We absolutely agree with state Rep. Stephen Kulik who said the other day that the region’s electricity users should not be forced to underwrite the Kinder Morgan natural gas pipeline through Franklin County.
Kulik and 90 other state legislators from all corners of the state have signed a letter to the House Energy Committee leadership that argues a Massachusetts energy bill being crafted should “not commit ratepayers to bearing the cost and risk associated with financing new gas infrastructure.”
Kulik represents much of Franklin County, including several towns the Northeast Energy Direct pipeline would cross on its way from the shale oil fields of Pennsylvania to Dracut. Pipeline critics dismiss Kinder Morgan’s assertions that the NED gas is for our benefit, to fuel gas-fired power plants instead of the coal, oil and nuclear powered plants that are closing or have closed. Pipeline foes contend the gas will be shipped to Canada for the benefit of Kinder Morgan’s export profit.
Kulik has said the pipeline is estimated to cost $5 billion to $8 billion, and that Kinder Morgan has suggested imposing a tariff on electricity users to pay for the pipeline, a move the Worthington Democrat said would be unprecedented. So Kulik and a bipartisan group of legislators have sent a pre-emptive message to the House Energy Committee chairman declaring their opposition. If private investors who would normally support such development see too much risk in the venture, why should the state allow Kinder Morgan to burden local consumers for something most neither want nor need?
There are other ways to meet the state’s energy needs. Last year Attorney General Maura Healey’s office released a report that determined the state could meet its future energy needs in other ways, such as hydro-electric from Quebec, solar and off-shore wind power, conservation, liquefied natural gas, and repairs and expansion of existing gas pipelines.
We are glad to see Kulik leaning forward on this issue that has engendered so much opposition in Franklin County. And it’s gratifying to see he has found allies among scores of other legislators elsewhere in the state — whose backyards the pipeline won’t cross but whose constituents could be burdened with an unwanted, unnecessary investment that would foster an over-reliance on fossil fuel for years to come.
We hope the legislative Energy Committee gets the message and looks forward to a time of clean energy paid for by willing consumers.