WADE – At the Main Street Grill, a group of men scowled at the prospect of a $5 billion natural gas pipeline cutting across their properties.

“They take over your land, and you don’t get nothing out of it,” said Joe Lovick, a lifelong resident of this one-caution-light town in northeastern Cumberland County. “You can’t build nothing on it. It’s just dead land. You’ve got to pay taxes for the rest of your life for their benefit.”

Many other people see nothing but advantages in the proposed pipeline, which would start in West Virginia and snake its way through the mountains of Virginia and the farm fields of North Carolina before ending 550 miles away, near Lumberton in Robeson County. Almost all of the pipeline would be underground in North Carolina.

Supporters say the pipeline will mean jobs, millions in tax revenue, less volatile home heating costs, cleaner air, and new business and industry for economically stagnant areas of eastern North Carolina.

Yet, except for people such as Lovick whose land would be directly affected, the proposed pipeline has prompted little discussion in Cumberland County.

“Frankly, the jury is out at this point,” said Doug Peters, president and chief executive of the Fayetteville Regional Chamber. “We don’t have enough information about the pipeline to make an educated judgment on the proposal.”

Amy Cannon, the Cumberland County manager, said, “We’ve really not had any public discussion of the pipeline.”

The pipeline could mean more than $1 million annually in tax revenue for Cumberland County by 2020. The 36-inch high-pressure transmission line would roughly parallel Interstate 95, cutting through Godwin, Eastover, Vander and Gray’s Creek.

Growing demand

The pipeline is a joint venture of Dominion Resources, Duke Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas and AGL Resources. The first news reports of the pipeline surfaced in April, when Duke Energy and Piedmont Natural Gas jointly announced a solicitation for proposals to build and operate a second major wholesale natural gas pipeline in North Carolina to meet growing demand. The other pipeline, called Transco, runs from the Gulf of Mexico to New York. It follows the Interstate 85 corridor in western North Carolina.

On Sept. 2, the two energy companies announced that Dominion would build the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. They described the line as “a key infrastructure engine to drive economic development and create jobs, helping counties on the pipeline’s route attract new, energy-dependent businesses and industries – especially along the Interstate 95 corridor in eastern North Carolina.”

While North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory has given his full support to the pipeline – recently stumping for it in Robeson and Wilson counties – officials in Cumberland County continue to take a wait-and-see attitude.

In an email, Peters, the Fayetteville chamber president, compared the pipeline with a new interstate. If that interstate did not have exit ramps, he wrote, it would not add much value to the community. If it did, he said, “it could be a game changer.”

The pipeline will have three taps in North Carolina for Piedmont Natural Gas to draw from, but it is doubtful that others will be able to do the same.

For one thing, most of the estimated 1.5 billion cubic feet of gas that would pass through the line has already been allocated to the four investors. For another, it may be cost-prohibitive to tap into the pipeline.

A document provided by Fayetteville Mayor Nat Robertson shows that it would cost roughly $500,000 to $1 million for a tap and probably more than $5 million for a “basic metering and regulation station.”

But that does not negate the opportunity for new industry to locate near the pipeline, said Jim Trusty, a spokesman for Piedmont Natural Gas.

Piedmont already has a vast network of natural gas lines in Cumberland County. Trusty said a new transmission line would allow his company to push more gas through the existing lines, increasing capacity and pressure.

At times in the past, Trusty said, industry has been forced to locate elsewhere because Piedmont could not meet the energy demands.

Coal conversion

In North Carolina, most of the natural gas would be used to fuel Duke Energy power plants. Duke, which would own 40 percent of the pipeline, has opened five natural gas power plants in the state since 2011 and closed seven of its 14 coal-burning plants, said Tom Williams, a Duke Energy spokesman.

Natural gas is cheaper and releases far fewer air emissions than coal-fired power plants, Williams said. The gas in the Atlantic Coast Pipeline would come from the giant Marcellus and Utica shale basins of Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania. The basins have become easily accessible in the past decade or so through an extraction method known as hydraulic fracking.

