Messenger: Email from Spire leaves out key context in natural gas pipeline dispute | Tony Messenger

For the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to approve such a pipeline, the monopoly utility company must demonstrate an actual need for it. That need is supposed to be demonstrated, in part, by the interest of other, independent gas shippers. But no such need was demonstrated, and the St. Louis market use of natural gas had been flat for some time, so to demonstrate need, Spire had one of its own affiliates serve as the entity purchasing the natural gas. So, the same company was developing the pipeline and, in turn, selling the natural gas to itself.

Ed Smith, who is very much a Missouri-based environmentalist — he works for the Sierra Club — responded to the Spire email with a series of tweets putting the issue in a more complete context:

“Spire omitted its illegal self-dealing in its email to customers,” he wrote. “The utility should be held accountable for self-dealing, but it doesn’t want that, so it’s telling people they will freeze this winter.”

The court is allowing the pipeline to run through Dec. 13. And there is more action required by FERC that could extend that further, even if the pipeline eventually gets shut down.

What the ruling has done — and this is a good thing — is hit the reset button on how FERC does its job. What the court has told the regulators is, well, next time be a bit more rigorous. The reason that utility regulators exist — whether it’s the Public Service Commission for state issues in Missouri, or FERC for federal issues — is that when utility companies have a monopoly, some entity has to make sure to protect consumers and other interests because there is no natural market to limit decisions that are designed to benefit shareholders at the expense of everybody else.