Healey urged to oppose gas plan

Advocates call on governor to fight pipeline expansion

‘States have tremendous power in fighting a project like this.’ NICK KATKEVICH, Rhode Island field organizer for the Sierra Club

A coalition of climate advocates is calling on Governor Maura Healey to oppose the proposed expansion of a gas pipeline, called “Project Maple,” which they say would hurt front-line communities and worsen the climate crisis.

In a letter sent to Healey on Wednesday, the advocates asked Healey to clarify her stance on the proposed project from the Canadian-based pipeline and energy company Enbridge. Healey has previously said she won’t allow any new gas pipelines, but Project Maple isn’t technically new. The company has proposed building next to existing pipelines and making upgrades to increase capacity.

“This project must be stopped,” wrote a coalition of climate and clean energy advocacy groups, including the Sierra Club, 350

Mass, and the

Conservation

Law Foundation. “The extraction, transportation and burning of fossil fuels like fracked gas is leading to catastrophic climate change.”

The effort in Massachusetts was matched in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island — states that the proposed project would also pass through — where letters were delivered this week to governors and state officials.

In response to the letter, Maria Hardiman, spokesperson for the Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, said it’s not clear the project is even viable, given the state’s clear mandate to move away from oil and gas.

“We are concerned that a large gas pipeline expansion will not address reliability issues in a way that is consistent with our net-zero emissions limits,” Hardiman said. “The Healey-Driscoll Administration is focused on achieving net-zero emissions by moving away from fossil fuels and expanding offshore wind, solar, and storage to deliver clean, affordable energy.”

The natural gas industry has been trying for years to expand the footprint of natural gas in the Northeast, but environmental advocates were perplexed when they learned last fall of the latest plan, — the project would pass through states that are working toward ambitious

plans to slash carbon emissions from fossil fuels.

The proposed project would expand the capacity of the existing Algonquin Gas Transmission Pipeline, which starts in northern New Jersey and terminates in Massachusetts at the Weymouth Compressor Station.

From there, it connects with a pipeline north of Boston.

According to Enbridge, the target in-service date is November of 2029.

“We are early in the process and plan to finalize the project scope and schedule for Project Maple based on our customers’ specific needs,” said Max Bergeron, Enbridge spokesman.

Increasing access to natural gas, he said, could help lower costs and help address reliability concerns in the region.

Both the state and the advocates opposing the project disagree, noting that the region’s over-reliance on natural gas for heating and electricity generation has resulted in energy bills that are tied to volatile markets.

If the project was completed according to Enbridge’s proposed timeline, Massachusetts would be expanding the presence of natural gas just as it reached a key deadline for slashing greenhouse gas emissions to half of 1990 levels by 2030, which is required by state law.

The proposal also comes as the state is taking steps to reel in gas, most notably through a recent order by the Department of Public Utilities to strategically move utilities away from natural gas.

Given that, Kyle Murray, Massachusetts program director at the clean energy advocacy group the Acadia Center, said it’s likely that if Project Maple got built, it will “end up being a stranded asset that costs ratepayers a lot more in the long term.”

In their letter to Healey, advocates said that in addition to the climate impacts, increased reliance on natural gas would compound harms to front-line communities. That includes communities near the shale fields where gas is fracked, resulting in pollution to the air, land, and water, as well as those along the route where emissions are released from compressor stations and some fear the risk of a pipeline explosion. While much of the approval process for Project Maple will lie in Washington with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, advocates trying to stop the project are hoping that governors will use the powers they do have — such as permitting for wetlands and air pollution — to stand in the way.

Nick Katkevich, a Rhode Island field organizer for the Sierra Club, said that organized opposition to the expansion of gas pipelines in the region has been successful before, and he believes it will be again. “States have tremendous power in fighting a project like this,” he said.