[act-ma] Wed July 30: Protest Planned Fracking in Massachusetts
pfsoto at mynas.com
Sun Jul 27 22:09:15 PDT 2014
------ Original Message --------
No Fracked Gas in Mass
/— *BOSTON RALLY – July 30, 2014 – Info Here*
— Latest News & Thoughts Blog
— Annotated FAQ about the Proposed Pipeline
— /What you can do!/ <http://www.nofrackedgasinmass.org/what-can-we-do/>
*Our Current Mission: *To stop the Kinder Morgan/TGP Northeast Energy
Direct project/(a high-pressure gas pipeline planned by Tennessee Gas
Pipeline Co., a subsidiary of Kinder Morgan, to run from Richmond in
Berkshire County through to Dracut, north of Boston.)/
*Our Broader Mission: *To stop the expansion of fossil fuel
infrastructure in Massachusetts and to promote expanded efficiency and
sustainable, renewable sources of energy and local, permanent jobs in a
clean energy economy.
*Why the pipeline is being proposed:*
Concerned about possible shortages of energy grid supply once the
region’s coal, oil and nuclear plants are off-line in a few years, all
six New England Governors signed a letter, urging regional cooperation
between them to make sure the grid stays sufficiently supplied. They
asked ISO New England and NESCOE to investigate what would be necessary.
Studies by these organizations resulted in a plan to upgrade efficiency
of the grid and to bring an extra 0.6 Billion cubic feet a day (Bcf/day)
of natural gas capacity into New England, along with an unprecedented
tariff on all electric ratepayers to cover the costs of the new
According to KM/TGP’s meetings with selectboards across the state, thier
pipeline proposal is in direct response to this plan, but they pipeline
they’re proposing is 2.2 Bcf/day. They say they will need to secure at
least 0.7 Bcf/day to make the project worth their while but have not
publicly disclosed how much is already slated in contracts they’re
Concerns over how the Governor’s letter and NESCOE’s creation of the
tariff came about were raised in a report from Conservation Law
Foundation, which presented a substantial amount of evidence that closed
door meetings with energy companies led to the request for more pipeline
Read CLF’s report
Why the pipeline is being opposed:
The proposed pipeline path runs through hundreds of private properties
and through some of the state’s most sensitive ecosystems and would be
paid for through new tariffs on our electric bills.
We have been researching the need for this pipeline (or lack thereof),
environmental and economic impacts and presenting across the state since
February and are constantly updating and filling out with new findings.
*LOW DEMAND SCENARIO SHOWS NO NEED*
Studies commissioned by NESCOE and conducted by Black & Veatch show that
if current levels of state energy efficiency programs continue, there is
no need for additional natural gas infrastructure even with economic
growth taken into account. This is called the “Low Demand Scenario”.
The low demand scenario is the only one that was never cost-analyzed as
a possible solution to current peak demand crunches in electric
generation gas supply. ISO New England’s own report states that their
number one challenge is dependence on natural gas. Yet ISO New England
and NESCOE are calling for more pipeline capacity, rather than first
developing more efficiency and clean energy solutions.
*POOR INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT*
Even if there were an actual need, there are currently enough leaks in
the existing infrastructure to provide another 400 MW of power. The two
most dangerous classes of these leaks are now slated to be fixed under
new legislation that has passed, but repairing Class 3 leaks (considered
non-dangerous) is not mandatory. We think it should be.
There are also existing pipelines that are standing at least partially
unused. Using these to capacity to store gas during non-peak times can
keep enough reserve to cover the few days every winter when peak demand
drives up prices. This project is not being driven by a shortage of gas
supply, just a shortage of cheap gas available to electric generation
plants during extremely cold weather when people use more of the gas
supply for heat.
» /*Inefficiencies in the grid are a problem nationwide.*/
*OVERSIZED SOLUTION TO PROPOSED “PROBLEM” – LIKELY EXPORT*
Even if the Low Demand Scenario was not proven, the amount of additional
pipeline capacity requested by NESCOE is 0.6 Billion cubic feet a day
(Bcf/d), but the Northeast Energy Direct pipeline project proposed by
KM/TGP is being planned for 2.2 Bcf/d.
With nearly four times the capacity called for, where is the other three
quarters of that capacity destined? The terminal hub in Dracut is also
connection point to the Martimes & Northeast (M&NE) pipeline which has
just applied to switch direction, bringing gas from Massachusetts,
through Maine to the Maritimes of Canada, where two ports have just
applied to switch from import to export. There is also new potential for
export from facilities in Maine and Everett, MA.
In selectboard meetings across the state, KM representatives have
repeatedly said that they have no control over who their customers are,
so exports are on the table. Their own open season bidding memo called
from LNG developers and customers in the Maritimes as well as local
distribution and electric utilities.
*NATURAL GAS POLLUTES MORE THAN EXISTING GRID SOURCES in MA*
Looking into the CO2 emissions averaged over all sources of electric
generation in MA, the average per source is 910 lb. per MWh. The average
natural gas generation plant is 1,210 lb. per MWh. Natural gas has done
it’s “bridge” work. With renewables phasing in at an unprecedented
rate, adding more natural gas would now take is in the wrong direction
for achieving the state’s greenhouse gas emissions goals – based on CO2
Natural gas is also primarily methane, a greenhouse gas over 86 times
more powerful than CO2. When a full accounting of methane’s impact is
taken into consideration, studies show that it has no benefit over coal
or oil in reducing greenhouse gas effects.
Natural gas is often touted as a “bridge fuel” to a clean energy
economy. We are standing at the far end, having crossed that “bridge”.
It’s time to step forward into that future we’ve been building.
Opposition to the Pipeline
/Letter to NESCOE**/
WHAT YOU CAN DO! <http://www.nofrackedgasinmass.org/what-can-we-do/>
/*WHAT WE ARE DOING
* Making informational presentations across the state, showing what
the pipeline components would be, where the areas of concern are,
what the possible impacts would be and why it’s not necessary and an
unfair economic and ecological burden.
* Organizing the impacted landowners, towns, concerned citizens, and
others to resist the pipeline project
* Creating space for groups and individuals to find and share
information, organize, collaborate, and plan — Networking with
elected officials, regulators and clean energy experts to help form
strategy for transitioning to a clean energy economy, creating
local, permanent, climate-friendly jobs
/*/*/*Check our tally of progress*/
<http://www.nofrackedgasinmass.org/the_score/> – and realize that it’s
only the tip of the iceberg.*/ Please explore our website and contact us
with any questions or suggestions.*/
More information about the Act-MA