Merrimack Station

From Global Energy Monitor
Part of the
Global Coal Plant Tracker,
a Global Energy Monitor project.
Download full dataset
Report an error
Related coal trackers:

Merrimack Station is an operating power station of at least 459-megawatts (MW) in Bow, Merrimack, New Hampshire, United States.


Table 1: Project-level location details

Plant name Location Coordinates (WGS 84)
Merrimack Station Bow, Merrimack, New Hampshire, United States 43.141094, -71.467511 (exact)

The map below shows the exact location of the power station.

Loading map...

Unit-level coordinates (WGS 84):

  • Unit 1, Unit 2: 43.141094, -71.467511

Project Details

Table 2: Unit-level details

Unit name Status Fuel(s) Capacity (MW) Technology Start year Retired year
Unit 1 operating coal - bituminous 113.6 subcritical 1960
Unit 2 operating coal - bituminous 345.6 subcritical 1968

Table 3: Unit-level ownership and operator details

Unit name Owner
Unit 1 Granite Shore Power LLC [100.0%]
Unit 2 Granite Shore Power LLC [100.0%]


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]

In 2018 PSCNH sold its power stations including the Merrimack Station to Granite Shore Power.[2]

In March 2023, Merrimack Station failed to qualify for a contract in ISO-New England’s capacity auction for 2026-27. In the 2022 auction, the power station had secured a contract for nearly $800,000 per month; after participating in the 2023 auction unsuccessfully, Merrimack will be without a major source of income in 2026.[3]

No Coal No Gas actions to shut down Merrimack Generating Station

No Coal No Gas is a direct action campaign to shut down the Merrimack Generating Station.

2019: "Bucket by Bucket"

Nearly 70 activists with the No Coal No Gas campaign were arrested at the Merrimack Generating Station for allegedly trespassing on the plant property. [4] The activists brought with them buckets to “take the coal from the plant so that it could never be burned, even if it had to be bucket by bucket.” The protestors were met by helicopters, police in riot gear, and the National Guard. Prior to the action, activists had taken at least 500 pounds of coal from near the plant and poured a large portion on the State House Lawn in Concord, NH.[5] In 2021, more coal was sent to policy makers, the private equity firms that owned the plant, and utility companies that are part of ISO-New England. [6]

2020: "Train by Train"

In winter of 2019-2020, No Coal No Gas activists conducted six blockades of coal-carrying trains headed to the Merrimack Generating Station.[7]

One of trains was stopped for a total of 11 hours over three blockades– the last of which took place on the final railroad bridge between the Merrimack River and the station. During this action, people climbed the sides of the bridge over the frozen river and refused to leave, forcing the train to stop for several hours.[8]

During another blockade, the train never stopped despite activists standing on the tracks, and despite emergency calls to the train operators. No one was injured, as activists moved away just before the train came.[9]

At another blockade, activists climbed onto 16-foot scaffolding erected on the train tracks to further delay shipments.[10]

2021: "Planting the future"

On October 3, 2021 18 protesters were arrested near the front gate of the coal plant as they pickaxed a small hole in the driveway, planted shrubs and flowers in and around the driveway, and refused to leave the site. Eventually several dozen riot police cleared the area.[11] Two months later the campaign attempted to speak with leadership at the corporate offices of Atlas Holdings and Castleton Commodities, two private equity firms that co-owned Merrimack Station. (Castleton has since divested from coal[12])

2022: Smoke stack action, parody press release

Four activists were arrested for climbing and chaining themselves to an inactive smokestack at the coal plant in January 2022. From more than halfway up the smokestack, they dropped a large banner reading “SHUT IT DOWN.” Protestors remained on the smokestack for several hours, intending to meet with Granite Shore Power leadership after ignored calls to delist the plant.[13],[14] Two of the people involved in the action later plead no contest to the charges of trespass and disorderly conduct.[15]

Later in 2022, the the NCNG campaign created a parody press release[16] on Utility Dive, which stated that the power plant owners requested to delist (and ultimately retire) the station.

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.

