Navigating New Hampshire’s Solar Project Challenges: 2025 Update
How interconnection queues, local zoning—and a 2024 state Supreme Court decision—are reshaping what gets built.
By Granite State Report
WARNER, N.H. — From a scraped‑over gravel pit tucked between I‑89 exits to a wooded ridgeline above a two‑lane state road, the sites for New Hampshire’s next wave of solar projects look nothing alike. What they have in common is a gauntlet: town boards revising ordinances in real time, neighbors pressing concerns about wetlands and wildlife, a state siting process that kicks in for the very largest projects, and an electric‑grid interconnection queue that developers liken to “I‑93 on a holiday weekend.”
The stakes are more than local. New Hampshire remains near the bottom of national rankings for installed solar; the technology generated roughly 2% of the state’s electricity as of mid‑2025, compared with double‑digit shares in several neighboring states. Advocates say rural projects can deliver affordable power and steady municipal revenue. Critics warn of forest clearing and industrialization of the countryside. And almost everyone agrees on two things: the rules are complicated, and the timeline is long.
Where New Hampshire’s solar buildout stands now
By national standards, the Granite State’s solar footprint is modest: about 312 MW installed as of Q2 2025, enough to power ~47,500 homes. Solar’s share of in‑state generation sits near 2%, placing New Hampshire in the bottom tier nationally for total installed capacity and five‑year growth projections. That slow pace contrasts with a U.S. market that added a record 50 GW in 2024 and continued installing at a blistering clip in 2025.
Energy context matters. Nuclear power from Seabrook still dominates New Hampshire’s generation mix; renewables—largely hydro, biomass and wind—make up most of the rest. Utility‑scale solar is a small fraction today, though the number varies by data source and whether rooftop production is counted.
Yet the ground is shifting. In June, Unitil cut the ribbon on a 4.9‑MW array in Kingston—the first solar farm owned and operated by a regulated electric utility in New Hampshire. It is expected to generate about 9.7 million kWh in its first year, enough to power roughly 1,200 homes.
Who decides where solar goes?
Local boards vs. the state SEC
For the bulk of rural projects, the front line is local. Town planning and zoning boards control site‑plan approvals, special exceptions, decommissioning bonds, stormwater permits and vegetative screening. Many towns now rely on New Hampshire’s Model Solar Zoning Ordinance and training materials developed by state and regional planners and Clean Energy NH to write or update their own rules.
Very large projects are different. When a facility’s nameplate capacity exceeds 30 MW, jurisdiction shifts to the New Hampshire Site Evaluation Committee (SEC)—the statewide siting body created under RSA 162‑H. The SEC may also assert jurisdiction over 5–30 MW renewable projects upon request or petition (for example, by the applicant or by citizen petitioners), effectively pre‑empting local approval authority while still taking municipal input. In 2024 the Legislature streamlined the SEC’s membership and procedures (HB 609), aiming to speed reviews.
That threshold helps explain why many proposals in rural towns cluster just under 5 MW AC. At 4.999 MW, developers can stay within local processes, avoid SEC proceedings, and still unlock the economics of “group net metering” for municipal subscribers. We see that strategy clearly in Warner’s “Poverty Plains” project (more below).
The Franklin case changed the guardrails
In April 2024, the New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled that a planning board may not deny a compliant solar site plan based solely on broad “purpose” provisions—such as generalized concerns about aesthetics, property values, or community character—without tying those concerns to specific, enforceable standards in the town’s regulations. The court also discussed the prospect of a “builder’s remedy” where a board wrongly withholds approval. The decision—Mojalaki Holdings v. City of Franklin—has quickly become must‑read case law for boards and developers alike.
What that means on the ground: towns that want to shape utility‑scale solar must write clear, objective standards into their ordinances (setbacks, height, glare studies, screening, wildlife surveys, decommissioning, stormwater design, road use)—and make findings tied to those standards. Simply saying, “It doesn’t fit our community character,” is no longer enough.
The “Wild West” problem: getting connected to the grid
Even after local approvals, a rural solar project isn’t real until it secures interconnection. In New Hampshire, developers say the study queue run by utilities—especially Eversource—has been slow and unpredictable, with hundreds of megawatts of distributed projects waiting for the engineering green light that triggers construction. In mid‑2024, reporting placed roughly 470 MW of solar and other distributed energy in Eversource New Hampshire’s line—more than the state’s entire installed solar base at the time.
There is a structural fix in motion. In April 2025, federal regulators accepted ISO‑New England’s compliance plan under FERC Order 2023, shifting the region’s interconnection process away from “first‑come/first‑served” serial reviews to cluster studies that winnow speculative projects and move credible ones through in batches. If implemented as designed, the reforms should shorten timelines and add predictability—though developers caution it will take a few cycles to see meaningful relief.
