It doesn’t make sense to spend money to eliminate (demand) and, at the same time, allow gas demand to grow on the island. That would be like pumping water from a swimming pool and leaving the hose on at the same time.”

Ron Gerwatowksi, chair of the R.I. Energy Facility Siting Board

Rhode Island Energy's LNG storage facility
135 Old Mill Lane
Portsmouth, RI 02871
View larger map

PORTSMOUTH — State regulators gave long-awaited authorization Thursday, Aug. 22, to a long-term plan to expand liquefied natural gas storage on the Portsmouth-Middletown line. 

But it’s not the carte blanche approval Rhode Island Energy wanted. Rather than a permanent LNG storage and equipment facility, the R.I. Energy Facility Siting Board granted the company a five-year license to expand its storage capacity and equipment at its existing site on Old Mill Lane. The 3-0 vote also came with a host of conditions, alongside ongoing review of a proposed ban on new gas hookups on Aquidneck Island, and noise to the neighboring residents.

Rhode Island Energy’s predecessor, National Grid, revived the site in 2019 in the wake of an emergency outage that left about 7,000 Aquidneck Island customers without heat for a frigid January week. Since then, state regulators have granted a temporary waiver each winter (ending March 31) to house LNG equipment in case of emergency. 

Seeking a more permanent solution, National Grid also applied in 2021 for a permanent license to expand the LNG storage and vaporization equipment facility. The siting board, which has final authority over proposals to create or significantly change state energy facilities including this one, has spent the last three years reviewing the proposal, through internal meetings and public hearings. 

Project details

The $33.5 million project, more than double the initial cost estimate, would allow the state’s primary gas supplier to house 70,000 gallons of LNG onsite — enough to provide gas to the island for 37 continuous hours, or three days of up to six hours per day when considering capacity constraints, according to the license application. The permanent facility plans also call for relocating equipment away from the road and adding fencing and noise walls to minimize impacts to neighboring residents. 

The gap between peak demand for gas and the existing supply is widely acknowledged, as is the vulnerability of a system reliant on a single, six inch pipe connecting the main gas pipeline to the island. But critics, including the Portsmouth and Middletown town councils and environmental groups, pushed for more environmentally friendly and less disruptive alternatives.

The R.I. Office of the Attorney General also weighed in with concern over the natural gas expansion amid the state’s ongoing decarbonization efforts, mandated by the 2021 Act on Climate Law.

Board Chairman Ron Gerwatowksi acknowledged the apparent contradiction.

“It doesn’t make sense to spend money to eliminate (demand) and, at the same time, allow gas demand to grow on the island,” he said during Thursday’s meeting. “That would be like pumping water from a swimming pool and leaving the hose on at the same time.”

Alternative proposals included having the utility company offer to buy at least 13 homes directly surrounding the site due to noise complaints and forcing the company not to accept new gas customers on the island altogether.

The siting board did not take a definitive stand on these suggestions, instead centering on whether a license should be granted, and for how long. A five-year initial duration, noting the projected two-year buildout, offers time for initial operational data as well as potential progress toward cheaper and more readily available clean heat alternatives, board members agreed.

As part of the approval, Rhode Island Energy will also have to file a plan with the related regulatory body, the Public Utilities Commission, outlining an island-specific energy efficiency plan to decrease reliance on natural gas. The first report must be submitted no later than June 1, 2025.

‘Reliability concern first’

Gerwatowski stressed the need for energy efficiency first and foremost due to the vulnerability of the existing gas pipeline; the emissions benefits are an important, but secondary consideration, he said.

“This is a reliability concern first,” he said.

He also pointed out that structural and lifestyle-related energy efficiency efforts take time, particularly with rental properties which require communications with tenants and a landlord who might live somewhere else.

Additional reports on construction progress and operation of the temporary vaporization equipment during winter months must also be submitted as part of the approval.

As for questions over noise and a moratorium on new gas hookups, regulators are leaving those decisions open for further review and input. Specifically, they plan to seek input from the Middletown, Portsmouth and Newport town councils on how banning Rhode Island Energy from taking on new gas customers on the island might impact development and area residents. Noise complaints are also better addressed once there is new data available showing the sound impacts of the expanded facility, which Rhode Island Energy has said will be less disruptive than the existing site due to relocation of equipment and new sound barriers.

In a June 5 memo to state regulators, Steven Boyajian, an attorney representing Rhode Island Energy, said the company would cooperate in providing regular check-ins or reporting on its operations, including noise studies once the new equipment and $500,000 sound wall are in place. 

Opposes moratorium

However, Boyajian objected to the proposal of a ban on new gas hookups, citing the lack of legal authority for regulators to impose a moratorium as well as the additional costs to Aquidneck Island customers who would be forced to pay for alternative, more expensive heating sources like electric heat pumps.

“A moratorium is effectively a tax on the greenhouse gas emissions of Aquidneck Island residents, in the form of higher heating bills, which would not be imposed elsewhere in the state,” Boyajian wrote. “This is nonsensical given the obvious fact that there is no difference between greenhouse gas emissions on Aquidneck Island and the emissions in the rest of the state insofar as the Act on Climate or any other State policy is concerned.”

Evelyn Garcia, a spokesperson for Rhode Island Energy, said in an e-mail Thursday that the company supported the board’s decision for a five-year license. 

“It is an important component of our continued commitment to provide safe, reliable, and affordable gas service to our customers on Aquidneck Island,” Garcia said. “As highlighted in today’s outcome, further proceedings will consider the potential for some sort of gas moratorium on the island. We strongly encourage the public — both residential and commercial — to fully participate in those forthcoming proceedings.”

The Conservation Law Foundation, which participated in the hearings on the proposal, praised state regulators for making “the best decision in a difficult situation.”

“Families and businesses on Aquidneck Island shouldn’t be left in the cold again,” staff attorney James Crowley said in a statement. “And they shouldn’t be left to rely on dirty, polluting fossil fuels like gas that accelerate climate change and harm our communities. The sooner we upgrade to clean energy sources and eliminate the need for LNG facilities like this, the better equipped we will be to protect our environment and the Rhode Island we know and love for future generations.”

The existing, temporary facility will open for the 2024-25 winter season, while construction on the expanded operation is underway.

Rhode Island Current (https://rhodeislandcurrent.com) is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Rhode Island Current maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Janine L. Weisman for questions: info@rhodeislandcurrent.com. Follow Rhode Island Current on Facebook and X.