Pipeline foes take their case to the PUC

The opponents of the Mariner East 2 pipeline have not gone away.

They’ve gone to Harrisburg. On Thursday a small band of residents opposed to Sunoco’s multi-billion dollar plan to transport volatile gases through their densely populated neighborhoods took their case directly to the state Public Utility Commission.

Nothing else has stopped Sunoco and parent company Energy Transfer Partners out of Texas from pushing toward the date when they will push the button to begin moving hundreds of thousands of barrels of butane, ethane and propane from the state’s Marcellus Shale regions across the full width of Pennsylvania to a facility in the former refinery at Marcus Hook.

Once there it will be stored and shipped to foreign customers.

The group of citizens from Chester and Delaware counties not only want the PUC to block Sunoco from putting Mariner East 2 online, they want the state agency to halt the same materials that are already flowing through a smaller, existing pipeline.

Sunoco wants to puts its Mariner East 2 pipeline, which has struggled with a series of delays, in operation by the end of the year. But they have been unable to complete the project with newly installed 20-inch pipe. So they are planning to use older, existing 16- and 12inch pipe to fill in the gaps.

Residents, who have not exactly been enamored with having this new pipeline as a neighbor, sometimes in their backyards and within a couple of hundred feet of schools and senior centers, believe the plan only increases what they already see as a risky plan.

Specifically, they claim Sunoco has not provided the public with a credible public awareness program in the event of a leak of these volatile natural gas liquids.

More than that, they also are asking the PUC to permanently halt operation of the pipelines, saying the project runs afoul of state laws regulating safe operation of utilities. They make the argument that the PUC has an obligation to protect citizens by ensuring pipeline safety.

It’s not the first time the argument has been made.

For months residents have complained to anyone who would listen – local governing bodies, county council, state legislators, Gov. Tom Wolf, and the PUC – asking them to intervene and halt the project.

So far their arguments have fallen on deaf ears.

For their part, Sunoco insists the state already has verified the safety of both the Mariner East 1 and 2 pipelines. They point out they have adhered to all PUC mandates, including several that stopped work on the line for months and delayed completion of the pipeline.

A risk analysis paid for by a grassroots group opposed to the pipeline underscored the concerns that have been raised by pipeline foes for months.

Specifically, it warned that in the case of a leak of hazardous, highly volatile liquids for the proposed 20-inch pipeline could extend up to 2,135 feet away from the site of the leak or rupture.

That reinforces one of the loudest complaints of pipeline foes, who question the notion of sending such volatile liquids through densely populated neighborhoods.

Mariner East 2 will run approximately 23 miles across the heart of Chester County before hitting the Delaware County border. Then it will snake another 11 miles across the western end of the county before arriving in Marcus Hook, following roughly the same path of the old refinery pipeline that carried petroleum to the refinery for years.

On Thursday the Battle of Mariner East 2 took a detour to the state capital.

Opponents made their case before the PUC. They argued that this is a terrible idea and that Sunoco’s new “hybrid” plan to get the pipeline up and running only makes things worse.

Back in May, state Sen. Andy Dinniman used a similar petition to the PUC and got construction halted after sinkholes developed in a West Whiteland neighborhood believed connected to drilling for Mariner East 2 that exposed the old Mariner East 1 pipeline. That edict was later partially overturned by the full PUC.

Regardless of what they rule, one thing is fairly certain. State regulators – as with everyone else connected to this project – will not be able to answer the one question that continues to hang over this proposal, the one that keeps residents awake at night: What if?

Every column could begin with that refrain, as the “truth” seems to be either subjugated by spin doctors, or simply ignored. Yet while the truth is never subjective, that hasn’t stopped some from manipulating facts to fit their desired narratives.

Let’s objectively examine some major stories so that we don’t tear up — literally — under false pretenses:

• Tear gassing “children” at the border: Headlines are blaring that the U.S. Border Patrol has been tear gassing women and children trying to enter America illegally – part of the so-called caravan from Central America. Numerous news reports and social media posts claim that the use of tear gas was excessive and unnecessary, insinuating that the migrants were simply standing near the border minding their own business.

Sorry. That’s not just disingenuous, but flat-out wrong.

First, border patrol agents were being attacked with rocks and bottles by an unruly mob. Given that the Central American nations from where the majority of caravan migrants hail are the most dangerous on Earth, it’s not a stretch to think that some of their citizens might also be carrying weapons. Protection of oneself and the border, are, and should be, paramount.

Second, let’s not forget that many in the caravan (which numbers almost 10,000) had already ignored Mexico’s orders to turn back, and, in fact, had just broken through the lines of Mexican security forces. Violence begets violence, and U.S. agents did what was necessary – using a mild type of tear gas to simply disperse agitators. Not only was that action the right protocol, but failure to do so would have amounted to dereliction of duty, placing America at risk.

Further, are we really supposed to believe it was mothers with kids in tow that smashed through armed Mexican police?

No country on Earth has an unrestricted open-border policy, (Mexico’s border, for example, is far tighter than America’s), so demands that America accept everyone at face value, with no vetting, and without going through the legal immigration process, is enough to make you cry.

• Mississippi Senate race: The last U.S. Senate race in the country is a runoff in Mississippi, pitting incumbent Republican Cindy Hyde-Smith (who is white) against Democrat Mike Espy (who is black).

Instead of a healthy debate on the issues that actually matter – health-care costs, job security, educational improvement – the race has devolved into, you guessed it, “race.” Or, more specifically, that Ms. Hyde-Smith is a racist.

Why? Because during an event, she stated that she’d be “in the front row” if one of her supporters “invited (her) to a public hanging.” It was a colloquial phrase that was simply intended to show praise for a supporter. As anyone with half a brain knew, there was absolutely zero racial intent with her statement. Poor choice of words, yes, but no racism whatsoever.

So extremists proceeded to hang nooses around the capitol, and trumpeted signs with messages such as: “We are hanging nooses to remind people that times have not changed.”

That’s great. People are actually equating today’s America – the most tolerant period in our nation’s history – with hanging people more than a century ago. And you wonder why race relations continue to deteriorate?

• Charlie Brown is “Racist”: This one takes the turkey. America’s so-called social-justice warriors (aka do-nothing Millennials living in their parents’ basements who take to social media – between binge-watching Netflix and sipping lattes they can’t afford – to protest whatever “offended” them in the prior 60 seconds) have slammed the iconic Charlie Brown Thanksgiving special as “racist.”

Why? Because Franklin, the black character, is sitting by himself on one side of the Thanksgiving table. If you’re waiting for the rest of the bigotry, sorry to disappoint. That’s it. That’s the entire reason that social media whiners are in an uproar.

Now that their “Peanuts-isracist” claim has been debunked, what’ll be next with the alwaysoffended class? Will they develop an allergy to Peanuts because the cartoon teacher has a “speech impediment?” Or because there is no helicopter parenting? Good grief! Enough is enough.

No matter what the snowflakes say, you’re a good man, Charlie Brown!