By adamg on Fri., 1/19/2018 - 12:48 pm
Beth Treffeisen reports on concerns in the Back Bay over a $15-million natural-gas pipeline National Grid wants to build under and through the neighborhood to support the new towers going up like mushrooms.
No word if Back Bay residents have talked to anybody in West Roxbury about how difficult it is to stop a pipeline.
Topics:
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
If money is a factor in the
By anon
Fri, 01/19/2018 - 1:15pm
If money is a factor in the Back Bay getting then NastyGrid can fugheddaboudehd!!
Hyde Park Ave fire
By tblade
Fri, 01/19/2018 - 1:28pm
Remember when Hyde Park Ave was on fire for 36 hours? That was awesome. (And that was just a regular gas main, right?)
How long will a pipeline fire last?
Probably a lot less time
By Stevil
Fri, 01/19/2018 - 1:45pm
That was a main feeding several homes during an extreme cold spell so they couldn't shut the line.
Hopefully if one of these breaks we have some redundancy and lots of other safeguards, though nothing is perfect.
Haven't followed this very closely. What's the alternative.
As long as the fire
By Tollhouse
Fri, 01/19/2018 - 1:47pm
As long as the fire department decides to allow people to stay warm versus putting out the fire.
Until they shut off the pipeline
By Waquiot
Fri, 01/19/2018 - 4:43pm
I hope that enlightens you.
Are you advocating that we
By anon
Fri, 01/19/2018 - 5:11pm
Are you advocating that we give up on natural gas as a residential energy source?
Our society has the knowledge for how to use natural gas safely. There's no reason to ban it because of the Hyde Park fire.
Did you know that MA
By Nathan Phillips
Sat, 01/20/2018 - 1:27am
Did you know that MA ratepayers are committed to paying $9.6B over the next 17 years to replace all our leaking gas pipes in the commonwealth? That's 5X the starting price of the big dig. It would pay for 20- 40% of homes in the commonwealth to switch over to cleaner, more efficient electricity for heating & cooking.
Electricity is more efficient?
By merlinmurph
Sat, 01/20/2018 - 5:13pm
Hardly. Plus, more expensive.
Look at heating using electricity.
You burn gas/oil/coal to generate electricity, then use that electricity to generate heat. That is inherently less efficient because each process is only X% efficient.
Besides, you expect free pipes?
Well
By Waquiot
Sat, 01/20/2018 - 5:53pm
On the one hand, if we all stopped using gas, there would be no need for the pipes. On the other hand, how much would it cost for the major upgrades to the electrical grid to get more electricity from the (gas powered) plants to our houses?
Again, less efficient
By merlinmurph
Sun, 01/21/2018 - 11:11am
You would be going thru two conversions: gas to electricity, then electricity to heat - less efficient.
I'm not sure what the big fear about pipes is. Yes, it's additional infrastructure, but the whole fossil fuel argument isn't very convincing.
Sure, it would be less efficient and costly upfront
By Waquiot
Sun, 01/21/2018 - 1:17pm
But don’t you get it, less natural gas in the Back Bay. I mean, wherever the electricity is generated would face the prospect of bigger and bigger natural gas pipelines, but whatever.
Maybe they can install oil
By anon
Fri, 01/19/2018 - 1:50pm
Maybe they can install oil tanks instead of natural gas and their neighbors can choke on the soot.
Everyone who's willing to
By anon
Fri, 01/19/2018 - 2:02pm
Everyone who's willing to give up their own gas usage in solidarity with the brave souls of the Back Bay, raise your hands.
Everybody willing to give up their strawman
By anon
Fri, 01/19/2018 - 4:56pm
Please raise their hands!
These pipelines are not about OUR gas use at all. These pipelines are about EXPORTING natural gas.
Thank you for your meaningless distraction dear.
Giving up the gas slogan:
By Smart Arse
Fri, 01/19/2018 - 5:13pm
"Hands up, don't poot."
(yeah I know. I'm an asshole).
How is opposing a new
By Nathan Phillips
Sat, 01/20/2018 - 1:30am
How is opposing a new pipeline to increase gas consumption the same as "giving up on has usage"?
I love how the well heeled denizens of the most expensive...
By Brian Riccio
Fri, 01/19/2018 - 2:57pm
land fill in this town are absolutely and passionately committed to stopping National Grid in their efforts to perpetuate this continued use of deadly fossil fuels.
Of course, ask a few of them how they plan on getting to Canyon Ranch or the Ferry this weekend and most of them will say "The Range Rover!".
Loving the idiot that National Grid trotted out to bullshit the alleged best and brightest with this line:
Uh-huh. NOW it is, due in part to fossil fuel producers and the best politicians they can buy stymieing renewable energy development as much as possible.
Ask the National Grid dickhead his opinion on this: Bloomberg New Energy Finance 6/15/17
People seem to have a hard time distinguishing
By Bob Leponge
Fri, 01/19/2018 - 5:04pm
between, on the one hand,
and
The latter is in no way NIMBYism.
They do have their work cut out for them...
By dmcboston
Fri, 01/19/2018 - 8:49pm
[img]https://i.imgur.com/MVh85ui.jpg[/img]
WR vs BB
By JohnAKeith
Fri, 01/19/2018 - 5:25pm
Is there a big difference between what's proposed for the Back Bay vs. what was built in West Roxbury? WR was a huge substation, right?
Back Bay residents might be complaining but I think most realize that there's already gas in the Back Bay and this is just more gas. They complain but it's only because someone asked for their opinions.
Want a fun time this weekend? Go to the City of Boston's ISD page and search building permits in the city in the 1920s and 1930s to read about all the people that gassed themselves to death.
Have a great day!
Add comment