Investor PresentationManchester, New Hampshire

OCTOBER 14, 2008

2

Safe Harbor Provisions

This presentation contains statements concerning NU’s expectations, plans, objectives, future financial performance and other statements that are not historical facts. These statements are “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. In some cases, a listener can identify these forward-looking statements by words such as “estimate”, “expect”, “anticipate”, “intend”, “plan”, “believe”, “forecast”, “should”, “could”, and similar expressions. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results or outcomes to differ materially from those included in the forward-looking statements. Factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those included in the forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, actions or inactions by local, state and federal regulatory bodies; competition and industry restructuring; changes in economic conditions; changes in weather patterns; changes in laws, regulations or regulatory policy; changes in levels or timing of capital expenditures; developments in legal or public policy doctrines; technological developments; changes in accounting standards and financial reporting regulations; fluctuations in the value of our remaining competitive electricity positions; actions of rating agencies; subsequent recognition, derecognition and measurement of tax positions; and other presently unknown or unforeseen factors. Other risk factors are detailed from time to time in our reports to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Any forward looking statement speaks only as of the date on which such statement is made, and we undertake no obligation to update the information contained in any forward-looking statements to reflect developments or circumstances occurring after the statement is made. This presentation references our 2008 earnings and 2008 guidance excluding a significant charge associated with a litigation settlement payment made to Consolidated Edison, Inc. Due to the nature and significance of the litigation charge, management believes that this non-GAAP presentation is more representative of our performance and provides additional and useful information to investors in analyzing historical and future performance. This presentation also references our 2008 projected EPS by segment, a non-GAAP presentation which management believes is useful to investors to evaluate the actual financial performance and contribution of NU’s business segments. These non-GAAP measures should not be considered as an alternative to NU consolidated net income and EPS determined in accordance with GAAP as an indicator of NU’s operating performance.

Please refer to our reports to the SEC for further details concerning the matters described in this presentation.

3

Daily Share Price and Volumes

$20.0$21.0$22.0$23.0$24.0$25.0$26.0$27.0$28.0$29.0$30.0$31.0$32.0

1/2 3/12 5/20 7/29 10/6

300,000

1,600,000

2,900,000

4,200,000

Share Price Daily Volume

January 2, 2008 – October 8, 2008

4

NU vs. Dow Utilities vs. Philadelphia Utility Index

-35%-30%-25%-20%-15%-10%

-5%0%5%

10%

UTY NU DJU

January 2, 2008 – October 8, 2008

5

Total Shareholder Return For Comparator Companies

SCG NST TE WEC ED XEL CNP PNW NU LNT NI POM AEE CMS AYE SRP

-45.0%

-35.0%

-25.0%

-15.0%

-5.0%

5.0%

December 31, 2007 – September 30, 2008

6

2008: Year of Progress For NU

Earnings growth strong; initial consolidated guidance raised on August 1

Major southwest Connecticut transmission projects on or ahead of schedule Long Island Cable, Middletown-Norwalk overhead section placed in

service NEEWS siting process has begun Favorable FERC rulings on transmission incentives Major financings completed successfully New legislation consistent with NU’s strategic initiatives

7

$71.6

$7.6 $7.4

($5.2)

$4.1

$123.6

$37.0

$67.7

$146.0

$79.4

($20.0)

$0.0

$20.0

$40.0

$60.0

$80.0

$100.0

$120.0

$140.0

$160.0

2007

2008

First Half Earnings

Distribution and Generation

Transmission Parent/Other

In M

illio

ns

Competitive

10.9%

*

’07-’08

83.0%

’07-’08

Consolidated

*

*Excludes $29.8 million after-tax charge from settlement of ConEd litigation

18.1%

’07-’08

8

First Half Distribution, Generation Earnings

$27.6

$20.7

$9.4

$13.9

$33.7

$21.6

$6.5

$17.6

$0.0

$5.0

$10.0

$15.0

$20.0

$25.0

$30.0

$35.0

$40.0

CL&P PSNH WMECO Yankee Gas

2007

2008

In M

illio

ns

9

2008 EPS Guidance

Previous 2008 EPS Guidance Current 2008 EPS Guidance Change

Distribution/Generation $1.05 - $1.15 $1.05 - $1.10 ($0.00 - $0.05)

