CEA’s Brydon Ross sat down with Isaac Orr to discuss a range of issues which unnecessarily cause families and small businesses to pay more for energy – from gasoline to electricity – and what can be done to ease the financial burden.
Read more – The Heartland Institute
In case you missed it, here were the top five stories we found interesting last week.
After more than six months of diminishing returns, Wall Street analysts who follow the energy sector are seeing improvements in an exchange-traded fund that serves as a benchmark index for the financial performance of energy stocks and key commodities such as crude oil. The SPDR Energy Select Sector, which trades under the symbol XLE, experienced a two-day gain of 1.7 percent that represents the first break of a downtrend line since December. This minor victory is encouraging investors who are also noticing a rebound in crude oil prices. As a result, analysts believe that oil producers and utilities may bump up consumer prices in the near future as they try to replenish the cash reserves.
After experiencing a hike in the wake of the Fourth of July holiday, gasoline and diesel prices at American gas stations were mostly steady towards the end of the month. The lowest prices in the nation could be found in South Carolina; however, drivers in certain parts of California paid closer to $3.00 per gallon. Whereas the national gasoline price average stood at $2.24 per gallon, stations in Modesto were charging $2.78, which is $0.04 higher than last year. OPEC officials were scheduled to meet in late July to discuss ways to support crude oil prices at a time when the U.S. dominates natural gas production.
Energy and utility regulators in the Aloha State have approved a proposal by the Hawaiian Electric Companies to transform the islands’ power grid so that it runs on 100 percent renewable energy by 2030, but this will result in a 44 percent increase in electricity rates for households. Renewable energy projects tend to be very expensive in the beginning and do not level off until several years later, which explains why Hawaiians will be subject to high rates for the time being. Under the current proposal, the big island of Oahu will stop burning coal for electrical generation by 2022.
The first megawatt of electricity generated by solar energy was recently delivered across the Wolverine State thanks to a special financing initiative approved in 2009. Michigan Saves is a project enacted by the Public Service Commission for the purpose of providing start-up cash to homeowners and businesses that wish to install solar panels. To this day, the project has funded 132 residential and nine commercial installations, which add up to one megawatt. Homeowners and business managers who would like to get financing from the Michigan Saves program should contact their local Public Service Commission, representatives.
In Australia, a tech startup challenge could launch a new trend of allowing families to not only reduce their residential power consumption but also sell their excess energy for profit. The concept of managing the demand for unused electricity is called “negawatt,” and it essentially consists of providing financial incentives to households and businesses that consume less electricity and heating than average. For example, a small cafe that decides to install skylights and to cook with propane could receive compensation for placing less demand on the power grid during business hours.
WASHINGTON, D.C. – JULY 21, 2017 – Today, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued final approval of the Environmental Impact Statement for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. After the announcement, Consumer Energy Alliance President, David Holt, issued the following statement:
“CEA applauds FERC’s decision to grant this critical permit for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. Strong bipartisan majorities across the Mid-Atlantic support this vital project that would bring much-needed energy supplies to communities across North Carolina and Virginia.
“Pipeline infrastructure is critical to ensuring that families and small businesses have access to the energy resources that power their lives and help them pursue the American dream. Final EIS approval on this pipeline – and many more pipelines waiting on FERC review – represent billions of dollars in investment that will put fathers and mothers to work and provide much-needed tax dollars to build schools, hospitals, roads and provide emergency services – not to mention, lower the cost of home heating and electric bills.
“FERC’s EIS approval does, however, amplify the need for a quorum at the Commission to give final sign off on pipelines projects that have been determined to be safe and in the public’s interest. CEA urges the Senate and White House to swiftly confirm those who have been nominated to fill vacancies on the Commission and to advance nominated candidates qualified for the role. It’s time to stop delaying and put Americans back to work building our energy infrastructure.”
A recent poll in May from CEA revealed that a majority of voters in Virginia, West Virginia and North Carolina support the approval and construction of the 600-mile-long Atlantic Coast Pipeline. In all, 60 percent of the voters surveyed by CEA in West Virginia, where the pipeline would start, support the project, while 54 percent support the project in Virginia and 52 percent of surveyed voters support it in North Carolina.
A small group of activists are trying to shut down the delivery of safe and reliable energy that is needed by families and small business across our community to allow us to heat our homes, fuels our cars, carry food and merchandise, and produce our crops.
