ShareThis Page
Pipeline to prosperity |

Pipeline to prosperity

Letter To The Editor
| Sunday, August 21, 2016 9:00 p.m

With more than 400,000 members nationwide, Consumer Energy Alliance’s mission is to help ensure stable prices for consumers and energy security. As a specific example of the infrastructure we need all across the nation, I support the Mariner East 2 pipeline, which will enhance reliability and improve access to the massive shale gas reserves in Pennsylvania.

This project deserves our support because it does a good job of balancing our energy needs with our nation’s environmental and conservation goals.

By permitting the Mariner East 2 project, Pennsylvania will see an influx of private investment, tax dollars and much-needed job creation. It represents a $3 billion investment in Pennsylvania’s economy, creating more than 30,000 jobs during construction and up to 400 permanently upon operation.

Access to affordable, reliable natural gas means lower energy costs for families, more opportunity for businesses and valuable raw materials for farmers, construction, cars and other products made locally. Because of this, homeowners, retirees, businesses and those living on fixed incomes will enjoy lower utility prices.

This proposed project also establishes protections that safeguard against potential environmental issues while simultaneously providing access to key natural resources. With environmental safety at its highest standard, this pipeline deserves our support.

Mike Butler

The writer is executive director of Consumer Energy Alliance Mid-Atlantic.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.