The Williams NESE gas pipeline is not better the second time around
The NESE project is still a bad bargain for New York
Key Takeaways:
Downstate New Yorkers would be on the hook for construction costs—likely higher than projected—and developer profits if the Northeast Supply Enhancement (NESE) gas pipeline is built.
The NESE would provide no direct permanent jobs in New York, only about 9% of the construction jobs would be sited in New York, and NESE profits would largely go out of state to a Tulsa-based company.
The assertion that NESE would reduce electricity bills is questionable, and for the downstate New Yorkers paying for the pipeline, its costs would substantially offset any such benefit.
Downstate New York does not face an urgent need for more gas—the 2025 forecast indicates a supply-demand gap would not be imminent before 2041/42, and additional strategies can reduce such gas demand.
The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) submitted public comments on September 5, 2025 challenging the economics of the proposed Northeast Supply Enhancement Project (NESE) gas pipeline.
The NESE pipeline would ship fracked natural gas from Pennsylvania to downstate New York for combustion in homes, businesses, and Long Island power plants. The project was rejected in 2020, but the utility National Grid now hopes to revive the project. Five years later, the reasons for rejecting it are even more compelling, according to the latest report from IEEFA.
National Grid contends downstate New Yorkers (New York City and Long Island) should pay for construction of the pipeline, yet the most recent forecast indicates no gap in energy supply for 15 years or more, and other alternatives exist to reduce gas demand.
“New York can chart a more cost-effective energy future without the NESE project,” Suzanne Mattei, energy policy analyst for IEEFA, stated. “A non-pipeline approach would more reliably create local jobs and keep gas customers’ money within the state, building New York’s economy.”
Despite National Grid’s assertion that NESE would reduce electricity bills, IEEFA has found the claim to be questionable based on energy price data. And for downstate New Yorkers, paying for the pipeline has the potential to negate any savings on electricity prices.
IEEFA notes that even though downstate New Yorkers would pay for the pipeline, most of the jobs from the project would be in New Jersey, and much of the money paid for the project would go out of state.
IEEFA concludes NESE was properly rejected in 2020, and should be rejected in 2025.
