New York City Pipeline Proposal Prompts Concern and Debate By Breanna Hughes
In May of 2018, Williams Energy proposed an expansion of their 10,000-mile interstate transmission pipeline system, which transports natural gas throughout the northeast. The expansion, named The Northeast Supply Expansion Project (NESE), would allow Williams to expand their pipeline through Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Staten Island, Brooklyn, and the Rockaways.
Approximately 23.5 miles of this expansion would be underwater, 17.4 miles in New York waters. Gas would be transported through National Grid, the main energy supplier for the region.
Photo from Watershed Institute
According to Williams, this expansion is necessary to meet increased demand for natural gas, which is currently in a shortage. “Natural gas supplies are at risk in downstate New York,” National Grid wrote in an email sent out to their downstate consumers. “Approval of the Northeast Supply Enhancement (NESE) Project is needed to access the additional natural gas supplies required to support our region.”
National Grid encouraged New Yorker’s to lobby their state legislators to help the project be approved by New York’s Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). “Without NESE, National Grid will not be able to supply natural gas to new commercial, industrial and residential customers to heat their homes or run their businesses, putting the region’s economic growth at risk, as well as impeding state and city carbon emission goals.”
Earlier this year, the DEC rejected the pipeline proposal, claiming the project failed to meet New York water safety standards, most notably the amounts of mercury and copper deemed safe per state law.
Williams applied for a permit again this year. Environmental activists have expressed concern about the proposed pipeline.
One major focus is the pipeline’s acceleration of climate change. Methane, the primary gas the pipeline would transport, is a significant greenhouse gas. The acceleration of climate change would negatively impact New York in the form of rising sea levels, severe storms, increased temperatures, and depleted marine life.
Disrupting the harbor is another concern. "This pipeline would be absolutely catastrophic for the harbor,” explained Robert Friedman of the Natural Resources Defense Council. “We are talking about trenching a pipeline under the harbor. 100 percent fatality rate for species down there."
Polling shows that the more New Yorkers learn about NESE, the more they oppose it. The DEC received 45,000 comments about the project. 90 percent of those comments were negative.
In July, Governor Cuomo signed a landmark New York climate bill that would increase clean energy and reduce the usage of fossil fuels. “It’s a very controversial proposal,” Governor Cuomo said about the pipeline expansion. “And that’s a political decision on the pipeline, and it will probably come down to the state Legislature.”
Cuomo and National Grid have subsequently tussled over the company’s refusal to activate gas hookups for new and returning customers, hindering real estate development in New York City. National Grid relented as the governor threatened to revoke the company’s license to operate in the Southern part of the state.
The Williams pipeline proposal is still pending.
Alan Armstrong, CEO of Williams Cos., urges New York to approve the pipeline’s permit. “It really does align well with Governor Cuomo’s efforts to both continue to grow the economy as well as reduce emissions pretty dramatically,” Armstrong explained, “if you are really passionate about climate change, stepping over and ignoring this opportunity makes no sense at all.” Armstrong’s view is premised on the notion that truck transportation and/or heating oil usage will rise if the pipeline fails.
Both sides are eager to see what the DEC will decide next time around.
Breanna Hughes is a Political Science student at Utica College