Transmission $0.75 - $0.85 $0.85 - $0.90 $0.05 - $0.10

Competitive Breakeven $0.00 - $0.05 $0.00 - $0.05

Parent, ex. Litigation Charge

($0.15) – ($0.10) ($0.10) $0.00 - $0.05

Consolidated, ex. Litigation Charge

$1.65 - $1.90 $1.80 - $1.95 $0.05 - $0.15

Litigation Charge ($0.19) ($0.19) N/A

Consolidated $1.45 - $1.70 $1.60 - $1.75 $0.05 - $0.15

10

Recent Earnings Growth Has Been Driven Primarily By

Successful Execution Around Major Projects

Northern WoodNorthern Wood

Waterbury LNGWaterbury LNG

COMPLETE

Long Island Replacement

Cable

Long Island Replacement

Cable

Glenbrook CablesGlenbrook Cables

Bethel-NorwalkBethel-Norwalk

COMPLETE

COMPLETE

Middletown-Norwalk Underground

Middletown-Norwalk Underground

Middletown-Norwalk Overhead

Middletown-Norwalk Overhead

COMPLETE

COMPLETE

11

Transmission Earnings Growth Has Resulted From

Increased Investment

$1,774

$1,491

$455

$605

$1,046

$82.5

$59.8

$41.1

$28.2

$113.2

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

$1,400

$1,600

$1,800

$2,000

2004 2005 2006 2007 12 Months Ended6/30/08

$0.0

$20.0

$40.0

$60.0

$80.0

$100.0

$120.0

Period End Rate Base Net Income

Rat

e B

ase

in M

illio

ns N

et Inco

me

in M

illions

12

How NU’s Allowed Transmission ROE is Calculated

10.20% 10.40%

0.74%0.50%

0.50%

1.00%1.00%

0.74%

0.46%

Initial 10/31/06 Order Current Authorized ROEs

Technology adder for underground portion of Middletown-NorwalkNew England projectsIncentive for RTO membershipIncrement beginning 10/31/06 for higher bond yieldsBase ROE

For projects in-service before1/1/09 and Middletown-Norwalk

12.44% 13.10%

(Increase of 20 basis points)

For projects entering service on or after 1/1/09, each specific incentive must be requested from FERC, and the project must meet certain tests.

Must address some of these considerations:• Non-routine

• Ensures reliability, or reduces congestion considerably

• Size

• Significant financing

• Multi-state

• Multi-pool

• Multi-company

• Technologically advanced

13

System Reliability: NEEWS Projects Will Improve Transmission

Capability, Help Access Renewable Power From the North

SPRINGFIELD

HARTFORD

345-kV Substation

Generation Station

345-kV ROW

115-kV ROW

Central ConnecticutReliability Project

InterstateReliability Project

Greater SpringfieldReliability Project

File Siting Applications: Early fall 2008; municipal consultations under way

Estimated Cost: $714M

File Siting Application: Mid-2009

Estimated Cost: $315M

File Siting Application: End of 2008; municipal consultations under way

Estimated Cost: $250M

*Total NEEWS costs projected to be $1.49 billion including $210 million of additional reliability-related expenditures.

14

Estimated Schedules For Major NEEWS Projects

Major NEEWS Projects

Greater Springfield Reliability

(115-kV/345-kV)

Interstate Reliability (345-kV)

Central CT Reliability (345-kV)

FERC incentive filing September 17, 2008 September 17, 2008 September 17, 2008

ISO technical applications approval

September 24, 2008 September 24, 2008 September 24, 2008

State siting applications filed

Early fall 2008 End of 2008 Mid-2009

Siting completed 2010 Mid / Late 2010 2010/Early 2011

Construction targeted to start on staggered basis

2010 2010 2011

In-service Mid-2013 Late 2012/2013 2013

15

Regional Energy Policy Continues To Be Shaped By State

Legislation

2005 Energy Independence Act

Distributed generation Generation RFP

2007 Energy Efficiency Act Integrated resource plan Peaking generation Increased DSM incentives Required decoupling Advanced metering Long-term bilateral contracts RPS standards increased

2008 RGGI regulations adopted

2008 Green Communities Act

Adopted RGGI Removed caps on utility

energy efficiency/demand response

Long-term contracts for renewable resources

Utility-owned solar generation

Smart grid pilot Green power offering

2006 Mercury Reduction Bill

Merrimack Scrubber 2007 Renewable

Portfolio Standards 2008 RGGI

regulations adopted 2008 distributed

generation authorization

16

Reduced Emissions -- Merrimack Clean Air Project

Expected to reduce sulfur emissions by more than 90% Expected to reduce mercury emissions by 85% Investment to be recovered through PSNH generation rates per legislation Merrimack a key source of low-cost power for PSNH

