Stop Excessive Construction of Fossil Fuel Infrastructure

5/23/2016 Breaking News!!!

Kinder Morgan Statement on Northeast Direct Energy project

“Pursuant to Rule 216(a) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 C.F.R. § 385.216(a)(2015), Tennessee provides notice of its withdrawal of the Application in this proceeding.”
Notice of Withdrawal


Kinder Morgan Statement on Northeast Direct Energy project

As a result of inadequate capacity commitments from prospective customers, Kinder Morgan, Inc., (NYSE: KMI) and its subsidiary, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (TGP), have suspended further work and expenditures on the Northeast Energy Direct (NED) project.


Kinder Morgan’s FERC Project Status Update for the Northeast Energy Direct Project

“At this time, Tennessee is in the process of determining how best to proceed consistent with existing contracts. As a result, Tennessee respectfully requests that the Commission not take any further action in processing the Application, pending Tennessee submitting a status report to the Commission no later than May 26, 2016.”


Status Report 2016-04-25

The Northeast Energy Direct Project (“NED”)

Kinder Morgan’s Northeast Energy Direct (NED) is a high-pressure pipeline carrying excessive amounts of natural gas through New Hampshire without a primary benefit to the state. It is a bad deal for NH that would take lands by eminent domain, likely raise energy rates, decrease home values, and threaten water quality across the region.

We demand a more sensible course for NH’s energy future with a plan that is flexible and forward-leaning while preserving our “live free or die” state. More About Us …

Produced by Mason NH resident Diane Varney-Parker

Why do we take this position?

  • Construction of this pipeline would violate our rights as stewards of the land we live on through the taking of that land by eminent domain or other coercion. It would also ravage our communities, expose us to danger of serious accidents , and devalue our property.
  • Common sense dictates that a project as massive, disruptive, and costly as NED should proceed only if it is clearly shown to be the best way to meet the public objective. Yet the pipeline’s advocates rush to tear up our landscape with little consideration of alternatives such as conservation, improved efficiency, and expanded use of renewable energy sources.
  • For too long, decisions related to energy have been unduly influenced by corporations and individuals motivated by financial and political interests rather than by the public good. This project is more of the same. The prospective benefit to the fossil fuel industry is clear, but the alleged public need has not been demonstrated.
  • Developing a sustainable, environmentally responsible energy policy is among the most important challenges the world faces. Such a drastic expansion of natural gas infrastructure would not only be harmful in its own right, but it would also be a barrier to implementing existing technologies for renewable energy and developing new ones.
  • Any benefit that might result from building this pipeline would come at an enormous environmental cost. Other approaches to the challenge of meeting our energy needs—including current, more sensibly scaled proposals for expanding the region’s access to natural gas—would be far more environmentally responsible.

Where do NH’s elected officials stand on NED?

We strongly oppose the proposed NED pipeline and have justified this position in many phone calls and letters to our government officials.  Facts are on our side but convincing elected officials that NED is a bad deal for New Hampshire has been a long road testing the patience of countless dedicated individuals.  The latest results of this campaign can be found in the statements of our elected officials.
» Government Statements Concerning the Proposed NED Pipeline

What is the NED project?

NED is a large pipeline expansion project being proposed by TGP/KM. It includes the large new natural gas transmission line that, earlier, had been referred to as the Northeast Expansion, which would include new looping along the 200 line from a gas hub in Wright NY to Richmond, MA, then a new path from Richmond north and eastward to a hub in Dracut, MA. The larger project also includes new pipeline from TGP’s 300 line in Pennsylvania, up through Susquehanna Co. and into NY state to the hub in Wright, providing a direct path from the fracking fields of PA to the gas hub in eastern MA and the connecting Maritimes and Northeast pipeline in Maine.  More about the NED Pipeline …

How do I become familiar with terms?

For many of us, this fight began many months ago and therefore familiar terms are shortened in discussions of the different aspects of this project.
» Abbreviations and acronyms

What would be the estimated cost to build NED?

Kinder Morgan estimates the entire NED pipeline could cost as much as $6 billion.
» Kinder Morgan’s Management Discusses Q4 2013 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

“Based on recent filings with the (N.H.) Public Utilities Commission, the average customer of Liberty Utilities will incur a cost of about $600 per year — for 20 years — should the Kinder Morgan pipeline be approved”
» Coalition of NH towns says NED pipeline will cost ratepayers

What is a land survey?

Many communities find out about the NED project by an unanticipated knock at the door or a letter in the mail from a land agent contracted by TGP/KM. The reason for this unannounced surprise is to request permission to survey your property.
» Landowner resources

 Where is the proposed route?

The most recent proposed route was released in the TGP/KM filing with the FERC  under docket CP16-21-000 on November 20th, 2015.
» Proposed NED route

Will the NED route use existing rights-of-way?

TGP/KM is claiming the benefits of “co-locatoin” with existing rights-of-way (ROW) in their “preferred ” NH Power Line Alternate route. It’s important to understand that “co-location” means primarily beside the existing ROW rather under or within it.  Pages 29–30 of the NED Resource Report 1 filed with FERC by TGP/KM on December 8th confirm the “Width of Existing ROW To Be Used During Construction” as 15 feet and the “Width of Existing ROW To Be Used During Operation” as zero feet.  The temporary construction easement is typically 125-150 feet therefore the existing ROW corridor would have to be reopened an additional 110-135 feet beyond the 15 feet borrowed from ROW.  After construction the massive scar would be allowed to partially regrow to the typical 50 foot pipeline easement.  Given that zero feet of this NED permanent 50 foot easement would be part of the existing corridor, the majority of the additional parallel easements would be forcefully taken from residents by eminent domain or coercion.  Important to note is that an existing ROW could be an easement on residential property rather than property owned by a utility.  So “co-location” could mean a landowner who previously accepted a narrow power line easement would now be forced into a wider easement and and a massive gas pipeline on their property.
» Resource Report 1 (co-location pages)
» Resource Report 1 (Highlighted)

ROW also introduces additional concerns for property owners and communities once an easement is granted.   The easement offers an existing ROW and therefore becomes a “preferred route” for future pipeline projects.

Is there a need for the NED pipeline?

The need for the NED project is at the heart of the fight between proponents and opponents.  More about NEED …

Why PROPOSE a pipeline?

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 per 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 infrastructure.  Read more …

Why OPPOSE a pipeline?

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.  Read more …

What can I do?

Community awareness about the NED varies greatly among residents. We believe distributing factual information to every community is important but do not have the resources to accomplish this enormous task alone. We encourage all to help accurately inform friends and neighbors about this massive project and we offer printable information to assist in these awareness campaigns.  Take Action!

How can I stay informed?

The NH Pipeline Awareness community working group hosts discussions primarily through email and social media. To become involved or stay informed please join our Google group or follow us on Facebook by clicking on either of the images below.