Proponents claim there is a need for more natural gas supply and that electricity price fluctuations in New England are the result of a lack of natural gas pipeline capacity.
Opponents argue that the need for natural gas is only during peak demand which exist for only a few hours of each of 10-27 of the coldest winter days. Therefore, planning and storage of the natural gas which flows 24/7/365 would be a better alternative than expanding infrastructure for peak demand.
» LNG Supplies for Peak Demand
Without expanding on which one of these sides is right or wrong, perhaps it’s easiest just to ask the question, “How much of the gas would benefit New Hampshire?”
Currently Energy North/Liberty Utilities is the only NH shipper to sign an agreement with Kinder Morgan. That agreement is for 115 dekatherms or 0.115Bcf/day of the proposed 2.2Bcf/day NED pipeline. That means this pipeline would put the lives, property, conservation land and air and drinking water sources of NH residents at risk for a mere 5% benefit for NH residents.
» Liberty Utilities (EnergyNorth Natural Gas) Corp. signed agreement to transport up to 115,000 dekatherms per day (Dth/d)
Proponents say the NED pipeline is in response to an “energy crisis” in New England and continues that New England pays some of the highest electricity rates in the country. Therefore, the NED pipeline is often promoted as a solution to bring more gas to reduce electricity rates. However as mentioned above, the only NH subscriber to the NED pipeline is Liberty Utilities. Liberty Utilities supplies heating fuel to homes and business. Despite 2 years of trying, not a single contract has been signed under NED for the generation of electricity. One would assume that if there really was an “energy crisis” in New England, it would not be so difficult to find subscribers.
One reason for a lack of subscribers is that NED is not the only solution to increased supply for New England. The graphic to the right offers insight into the number of pipeline proposals in the region and suggests we question, “Does New England need every pipeline proposed and what will happen to our rates when we ultimately must pay for the construction of all of these projects?“
We could further offer explanation of why current pipeline capacity is more than adequate for New England but instead we go straight to the hub in Dracut, Massachusetts and offer their information on the subject.
» Questioning the Need for the Proposed Kinder Morgan Gas Pipeline
We don’t need Kinder Morgan’s pipeline – LNG or fixing leaks can address our 1 percent problem
“The case for need is generally predicated on the winter peaking problem. Winter is a time when the weather can be dangerous. People are vulnerable. It’s a scenario screaming for exploitation by an opportunistic businessman looking to export natural gas to global markets.” Read more …
Kinder Morgan critics say pipeline downsize proof pipe not needed at all
“Several opposition groups contend that Kinder Morgan’s just-announced downscale of its proposed Tennessee Gas Co. pipeline through upstate New York and central New England supports their view that the Northeast Energy Direct project is not needed to meet regional supply requirements.” Read more …
As Cold Sets In, the New England Winter Energy “Crisis” Fizzles
“We’re reaching the end of our first major cold snap here in New England, so let’s take stock of how New England’s electric system and market are faring. In short, we are doing much better than expected, to the great surprise of the many “experts” who have said we are in a “crisis.” Read more …
The six New England Governors did not request the NED pipeline
The six New England Governors, through NESCOE, have requested construction of new or expansion of existing pipelines to provide additional natural gas capacity. The increased capacity the states requested was 0.6Bcf/day. The proposed NED pipeline would transport nearly 4 times that amount or 2.2Bcf/day.
» New England Gas-Electric Focus Group Final Report