Death and disease attributable to fine particle pollution from Merrimack

In 2010, Abt Associates issued a study commissioned by the Clean Air Task Force, a nonprofit research and advocacy organization, quantifying the deaths and other health effects attributable to fine particle pollution from coal-fired power plants.[17] Fine particle pollution consists of a complex mixture of soot, heavy metals, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides. Among these particles, the most dangerous are those less than 2.5 microns in diameter, which are so tiny that they can evade the lung's natural defenses, enter the bloodstream, and be transported to vital organs. Impacts are especially severe among the elderly, children, and those with respiratory disease. The study found that over 13,000 deaths and tens of thousands of cases of chronic bronchitis, acute bronchitis, asthma, congestive heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, dysrhythmia, ischemic heart disease, chronic lung disease, and pneumonia each year are attributable to fine particle pollution from U.S. coal plant emissions. These deaths and illnesses are major examples of coal's external costs, i.e. uncompensated harms inflicted upon the public at large. Low-income and minority populations are disproportionately impacted as well, due to the tendency of companies to avoid locating power plants upwind of affluent communities. To monetize the health impact of fine particle pollution from each coal plant, Abt assigned a value of $7,300,000 to each 2010 mortality, based on a range of government and private studies. Valuations of illnesses ranged from $52 for an asthma episode to $440,000 for a case of chronic bronchitis.[18]

Table 1: Death and disease attributable to fine particle pollution from Merrimack Station

Type of Impact Annual Incidence Valuation
Deaths 3 $22,000,000
Heart attacks 6 $610,000
Asthma attacks 47 $2,000
Hospital admissions 3 $58,000
Chronic bronchitis 2 $830,000
Asthma ER visits 2 <$1,000

Source: "Find Your Risk from Power Plant Pollution," Clean Air Task Force interactive table, accessed March 2011

Coal Sources

In 2008, the Merrimack plant burned 534,420 tons of coal from Colombia, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia.[19]

  • Colombia: 157,200 tons, or 28.57% of the coal burned in 2008
  • Greene, PA: 232,150 tons, or 43.44%
  • Buchanan, VA: 8,030 tons, or 1.5%
  • Marion, WV: 49,050 tons, or 9.18%
  • McDowell, WV: 31,730 tons, or 5.94%
  • Monongalia, WV: 60,760 tons, or 11.37%
  • West Virginia total: 141,540 tons, or 26.48%

According to, Merrimack purchases some coal from companies who practice mountaintop removal mining (MTR), though does not burn coal directly from MTR mines.[20]

Colombian Coal and Human Rights Violations

Colombia's coal mines, like many industries in the country, are filled with stories of displacement and terror. A number of entire communities in the coalfields have been displaced, including Tabaco, a 700-person Afro-Colombian village that was razed in 2001.[21] People living near the coalfields have faced malnutrition, diseases such as ringworm, and restricted access to land since the large mines opened up.[21]

The Drummond Company (operator of la Loma mine in Colombia) has been the subject of numerous lawsuits regarding the murders of 70 union miners and railroad workers, collectively.[22][23][24] The murdered Colombians were killed by the notorious paramilitary group, United Self Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), which had been hired by Drummond to act as security.[23] In addition to those killed, a lawsuit against Drummond describes "how hundreds of men, women, and children were terrorized in their homes, on their way to and from work… innocent people killed in or near their homes or kidnapped to never to return home, their spouses and children being beaten and tied up, and people being pulled off buses and summarily executed on the spot."[23]

Reducing Air Pollution Emissions

In 2006, Governor Lynch signed legislation that requires all New Hampshire coal-fired power plants are required to reduce mercury emissions by 80 percent.[25] The legislation states that the Public Service Company of New Hampshire Merrimack station has to reduce mercury using a wet flue gas desulphurization (FGD), or scrubber, system by 2013.[25] The company is not allowed to purchase mercury credits or allowances in place of a scrubbers.[25] The scrubber system is also expected to reduce sulfur dioxide, sulfur trioxide, and small particulate matter, as well as increase area visibility.[25]

PSNH had until June 8, 2007 to file an application for a Temporary Permit for a flue gas desulphurization system with the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES) Air Resources Division.[26] On June 6, 2007, PSNH filed their application for the Temporary Permit; additional information was added to their application on September 4, 2007, April 17, 2008, October 24, 2008, November 21, 2008, and December 11, 2008.[26] On December 11, 2008, an announcement of a public hearing and request for public comments was published in the "Concord Monitor".[26] The same announcement was published in the New Hampshire "Union Leader".[26] The public hearing was held on January 15, 2009 and public comments were accepted until January 23, 2009.[26]