Case files: how the fight is playing out in rural towns
Warner: Turning a gravel pit into power
Warner’s Poverty Plains Solar is a ~5 MW AC array sited on a largely cleared gravel pit along I‑89. Developed by Encore Renewable Energy, the project is “shovel‑ready” and designed for group net metering through the Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire (CPCNH), which will allocate bill credits to participating municipal loads. First‑year output is estimated at ~8.8 million kWh starting in mid‑2026. Town records reflect detailed attention to decommissioning funding and to potential wildlife issues, including habitat for northern black racer snakes and wood turtles—both sensitive species in the state.
ISO‑NE’s reliability review under Tariff Section I.3.9 found no significant adverse system impact for the project to interconnect via Eversource’s Oak Hill Substation on the 317 circuit—one of several technical steps needed before construction.
Why it matters: Poverty Plains epitomizes the siting compromises towns say they want—disturbed land over forests or prime soils, rigorous decommissioning, and a structure that returns value locally via group net metering.
Loudon: Wetlands, tree cutting, and a special exception
Just east of Concord, Loudon has spent much of the past year working through a proposal by NH Solar Parent LLC for a ground‑mounted array off Route 106. A September 2024 site walk with the Planning Board and Conservation Commission flagged wetlands and tree‑cutting limits (including a “no clear‑cutting” request along an abutting lot). By October, the Planning Board referenced upcoming Zoning Board hearings on a special exception for a solar facility and a separate special exception for wetland impacts. The minutes read like a checklist of issues rural boards now scrutinize: driveway location, drainage, buffers, fire access, and neighborhood screening.
Why it matters: Loudon shows how towns are applying fact‑specific conditions—exactly the kind of record that, post‑Mojalaki, can make or break an appeal.
Kingston: The utility steps in
In Kingston, Unitil’s 4.9‑MW array—New Hampshire’s first utility‑owned solar farm—went live in June. Because state law generally bars utilities from owning generation, Kingston proceeded under a narrow statutory exception for small renewable projects tied to a utility’s distribution load. Unitil (and local media) expect the project to produce ~9.7 million kWh in its first year and deliver lifetime ratepayer savings; it also marks the emergence of “utility‑as‑developer” for community‑scale solar in the state.
Why it matters: In a state that has wrestled over net‑metering policy, a regulated utility deploying distribution‑scale solar is a notable new actor—one with access to capital and a rate base.
Hopkinton & Webster: When a project triggers state siting
On town‑owned and adjacent private parcels near the Hopkinton/Webster landfill, the long‑proposed Deer Meadow Solar is sized at ~75 MW AC, large enough to trigger SEC jurisdiction. ISO‑NE records show a 76.25‑MW project advanced through reliability review in 2022; town minutes and fact sheets describe a multi‑year local process to prepare for state siting, decommissioning finance, and community agreements. At this scale, the debate shifts from screening plantings to regional transmission questions and state‑level standards.
Why it matters: Few New Hampshire projects are big enough to go through the SEC. When they do, local concerns still register—but the process, timeline, and evidentiary burden change dramatically.
Lessons from projects that didn’t happen
Rural New Hampshire has also seen cancellations. The Chinook Solar project in Fitzwilliam—once slated to be among the state’s largest—was pulled in 2022, after years of planning. The reasons were multifactorial (market shifts, local pushback, permitting risk), and the cancellation has become a cautionary tale for towns and developers alike. Meanwhile, some mid‑sized projects—like a 3.5‑MW array approved in Swanzey—have moved steadily through planning, an example of how clear local standards can facilitate approvals.
The rulebook: zoning, wetlands, and stormwater
Even when a rural project stays below SEC thresholds, developers navigate a thick stack of rules:
- Local solar ordinances. Towns are increasingly adopting tiered standards (rooftop vs. small ground‑mount vs. utility‑scale), fixed setbacks, glare studies for nearby homes and roads, vegetative screening plans, fencing, and decommissioning bonds indexed to inflation. Many draw language from the model ordinance produced for New Hampshire cities and towns.
- Wetlands and Alteration of Terrain (AoT). For arrays covering many acres, NHDES requires a stormwater management plan, attention to whether panel “drip edges” count toward impervious area, and measures that break up runoff and promote infiltration between rows. The state’s 2025 Stormwater Manual update—and a 2025 DES letter to lawmakers regarding SB 65 on solar stormwater—signal evolving best practices tailored to PV sites.