By attempting to shut down this pipeline, these groups threaten the economic health of our community and add an incredible $121 million dollars per year in extra energy costs to families and businesses across Michigan.
It’s critical to take-action now and speak up in support of the safe and reliable delivery of the energy we need to power all aspects of our daily lives.
We need pipelines to deliver energy safely, to ensure the health of our communities and our environment while also providing price relief to people and families on tight budgets in communities across our state.
Standing in quiet support won’t work – our families cannot afford policies that harm our middle class!
As a Michigan resident who supports protecting our Great Lakes and a rational energy policy, I want to express my strong support for Line 5.
Families, farmers, and small businesses across our state rely on the oil and propane that Line 5 has safely delivered for more than sixty years. Line 5 is a well-maintained, critical piece of infrastructure. Without it, energy costs will increase for our communities and threaten the growth of a stronger, healthier economy for our state.
Shutting down Line 5 will have costly implications on families like my own and residents across the state. Without this pipeline, energy costs for families and businesses will increase by more than $121 million dollars every year. This simply acts as a tax on every day hardworking citizens, taking money from the pocket books of families and seniors living on fixed incomes. We should not allow energy prices to increase for our communities across the state for no reason. We also should not ignore the potential impacts to the environment that could occur by transporting this same fuel by alternative, riskier means of transportation that Line 5 is already moving safely.
I encourage you to support Line 5 and other critical pipeline infrastructure that helps ensure our environment is protected and that families and businesses have access to affordable energy prices they depend on.
We Need Your Help! A small group of anti-energy activists are trying to stop the flow of clean, affordable natural gas to meet our needs and lower your power bills.
Massachusetts families, seniors, and those of us living on fixed incomes are paying the 3rd highest power bills in the country – over 60 percent more than the national average!
It doesn’t have to be this way and you can do something about it.
Join us and tell Governor Baker that you support more power to lower electricity prices. Pipelines like the Atlantic Bridge Project will boost our supplies of natural gas to help meet our electricity demand, heat our homes, and keep the lights on.
Governor Baker needs to hear from you! No more delays, we need relief now.
Dear Governor Baker,
I’m a Massachusetts resident and I support a stronger energy future that brings in more natural gas supplies from the Atlantic Bridge Pipeline project.
Living in our state is expensive. Costs for healthcare and housing keep rising for working families and people on fixed incomes. We pay incredibly high electric rates that are the third highest in the country — over 60% more than the average American. We need help.
If our sky-high rates aren’t bad enough, we’ve been repeatedly warned by regulators that we simply don’t have enough natural gas to meet our needs for electricity.
The Atlantic Bridge Pipeline project can help boost our natural gas supplies. Noisy activists have tried to stop and delay common-sense solutions that only hurt me in the end with continued higher bills and unnecessary costs.
We need a balanced energy policy in Massachusetts that works for everyone and especially for those that can least afford our out of control rates. Please support the Atlantic Bridge Project without delay. Massachusetts families and seniors need a break.
The American energy renaissance has changed the dynamics of world markets – making American businesses more competitive. American companies are now primed to expand their operations, hiring hundreds of thousands of new employees to build new facilities and make new products. However, we need world-class energy infrastructure to make this all happen.
The domestic energy production landscape has changed markedly in recent years. America surpassed Russia to become the world’s top producer of natural gas in 2009. The Environmental Information Agency recently announced that U.S. exports of crude oil and petroleum products have more than doubled since 2010. Despite such increases in domestic production, the development of transportation energy infrastructure has not kept pace. Oil and gas need to travel from the wellhead to their final destination, whether that is storage or processing plant, or customers at the end of the chain.
A more robust pipeline infrastructure would make transportation of oil, natural gas and their products more efficient by reducing transportation costs and offering a more reliable mode of transportation. A well-developed energy transportation network would also reduce regional price differences.
Read more – U.S. News and World Report
The average Mid-Continent family currently enjoys some of the lowest electricity costs in the nation. While these low costs are attributable to the region’s access to natural resources and booming energy production,[1] they could end in only a few years unless our elected officials work to quickly approve infrastructure and pipeline projects. This planning is especially important, as some of the nation’s poorest communities reside in states across the Mid-Continent region (e.g. Camden, AR; Opelousas, LA; Deming, NM; Commerce, OK; and San Benito, TX, where the average household income is $24,857[2] – 55.43 percent less than the national average).
