20140957 Ver 2_Pipeline Insurance Reinsurance_20170819

Strickland, Bev
From:J Donald Keen <[e-mail]>
Sent:Saturday, August 19, 2017 6:14 PM
To:SVC_DENR.publiccomments
Subject:Pipeline Insurance ? Reinsurance ?
In view of the tremendous risks to Environmental waters , water supplies, marine life , and the many ill effects
pointed out in the
excellent paper you sent with talking points - what type and amount of liability Insurance is required to even
submit an application
for a project like the Atlantic Coast Pipeline ? Remember that the Gulf spill a few years ago cost BP over $20
Billion and the end is
not yet in sight.
Additionally , the purpose of the Pipeline is to carry Frack Gas which itself has not been properly insured and
is already causing
untold damage to Global Warming because of escaped Methane to upper atmosphere where per pound effects
are maybe 80 times
worse than CO2 . The old idea that NATURAL GAS is a cleaner source of energy than coal is rendered void by
the extra spilled - escaped Methane at fracking sights and beyond in transmission of this dangerous gas to users
.
Our current Administration seems to taking on outlandish risks advising various operators and developers to
go ahead without
bother with EPA standards but they will not be able to protect violators long because the public image scores
this administration
so low ( maybe 30% approval ) and courts have already issued warnings about taking these risky steps and have
stopped some actions.
It is now apparent that Duke Energy and any supplier of energy should take to obvious routes of going
to Solar , Wind , and other
non -fossil renewable energy sources and skip entirely this obsolete step of switching from coal - at this time
frack gas is going backward from an overall basis. They should not spend public credit or public funds for
these backward steps.
1