The need for natural gas: Let’s not wait to miss it when it’s gone.

(Click here for a printable version of this column)

“If it is not seemly, do it not.
If it is not true, speak it not”
-Marcus Aurelius, Emperor of Rome, 161-180 AD

Opponents of natural gas infrastructure projects would do well to heed the words of the estimable Aurelius. Instead, they’re at it again, twisting the truth (some might say mangling it) to correspond to their ideological worldview.

These folks continue to claim flat-out that Oregon and Washington don’t need to increase the supply of natural gas; nor do we need the pipelines capable of bringing it to us. Their assertions simply don’t fly.

Consider the most recent official filings of natural gas utilities in Oregon and Washington, delivered as sworn testimony. These filings project that the number of natural gas customers and the demand those customers place on natural-gas delivery systems is set to grow exponentially in just two short decades. In Oregon, this equates to a cumulative increase of 66.2% and 478,674 new gas customers by 2028. In Washington, estimates indicate that the number of gas customers will grow by 55.2%. That’s 626,962 new customers over the same period.

 
On top of customer growth, we also expect rapid growth in the use of natural gas to generate electricity. In 1990, our region used virtually no natural gas to generate electricity. Currently, it uses roughly a quarter-billion cubic feet of natural gas for that purpose on an average day. By 2020, the region’s utilities project that usage of natural gas for electric generation will top 1 billion cubic feet on an average day, or 400 percent more than was used in 2007.

You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to grasp the fact that our existing natural gas infrastructure was never intended to meet this level of usage. Yet only minor upgrades of delivery capability have been made to the system since the 1950s.

The truth is this: New ground must be broken on new natural-gas-infrastructure projects – and broken soon. LNG terminals on the Columbia River or at Coos Bay will provide new ability to meet natural gas demand, without the need for as many pipeline delivery systems. Without them, all new gas supply would have to come from the Rocky Mountain region of Wyoming, requiring hundreds of miles of new pipeline.

Yet, in the face of these indisputable facts, opponents of terminals and pipelines continue to claim that new infrastructure development has been proposed solely to increase the market for natural gas in the Northwest, rather than to respond to irrefutable projections of increased need. This misconception puts the cart before the horse and serves only to confuse and deter objective discussion of energy policy.

Sadly, the victims of this confusion will be the people of Oregon and Washington. Our citizens have a right to expect that the future energy required to heat our homes and power our places of employment will not be held hostage to extreme views that damage, rather than advance, our energy future.

 
It is not a stretch to submit that should opponents’ opinions ultimately hold sway, things could get awfully cold and awfully dark, awfully fast.

Energy Action Northwest has embarked upon a year-long effort to bring truth and clarity to the energy debate. We have committed to The Great Energy Reality Check of 2009, a comprehensive program designed to engage and inform that we hope will allow citizens and elected officials to see the truth of our energy dilemma. I hope that the people of the Northwest will join us in this cause, adding their voices to the pursuit of sound energy policy for the Northwest.

Edward A. Finklea

Edward Finklea is Executive Director of Energy Action Northwest, a business and labor coalition that advocates rational energy policy.