Even small increases in energy prices could have a devastating effect on families in the Mid-Continent region where like the list above have median household incomes of $10,000 to $25,000 dollars less than the national average[3], and where low-income households pay roughly 22% of their after–tax income on residential utility bills and gasoline, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
Right now, access to abundant, low-cost energy across the region is being challenged by an absence of sufficient energy delivery in the form of new pipelines and upgrades to existing pipelines. These pipelines are necessary to meet demand and bring energy to Mid-Continent families and businesses.[4]
In fact, according to the Mid-Continent Independent System Operator (MISO), the independent grid manager for 15 states:
“The region could have a power generation shortfall starting in 2018 due to significant power plant retirements.”[5]
The number of power plant closures is especially concerning when the increasing demand for energy is taken into consideration, especially in states such as Texas, which set a record for electricity use in August 2016.
Most of the anticipated power plant retirements in the U.S., and in the Mid-Continental region, will come in the form of coal and nuclear – meaning a majority of that expected shortfall will need to be made up with natural gas fired electricity generation. To accommodate that demand, new and upgraded pipelines for natural gas power plants will be essential.
While most Mid-Continent families currently pay, on average, a rate roughly 9% lower than the national average of 12.90 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh), it is also home to states like Texas where the average monthly bill is 17% higher than the national average.[6]
Despite these numbers, there is good news. Expansion of energy delivery from pipeline build-outs has had a positive effect on consumers across the Mid-Continent and the nation. Currently, families and motorists in the region are saving $34.6 billion in gasoline costs compared to 2012 levels based on data compiled by the Energy Information Administration.
With pipelines responsible for moving roughly 70% of the nation’s crude oil and petroleum products,[10] these savings have largely been achieved due to stable energy delivery and many families and households in the Mid-Continent are turning those savings (approximately $1.17/gallon) into more travel and leisure activities. Just this year, over Memorial Day Weekend, AAA estimated that travel was at its highest levels since 2005, with more than 39.3 million Americans driving or flying more than 50 miles from home. To put that into perspective, a Mid-Continent history lover’s road trip from the Alamo, in San Antonio, to Mt. Rushmore, in South Dakota, would cost $110.46 less than it would have in 2012.
So, why are states in this region now in danger of experiencing power generation shortfalls and rising prices?
One solution to the problem of high energy prices and generation shortfalls is to increase our oil and natural gas output. However, to fully realize the benefits of increased production, we must also increase our ability to deliver that energy through expanded pipeline capacity.[11] This solution requires eliminating the regulatory constraints that have, in the past, prohibited our output capacity from growing.[12]
However, getting approval for this infrastructure has been difficult. In fact, there are at least 11 major projects totaling 12,718 MMcf/day in natural gas. These projects, which currently have no timeline for approval from Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), could help consumers, families, and small businesses deal with energy shortfalls.[13]
And although major pipeline projects were eventually approved by the Trump administration, those delays resulted in the loss of valuable time needed to expedite the growth of our energy delivery capabilities. If we are going to effectively lower energy prices for ratepayers, it is vital that we continue to increase our pipeline infrastructure.
Benefits and Implications of Expanded Pipeline Development
Cost & Safety Implications of Energy Delivery in Mid-Continent[17]
Capacity competition for transportation space can often lead to pressures on other impacted industries. The agriculture industry, for example, is relatively inflexible in terms of which transportation methods it can use, so whenever one of these options becomes unavailable, the crops are inevitably lost or transportation costs increase. [18] Grain must move via trucks or via trains for certain routes and areas. If the new energy delivery capacity is built, it would free up additional trucks or trains for grain transport.
The likelihood of pipeline leaks and spills are now significantly lower than they were in the past due to stringent regulation and improved monitoring technology.[19]While many energy delivery options are needed, transportation via pipeline is often the most economical option for many suppliers because of the large volumes they transport. Transporting fuels via pipeline can average $5 per barrel while other modes of transport can range upwards of $20 per barrel and are subject to capacity competition from other commodities and seasonal shutdowns.
Families, Communities, and Finances: The Consequences of Denying Critical Pipeline Infrastructure
A report recently released by Consumer Energy Alliance found that rejecting pipeline infrastructure and baseload power generation would remove almost a third of U.S. electricity generation capacity by 2030, dangerously raising electric rates nationwide, especially on poverty-stricken households. It also found significant impacts on energy security and fuel supplies as well as varying harmful regional implications.
To download the complete white paper, click here.
