In 1990, New Hampshire provided 9.2% of its electricity by non-hydro renewable means. In 2004, it provided less than 4.0%.
Even in absolute terms (as opposed to percentage terms) the amount of renewable energy produced in New Hampshire has fallen, from 1,137,722 Megawatt-hours to 946,165 Megawatt-hours.
Fossil fuel used in 2004 represented more than 47% of New Hampshire's electrical generation, lead by large increases in the use of natural gas. As recently as 2002, though, New Hampshire produced less than 30% of its electricity using fossil fuels. In that year, nuclear electricity, the single reactor operating at Seabrook, produced 58.7% of New Hampshire's electricity the highest in percentage terms, but not the highest in absolute terms. In absolute terms the reactor at Seabrook produced more than 10,000,000 megawatt-hours for the first time in 2004.
Renewable energy
as a whole including hydroelectricity has been falling in New Hampshire. I have no idea why that is, by the way, I am only reporting the figures.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/st_profiles/sept05nh.xlsConstruction of the second nuclear reactor at Seabrook was stopped as the result of protests, and the last time I was there, the hulking rusting shell of the second reactor was still there. Had the reactor been completed it is easy to imagine that
all of New Hampshire's electricity would have been provided by greenhouse gas minimized strategies.