It’s not too late for you to send a message to state environmental officials that Massachusetts needs to stop all new and expanded development of fossil gas facilities. The controversial Weymouth compressor project has been delayed again – for the nth time! – and the state’s permitting decisions now won’t be made until November at the earliest. In the meantime, Senators Warren and Markey and Congressman Lynch have come out strongly against the proposed facility, even filing a bill in Congress to prevent its construction.
In Ashland, town officials have taken Eversource to land court to block a plan to double the size of gas pipelines in the area. In Charlton, residents and local officials are pushing back against a proposal now before the state’s Public Utilities Commission that would result in a 2 million gallon LNG tank farm near the Charlton-Southbridge border.
Across the Commonwealth, in towns like Rehoboth, Longmeadow and Athol, the story is the same: local residents and leaders are pushing back against new, hazardous gas projects. They’re getting their communities and their energy providers to embrace the new reality in which:
Climate change impacts are accelerating
Demand for gas is declining
The cost of delivering renewable sources (including battery storage facilities) makes them effective competitors with fossil fuels like gas.
Now, to add even more data to the discussion, the Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) has come out with a compelling new study entitled A Bridge Backward? The Risky Economics of New Natural Gas Infrastructure in the United States. Using national data that includes a breakout on proposed projects and demand forecasts in New England, the study concludes that, “Investors in these projects will likely face a significant risk of stranded investments, with tens of billions of dollars in book value remaining on assets without a clear source of future revenues.” In other words, the data shows that new gas is not needed, is NOT good for the economy and that consumers will pay a steep price for these projects and get nothing in return.
The obvious solution? Invest in the clean renewable sources of the future instead of perpetuating a dirty energy technology that’s already becoming obsolete. Will Gov. Baker’s energy appointees embrace the obvious? Maybe –with your help