[1],2 Electric Power Monthly, U.S. Energy Information Administration, https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_5_6_a
[2] Poorest Towns in Every State, 247 WallST. http://247wallst.com/special-report/2017/05/03/poorest-town-in-every-state-2/
[3] United States Census Bureau, https://www.census.gov/topics/income-poverty/income/data.html
[5]Underground Natural Gas Storage, US Energy Information Administration, https://www.eia.gov/pub/oil_gas/natural_gas/analysis_publications/ngpipeline/undrgrnd_storage.html
[6] 2015 Average Monthly Bill – Residential, US Energy Information Administration, https://www.eia.gov/electricity/sales_revenue_price/pdf/table5_a.pdf
[7] http://groundswell.org/frompower_to_empowerment_wp.pdf
[8] http://groundswell.org/frompower_to_empowerment_wp.pdf
[9] FRAC Research Data, SNAP Monthly Data, October 2016 http://frac.org/wp-content/uploads/snapdata2016-oct.pdf
[10] https://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/ib_23.pdf
[11] http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Lack-of-pipeline-capacity-may-dim-U-S-energy-6290198.php
[12] http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Lack-of-pipeline-capacity-may-dim-U-S-energy-6290198.php
[13] Major Pipelines Pending, FERC https://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/indus-act/pipelines/pending-projects.asp
[14] America’s Oil Pipelines, NAM, http://www.nam.org/Issues/Energy-and-Environment/Crude-Oil-Pipeline-One-Pager.pdf
[15]Corpus Christi Caller Times, April 17, 2017. http://www.caller.com/story/money/business/local/2017/04/19/exxon-mobil-corp-worlds-largest-ethylene-cracker-plant-south-texas/98820232/
[16] U.S. Natural Gas Exports and Re-Exports by Point of Exit, U.S. Energy Information Administration, https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_move_poe2_dcu_nus-nmx_a.htm
[17] Consumer Energy Alliance (CEA) recently issued a report entitled, “Families, Communities and Finances: The Consequences of Denying Critical Pipeline Infrastructure,” which found that rejecting pipeline infrastructure and baseload power generation would remove almost one-third of U.S. electricity generation capacity by 2030, dangerously raising electric rates nationwide, especially for poverty-stricken households. It also found significant impacts on energy security and fuel supplies as well as varying harmful regional implications.
[18] Transporting Grain by Pipeline, Elaine Kub, http://www.fb.org/newsroom/new-pipeline-infrastructure-key-to-unloading-freight-rail-backlog-helping-a
[19] Insufficient Freight, American Farm Bureau Federation, http://www.ourenergypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/InsufficientFreight-WhitePaper-D7.pdf
According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), Midwesterners pay more for their electricity than the average American household in other parts of the country. [1] Over the past year in the Midwest, households in Wisconsin chipped in $196.37 more than the national average, while Michiganders paid $265.75 more than the national average for their energy.[2]
The Midwest is also home to six of the nation’s top 18 agricultural producing states based on cash receipts, with Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Indiana in the top 10. [3] Believe it or not, adequate energy delivery infrastructure is vital to keep crops, farmers, and the Midwest economy moving.
American Farm Bureau Federation Chief Economist Bob Young makes the connection between agriculture and energy delivery in a 2015 report[4] w analyzing the effects of rail congestion on the U.S. grain industry:
American farmers depend upon rail freight to move their products to market. The surge in rail transportation of crude oil has affected that ability and timing in recent years…Construction of new pipelines would certainly be a more effective way to move that product to market. It would take crude oil off the rails and, in doing so, improve the overall efficiency of the transportation system. Improved pipeline infrastructure will also help enhance American energy security for everyone.[5]
Families across the Midwest will also benefit from the expansion of energy delivery infrastructure.
Implications of Energy Delivery in Midwest[6]
The Need for Pipeline Infrastructure
The recent approval and construction of new pipelines, such as Dakota Access, will assist in providing access to resources that will help power Midwest homes and businesses more affordably and reliably, helping the region avoid the sky-high prices seen in other parts of the country, like New England. It will also open up critical capacity for the region’s agriculture industry to efficiently and more cost-effectively run their businesses and ship their products to market – benefiting not only the farmers but families and businesses across the region and nation. As the 2015 Farm Bureau report concluded:
Expansion of U.S. pipeline capacity…represents the best alternative to add overall freight system capacity and relieve the congestion that has threatened grain movement during recent marketing years.
