What others say: Appalachian pipeline must have minimal impact

  • Tuesday, August 8, 2017 3:57pm
  • Opinion

The proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline would carve a 150-foot-wide swath through the Appalachian Mountains, including a several-mile stretch tracking and then crossing the Appalachian Trail — the revered 2,168-mile hiking route that extends from Georgia to Maine.

The threat to the bucolic nature of that trail (even though it already crosses roadways about every four miles) has drawn a national spotlight to the project, one of a half-dozen pending or approved natural gas pipelines running from Appalachian shale fields to outlets along the East Coast and in the Midwest. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which recently issued a final environmental impact statement for the Mountain Valley project, needs to ensure that the pipeline, if it goes forward, will be minimally invasive to such beautiful terrain, and have as little impact on the Appalachian Trail as possible.

But the bigger question is when and whether such pipelines are necessary, and whether FERC, which must approve all interstate gas pipelines, is up to the task of deciding.

ADVERTISEMENT
0 seconds of 0 secondsVolume 0%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
00:00
00:00
00:00
 

Critics argue that the commission is too cozy with the pipeline industry and too quick with the approval stamp (which is especially galling for landowners who then lose property to pipelines through eminent domain). They say it does not adequately weigh public input and fails to take a broad view of the state of the natural gas supply, as well as its impact on the environment.

In a controversial statement filed as he left FERC earlier this year, former commissioner Norman C. Bay (an Obama appointee) argued that while FERC has been approving pipelines to ship gas from the Marcellus and Utica shale fields in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, it “has never conducted a comprehensive study of the environmental consequences of increased production from that region” in determining the environmental impacts of the pipelines themselves. Such a narrow focus fails, for instance, to account for the amount of methane incidentally released into the atmosphere, which has an exponentially higher short-term impact on global warming than carbon dioxide.

What’s more, just because a pipeline’s builders can show they have buyers for the gas does not mean the pipeline is necessary; nor does the short-term demand justify infrastructure investment with half-century shelf life.

FERC officials say they listen to all sides, and note that the commission lacks the authority to regulate how gas is produced or captured — just how it reaches its market.

To be sure, natural gas is a better alternative to higher-polluting coal in generating electricity or heating homes (which it long ago supplanted), but gas is still a fossil fuel and the world should be focused on weaning itself as much and as fast as it can to limit the worst effects of global warming.

There are several reform proposals floating around to make FERC more effective. One, introduced by two Virginia Democrats in the Senate and by a West Virginia Republican in the House, would tackle several issues, including requiring more public hearings in more locations along a planned pipeline route. Another proposal is to change the framework for how FERC measures need, requiring it to consider the aggregate impact of pipelines, rather than just taking each application as it comes.

FERC needs a review of what its mission is and whether that mission is being achieved. It seems foolish to weigh the merits of pipeline proposals individually, and without accounting for the entire environmental impact of moving gas to market. In an era of global warming, it’s also foolish to expand infrastructure that will serve to hasten climate change, rather than combat it.

Given the “drill, sell, burn” mindset in the White House and Congress, meaningful reform will be hard to achieve — the prevailing philosophy favors less government involvement and the undoing of even efficient regulatory regimens. Still, the effort needs to be made for the sake of the environment’s sake, for consumers who could well wind up shouldering the costs of overdeveloped and unnecessary infrastructure, and for investors who would be on the hook if that expensive infrastructure becomes obsolete as the world moves away from burning fossil fuels.

—Los Angeles Times, July 31

More in Opinion

(Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: Life is harder when you outlive your support group

Long-time friends are more important than ever to help us cope, to remind us we are not alone and that others feel the same way.

A silver salmon is weighed at Three Bears in Kenai, Alaska. Evelyn McCoy, customer service PIC at Three Bears, looks on. (Photo by Jeff Helminiak/Peninsula Clarion)
Opinion: Will coho salmon be the next to disappear in the Kenai River?

Did we not learn anything from the disappearance of the kings from the Kenai River?

Jonathan Flora is a lifelong commercial fisherman and dockworker from Homer, Alaska.
Point of View: Not fishing for favors — Alaskans need basic health care access

We ask our elected officials to oppose this bill that puts our health and livelihoods in danger.

Alex Koplin. (courtesy photo)
Opinion: Public schools do much more than just teach the three Rs

Isn’t it worth spending the money to provide a quality education for each student that enters our schools?

Gov. Mike Dunleavy speaks to reporters at the Alaska State Capitol on Thursday, April 17, 2025. (Jasz Garrett / Juneau Empire file photo)
Letter to the Editor: Law enforcement officers helped ensure smooth, secure energy conference

Their visible commitment to public safety allowed attendees to focus fully on collaboration, learning, and the important conversations shaping our path forward.

Laurie Craig / Juneau Empire file photo
The present-day KTOO public broadcasting building, built in 1959 for the U.S. Army’s Alaska Communications System Signal Corps, is located on filled tidelands near Juneau’s subport. Today vehicles on Egan Drive pass by the concrete structure with satellite dishes on the roof that receive signals from NPR, PBS and other sources.
My Turn: Stand for the community radio, not culture war optics

Alaskans are different and we pride ourselves on that. If my vehicle… Continue reading

U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) delivers his annual speech to the Alaska Legislature on Thursday, March 20, 2025. (Jasz Garrett / Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: Sullivan, Trump and the rule of lawlessness

In September 2023, U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan established his own Alaska Federal… Continue reading

UAA Provost Denise Runge photographed outside the Administration and Humanities Building at the University of Alaskas Anchorage. (courtesy photo)
Opinion: UAA’s College of Health — Empowering Alaska’s future, one nurse at a time

At the University of Alaska Anchorage, we understand the health of our… Continue reading

U.S. Rep. Nick Begich III, R-Alaska, address a joint session of the Alaska Legislature on Thursday, Feb. 20, 2025. (Mark Sabbatini / Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: A noncongressman for Alaska?

It’s right to ask whether Nick Begich is a noncongressman for Alaska.… Continue reading

Boats return to the Homer Harbor at the end of the fishing period for the 30th annual Winter King Salmon Tournament on Saturday, March 23, 2024 in Homer, Alaska. (Delcenia Cosman/Homer News)
Opinion: Funding sustainable fisheries

Spring is always a busy season for Alaska’s fishermen and fishing communities.… Continue reading

Gov. Mike Dunleavy holds a press conference on Monday, May 19, 2025, to discuss his decision to veto an education bill. (Jasz Garrett / Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: On fiscal policy, Dunleavy is a governor in name only

His fiscal credibility is so close to zero that lawmakers have no reason to take him seriously.