In his March 18 My Turn column supporting the Kinder Morgan pipeline, Tom Kiley (president and CEO of the Northeast Gas Association) writes “All projects proposals must and should undergo close environmental review.” He then asserts “… natural gas projects will continue to be both safe and environmentally compatible.”
I agree with Kiley with respect to the need for a “close environmental review.” But I don’t agree that the pipeline will be “environmentally compatible” here in Franklin Country and beyond.
The recent increase in the production of natural gas from shale deposits has significantly changed energy outlooks in the US. Shale gas can have important climate benefits if it displaces more carbon-intensive oil or coal. That said, local land and water impacts and the potential for upstream methane emissions to counteract this potential of reduced combustion greenhouse gas emissions is under review.
What is called for is a life cycle assessment (LCA). A life cycle assessment of fracked gas would analyze every step involved in the entire lifetime of well site land impacts, material use, toxicity, transportation and water impacts as well as other environmental and economic risks with respect to the public health.
A life cycle assessment is crucial and can lead to some surprises. For example, certain solar panels, usually thought of as the “greenest of the green,” can produce significant environmental waste materials when considering how to dispose of cells after use and the material used and wasted during the production process. Thus, it is essential to include every aspect of the fracking production process.
In the larger environmental picture, the Kinder Morgan pipeline is an enabling technology for the increased use of fossil fuel when what has been called for in the recent Paris climate conference is a decrease in the use of fossil fuels.
JOHN BOS
Shelburne Falls