The need for expanded pipeline infrastructure can be underscored by the anticipated increase of natural gas and wind to the Midwest’s energy portfolio. With these changes, the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), the entity responsible for electricity delivery in states including Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin, projects the following:
Importantly, given its intermittent nature, the expected rising contribution of wind to the region’s energy mix in the coming years not only highlights the importance of natural gas and related energy-delivery infrastructure, to ensure reliable, affordable electricity for families and businesses in the Midwest.
The importance of increased access to energy resources and the infrastructure that transports them was underscored by the 2017 OMS MISO Survey Results. The survey projects that in 2022, the Indiana/Kentucky and Michigan Lower Peninsula zones are expected to face electricity generation shortfalls of up to 400 MW and 1500 MW, respectively.[20]
Expansion of energy delivery from pipeline build-outs has had a positive effect on consumers across the Midwest region and nation at-large. Currently, families and motorists in the region are saving, on average, more than $26 billion in gasoline costs compared to 2012, based on data compiled by the EIA. With pipelines responsible for moving roughly 70% of the nation’s crude oil and petroleum products,[21] these savings are largely due to stable energy delivery [22] – and many families and households in the Mid-Atlantic are turning those savings into more travel and leisure activities. Just this year, over Memorial Day Weekend, AAA estimated that Memorial Day travel was at its highest levels since 2005, with more than 39.3 million Americans driving or flying more than 50 miles from home.[23] To put that in perspective, a Midwest road trip from Titletown in Green Bay, Wisconsin, to the NFL Hall of Fame in Canton, Ohio, would cost $54.51 less than it would have in 2012.[24]
Families, Communities, and Finances: The Consequences of Denying Critical Pipeline Infrastructure
CEA’s aforementioned report found that rejecting pipeline infrastructure and baseload power generation would remove almost a third of U.S. electricity generation capacity by 2030, dangerously raising electric rates nationwide, especially on poverty-stricken households. It also found significant impacts on energy security and fuel supplies as well as varying harmful regional implications.
To download the complete whitepaper, click here.
[1] Electric Power Monthly, U.S. Energy Information Administration, https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_5_6_a
[2] Electric Power Monthly, U.S. Energy Information Administration, https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_5_6_a
[3] https://data.ers.usda.gov/reports.aspx?ID=17844
[4] http://www.ourenergypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/InsufficientFreight-WhitePaper-D7.pdf
[5] http://www.fb.org/newsroom/new-pipeline-infrastructure-key-to-unloading-freight-rail-backlog-helping-a
[6] Consumer Energy Alliance (CEA) recently issued a report entitled, “Families, Communities and Finances: The Consequences of Denying Critical Pipeline Infrastructure,” which found that rejecting pipeline infrastructure and baseload power generation would remove almost one-third of U.S. electricity generation capacity by 2030, dangerously raising electric rates nationwide, especially for poverty-stricken households. It also found significant impacts on energy security and fuel supplies as well as varying harmful regional implications.
[7] http://groundswell.org/frompower_to_empowerment_wp.pdf
[8] http://groundswell.org/frompower_to_empowerment_wp.pdf
[9] http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2016/demo/p60-256.pdf , Table 3
[10] http://frac.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/snapdata2016-jul.pdf
[11] See http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/17 ; http://frac.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/snapdata2016-jul.pdf
[12] The reliability gap is the gap between current grid reliability and desired reliability. This gap is due to a lack of natural gas capacity to reduce bottlenecks and supply shortages.
[13] EIA October 2016 Electricity Report, https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_5_6_a
[14] Families, Communities, and Finances: The Consequences of Denying Critical Pipeline Infrastructure, Id.
[15] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-05-05/trump-s-delay-stalls-50-billion-of-energy-projects-in-pipeline
[16] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-05-05/trump-s-delay-stalls-50-billion-of-energy-projects-in-pipeline and http://www.nexusgastransmission.com/content/project-overview-map
[17] http://generationhub.com/2016/08/23/miso-energy-mix-51-coal-in-2015-expected-to-declin
[18] http://generationhub.com/2016/08/23/miso-energy-mix-51-coal-in-2015-expected-to-declin
[19] http://generationhub.com/2016/08/23/miso-energy-mix-51-coal-in-2015-expected-to-declin
[20]https://www.misoenergy.org/Library/Repository/Meeting%20Material/Stakeholder/Workshops%20and%20Special%20Meetings/2016/OMS-MISO%20Survey/2016OMS-MISOSurveyResults.pdf
[21] https://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/ib_23.pdf
[22] https://www.eia.gov/opendata/qb.php?category=40715
[23] http://newsroom.aaa.com/tag/memorial-day-travel-forecast/
[24] Based on the most recent gasoline price and consumption data available from the Energy Information Administration.
