The Globe’s editorial (Our Russian ‘pipeline’ and its ugly toll) is an outrage. Its central idea- that environmental activists are NIMBY-motivated and wink at destructive projects in other countries- is an insult to the good faith opponents. The article’s conclusion- that Massachusetts should accept the environmental damage of pipelines in towns like Pittsfield or Danvers- is designed to shame those who speak against the corporate creed of more pipelines.
The central dilemma posed by the article-whether should we let others degrade their homes for our fuel or instead that we should degrade our own homes to keep the gas flowing-is a false choice. The third choice, to forego natural gas and build clean energy technology at the scale and pace needed, is our best option.
Fortunately, a Massachusetts Senate bill proposed by Mark Pacheco is up to the task of reshaping our energy future with the clean technologies needed. Call your senator and support that bill!