Newsletter Signup
Stay up to date on all the latest news from Boston.com
Green light for East Boston substation has environmental advocates up in arms. Here’s why.
“This decision ignores the advice of experts who have presented alternatives to this construction.”
Eversource will soon be able to begin construction of its controversial East Boston substation after a state board gave the project a green light over staunch opposition from community members and environmental advocates.
Earlier this week, Massachusetts’s Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) granted Eversource a certificate allowing the utility company to bypass 14 remaining state and local environmental permits, a move that sparked local outrage.
“This decision is extremely disheartening and disappointing, particularly after years of experts and community members voicing serious concerns,” Paula García, a senior energy analyst and energy justice lead at the Union of Concerned Scientists, told The Boston Globe.
Advertisement:
In requesting the certificate, Eversource argued that some of the permits were “unduly delayed and inappropriately conditioned.”
Here’s what to know:
The background
First pitched in 2014, the substation would convert high voltage electricity from a transmission line into a lower voltage so it can be delivered to homes, WBUR reported.
Eversource plans to build along the Chelsea Creek in East Boston’s Eagle Hill neighborhood. An Eversource spokesperson told Boston.com the company does not yet have a construction start date.
What’s the purpose?
The substation will address electric capacity constraints at Eversource’s existing substation in Chelsea, the company said in a statement shared with Boston.com.
Advertisement:
“East Boston is the city’s fastest-growing neighborhood and the only neighborhood in Boston without an existing substation,” Eversource said. “Demand for electricity in East Boston continues to rise, making it necessary to build new infrastructure that will support growth for years to come.”
The new substation, the company continued, “will ensure we can provide safe, reliable electric service to thousands of homes and businesses, and help the City of Boston achieve its aggressive carbon-reduction goals — supporting electrification and clean energy opportunities.”
Why are people against it?
However, critics have questioned the need for a new substation and taken issue with its flood-prone location, raising environmental and safety concerns in a working-class area that already houses Logan Airport, jet fuel storage tanks, and several major highways.
In 2021, nearly 84% of Boston voters opposed the substation in a nonbinding ballot question.
“The people of Boston overwhelmingly reject the proposed location of the substation in East Boston in a flood plain, in a residential area, in an environmental justice community — and so do I,” then-Mayor-elect Michelle Wu told Boston.com at the time.
Eversource has said the substation’s design exceeds local and federal flood-elevation standards and that it would be built to withstand 500-year floodwaters, the Globe reported.
Advertisement:
EFSB Director Andrew Greene acknowledged community concerns at the board’s hearing Tuesday, the newspaper reported.
“There is no energy project that has ever been built that doesn’t have some environmental impacts,” he said, adding that the benefits outweigh those risks, which have been “substantially minimized and mitigated.”
Others disagreed with Greene’s assessment.
What they’re saying
In a statement Wednesday, Sen. Ed Markey said the substation’s construction would be an “environmental injustice,” adding that the project “jeopardizes the health, safety, and quality of life of all East Boston and Chelsea residents.”
“Instead of incorporating the concerns and input of local Black, Brown, and immigrant communities who are fighting for their health and their homes, the Energy Facilities Siting Board has excluded them and put utility profits over people,” Markey continued. “This decision ignores the advice of experts who have presented alternatives to this construction.”
State Sen. Lydia Edwards, whose district includes East Boston, called the EFSB decision short-sighted and wrong, arguing that the decision should have waited until Gov.-elect Maura Healey takes office in January and appoints new board members.
“The community has spoken over and over again,” Edwards wrote on Twitter. “No one supported the substation other than Eversource & the EFSB, they ignored evidence of racial bias, alternative locations, and rushed this to benefit corporate greed.”
Eversource, however, asserted the EFSB decision was “the culmination of a robust public process that ensures we can provide safe, reliable electric service for our customers in East Boston and Chelsea.”
Advertisement:
The company added: “Throughout this process, we have worked diligently to demonstrate that the project exceeds safety and environmental standards, and we appreciate the careful consideration that went into the board’s decision.”
Environmental justice group GreenRoots said it plans to appeal the decision with the Conservation Law Foundation.
“We are appalled that the same systemic injustices we fight to dismantle, are the same systemic harms perpetuated by our state boards,” the group tweeted, “but our work does not stop here.”
To comment, please create a screen name in your profile
To comment, please verify your email address
Conversation
This discussion has ended. Please join elsewhere on Boston.com