The Mid-Atlantic region, comprised of Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia and Washington, D.C., spend nearly $233 more on electricity over the course of a year. Families in New York paid $559.21 more than the national average; New Jersey residents paid $340.35, Maryland $181.55, and Pennsylvania $159.03, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).[1]
Energy delivery is vital for Mid-Atlantic families, small businesses, and manufacturers, for fuel, home heating and cooling, and transportation. Increasingly, natural gas suppliers rely on efficient energy delivery systems – such as pipelines – to provide nearly half the region’s electricity. With the high cost of electricity caused by decreases in pipeline availability, it’s important that infrastructure and pipelines in the Mid-Atlantic are expanded to keep pace and deliver affordable energy supplies.
This is especially true for small towns like Johnstown, PA; Crestwood Village, NJ; Cumerberland, MD; Salamanca, NY; and Princeton, WV, where the average household income is $29,150[2] – 47.73 percent less than the national average.
So, why is electricity in the Mid-Atlantic more expensive than the rest of the United States?
The answer is simple: tight supply and increasing demand. With prices worsening because of failed public policies. These policy choices led to the rejection of infrastructure and pipeline projects that would have produced and delivered natural gas in and around the region, which is now inflating the price of electricity, especially in New York.[3]
To understand why it is important to note that the Mid-Atlantic region is served by two regional transmission organizations: The Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland Interconnection (PJM) and the New York Independent System Operator (NYIS). While PJM and NYIS are adjacent to one another and have similar fuel mixes (see graphs in white paper link), NYIS is hamstrung by a self-inflicted lack of access to affordable oil and natural gas.
In addition to banning hydraulic fracturing throughout New York in December 2014,[4] Governor Cuomo also rejected both the Constitution and Northern Access pipelines, in 2016 and 2017, respectively. Additionally, Governor Cuomo’s administration has fought against the Algonquin pipeline expansion and has been slow to approve a pipeline needed for electric generation in Wawayanda.
The New York Post recently editorialized:
Cuomo needs natural gas for his plan to steer the state toward renewable energy. “I don’t think you can get from here to there without using natural gas,” Cuomo said last week. Yet pipelines are the safest way to ship natural gas, and Cuomo’s crew isn’t approving them, so how are New Yorkers supposed to get gas to run generators and keep the lights on?[5]
So, what is the solution? Building more pipelines.
The New York Times penned a similar piece recently, writing that New Yorkers will become more reliant on natural gas to meet their electricity needs.[6] The upcoming closure of the Indian Point nuclear power plant will undoubtedly further augment the demand for natural gas.[7]
If bans on energy production were lifted and more pipelines were built to expand energy delivery in the region, electricity would become less expensive.
That would mean low-income families who, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) are spending close to 22 percent of their after–tax income on residential utility bills and gasoline could have more room in their budget for things like food, clothing, and housing. And while median incomes in the Mid-Atlantic are higher than the national average, they also pay a disproportionately higher amount for energy than other states across the nation.
Implications of Energy Delivery in the Mid-Atlantic[8]
Despite these consequences, there is good news. Expansion of energy delivery from pipeline build-outs has had a positive effect on consumers across the Mid-Atlantic and the nation as a whole. Currently, families and motorists in the region are saving, collectively, more than $25.9 billion in gasoline costs compared to 2012 levels, based on EIA data. With pipelines responsible for moving roughly 70% of the nation’s crude oil and petroleum products,[16] these savings have been achieved, in large part, because of stable energy delivery.[17] Many families and households in the Mid-Atlantic are turning those savings into more travel and leisure activities. Just this year, over Memorial Day Weekend, AAA estimated that travel was at its highest levels since 2005, with 39.3 million Americans driving or flying more than 50 miles from home. [18] To put that in perspective, a road trip from Charleston, West Virginia, to New York City would cost $48.82 less than it would have in 2012.[19]
A recent report from the American Chemistry Council (ACC), shows that the Mid-Atlantic/Appalachian region could become another center for petrochemical and plastic resin manufacturing, similar to the Gulf Coast. This development could bring 100,000 permanent jobs to the Mid-Atlantic and its neighboring states, and add $2.9 billion in new federal, state, and local tax revenues annually. It is essential, however, that more pipelines are built for this economic potential to be realized.[20]
Public Policy Has Negatively Impacted Mid-Atlantic Energy Delivery
As of June 2017, policy-makers and regulators in the region have prevented several important opportunities to bring on necessary supplies and capacity improvements by denying pipeline infrastructure development and expansions. Despite the inability to address shortfalls during extreme weather events, like the Polar Vortex of 2014, policymakers have been unable or unwilling to remove barriers to allow for pipeline expansion.
