston’s tech corridor. When Connecticut acts, it brings an existing nuclear workforce at Millstone. Each state that opens is another competitor for the same dollars and the same developers. New Hampshire goes from being the only option to one of six.

The joint statement tells us they will follow. The question is whether New Hampshire moves first or competes from behind.

For too long, energy policy in New England has been about managing scarcity: rationing constrained supply, hedging against winter price spikes, hoping demand does not outrun aging infrastructure. An abundance mentality starts from a different premise: More generation is better, private capital willing to build it should be welcomed, and the goal is cheaper, more reliable power, not just managing with less.

But the land use framework has not caught up. Municipal zoning still treats data centers inconsistently, and some towns have no zoning path for them at all. Local governments should have every tool they need to regulate site plans, set performance standards and protect their communities. What they should not have is the power to ban an entire category of commercial or industrial use from zones already designated for that purpose. Every month that zoning lags behind energy policy is a month the window stays open for someone else.

Every project of this kind has two large industrial taxpayers: the data center and the power plant. Each anchors a host town’s tax base. Both pay the Business Profits Tax and the Business Enterprise Tax. In a state with no broad-based income or sales tax, that math matters.

New Hampshire spent decades building an energy market that protects ratepayers and a regulatory environment that welcomes nuclear power. For the first time, private capital is lining up to build the generation this region needs. The window is open. It will not stay open forever.

We can adopt an abundance mentality and finish the job, or watch the investment, jobs, tax base and cheaper power go to states already moving to catch up.

Read the commission report at nuclearnh.energy.

State Rep. Keith Ammon represents New Boston, Mont Vernon, and Lyndeborough (Hillsborough 42) and serves on the board of the New Hampshire Blockchain Council. He wrote this for NHJournal.com.

This story was originally published by the NH Journal, an online news publication dedicated to providing fair, unbiased reporting on, and analysis of, political news of interest to New Hampshire. For more stories from the NH Journal, visit NHJournal.com.