- Wildlife and habitat. Site reviews increasingly reference guidance for wood turtles and northern black racer snakes—both Species of Greatest Conservation Need—which can drive seasonal restrictions on clearing, maintain riparian buffers, and shape fence design. Conservation groups also press for pollinator‑friendly seed mixes under and around panels and for solar grazing (sheep) to reduce mowing.
- Property taxes. Most towns offer a property tax exemption for residential and commercial solar equipment under RSA 72:61–72:62, removing the assessed value of PV equipment from the tax base. For utility‑scale projects, towns often negotiate PILOT agreements under RSA 72:74 to provide predictable annual payments and avoid disputes over valuation. Recent agendas and agreements in towns such as Warner, Northfield and Laconia show how commonly PILOTs are deployed.
Follow the money: net metering, community power and tax credits
Net metering—the rules governing how solar exports are credited—has defined the economics of distributed solar for a decade. In 2024, the Public Utilities Commission chose to keep compensation rates unchanged from a framework largely set in 2017, citing insufficient evidence to justify a change. In parallel, Governor Chris Sununu has repeatedly vetoed legislative efforts to expand large net‑metering eligibility to 5‑MW projects, a constraint developers say limits scale and municipal savings.
To work around those limits, many rural arrays now rely on Group Net Metering and community power structures. The Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire (CPCNH) is actively aggregating municipal loads and pairing them with projects like Poverty Plains, allocating credits and stabilizing long‑term energy costs for member towns.
At the federal level, the Inflation Reduction Act remains the big lever. A baseline 30% Investment Tax Credit (or elective pay for qualifying public entities) can be stacked with a 10‑percentage‑point “Energy Community” adder and a separate Domestic Content bonus if projects meet strict sourcing requirements. Brownfield and legacy energy communities in parts of New Hampshire may qualify; Treasury and IRS guidance in 2023–2025 clarified how developers document eligibility.
Why it matters for rural towns: Combine a federal credit stack, a local PILOT, and guaranteed municipal offtake via CPCNH, and a 4–5‑MW project can pencil out with modest site impacts—provided it clears the interconnection queue.
What both sides are saying
Supporters focus on economics and siting: build on disturbed land (landfills, gravel pits, brownfields), use agrivoltaics (sheep grazing) to keep land in semi‑agricultural use, plant pollinator mixes to boost habitat, bond decommissioning to leave the site clean, and bring in recurring PILOT dollars.
Opponents worry about forest clearing, stormwater and wetlands, glare, wildlife corridors (turtles, snakes), fire safety, and property values. Some of these can be addressed with design tweaks; others are binary (clear the forest or don’t). After Mojalaki, opponents must tie their objections to specific, adopted standards to withstand appeal.
Five practical lessons from recent projects
- Write it down. Post‑Mojalaki, towns that want leverage need ordinance language that is objective and enforceable—not just purpose statements. The model ordinance is a strong start; tailor it to local topography, habitats and road standards.
- Prefer disturbed sites. Gravel pits, capped landfills and old industrial parcels consistently draw less pushback and often fare better with interconnection. The Warner project is an instructive template.
- Design for water. Treat panel rows like miniature roofs; break up flow and infiltrate between strings. Use the 2025 Stormwater Manual and NHDES solar‑specific stormwater guidance to set expectations early.
- Plan the end at the start. Require decommissioning cost estimates, inflation escalators, and financial assurance (bond/escrow) that survives ownership changes. Warner’s public decommissioning plan is a clean exemplar.
- Mind the queue. Ask developers to present a realistic interconnection timeline, including where they sit in the queue and how ISO‑NE’s cluster process affects milestones. Monitor utility postings as Eversource brings its New Hampshire queue reporting online.
What to watch next (2025–2026)
- Order 2023 in practice. ISO‑NE’s first full cluster study cycles will indicate whether reforms are unclogging the queue—or simply reshuffling it.
- Town‑by‑town ordinance updates. Expect more rural towns to adopt utility‑scale solar sections with wildlife and stormwater specifics, learning from Warner and Loudon records.
- SEC streamlining. With HB 609 implemented, watch whether the SEC can move large projects more efficiently while maintaining robust public participation.
- Municipal grant programs. Delays in the state’s municipal solar grant funding created headaches in 2025; project sponsors will be watching for smoother disbursement.
- Utility participation. If Unitil’s Kingston project delivers on savings claims, other regulated utilities may seek similar small‑generation exceptions to build community‑scale solar.
Embedded videos: hearings, how‑tos, and site examples
Unitil’s Kingston Array—local TV segment
(Context: New Hampshire’s first utility‑owned solar array goes live in Kingston.)