Two coal units supply about 35% of PSNH’s energy requirements PSNH energy costs now about 25% below region’s rates Scrubber will add estimated 0.3 cents/kWh to PSNH bills

Scrubber required by New Hampshire statute for mercury emissions reductions

Revised estimate of $457 million Engineering, Procurement &

Construction contract secured with Washington Group International in fall 2007

Estimated construction start: 2009 Estimated project completion: 2013

17

Investments Required to Serve Customers Will Increase Rate

Base

$1,046 $1,491$2,172

$2,716 $2,988 $3,435 $3,892

$3,429$3,787

$4,297

$4,623$4,897

$5,157$5,422

$0

$1,000

$2,000

$3,000

$4,000

$5,000

$6,000

$7,000

$8,000

$9,000

$10,000

2006Actual

2007Actual

2008 Est. 2009 Est. 2010 Est. 2011 Est. 2012 Est.

Electric Transmission Distribution and Generation

Target Utility Capitalization Structure = 45% equity, 55% debt

$5,278

$7,339

$6,469

$7,885

Rat

e B

ase

in M

illio

ns

Projected Rate Base

2008-2012CAGR of 12%

$4,475

$8,592

Projected Distribution & Generation Rate Base

CAGR of 7%

Projected Transmission

Rate BaseCAGR of 22%

$9,314

Note: 50% CWIP approved for major southwest Connecticut investment until projects enter service. 100% CWIP in rate base assumed for NEEWS projects. Rate base estimates not yet updated for 5/13/08 NEEWS projections or for 8/1/08 Merrimack Clean Air Project update.

18

New England’s Environmental Targets

RPS Requirements

7.5

23.3

0

5

10

15

20

25

Current 2025

% o

f Ene

rgy

Requ

irem

ents

RGGI Requirements -- CO2

50

48

63

01020304050607080

2000-2006 Range 2025 Expected"Business asUsual" Range

2025 Target

Mill

ions

of T

ons

22-24 million MWh of new renewable generation needed to meet 2025 RPS requirements

25-38 million MWh of new non-carbon emitting generation needed to meet 2024 RGGI requirements

54

71

1. Energy Efficiency

2. Renewable Resource Development

3. Low carbon imports (Canada)

Keys to Solution

19

Additional New England and Eastern Canadian Resources

Will Help Meet New England’s Needs

H

N

W

Hydro

Nuclear

Wind

B Biomass

General Movement Of Power

New England’s Most Attractive Renewable Energy Locations

W

N

H

H

H

Newfoundland & LabradorExploring development

of large Hydro facilities

New BrunswickExploring development

of 1 or 2 nuclear units

W

Eastern Canadian Resources

W

W

WW

B

B

B

B

QuebecHydro Quebec plans to develop a portfolio of hydroelectric projects totaling 4,500 MW and integrate 4,000 MW of planned wind power by 2015

S Solar

S

20

North-South Interface

Power Injection PointsPower Injection Points

Tier 2 – Regional Economic Projects

Tier 2 – Regional Economic Projects

Inject 1,200 MW Hydro-Quebec power at Webster (NH)

Inject 1,200 MW Hydro-Quebec power at Webster (NH)

Possible Hydro-Quebec – Webster HVDC

• 1,200 MW Transfer

Possible Hydro-Quebec – Webster HVDC

• 1,200 MW Transfer

Inject 400 MW of Northern New Hampshire renewable resources

Inject 400 MW of Northern New Hampshire renewable resources

Proposed Northern Loop Upgrades

• 115 kV or 230 kV AC• Connection for renewable

resources

Proposed Northern Loop Upgrades

• 115 kV or 230 kV AC• Connection for renewable

resources

Tier 3 – Cross Regional Economic Projects

Tier 3 – Cross Regional Economic Projects

Tier 1 – Reliability UpgradesTier 1 – Reliability Upgrades

NEEWS project provides strong path for delivery into CT

NEEWS project provides strong path for delivery into CT

Enhanced Northern New England Transmission Key to

Meeting Regional Needs

Multiple Projects in

Maine

• Key to allowing northern power to flow to load centers in MA/CT

• Multiple configurations possible (overland AC, submarine DC, others)

• Key to allowing northern power to flow to load centers in MA/CT

• Multiple configurations possible (overland AC, submarine DC, others)