On March 9, 2009, the Department of Environmental Services issued the final Temporary Permit for the limestone-based FGD system.[27][28] The permit expires on September 30, 2010.[27] The DES also released a Findings of Fact and Director's decision document, which contains responses to comments submitted during the winter 2008/2009 comment period.[26] The comments are grouped into the following categories: public health, project cost, federal New Sources Review Program Requirements, future state and/or federal rules, proposed sulfur dioxide emission limits and Regional Haze Requirements, alternative operation scenarios, procedural issues on the DES's Review of the Permit Application, and the Title V Permit.[26]

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."[29] Environmentalists supported the study, as did Hirschberg's businesses coalition. Several speakers said Merrimack Station should be closed. Representatives of the Concord and Nashua chambers of commerce testified against the bill, as did labor groups and officials from Bow, Hooksett and Manchester.[29]

On April 8, 2009, proposed bill SB-152 was defeated in the New Hampshire State Senate by a vote of 21-1.[30][31]

In November, 2009, the State Evaluation Committee voted 5-4 against reconsidering its approval of the scrubber retrofit, denying requests from from a group of businesses and power producers - including PSNH competitors, the Conservation Law Foundation, The Union of Concerned Scientists and the Campaign for Ratepayer Rights - that challenged the board's assessment that the 445-foot smokestack was not a "sizable" addition. The committee also rejected by 1 6-3 vote a petition from a citizens group of nearly 160 residents in neighboring towns, including Pembroke, Allenstown, Hopkinton, Dunbarton and Hooksett, which argued that the stack would decrease home values in sight of it, increase rates to the utility's customers and potentially contaminate the Merrimack River with mercury waste.[32]

According to reporting from December 2023, Merrimack Station had repeatedly failed to meet pollution limits during the year despite multiple attempts to redo testing. A retest scheduled for December was reportedly not completed because the plant could not connect to the electric grid, and regulators were waiting for Granite Shore Power to schedule another retest.[33]

In February 2024, the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services ordered Merrimack Station to complete an emissions compliance test by March 31, 2024. Community members have reportedly been expressing alarm at ongoing pollution from the plant.[34]

EPA requests emission data

In May 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency requested emission data on Public Service of New Hampshire's coal-fired power plants in Bow and Newington, NH.[35] The EPA is looking for data on finances on upgrades to the plants since 2000.[35] The request is not related to controversy over the Bow plant's scrubber project, but "part of a national initiative to investigate coal plants and whether they have complied with federal laws that require any new or expanded sources of pollution to be thoroughly reviewed."[35] However, EPA investigator Greg Dain said that "information the agency gathers could answer some of the questions that PSNH's challengers are asking."[35] PSNH was given until July 20, 2009 to submit information on the Bow plant and until September 20, 2009 for the Newington plant. [35]

Coal Train Derailment, November 2009

Late in the morning of November 17, 2009 in Nashua, New Hampshire, seven cars of an 87-car train derailed.[36] Three of the cars toppled over, spilling about 300 tons of coal, while four cars remained standing upright.[36] The train was traveling on Pan Am tracks to deliver coal to the Merrimack Station.[36] According to the Nashua Telegraph, "The trains carrying coal to Merrimack Station make up a significant portion of the state’s freight rail traffic. It takes more than 100 trains similar to the one that derailed Tuesday to provide the power plant with its coal each year, although not all of those run through Nashua."[36]