Clean Energy NH—New Solar Zoning Guidance
(Context: Practical municipal guidance for drafting and updating solar ordinances.)
Warner, NH—Town solar project (group net metering origins)
(Context: How Warner organized around group net metering; helpful background for Poverty Plains.)
Encore Renewable Energy—Repurposing Land for Solar
(Context: The developer behind Poverty Plains describes “brownfields to brightfields” siting.)
Community solar in NH—member‑owned model
(Context: Overview of community and group‑metered solar models.)
Sidebar: a rural solar glossary
Group Net Metering. A structure that allows one generating facility (often <1 MW for statutory reasons) to allocate bill credits to a group of subscribers—commonly municipalities—on the same utility system. CPCNH uses this model to tie projects like Poverty Plains to member towns.
PILOT (Payment in Lieu of Taxes). A negotiated agreement under RSA 72:74 establishing predictable annual payments from a utility‑scale facility. Particularly common for 1‑ to 10‑MW arrays.
SEC (Site Evaluation Committee). The state board with jurisdiction over >30‑MW projects and, if it asserts jurisdiction, 5–30 MW renewable projects. It pre‑empts local permits but must consider municipal input.
Order 2023. FERC’s reform of U.S. interconnection procedures, pushing ISO‑NE and other grid operators to use cluster studies that process many projects simultaneously.
Energy Community / Domestic Content (IRA). Federal tax‑credit “adders” worth up to 10 percentage points each for projects that meet geographic or U.S.‑content requirements.
The bottom line
Rural New Hampshire is not fighting over whether to build solar so much as where and how. Projects on disturbed lands with robust stormwater designs, wildlife safeguards, decommissioning finance, and transparent local value propositions (PILOTs and municipal savings) are finding a path. Projects that require heavy forest clearing without such benefits face harder sledding—especially if opponents can ground their arguments in the town’s adopted standards.
Meanwhile, the grid connection queue may prove to be the ultimate decider. If Order 2023 reforms unclog interconnection and if towns continue to professionalize their ordinances post‑Mojalaki, New Hampshire’s rural landscape will likely see more 4–5 MW arrays—quiet rows of panels in gravel pits and along utility corridors, sending power and payments to town halls and school districts.
That, more than any courtroom fight or veto message, is where the battle over new rural solar in New Hampshire will be won.
References & further reading
- Installed capacity and market context. Solar in NH—capacity, rank, jobs; U.S. market installations, 2024–2025.
- “NH has never been a trailblazer on solar.” Overview of why the state lags and what’s changing.
- Municipal solar ordinance resources. Regional planning model ordinance; Clean Energy NH zoning webinar.
- Mojalaki Holdings v. City of Franklin (2024). Supreme Court opinion and municipal law analysis.
- Interconnection reforms & backlog. ISO‑NE Order 2023 acceptance; reporting on Eversource’s NH queue; ISO backgrounders.
- Warner—Poverty Plains Solar. CPCNH project overview and Q&A; Warner decommissioning plan; town minutes noting species/habitat; ISO I.3.9 letter.
- Loudon—NH Solar Parent LLC. Site‑walk minutes (wetlands, tree‑cutting), Planning Board minutes (special exceptions for solar and wetlands).
- Kingston—Unitil utility‑owned array. NHPR report; Unitil project page; WMUR coverage.
- Deer Meadow Solar (Hopkinton/Webster). Town fact sheet; ISO reliability letter; local public‑hearing minutes.
- Chinook Solar cancellation (Fitzwilliam). NHPR coverage.
- DES stormwater & wetlands guidance for solar; 2025 manual update; SB 65 testimony.
- Wildlife considerations. USFWS wood turtle overview; NH NRCS BMPs; NH Fish & Game species materials.
- Pollinators & solar grazing. National guidance for pollinator‑friendly utility‑scale solar; American Solar Grazing Association; research on sheep grazing under panels.
- Tax policy. RSA 72:61–72:62 (equipment exemption); RSA 72:74 (PILOT); practice examples from Warner, Northfield, Laconia.
- Net metering policy. PUC decision (2024) to keep rates unchanged; Governor veto of 5‑MW expansion (2020).
- IRA tax‑credit “adders.” IRS energy community guidance; domestic‑content guidance portal.
Editor’s note
This report synthesizes public documents, town meetings, agency guidance, court rulings, and credible journalism through September 2025. Figures may vary by data source and whether small‑scale (behind‑the‑meter) generation is included. Where multiple sources exist, we cite the most recent or authoritative.
Join the UNAFFILIATEDS FACEBOOK GROUP to join the Independent Voter Movement
