President Donald Trump’s push to expand natural gas infrastructure in New England is putting climate conscious congressional Democrats from the region in a tough spot.
Driven by stubbornly high electricity prices, reliability concerns and delays in offshore wind development, New England Democrats are increasingly divided over whether additional natural gas infrastructure is needed to lower energy costs — and whether Congress should make it easier to build those projects.
The question is particularly salient and difficult for Senate Environment and Public Works ranking member Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), one of Congress’ premier climate action hawks who is also working on legislation to reform federal permitting rules for energy projects.
“We’ve got significant additions coming in from offshore wind that’ll help provide our energy needs, but the pipeline question requires some consideration,” Whitehouse said during a recent interview.
The debate highlights an increasingly uncomfortable question for Democrats who have made lowering utility bills a political priority: whether more natural gas infrastructure could meaningfully reduce costs for consumers — and whether those savings justify locking in decades of new fossil fuel investment.
Pipeline developers are urging lawmakers to send permitting reform legislation to Trump’s desk this year. And they argue changes to the Clean Water Act are critical to preventing states from blocking interstate pipeline projects.
“Pipelines are something that needs to be seriously considered,” said Maine independent Sen. Angus King, who caucuses with Democrats. “We suffer from high prices in the winter because of a lack of them.”
Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey, Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont and Rhode Island Gov. Dan McKee — all Democrats — have all signaled varying degrees of openness to additional pipeline infrastructure as a way to ease high energy prices.
But New England is also is home to two more the Senate’s most prominent climate action advocates: Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey, neither of whom is wavering in opposition to new fossil fuel infrastructure.
“I just don’t understand why we would lock ourselves into fossil fuel infrastructure for decades, when there’s cheaper clean energy immediately available,” Warren said.
New England dilemma
The debate reflects a long-standing challenge facing New England’s energy system. The region relies heavily on natural gas to generate electricity and heat homes, but its limited interstate pipeline network becomes constrained during cold snaps, when residential heating demand takes priority over power plants.
Electricity generators are then often forced to burn more expensive fuel oil or purchase imported liquefied natural gas — driving up power prices for consumers. Those dynamics have contributed to some of the highest winter electricity prices in the country.
The Trump administration has argued Democratic opposition to pipelines is responsible for New England’s high electricity costs. After Winter Storm Fern exposed the region’s vulnerabilities in January, Energy Secretary Chris Wright was quick to point the finger.
“In New England, just bad policies, bad politics around energy has made it so that they don’t have enough capacity to bring natural gas in when it matters, at peak demand times,” Wright said at a press briefing shortly after the storm.
Canadian pipeline developer Enbridge has proposed a roughly 10 percent expansion of its Algonquin Gas Transmission Pipeline that serves New England, while Williams is seeking to revive the long-stalled Constitution Pipeline, a 125-mile project that would transport Marcellus Shale gas from Pennsylvania to eastern New York. That would help bolster supplies around the broader region, say developers.
New York denied Constitution a Clean Water Act Section 401 certification in 2016 under then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo. Now, the state is embroiled in a battle with Williams and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission over potentially halting the pipeline again. It’s a big reason Republicans want to prevent states from using water quality certifications to block projects.
As Democrats accuse Trump of raising energy prices by attacking renewable energy ventures, the White House has has looked to turn the spotlight on New York Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul.
“If Democrats actually want to get projects done and lower energy prices for their residents, they should get a deal done. Those are the ones blocking the permitting, because they’re not using common sense,” said Jarrod Agen, executive director of the White House National Energy Dominance Council, said during June’s POLITICO Energy Summit.
Clean energy advocates counter that regions with greater renewable energy generation have generally fared better on electricity prices during extreme weather. They argue that offshore wind delays — exacerbated by the administration — have only worsened New England’s supply challenges.
“Trump is trying to create an addiction to natural gas in Massachusetts,” Markey said. “The natural gas industry is terrified of offshore wind, and its 30,000 new megawatts of electrical generation capacity.”
But demand and prices may be overshadowing such arguments. “The pipeline issue has to go through what the local process is,” said Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.). “But we need more energy.”
The permitting fight
How much authority states should retain over interstate pipelines is now at the center of Whitehouse’s high-stakes permitting negotiations with other senior senators.
House Republicans’ PERMIT Act, H.R. 3898, which passed the House in December, would ease Section 401 requirements and limit states’ ability to block interstate pipeline and other projects. Blue states have also used the Clean Water Act against coal and natural gas export terminals.
Sen. Alan Armstrong (R-Okla.) — a former energy executive who has been working to inform the permitting talks — introduced S. 4944 last month that would give FERC power over Section 401 reviews.
Senate Environment and Public Works Chair Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), said Section 401 remains one of her top priorities in permitting reform negotiations.
“[Section 401] is a big part of why permitting takes so long, and why things get so hung up in the courts,” Capito said. “We’re not looking at removing that completely, just reforming it to make it work better.”
The Trump administration has already proposed changes to water-quality certifications that would narrow states’ authority. The EPA rule would limit reviews to a project’s potential discharges into waters of the United States.
Asked about deeper Section 401 changes, Whitehouse declined to discuss details but emphasized that negotiators are trying to craft legislation that applies broadly across energy sources. “We’re trying to make it generic,” Whitehouse said.
Environmental groups are urging Whitehouse to hold the line. Nearly 60 sent a July letter opposing legislation that would restrict the ability of states and tribes to review the water-quality impacts of pipelines, dams and other infrastructure.
“We continue to see that there are discussions ongoing, and it’s not just Republicans,” said Nancy Stoner, a senior attorney at the Environmental Law and Policy Center and a former EPA water official. “We take the position that 401 should not be a part of the discussions and that those who are saying that 401 is being misused are mistaken.”
Whitehouse acknowledged he doesn’t personally see the need for new pipelines, but that region’s dynamics may influence his decision as negotiators work to develop compromise legislation.
“I don’t see the need [for more pipelines], but I represent Rhode Island, and a lot depends on what the whole regional market does in terms of demand and rising prices,” Whitehouse said.
Miranda Willson, Carlos Anchondo and Benjamin Storrow contributed to this report.