Citizen Groups

Articles and Resources


  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Stacy Morford, "Survival Strategy for an Aging Coal Plant," Climate Progress, March 5, 2009.
  2. "Granite Shore Power Completes Acquisition of Select Power Generating Assets of Public Service Company of New Hampshire", accessed June 2020
  3. "New England’s last coal-fired power plant loses key revenue source" CommonWealth, March 21, 2023
  4. Shawne K. Wickham New Hampshire Sunday News. "67 arrested at Bow power plant protest; largest NH green action since 1970s". Retrieved 2022-11-22.
  5. Brooks, David (8/20/2019). "After dumping coal in front of State House, protesters vow to shut Bow power plant". Concord Monitor. Retrieved 11/22/2022. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |access-date= and |date= (help)
  6. Peterson, Barbara (12/23/2020). "Climate activists mount utility strike to urge the shutdown of New England coal plant". Retrieved 11/22/2022. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |access-date= and |date= (help)CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  7. "JANUARY 2 COAL TRAIN BLOCKADE". 1/7/2020. Retrieved 11/22/2022. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |access-date= and |date= (help)CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  8. "COAL RESUPPLY TRAIN BLOCKADED IN T". 12/11/2019. Retrieved 11/22/2022. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |access-date= and |date= (help)CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  9. Wasser, Miriam (12/17/2019). "N.H.-Bound Coal Train Kept Rolling, Despite Activists On The Tracks". WBUR. Retrieved 11/22/2022. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |access-date= and |date= (help)
  10. "4 Arrested After Protesters Use Scaffolding To Block Train Carrying Coal In Harvard". Retrieved 2022-11-22.
  11. "'We Will Keep Coming Back' Until Coal Burning Ends, Activists Say -". Retrieved 2022-11-22.
  12. "Castleton Divests from Merrimack Station". 4/18/2022. Retrieved 11/22/2022. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |access-date= and |date= (help)CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  13. "ACTIVISTS SCALE SMOKESTACK AT NH COAL PLANT AND RELEASE "SHUT IT DOWN" BANNER". 1/10/2022. Retrieved 11/22/2022. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |access-date= and |date= (help)CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  14. Brooks, David (1/10/2022). "Protesters arrested after climbing inactive smokestack at Bow power plant". Concord Monitor. Retrieved 11/22/2022. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |access-date= and |date= (help)
  15. "No Coal, No Gas, No Contest". 7/24/2022. Retrieved 11/22/2022. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |access-date= and |date= (help)CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  16. "Granite Shores Power, Atlas Holding Announce Delist of Merrimack Station, Closure of Coal Assets | Utility Dive". Utility Dive. Retrieved 2022-11-22. {{cite web}}: Check |archive-url= value (help)CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  17. "The Toll from Coal: An Updated Assessment of Death and Disease from America's Dirtiest Energy Source," Clean Air Task Force, September 2010.
  18. "Technical Support Document for the Powerplant Impact Estimator Software Tool," Prepared for the Clean Air Task Force by Abt Associates, July 2010
  19. "New England power plants that use coal and where the coal comes from", Appalachian Voices, accessed March 30, 2009.
  20. "What's my connection?", website, Accessed March 2010.
  21. 21.0 21.1 Aviva Chomsky, "The dirty story behind local energy", "The Boston Phoenix", October 1, 2007.
  22. International Rights Advocates, "Juan Aquas Romero, et al. v. Drummond Company Inc., et al.", Plaintiff's Opening Brief, December 11, 2007.
  23. 23.0 23.1 23.2 "Federal lawsuit alleges U.S. mining company Drummond paid millions to Colombian paramilitary terrorists who killed 67; including "execution" of union leaders", "Reuters", May 28, 2009.
  24. "Children of slain Colombian coal miners sue Drummond Co. in Birmingham federal court", "Birmingham News", March 20, 2009.
  25. 25.0 25.1 25.2 25.3 "Title X Public Health Chapter 125-O:11 Multiple Pollutant Reduction Program: Mercury Emissions," New Hampshire, effective June 8, 2006.
  26. 26.0 26.1 26.2 26.3 26.4 26.5 26.6 "Findings of fact and Director's decision", State of New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES) Air Resources Division, accessed April 28, 2009.
  27. 27.0 27.1 "Temporary Permit", State of New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Air Resources Division, March 9, 2009.
  28. "DES issues temporary permit for PSNH Merrimack Station flue gas desulphurization system," New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services press release, March 9, 2009.
  29. 29.0 29.1 Gary Rayno, "Power plant study plan fuels scrubber debate," Union Leader, 3/14/09
  30. "PSNH Statement – Senate vote on SB152", Public Service Company of New Hampshire press release, April 8, 2009.
  31. "Mass. tax collectors told stay out of NH", "New Hampshire Business Review", April 9, 2009.
  32. Amy Augustine, "Scrubber controversy continues," Concord Monitor, 11/26/09
  33. "Delays in emissions testing at New England’s last running coal plant raise questions for advocates," NHPR, December 17, 2023
  34. "Merrimack Station faces scrutiny from regulators almost a year since failed emissions test," NHPR, February 17, 2024
  35. 35.0 35.1 35.2 35.3 35.4 Chelsea Conaboy, "EPA wants details on coal plants", Concord Monitor, May 7, 2009.
  36. 36.0 36.1 36.2 36.3 Karen Lovett, "Derailed train snarls traffic in the city", "Nashua Telegraph", November 18, 2009.

Additional data

To access additional data, including an interactive map of coal-fired power stations, a downloadable dataset, and summary data, please visit the Global Coal Plant Tracker on the Global Energy Monitor website.