Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by sesport on November 11, 2010 at 18:44

Electro - This is from almost a year ago. Scroll down about 9 items. I'm thinking that what Con Ed wants, Con Ed gets. lol, 80)

http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/keyDevelopments?symbol=ED

Spectra Energy Corp. Signs Binding Precedent Agreements With Chesapeake Energy Corporation, Consolidated Edison, Inc. And Statoil Natural Gas For Pipeline Project To Deliver New Natural GasMonday, 28 Dec 2009 04:00pm EST
Spectra Energy Corp. announced that it has signed binding precedent agreements with Chesapeake Energy Corporation, Consolidated Edison, Inc. and Statoil Natural Gas for an expansion of its existing Texas Eastern Transmission (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission (Algonquin) pipeline systems to deliver new, critically needed natural gas supplies to the New Jersey and New York area. The proposed pipeline would be capable of transporting up to 800 million cubic feet per day of new natural gas supplies to the region and is targeted to be in service in the fourth quarter 2013. Specific facilities design and related costs will be finalized following the results of the project's open season, which will be announced shortly. However, aspects of the proposed expansion include: - construction of a new, 16-mile pipeline extension that connects Texas Eastern's existing pipeline in Staten Island, N.Y., to a new interconnect with Con Edison in New York City, NY; - replacement of five miles of existing pipeline in New Jersey and New York with larger diameter pipeline, and - additional facilities on Spectra Energy's existing Algonquin pipeline system. - - - - - (repeated)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Robert Duke on November 11, 2010 at 15:48

Has anybody else noted this, targetted a week ago at the Marcellus:
http://www.smartplanet.com/business/blog/intelligent-energy/frackin...
I have no idea how biased all this is, just popped up in one of my tech feeds; seems to apply specifically to Marcellus Shale - in case you can't read the link, I think a bunch of NY geologists say there is significant uranium contamination in the shale up there.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on November 11, 2010 at 18:54

Thanks, Robert. And thanks for the caution about the potential for bias and the reference to your source for the info. I imagine this would be something that would require an objective collection of a body of evidence, if some hasn't already been collected. And as I'm not an expert in this field, I will refrain from speculating.

80)

• ▶ Reply