OPINION

EDITORIAL: Pilgrim Pipeline a loser for entire region

Government forces continue to unite against the Pilgrim Pipeline project — and yet it may still not matter if the voice that counts most is willing to sign off on the project. That power remains with Gov. Chris Christie, and while he hasn’t specifically supported the pipeline, his apathy toward the environment suggests he won’t seriously consider the concerns related to this project.

Still, it can’t hurt to continue fighting the good fight, as Morris County freeholders did last week in unanimously — and forcefully — opposing the pipeline plan. It’s worth remembering that the freeholders are rock-ribbed Republicans to the core — not exactly the type of governing body we’d expect to take the side of environmentalists. But the danger here cuts through their own backyard, and they don’t like it.

The freeholders aren’t the only ones. In fact they’re a bit late to the game, with nearly every community through which the pipeline would likely cut — and even a few that are merely adjacent to the directly affected areas — having already formalized their resistance.

But in the end, the state Department of Environmental Protection will undoubtedly do Christie’s bidding in reviewing the project, depending on what national conservatives tell Christie to think about the proposal.

Few ever really want a pipeline cutting through their own town, which is why government has a right to dictate such projects if they are deemed to be in the public’s best interest and meet the necessary requirements. But Big Oil and its corporate compatriots want us to believe that every pipeline project, regardless of its individual merit, represents an important, incremental step toward energy independence. A bonus is the economic development component and the temporary jobs they create. Opposition, therefore, is portrayed as selfish and foolhardy, placing too big a priority on trumped-up safety threats.

But not all pipeline projects are created equal. The Pilgrim Pipeline, expected to run 178 miles between Linden and Albany, N.Y, would cut through large swaths of environmentally sensitive land and watershed areas affecting the drinking water of millions of New Jersey. Leaks and larger breaches could be an environmental disaster. The chances of a major accident are greater in this instance because the pipeline would be transporting Bakken crude, a particularly flammable form of oil.

But the biggest danger of all may be the Pilgrim company’s own credibility. Its officials have already tried to use eminent domain threats to intimidate homeowners who were not allowing surveyors on their properties. Critics challenged the company’s eminent domain powers, but that misses the larger point; if Pilgrim was already willing to pull that kind of outrageous stunt to get its way, why should the public trust anything officials say about the project and the supposed safety of the pipeline?

Freeholders also raised concerns about Pilgrim. “We do not have confidence that the company proposing to build this pipeline has the experience or proven track record to ensure a safe environment for our residents,’’ Freeholder John Krickus said.

We continue to encourage pushback against the Pilgrim Pipeline at every turn. It’s an unnecessary project that carries a genuine and significant environmental risk. And the company behind it simply hasn’t earned the right to impose that risk.