No, you don’t want a Pipeline through the Pine Barrens / Rebuttal to APP Article

From my friend and Candidate for Congress Fred LaVergne - Democratic-Republican in the 3rd CD of NJ which also covers a major portion of the Pine Barrens as does the 4th CD of NJ that I’ll be representing. I stand by his reply and his concern for the Pine Barrens and what it means to us.

Please share.

My response to Matt Rooney’s Article on the Pipeline – in case he deletes my response.

THERE’S A REASON your OIL TANK is not on your living room rug….

•  Not all the reasons to oppose the pipeline ROUTE are bunk.

MY primary objection is the use of the “Memorandum of Agreement” as a pass-through of exceptions to the Comprehensive Management Plan reserved for Government Agencies to a private entity – THE VERY SAME OBJECTION raised by Ed Lloyd, who, as an Environmental Attorney and Board Member, was forced to recuse himself by Christie’s administration on this issue in January.

Mr. Lloyd and I spent the next 1/2 hour in the adjacent conference room privately discussing how to thwart the use of this method of approval, because it opens the door to further exceptions/exploitation, pulling the teeth from the protections incorporated in the management plan.

This was not, and has never been, about the pipeline. It’s about removing the restrictions.

The grid carries the electricity from sources all along the Eastern Seaboard, so “scaring” people that they will lose their power if that plant was shuttered are disingenuous, if not an outright lie.

The 2003 Blackout in NY was due to an issue in CANADA…the grid is that interconnected – and if Salem or Oyster Creek or Beasley’s Point dropped off-line, tomorrow – the lights would be on in minutes, if they ever went out at all.

Confirmed that with the retired Oyster Creek Engineer-Lead working with us on a cooling option not yet explored…

Christie put Roohr up as a newbie for a “yea” vote on the pipeline and the OCEAN WalMart, in exchange for Roohr’s ability to do the development he has sought for years in Pemberton that does not meet the guidelines…One dirty hand washes the other.

The local residents all know – just like they know the pipeline route is a “short-cut” – the UNION Protesters who showed up in January were unaware that they were protesting for LESS WORK! They know, now. I told them – then I SHOWED them. They’re pissed.

There is a pathway OPEN to the pipeline. It involves 14 more miles, and does NOT cross the  protected ecosystem and gerrymander back and forth in Corbin City across “WHOSE LAND”???

Classic “on-ramp” scheme.

If SJG follows the rules already in place, there would be no objection.

There are many options to enhance the grid. We will be proposing several, ourselves.  (Helps to have engineers on your team, rather than just politicians.)

Those temporary jobs in construction are just that….temporary.


Why, rather than Keystone, is the oil not refined on-site and shipped by road and truck to US Consumers – with tank storage adjacent to the pipeline?

Burlington County just lost 1500 jobs due to the closure of New Century Trucking. I think I know where they can find the trucks AND the drivers.

Meanwhile, how many folks working on the Alaskan Pipeline when it was built were still working on it 5 years after it was completed?

Answer? Nearly none…I knew, and still know, many.

Refine and sell the oil here – out west, that is – and on-site.

There’s a reason your oil tank isn’t on your living room rug. Think about that.

As to the local grid – the plant won’t close without the pipeline…and the pipeline can still be built. IF THEY FOLLOW THE RULES, they don’t NEED the exception – and that’s 14 more miles of Union Labor.

I’ll keep my environmental protections, thank you very much.

Try to be better informed, next time.

Sierra Club doesn’t know all the environmental answers, any more than Ted Nugent is what every NRA member looks like.

BTW – Ms. Belgard is an “environmentalist” like Tom MacArthur is an “outdoorsman”. I am actually BOTH…and local, to boot.