In a news release, Duke Energy said the conversion from coal to natural gas has allowed the company to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions by 20percent, sulfur dioxide emissions by 84 percent and nitrogen oxide emissions by 63 percent.

Regardless of those figures, environmental groups in Virginia and West Virginia have aligned to fight the pipeline.

In Virginia, the Piedmont Group of the Sierra Club has joined forces with three other organizations. Among the concerns: environmental damage along the path of the pipeline, including the potential contamination of drinking water supplies; loss of property values; property rights violations; lost tourism revenue; public safety concerns; and damage to agricultural-based economies. Lawsuits have been filed in an effort to block the pipeline.

In February, a natural gas pipeline in rural Kentucky exploded, destroying two homes and sending two people to the hospital. Afterward, National Public Radio reviewed federal pipeline accident data. NPR concluded that although the nation’s 300,000 miles of pipelines are generally safe, the lines “experience an average of 90 failures a year that the government considers significant.”

A petition on the wesbsite MoveOn.org urges Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe to withdraw his support and stop the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. The petition has been signed by more then 2,400 people.

In North Carolina, the Sierra Club has yet to take a stand on the pipeline, while Environment North Carolina has come out against it.

Dave Rogers, field director for Environment North Carolina, said the group opposes the pipeline largely because it is against anything that promotes the burning of fossil fuels and increases global warming.

The organization advocates for wind and solar power. Rogers points to a new study by the Environment North Carolina Research and Policy Center that concludes that carbon pollution from five coal plants could be eliminated in the state if wind power is developed off the North Carolina coast.

Regulatory review

The mounting opposition in Virginia has not slowed plans for the pipeline. On Oct. 31, after two months of public hearings, Dominion officially pre-filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, triggering an environmental review of the project.

Another round of public hearings has been scheduled for Jan. 6 at the Doubletree hotel in Fayetteville and Jan. 7 at the N.C. Agricultural Center in Johnston County.

Construction is anticipated to begin in 2016, with operation beginning in 2018.

A study commissioned by Dominion found that the pipeline’s construction would generate more than $680 million in economic activity in North Carolina through 2019. In that time, the study found, the pipeline would support more than 4,400 jobs in the state, including almost 2,600 directly in construction.

Beginning in 2019, operation of the pipeline would generate $11.7 million a year in economic activity in North Carolina and support 52 jobs annually, including 18 directly employed in pipeline operations.

People whose land lies in the pipeline’s path would be offered a one-time payment for an easement to allow construction and maintenance of the line. Jim Norvelle, a spokesman for Dominion, said there is no way to provide a rough estimate of the average payment because too many variables are involved.

The right of way will be 110 feet during construction and 50 feet after the pipeline is operating, Norvelle said. Landowners cannot build permanent structures or plant trees on the easement, but they can continue to use it for such purposes as raising crops, grazing livestock and riding four-wheeled vehicles.

Though far from set in stone, maps showing a preferred route for the pipeline can be found on Dominion’s Atlantic Coast Pipeline website – https://www.dom.com/ corporate/what-we-do/natural-gas/atlantic-coast-pipeline.

Norvelle said North Carolina has 1,253 tracts in the proposed pipeline corridor. He said owners of 1,083 of those tracts – or 86.4 percent – have given Dominion permission to survey their land. Owners of 69 tracts have denied permission, and 8.1 percent have yet to respond, he said.

It is likely that landowners who refuse to accept payment for an easement will be forced to do so through a legal process known as eminent domain.

The company cannot have eminent domain until the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rules there is a public need for the pipeline and approves the project, Norvelle said.

Dominion’s maps show the preferred route cutting through property owned by Grant Singleton near the intersection of Baywood and Murphy roads just outside the Eastover town limits. Singleton, a real estate agent, has plans to someday develop the three tracts that total about 73 acres. He said he inherited the land from his father.

Singleton knows all about eminent domain. He said he is in favor of progress but hopes energy officials can work with him on a route that will minimize the detrimental effects on his properties. Singleton said he wants to meet with pipeline officials before giving them permission to survey.

