Easy to Be Against Everything, Hard Part is Solving Problems

A group of Attorneys General filed suit earlier this week against a new rule that was finalized this year to allow the transport of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) by rail.

Everyone wants the light to come on when you flip the switch or heat for their home in the wintertime. However, there is a nationwide push to cut off any and all abilities to ensure that the resources necessary to make those things happen can get to their destinations to service consumers.

Pipelines are the safest means to transport energy resources according to the U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMS). They are 4.5 times safer than rail which is safer than transportation by truck on our nation’s roadways.

California Attorney General, who hails from a state currently experiencing blackouts, said in response to the lawsuit, “We’re going to court because our families expect our government to put their safety first, not put them in harm’s way.”

So the impetus of the lawsuit is safety? Highly doubtful. Otherwise, there would be a concerted push to develop more pipelines based on what is the safest.

While we don’t know the California AG, his argument is no different than the anti-pipeliners in Southeast Pennsylvania – against everything. Not sure that the anti-pipeliners want to be without air conditioning during the warmest days of the year like some of the California AG’s constituents are now.

The alternative, adding more tanker trucks to the road, is the most alarming. Anti-pipeliners do not think about the cause of their actions, but then again why should they. Anti-pipeliners enjoy criticizing the safest option available and exacerbating the problem rather than offering solutions.