Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 10/17/2026 6:12:35 AM PDT by george76
New study released ahead of November election shows 'Project Beacon' saving ratepayers hundreds of millions of dollars per winter.
Massachusetts could pivot in the direction of affordable and reliable energy by expanding on existing natural gas capacity, according to a new study that says ratepayers could save $367 million per winter. Since many of those same ratepayers are also voters, that’s a figure that should pique their interest.
The Fiscal Alliance Foundation, a nonprofit headquartered in Boston, highlights the benefits of “Project Beacon” in its study released just ahead of the state’s gubernatorial election. The projected savings for homeowners and businesses are enormous. But Massachusetts ratepayers, in particular those who can vote, must pressure political figures to make a clean break with current policies.
What better time than the upcoming elections to do exactly that? The foundation’s study makes a compelling case that Massachusetts could get out in front of some nasty winters if it moves now to address its lack of energy infrastructure. As it is, Bay Staters already pay the fifth-highest electricity prices in the United States at 25 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh) with natural gas supplying more than 65 percent of their state’s electricity in a typical year.
Massachusetts residents can’t change their geology, but they can tap into their neighbors; Project Beacon could make nearby resources readily available at greater capacity.
Enbridge, a Canadian-owned gas pipeline company, announced its intention to launch Project Beacon back in May. If approved, the project would upgrade the existing Algonquin pipeline system, which carries natural gas from New Jersey into Massachusetts. Always on Energy Research, which performed the analysis for the foundation’s study, examined seven winters from 2019–20 through 2025–26 and found that Project Beacon could have saved Massachusetts ratepayers an average of $367 million per winter during those periods. Moreover, the findings break down how Project Beacon would benefit households and businesses. Individual ratepayers would save about $95 per winter, commercial customers about $792 per winter, and industrial customers nearly $4,600 per winter.
Pipeline Policy Stance a Key Test in Governor’s Race..
So, the question becomes: Will the political class in Massachusetts listen? There are reasons to be hopeful and reasons to be cynical. Gov. Maura Healey, a Democrat running for a second term, appears to have had an epiphany. She suddenly favors an "all-of-the-above" approach to energy that would theoretically include natural gas pipelines. But voters need to remember that during her time as attorney general, Healey was all in with opposing natural gas pipelines. So where is she now?
Project Beacon clearly puts her all-of-the-above pledge to the test, and so far, she remains noncommittal. The same is not true of Mike Minogue, her Republican gubernatorial opponent. The businessman and military veteran expresses support for natural gas pipelines on his campaign website.
Yet, Paul Diego Craney, the executive director of the foundation, insists both candidates fully explain their respective takes on Project Beacon ahead of the election.
“The people of Massachusetts deserve to know where both candidates stand on a project that will have a direct impact on what families and businesses pay to keep the lights and heat on,” Craney said in a press statement. “Governor Healey and Mike Minogue should each tell voters whether they will commit to moving Project Beacon forward. Whoever takes the oath in January will inherit the same pipeline constraints and the same affordability problem. This study gives the next administration a concrete opportunity to do something about both.”
Expensive Double-Whammy..
Embracing Project Beacon would also mean making a clean break with anti-energy policies that have held sway in Massachusetts up until now. Always on Energy Research is part of another study titled "Blue States, High Rates" that delves into how blue state policies overloaded with renewable mandates and expensive regulations drive up energy costs. Massachusetts, for example, is part of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a multistate climate initiative based on “cap and trade” regulations and carbon taxes. The study, done in partnership with the Institute for Energy Research, points out that Massachusetts is the only New England state operating a state-only emissions cap on electric-generator emissions, in addition to being a founding member of RGGI. That’s an expensive double-whammy and a warning to other states.
Pennsylvania would be one that comes to mind..
That’s where Gov. Josh Shapiro, another Democrat up for re-election this November, withdrew his state from RGGI after encountering stiff opposition from industry and labor groups. But as an alternative, Shapiro has proposed his own state-level cap and trade plan known as the Pennsylvania Climate Emissions Reduction Act, or PACER. If the elections were to go south for the Republicans in the Keystone State, Shapiro could possibly push PACER through the state legislature and rejoin RGGI. That’s a worst-case scenario for the cause of affordable and reliable energy.
Conversely, if Massachusetts were to suddenly embrace a natural gas pipeline plan that lowers energy prices it could set an example that reverberates with other RGGI participants. The concept of “blue states, high rates” is a catchy phrase that could catch on.
Hello Bay State voters and ratepayers. Are you all paying attention?!
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
We could be using natural gas in our vehicles and its my understanding that we have more of that, than the rest of the world has oil.
But that would be a sin against Gaia. Surely the Gay State wouldn’t want that.
but PM Carney says Canada is at WAR with the US . Carney has 91% of his investments in the US and making a killing while he destroys Canada ,LOL
I’d say the odds are favorable that they will block the pipeline.
They continue to elect delusional Democrats. They deserve to freeze.
“that’s a figure that should pique their interest”
but won’t because:
1. the lying leftist corporate media will make sure the voters never hear that figure
2. even if they do hear it, Massachusetts voters will always vote democrat, even if the democrats demand that their first born sons be turned over to the government for ritual sacrifice by having their living hearts publicly cut out of their bodies ...
Let the massholes freeze.
NG, not being a liquid fuel, is not really a good choice as a vehicular motivator.
Correct, NG is great for heating and cooking but not suitable for cars. Possible but not practical.
so Carney knows nothing about this pipeline because if he did he would block it ,LOL
Massachusetts sits 300 miles from the largest gas field in the world - the Marcellus Shale
Yet they are so ideologically stupid, they have put themselves in a situation where they must import Algerian, and even Russian LNG from gas terminals in the Caribbean and pay EU prices.
Diesel would be my choice, but not at $7/gal.
[When I bought my 2 TDIs, Diesel [pre ULSD] was cheaper than gasohol.]
Now reality has slapped those damn Yankees hard.
They stuck their noses In the air and said nope years before.
They are part of the climate cultists.
But now they are desperate, so screw the environment.
Typical leftist hypocrites.
The project will take longer than predicted, cost twice as much because the commies are in charge. They want their cut.
Now reality has slapped those damn Yankees hard.
They stuck their noses In the air and said nope years before.
They are part of the climate cultists.
But now they are desperate, so screw the environment.
Typical leftist hypocrites.
The project will take longer than predicted, cost twice as much because the commies are in charge. They want their cut.
https://www.newsminimalist.com/articles/hydro-quebec-and-massachusetts-utilities-clash-over-winter-power-cutoff-577b65b2
I see Massachusetts is looking for a more reliable energy supplier. Guess going Green did not work…..
CNG, compressed natural gas, is used quite a bit for urban bus fleets. But you’re right, in general it is not a good choice for a vehicle fuel.
They won’t do it. That would only cause more of what a Dutch fellow I recently spoke with called “fossil fuel contamination”.
I once spoke to a city mechanic tasked with maintenance of such vehicles. He told me that CNG fuel systems were abysmally unreliable.
I am surprised at that. NatGas is used quite a lot on large fixed diesel-cycle generator setups. There’s nothing complicated there, they must have just gotten a poor fueling system.
In general, those engines last a lot longer/require less maintenence because the NG burns so much cleaner than liquid diesel fuel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.