Vol. 2, No. 1 Contents
Headline Back Issues Winter 1997
|
Pipeline routes prompt concern about habitat Gulf of Maine - Even as they welcome the new supply of cleaner fuel that gas developers hope to market to the region, communities and environmental agencies throughout the Gulf are seeking assurances that the environmental effects of the proposed pipelines will be kept in check.
In December, Canada's National Energy board shelved consideration of a third proposal, the Trans Maritimes Pipeline Project, at the company's request. NAPP proposes traversing the Gulf of Maine with a pipeline constructed along the ocean floor. M&NE, much farther along in the regulatory approval process, would travel overland, crossing numerous rivers and streams that are home to migratory fish. Natural gas proponents point out that it burns cleaner than coal and oil, which emit pollutants that can return to the Gulf of Maine water shed in rainfall or dry particles, causing a variety of problems in coastal an marine environments. Lacking an adequate infrastructure to distribute natural gas throughout the region, the northeastern US now relies much more on oil than does the rest of nation, and also pays more for the natural gas it does use, according to the New England Gas Association, a regional trade association. But the group notes that natural gas use is increasing rapidly, creating a ready market for the Sable Island reserves. The companies say in addition to providing cleaner fuel, developing their pipelines will also create jobs by making an economical fuel source available for new businesses. Review of projects continues The Canadian portion of M&NE's proposal has been approved by Canada's National Energy Board, and construction of a gas plant is already under way at the Goldboro, Nova Scotia site where the pipeline will make landfall. The US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has approved the first US phase of M&NE's project the portion of the pipeline that travels from Westbrook, Maine to Dracut, Massachusetts according to spokesperson Tamara Young Allen. She said she anticipates FERC staff will recommend to the commission whether or not to approve phase two of the project this summer in a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). Along with environmental issues, FERC also considers the need for the proposed projects, as well as proposed customer rates and other factors, said Young Allen Brian Prenda of M&NE said the company will begin construction of phase one this spring and expects to start construction on phase two next year. North Atlantic Pipeline Partners filed an application for its North Atlantic Natural Gas MarineLine with FERC and NEB in October 1997. FERC staff are starting on a Draft Environmental Impact Statement on that project, said Young Allen. Though it filed its application much later than M&NE, NAPP had unsuccessfully petitioned the US and Canadian federal governments to consider its proposal alongside M&NE's application. The project's first phase would bring gas from the Sable Island reserves to Country Harbour Nova Scotia, from there crossing the Gulf of Maineto Seabrook, New Hampshire, connecting with the existing natural gas network, and distributing fuel throughout northeastern US and Canada The project's second and third phases would extend the system into Newfoundland and offshore eastern Nova Scotia. Economic growth expected One factor of major importanct to communities along a pipeline route is the potential for business development.
Maine also recognizes the benefits of a new source of natural gas, according to Jim Connors, senior policy development specialist in the Maine State Planning office and staff representative to state's interagency Natural Gas Working Group, which monitors development of pipelines in the state. "The state of Maine from the governor on down are welcoming the access to natural gas these pipelines will bring," Connors said. He pointed out that M&N has lateral pipelines that would provide opportunities for local distribution companies to grow, while NAPP's pipeline would bypass all of Maine and its energy markets. But though communities in the Gulf may be eager for cleaner-burning fuel and increased economic opportunity, they're cautious in making environmental tradeoffs to gain these benefits. "We would much rather have a natural gas pipeline than an oil pipeline because of the potential impacts from spills and other associated things are much, much lower . We see this as something that is going to happen and we want to play a role in making sure it gets done in as an environmentally responsible and safe manner as possible," said Mike Herz, board member of the Alna, Maine based Sheepscot Valley Conservation Association. Land route provokes habitat concerns "[M&NE is] proposing construction during spring summer fall seasons and we do have timing concerns on some of the real sensitive streams," where anadromous fish would be migrating and spawning, said Steve Timpano, environmental coordinator for the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries & Wildlife. Several state environmental agencies are involved in the permitting process, though FERC has ultimate jurisdiction. The public can voice their opinion on the project at public hearings or by mail. Timpano said IF&W is also concerned about threatened and endangered species living along streams, such as freshwater mussels and some species of dragon flies; and about waterfowl and wading bird habitat. He said the agency wants M&NE to avoid construction when the birds are nesting and rearing their broods. Gus McLachlan, M&NE's environmental manager, said attempts to avoid streams and rivers can make routing complicated. But, he said, by working with community members to develop alternate routes, "a workable solution" ca usually be found. Accommodating one environmental issue may mean compromising another, however. For example, moving one proposed M&NE crossing of the Sheepscot from a wetland to another site may preserve the wetland, but could affect anadromous fish spawning habitat, according to Mike Herz, Board member of the Alna, Maine based Sheepscot Valley Conservation Association. Another concern regarding anadromous fish habitat is the excavation of stream bottoms and the resulting accumulation of silt that would fill in spawning and rearing habitat downstream, said Gregg Horton, a fisheries biologist with the Maine Atlantic Salmon Authority, adding, "I've never known of a project that has involved such extensive excavation of the stream bottom that [M&NE is] talking about." Many of these issues would come up with any infrastructure project that required stream crossings, Timpano said, adding, "I guess the one item that is new to my experience is the idea of avoiding impacts on larger rivers by directional drilling when they can drill underneath and run the pipe through." Canadian environmental officials faced an additional concern. Slates along the pipeline's proposed path through Nova Scotia and New Brunswick are high in sulfites. When exposed to rain, the runoff can cause streams to acidify, making heavy metals such as lead and mercury more easily absorbed by wildlife, and affecting the well-being of salmon and trout and their food supplies, said Alan McIver of the Environment Canada's Environmental Protection Branch. Sterling noted that, unlike the M&NE proposal, NAPP's proposed pipeline would only traverse a few miles on land. Nevertheless, she said, "The engineers would certainly be working with environmentalists or community groups if that's applicable to ensure that there are no problems with the stream crossings." Marine impacts debated Both proposals would require a pipeline be laid from the reserves off Sable Island, a federal Migratory Bird Sanctuary, to mainland Nova Scotia. According to Jerry Conway of Canada's Department of Fisheries and Oceans, this part of either project would disrupt the marine environment. But, he said of the M&NE proposal, "It's certainly a far more acceptable pipeline as opposed to [NAPP's] that was going to be extending along the Scotian shelf through the north Atlantic right whale conservation area and lucrative fishing areas." But NAPP maintains that offshore pipelines cause fewer environmental impacts than onshore construction. "We're very well aware of the right whale habitat and breeding area and would take care to avoid that habitat to avoid disruption to them," said Sterling. She said NAPP has also begun speaking with fishermen, in the US and Canada, "But we're much more focused on Atlantic provinces now because that's where the pipeline is. We're a year away from pipeline being in this area." For information on the status of the pipeline projects call: Ross Hicks Paul McKee Cite the appropriate project docket number: |
||||||||||
PDF Version
Gulf of Maine Council on the Marine
Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline Project (M&NE) and North Atlantic Pipeline Project (NAPP)are vying for approval to distribute the gas being developed by the Sable Offshore Energy Project to markets in Atlantic Canada and New England. Although more than one company can receive permits to distribute the gas, the first to do so is in the advantageous position of cornering certain markets.
A gas plant now under construction in Goldboro, Nova Scotia, where the pipeline from the Sable Island Reserves will make landfall, will provide approximately 45 new jobs in the small town, according to Gordon MacDonald of the Guysborough County Regional Development Authority. But, he said, "It's the ancillary activities that are going to bring the real jobs. It's what the development is going to lead to down the road in additional industry."