Letter Submission

To submit a letter to the editor, please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Letters must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published. We do not run anonymous letters. Local issues get priority, as do local writers. We encourage writers to keep letters to no more than 400 words, but will accept longer letters to be run on a space-available basis. Editors reserve the right to edit letters for spelling, grammar, punctuation, excessive length and unsuitable content.


Rising electricity prices are harmful to our standard of living

To The Daily Sun,

America's first offshore wind power plant, five turbines, will cost about $300 million to build. Located three miles from Block Island, off the coast of Rhode Island, the wind farm is supposed to generate enough energy to power 17,000 homes. The projected cost is about $17,600 per household to build.

That means if the homes served paid for the construction cost through their electric bills over a 30-year period their rates would increase, best case scenario, by $48.89/month without factoring in debt service, operating cost, maintenance costs or useful life of the equipment. We know those costs will not be zero. Would you be comfortable with that kind of rate hike?

The comparatively high cost of offshore wind doesn't worry environmentalists, and socialists love the idea. Salon.com says about the project, "it's the precedent that counts." What is more alarming is that despite the cost, federal officials want to power 23 million homes with offshore wind by the year 2050. That means construction cost alone in today's dollars would be about $405 billion. All I want to know is: Where is the money for that going to come from?

Offshore wind power is expensive because installing and maintaining any kind of infrastructure at sea and underwater is extremely difficult. Ocean salt water is corrosive and makes operating such facilities difficult and expensive. Electricity is so comparatively inexpensive in most parts of the country that offshore wind isn't generally competitive.

Offshore wind is so pricey that early investors in it, like Germany, plan to stop building new turbines to lower their cost of electricity. There's a message in there somewhere. We know the average American's electric bill has gone up 10 percent since this administration took office due to regulations imposed by government bureaucrats in support of green energy. It has risen far more than that right here in New Hampshire.

Most economic analysts agree rising residential electricity prices are also harmful to the standard of living of American households. High-priced power disproportionately hurts poorer families, the elderly and other lower and fixed income groups. The poor tend to spend a higher portion of their incomes on "basic needs" like power, so all increases in these prices hits them the hardest.

As essential goods like electricity become more expensive, the cost of producing goods and services that use electricity increases, effectively raising the price of almost everything. The higher prices are ultimately paid for by consumers. Businesses in areas served by these high-cost projects are disadvantaged compared to their competitors. High electric rates are a contributing factor in business relocation ... and that reduces the number of jobs available in affected areas.

Clean energy is good. Smaller carbon footprint is desirable. The question becomes how to cost effectively move toward what is good and desirable. Life isn't always getting what we want when we want it. Sometimes we have to temper our enthusiasm for the good and desirable with our ability to pay.

Marc Abear


  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 407

Chandler is first and foremost committed to constituent service

To The Daily Sun,

This is a letter for all of those who live in the 27 towns that encompass Senate District 2:

Please vote for Charlie Chandler for state senator.

Your vote on Nov. 8 will pave the way to improving the lives of our residents and neighbors.

My Number One reason for supporting him is because he is a man of integrity. His commitment is first and foremost to constituency service. Charlie pledges his loyalty to us, his constituents, not to Grover Norquist and his Americans for Tax Reform organization.

These are some of reasons I believe Charlie is the best candidate for Senate District 2.
He supports:
— Fixing our crumbling roads and bridges.

— Expanding broadband internet access.

— Local businesses and will fight for well-paying jobs that support our families.

— Investment in K-12 public education, our community colleges and the New Hampshire university system which is key to our economic growth.

— Making Medicaid coverage permanent providing quality and affordable health care to nearly 50,000 hardworking Granite Staters.

— Comprehensive efforts in prevention, treatment, and recovery, as well as tough penalties for drug dealers.

— Legislation that will expand drug and alcohol education in schools.

Support of the above will create a thriving economy, keep businesses profitable, entice new businesses to New Hampshire, and ensure that our residents are healthy, educated, and lifted up economically.

To quote Charlie himself, "I've got deep roots here. I can't think of a better way to spend my time than fighting to build a stronger future for our families."

I agree wholeheartedly. As we have all heard this election cycle your vote is more important than ever. Believe it.

Please consider Charlie Chandler for state Senate District 2.
Paula Trombi

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 410