A natural gas pipeline that is set to run through North Carolina threatens to exacerbate the climate crisis and harm vulnerable communities.
Last Thursday evening, local community members and environmental advocacy organizations gathered at Parkway United Church of Christ to discuss concerns about the looming threat of the Transco Southeast Supply Enhancement Project (SSEP).
The meeting aimed to inform the public about the dangers of the proposed pipeline expansion and mobilize action against the project.
What is SSEP and who is behind the project?
Williams Companies, an energy corporation based in Tulsa, Oklahoma, operates the Transcontinental (Transco) pipeline, which stretches across 10,000 miles, transporting methane gas from Texas through the Southeast to New York City. The proposed SSEP is part of a massive expansion of the Transco system that would carry an additional 1.6 billion cubic feet of methane gas daily.
The SSEP project, if approved, would extend across Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Alabama, including approximately 28 miles of 42-inch-wide pipelines in North Carolina. The pipeline would run alongside existing pipelines in counties such as Rockingham, Guilford, Forsyth, and Davidson.
Williams is projected to begin SSEP construction in Spring 2026 and make the pipeline operational by late 2027. However, the proposed expansion has raised significant concerns about safety risks posed by methane, a colorless and odorless gas that can cause deadly explosions without warning.
The dangers of natural gas pipelines
Corrosion, the leading cause of pipeline failures, occurs when liquid exposure weakens pipes, leading to leaks. Improper installation can also result in explosions as pipes loosen over time. Regular inspections and maintenance are crucial for safety.
Beyond explosions, methane leaks occur throughout production, transport and distribution. Such leaks contribute to climate change, water contamination and ecosystem disruption. Continued reliance on fossil fuels has long-term consequences for public health and the environment.
Transco’s troubling safety record
Transco’s safety record is alarming — over the past decade, its pipelines and compressor stations have exploded or caught fire ten times, causing six deaths and 103 injuries, along with property damage and methane emissions. Many incidents were attributed to preventable operational failures.
Environmental and economic concerns
Several environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, Power Up NC, 7 Directions of Service, and the Piedmont Environmental Alliance (PEA), spoke out against the project at the meeting. PEA’s Events and Partnership Manager Jessica Rowe emphasized the urgency of stopping the SSEP.
“Williams is in the early stages of the project. There is still time to slow it down or even stop it altogether,” Rowe said. “The change we want to see won’t come from the national level. It’s at the local level — county and state representatives must be made aware of the potential consequences of this project.”
Rowe highlighted the lack of local benefits that would come from the SSEP, particularly for residents along the Transco corridor.
“Transco claims the project will bring substantial economic benefits, but our analysis shows otherwise. Most of the jobs created will be short-term, often given to out-of-state contractors, and typically offer poor working conditions,” she said. “Instead, we should be focused on creating long-term, sustainable jobs for local communities.”
The economic benefits touted by Transco, including tax revenue, have been called into question. Studies indicate that the anticipated tax benefits from pipeline projects are often less substantial than projected, and large corporations, including those in the pipeline industry, may use loopholes to minimize payments.
An analysis of the Keystone Pipeline found that property taxes during construction amounted to just $4 million across seven counties. A report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities highlights how energy companies reduce tax obligations through profit shifting and other strategies that can significantly diminish the expected tax revenue for local communities.
In its filings, Transco has acknowledged that those most directly affected by the SSEP would not experience its benefits. The company’s own documents state, “the benefits of the project are not realized by those who are impacted.”
The push for renewable energy alternatives
Locals and environmental advocates argue that financial investments should shift to renewable energy sources like solar and wind, which are cleaner, more sustainable, and less volatile than fossil fuels.
“These energy projects are unnecessary,” Rowe said. “We can — and should — shift to renewable energy to build the energy future we need.”
This need for renewable investment is further underscored by the role of Duke Energy, a key proponent of the SSEP.
A Sierra Club “Add Up” campaign urges Duke Energy, an SSEP project proponent, to prioritize clean energy. A 2023 Sierra Club report gave Duke a “D” grade for its clean energy transition, citing limited progress under the Inflation Reduction Act. The report criticizes Duke’s continued reliance on methane gas infrastructure, which harms the environment and increases consumer costs.
Local health risks further compound the dangers of fossil fuel dependence. Duke Energy plans to build two 1,360 MW gas turbines in Person County, North Carolina, just three miles from Woodland Elementary School, raising additional health concerns.
Lessons from past victories and next steps
Despite these challenges, opponents find hope in past victories. In May 2024, communities in New York successfully defeated Transco’s Northeast Supply Enhancement Project, proving that grassroots efforts can stop harmful infrastructure projects.
Meeting attendees were encouraged to sign the “NO SSEP” petition and participate in future public hearings and town halls to voice their opposition.
