Out of touch with Vermonters' pocketbooks
The 40 percent increase in the projected cost of the Vermont Gas pipeline project through Addison County has all the charm of a bait-and-switch, especially for customers who will have to foot the bill.
The company's claim that customers will continue to save money over alternatives such as fuel oil and propane means nothing to people already hooked up to natural gas.
Spokesman Jim Sinclair's insistence that the cost increase "doesn't affect the economic fundamentals in any way" shows the company to be out of touch with the pocketbook reality of many Vermonters.
Vermont Gas said on Wednesday the updated total cost for phase I of the pipeline project now stands at $121.6 million, up from the original estimate of about $86 million the company presented in early 2013.
The company blamed increased construction cost driven by the demand for pipeline projects across the Northeast, as well as the price tag of accommodating people living on the pipeline route and "enhanced project oversight."
Sinclair claims the increased cost is "not surprising," yet nobody in his organization had the foresight to cover the possibility of a price jump into estimates presented to regulators and the public. And the news of the price increase comes only a week after Vermont Gas was touting the project winning final approval from regulators.
The economic fundamentals argument is critical for Vermont Gas because a new math on the payoff of the project could affect the Certificate of Public Good already issued by the Public Service Board.
As Geoff Commons, director for public advocacy for the Department of Public Service, put it, regulators could find that "with the new price tag, it was not in the public interest."
The uncertainties introduced by the cost increase also give fuel to opponents who have ramped up their public protests against the pipeline in recent weeks.
In late May, a group opposed to the pipeline extension with one protester chaining herself to the front door of the company's South Burlington headquarters. At least three people were cited for trespassing following the protest.
On Wednesday, five women staged a "knit-in" protest against the project that resulted in one woman — who owns property on the pipeline route in Addison County — being cited with trespassing.
Vermont would benefit from increased access to natural gas — an energy alternative that over time has proven to be less costly and cleaner than many conventional alternatives.
Yet anyone behind a project on such a scale as extending natural gas pipeline from Chittenden County to Rutland should be ready to handle controversy.
Vermont Gas is owned by Gaz Metro, the Quebec-based energy company that also owns Green Mountain Power and major stakes in the state's electricity transmission trunk systems.
A company that is a part of an international conglomerate that dominates the state's energy market would do a better job of handling a public relations setback represented by the pipeline cost increase.
Join the conversation online at BurlingtonFreePress.com or send a letter to the editor to letters@freepressmedia.com. Contact Aki Soga at asoga@freepressmedia.com. Follow him on Twitter at @asoga.