Dominion’s maps also show the pipeline’s preferred route cutting across property owned by James Carter, near the intersection of Sanderosa and Huckleberry roads in Vander. Carter said he has received a phone call from pipeline officials, but he has not been asked for permission to survey his land or told about public meetings.

Like Lovick and others at the Main Street Grill, Carter is none too happy.

“I think they are going to do what they are going to do regardless of how I feel,” he said. “It’s all like sleight of hand. Nobody wants to be up front of what they are trying to do.”

Staff writer Greg Barnes can be reached at barnesg@fayobserver.com or 486-3525.

TRUE OR false:Christmas trees grow in all 50 states (including Alaska and Hawaii).

The tradition of bringing Christmas-like trees inside predates the birth of Christ.

It used to be illegal to have a decorated Christmas tree in Massachusetts on Dec. 25.

Early Christmas tree decorations were mostly edible.

The first recorded use of Christmas trees in the U.S. was in Williamsburg.

Let me help lend a little context to each statement.

If you look up that first one online, you’ll probably find many sources that verify it, but it might not be as true as we’d like to believe. While it’s true that trees suitable for use as Christmas trees grow in all 50 states, there’s no verification of the existence of Christmas tree growers or farms in every state. The most recent Ag Census (2009) found no Christmas tree farms in Alaska, Arizona, Wyoming, Nevada or North Dakota.

Oregon, Pennsylvania and North Carolina tend to lead the pack, with Virginia ranking sixth in total trees harvested and total acreage as recently as 2007, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

As for when the Christmas tree tradition began, it was before Jesus was born. Bringing evergreen plants or plant parts inside during the shortest days of winter has a long history. In early polytheistic Egyptian and Roman culture, decorating with green palm rushes or evergreen boughs was associated with worship of god(s). Between then and now the Druids of Great Britain, along with the Germans and Scandinavians of the late Middle Ages, had their own beliefs associated with evergreen trees during the winter solstice.

Christianity traces the use of the Christmas tree as part of the Christmas celebration to Martin Luther in the early 1500s. Legend has it he was walking home through the woods on a cold Christmas Eve and was consumed by the beauty of snow-dusted evergreens reflecting the moonlight. It’s said that he cut a little fir down to bring inside and decorated it with candles.

Why then would it be true in 1659 that the General Court of Massachusetts made it illegal to hang Christmas tree decorations? Because then, like now, some Christians (in this case, the Puritans) didn’t like it that the use of Christmas trees began as a pagan tradition.

I really like the idea of Christmas tree decorations being edible. A small remnant of that practice is the hanging of candy canes on the tree and the occasional string of popcorn. German–Americans continued to use apples, nuts and marzipan cookies even into the early 20th century, when most other Americans had started decorating with homemade ornaments. Wouldn’t it be nice to simply eat the decorations instead of having to pack them up in storage for a year?

And finally, the last point is false, but it was sort of a trick question. The best Internet sleuthing I can do finds that historians claim U.S. soldiers stationed at Fort Dearborn, Ill., in 1804 for the Revolutionary War harvested Christmas trees from the nearby woods to help celebrate Christmas in their barracks. Fort Dearborn is now Chicago.

Williamsburg can, however, claim the first decorated tree. Charles Minnegrode was a German professor at the College of William Mary, and in 1842 he brought a Christmas tree with him on a visit with a fellow professor, whose children entertained themselves by decorating it with colored paper and candles attached to the branches with wire.

Regardless of how well you did with the quiz, if you are one of the 8 in 10 Americans who put up a Christmas tree—and especially if you have an “all-American” real Christmas tree that is 100 percent biodegradable and provides local jobs—Merry Christmas from Virginia Cooperative Extension!

Adam Downing is an agent in Virginia Cooperative Extension’s Madison County office, specializing in forestry and natural resources. Phone 540/948-6881; fax 540/948-6883; email adowning@vt.edu.