Families, Communities, and Finances: The Consequences of Denying Critical Pipeline Infrastructure
CEA’s aforementioned report found that rejecting pipeline infrastructure and baseload power generation would remove almost a third of U.S. electricity generation capacity by 2030, dangerously raising electric rates nationwide, especially on poverty-stricken households. It also found significant impacts on energy security and fuel supplies as well as varying harmful regional implications.
To download the complete white paper, click here.
[2] Poorest Towns in Every State, 247 WallST. http://247wallst.com/special-report/2017/05/03/poorest-town-in-every-state-2/
[3] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-02-06/northeasts-record-natural-gas-prices-due-to-pipeline-dearth
[4] Citing Health Risks, Cuomo Bans Fracking in New York State, New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/18/nyregion/cuomo-to-ban-fracking-in-new-york-state-citing-health-risks.html
[5] Why does Cuomo keep rejecting pipelines New Yorkers could benefit from?, New York Post, http://nypost.com/2017/04/16/why-does-cuomo-keep-rejecting-pipelines-new-yorkers-could-benefit-from/
[6] How New York City Gets Its Electricity, The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/02/10/nyregion/how-new-york-city-gets-its-electricity-power-grid.html?_r=0
[7] Nuclear power supplies about one-third of the power in New York.
[8] Consumer Energy Alliance (CEA) recently issued a report entitled, “Families, Communities and Finances: The Consequences of Denying Critical Pipeline Infrastructure,” which found that rejecting pipeline infrastructure and baseload power generation would remove almost one-third of U.S. electricity generation capacity by 2030, dangerously raising electric rates nationwide, especially for poverty-stricken households. It also found significant impacts on energy security and fuel supplies as well as varying harmful regional implications.
[9] http://groundswell.org/frompower_to_empowerment_wp.pdf
[10] http://groundswell.org/frompower_to_empowerment_wp.pdf
[11] Over the course of a year, while the average American family spends $116 monthly ($1392 annual) on electricity while the average Mid-Atlantic family spends $131.73 month ($1581 annually).
[12] FRAC Research Data, SNAP Monthly Data August 2016,
http://frac.org/research/resource-library/snap-monthly-data-2016
[13] FRAC Research Data, SNAP Monthly Data December 2016,
http://www.frac.org/wp-content/uploads/snap_tables_12.2016.pdf
[14] Annual Energy Outlook 2016, U.S. Energy Information Administration, https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/workinggroup/transportation/pdf/aeo2016%20transportation%20working%20group%202%20presentation.pdf
[15] Constitution Pipeline, Constitution Pipeline Committed to Building Federally Approved Pipeline, Delivering Energy Savings and Environmental Benefits to Northeast U.S.
[16] https://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/ib_23.pdf
[17] https://www.eia.gov/opendata/qb.php?category=40715
[18] http://newsroom.aaa.com/tag/memorial-day-travel-forecast/
[19] Based on the most recent gasoline price and consumption data available from the Energy Information Administration.
[20] New Report Shows Potential for Major Appalachian Petrochemical Industry, American Chemistry Council, https://www.americanchemistry.com/Media/PressReleasesTranscripts/ACC-news-releases/New-Report-Shows-Potential-for-Major-Appalachian-Petrochemical-Industry.html
CEA’s Brydon Ross was quoted discussing the need for critical energy infrastructure in New England.
According to Brydon Ross, CEA’s vice president for state affairs in comments to Rigzone, “In reality, it’s a small but very influential set of opposition voices that are setting and determining the economic future and trajectory for an entire state and region.” He went on to say, “At the end of the day, the polls are confirming what we all intuitively know – we need this critical infrastructure and the public not only wants it maintained but expanded.” He believes this opposition can be overcome with increased education.
Read more – Oilpro
