A pipeline company is reviving plans to build two natural gas pipelines into New York State, a major reversal that amounts to a bet that the Trump administration will be able to strong-arm states into signing off on energy projects.
New York had blocked both pipelines, called Constitution and Northeast Supply Enhancement, over environmental concerns. But the Trump administration has made clear that it wants more oil and gas infrastructure, including in the Northeast, where pipelines had become so hard to build that companies had all but given up on them.
The decision by the pipeline business, Williams Companies, to formally restart efforts to build the pipelines comes a week after the Trump administration withdrew its opposition to a wind energy project, Empire Wind, off the coast of Long Island, after weeks of lobbying by Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York.
As part of the discussions over letting Empire Wind move forward, Ms. Hochul said she would work with the Trump administration on new energy projects that comply with state law, though she did not explicitly mention pipelines. But Doug Burgum, the interior secretary, later posted on X that Ms. Hochul had signaled a “willingness to move forward on critical pipeline capacity.”
The Constitution pipeline was designed to transport gas more than 100 miles from northeast Pennsylvania toward Albany. The lesser-known and shorter Northeast Supply Enhancement project would run largely underwater, from New Jersey toward New York City.
Williams, based in Tulsa, Okla., said Thursday that it was in talks with state officials about both projects and had asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to reinstate a permit for the Northeast Supply Enhancement.
The company scrapped both projects after New York officials in effect blocked them by denying water quality permits. In a statement, it described the projects as “essential to address persistent natural gas supply constraints in the Northeast, constraints that have led to higher energy costs for consumers and increased reliance on higher-emission fuels like fuel oil.”
Paul DeMichele, a spokesman for Ms. Hochul, said her administration was “committed to improving reliability and reducing costs for New Yorkers, and all applications are reviewed impartially to determine potential impact and compliance with state law.”
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The battle over gas pipelines from Pennsylvania — which is home to a portion of a prolific natural gas field called the Marcellus — into New York and New England has been raging for years.
As New York and New England have closed their coal-fired power plants over the past two decades, they have come to rely heavily on natural gas, which now supplies nearly half of all electricity in both regions. Yet natural gas and electricity costs in the Northeast are among the highest in the country, partly because there aren’t enough pipelines to deliver fuel to the region. Partly as a result, many parts of the Northeast use fuel oil or import liquefied natural gas by ship, which can be much more expensive.
The gas industry and some experts have argued that piping in more cheap gas from Pennsylvania’s abundant shale fields would reduce the cost of energy in New York and New England.
“When you get into the Northeast, the states’ ability to block pipelines has been pretty chronic, particularly in the New York City market,” Alan Armstrong, chief executive of Williams, said in an interview with Bloomberg in March. “I think what’s going to fix that is people being really upset about their utility bills.”
A recent study by S&P Global found that expanding pipeline capacity could reduce natural gas prices in the Northeast by 20 to 30 percent. The effect would be particularly pronounced during winter months, when gas is used to heat homes and demand is at its peak.
Yet many Democratic officials and environmentalists have strongly opposed new pipelines on the grounds that the additional natural gas would increase greenhouse gas emissions and make it harder to tackle global warming.
Some analysts have argued that the climate impacts of new gas pipelines are complex. In the short term, the extra natural gas might help reduce New England’s emissions, by displacing oil or liquefied natural gas that are responsible for more emissions per unit of energy. Over a longer period, however, a large supply of cheap gas could discourage businesses and residents from switching to renewable energy or electrifying their homes.
In 2016 and 2020, Andrew Cuomo, New York’s governor at the time, blocked Williams’s attempts to build pipelines into the state by denying it water permits under the Clean Water Act, on the grounds that the projects could pollute local waterways and increase greenhouse gas emissions. The first Trump administration sought to restrict states’ ability to veto pipelines through the Clean Water Act. The Biden administration later lifted those restrictions.
Rebecca F. Elliott covers energy for The Times with a focus on how the industry is changing in the push to curb climate-warming emissions.
Benjamin Oreskes is a reporter covering New York State politics and government for The Times.
Brad Plumer is a Times reporter who covers technology and policy efforts to address global warming.
The post N.Y. Natural Gas Pipelines Get a Second Chance Under Trump appeared first on New York Times.
