By Bob Katzen
The House 25-129, rejected an amendment that would require the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, in consultation with the Department of Public Utilities and the Energy Facilities Siting Board, to conduct a competitive solicitation for proposals to increase firm interstate natural gas transmission capacity into the Bay State with a goal of enhancing winter energy reliability and mitigating price volatility affecting ratepayers.
“[My amendment] would have required the executive branch to put out solicitation for bids to build a pipeline from the Appalachian Shale to Massachusetts, introducing an ample supply of cheap natural gas to ratepayers,” said amendment sponsor Rep. Marc Lombardo (R-Billerica). “Had Maura Healey not stopped the Kinder Pipeline, it would’ve saved rate payers $5 billion since 2018. We saw during the arctic blast of late January and early February how ill-prepared our energy portfolio is to reliably and cost-effectively handled the demands of Massachusetts. During that time hydroelectric from Canada was terminated, and wind produced less than one percent of electrical needs. Instead, ISO New England needed to bring online oil-based production, which accounted for 40 percent of the energy supply at that time. Additional gas supply would have been significantly cheaper and cleaner for Massachusetts ratepayers. If we’re ever going to be serious about lowering costs, then we need to increase our gas supply.”
Rep. Cusack acknowledged that more gas capacity will help address winter reliability and address price volatility which is why the Department of Public Utilities (DPU) has a tool and is already doing it. This past January, the DPU approved expansion of Eversource’s Algonquin pipeline, which will lower costs for over 600,000 gas customers. Developers will pay for this expansion, not ratepayers. Gas is a part of the all-of-the-above strategy, and continued conversations are needed and will happen. And also, to build a new gas pipeline, would be about a 10-to-15-year process, and would require interconnection to New York, and they would have to build first. So this solicitation would be very premature, and no one would actually bid on it, since it’s not buildable yet.
(A “Yes” vote is for the amendment. A “No” vote is against it.)
Rep. Christine Barber No Rep. Mike Connolly No Rep. Paul Donato No Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven No