Letters: Risks of not addressing Chicago’s leak-prone gas infrastructure are too high

The Dec. 1 editorial criticizing Peoples Gas’ infrastructure modernization program paints an unfair picture, particularly in its characterization of contractors ( “Regulators should say no — again — to push by Peoples Gas to resume its unaffordable pipe rebuild” ). As one of the primary contractors working on this critical project (at least before the Illinois Commerce Commission’s “pause”), Miller Pipeline has employed 237 Illinois workers who are members of 26 local unions — each of whose work the editorial board demeans as “digging up Chicago’s streets and inconveniencing residents.

” Instead of sneering at hardworking union members, who do extremely difficult work to protect Chicagoans, I wish the editorial board had acknowledged the facts. Our teams have repaired more than 250 miles of leak-prone pipe in Chicago alone, modernizing a rapidly corroding system from the 1800s. Our crews prevent deteriorating infrastructure from becoming catastrophes.



The stakes couldn’t be higher. For example, in 2010, a natural gas pipeline in San Bruno, California, ruptured, resulting in devastating consequences and loss. The board ignores the benefits of our work.

Where modernization has been completed, safety has increased and carbon emissions have decreased, improving air quality. The editorial board agrees that “old, leaky pipes must be retired or replaced.” According to Peoples Gas, more than 1,100 miles of pipe have less than 10 years of life remaining and need immediate replacement.

These aged pipes present significant safety concerns that must be addressed before potentially devastating failures occur. And the editorial doesn’t account for the work left to be done. Instead, the board offers only a vague preference that work should be done “surgically.

” Work plans are already reviewed and approved based on risk assessments, prudence, and the necessity to maintain the safety, reliability and affordability of energy. Meanwhile, the ICC’s pipeline safety staff and two administrative law judges say the plan Peoples Gas put forth should be enacted and construction should resume. Does the board know better than all of them? Without systematic replacement of this centuries-old infrastructure, emergency repairs and maintenance will likely cost far more, and safety and environmental progress will be imperiled.

Moreover, this work provides well-paying union jobs that support Illinois families. The risks of doing nothing to address Chicago’s leak-prone infrastructure are too high. I respectfully ask that the Tribune Editorial Board focus on facts and implementing cost-effective methods of doing essential safety work.

Unfortunately, its editorial only casts blame while offering no practical solutions. — Bob Nowak, director of operations, Miller Pipeline, Mount Prospect Regarding the op-ed “To fix failing Peoples Gas pipe replacement program, focus on safety — not expansion” (Dec. 19): I live in a modest co-op in a 100-year-old building, with an old and underpowered electric supply.

If I use the microwave and the toaster at the same time, I’ll blow a fuse. I have radiator heat and a gas stove (which I don’t use much, except in the times of year I can fling the kitchen door wide open). I’d love to switch to an electric stove and an electric heat pump, but my building’s electric supply cannot support that.

Replacing that will be dauntingly expensive, and we are not sure when that will happen. For the foreseeable future, it seems that my neighbors and I are stuck depending on Peoples Gas for our heating and cooking needs. So I’ve been dismayed to learn of the expensive and wasteful shenanigans that have been going on since 2007 under the guise of a pipe modernization project at Peoples Gas.

Massive cost overrun, massive delays, no measurable increases to safety, while the utility boasts of record profits benefiting shareholders. With a name like Peoples Gas, you’d think the utility would had a shred of interest in serving the public, but I guess not. The Illinois Commerce Commission halted the pipe replacement program in 2023 to investigate, and its findings could not be more clear.

Now it must hold Peoples Gas accountable, with any money spent on this project employed toward the interests of actual safety and not to continue to line shareholder pockets. — Kristin Sherrard, Chicago The Jan. 23 op-ed by Brad Weisenstein ( “Rally around the Illinois flag we’ve already got” ) offers some excellent reasons for the state of Illinois to retain the current state flag.

One factor cited is the estimated $2.5 million cost to replace the current flag, which features an eagle with a red banner in its beak. Here’s another.

The Illinois Centennial Monument was dedicated in 1918 and dominates the Logan Square roundabout. The 50-foot marble column, which was designed by Henry Bacon, architect of the Lincoln Memorial, is topped by an eagle figure, clearly a reference to the state flag. Replacing the current flag with a modern design would sort of make the Centennial Monument somewhat obsolete.

— Edward M. Bury, Chicago Brad Weisenstein’s op-ed encouraging retention of the existing Illinois state flag is completely accurate. The present flag is excellent, as is, and there is no justification for spending millions of dollars for a new flag.

Of course, wasting money is an Illinois pastime. I also believe that allowing flag voters to vote multiple times is an ignorant way of conducting a contest. My one criticism of the op-ed is the omission of how to vote.

Simple as that may be, failing to give voting instructions is a negative. — Robert Tingler, Palatine I am in agreement with Brad Weisenstein to not change our beautiful Illinois flag! Our state is already in financial trouble, and as a taxpayer, I am sick of the wasteful spending. For who? For what? I am not benefiting from any of this nonsense.

Our state is not benefiting. — Anne Weber, Aurora I agree with those who believe that Illinois does not need the additional expense of creating a new state flag. If Gov.

JB Pritzker wants another flag, he can certainly pay for his own personal flag design and fly it over his residence. But his new flag should reflect the actual condition of Illinois. — Bob Gavenda, Crete, Illinois Why do we need a new flag? Nothing is wrong with the current one.

Is this a ploy by our governor to divert attention away from the high taxes we pay? Not to mention all the people and businesses that have left the once-great state of Illinois. We have huge pension debt that needs to be dealt with, but does our governor feel a new state flag is more important? Illinois does not need a new flag. It needs a new governor and legislature.

— Ralph Chichester, Oak Forest Just when I think it’s time to give up on the Tribune with its editorial right turn, reduced sports coverage and constant Brandon Johnson drama, my Sunday paper arrives (a real paper) with a fine article about the invention of rape kits ( “A forgotten woman key to a change in forensics,” Jan. 26). Please continue to provide that type of reporting.

— Dave Hubert, Yorkville, Illinois Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected] ..