A study released Tuesday projects the proposed PennEast pipeline would have saved Pennsylvania and New Jersey consumers more than $890 million in energy costs had it been in operation during the winter of 2013-14.

The route of the 114-mile pipeline, projected to be in service by 2017, includes portions of Penn Forest, Kidder, Towamensing and Lower Towamensing townships in Carbon County.Concentric Energy Advisors submitted the report, which excluded "potential savings that may have been achieved in the electric market on extreme peak days in which temperatures were coldest and natural gas demand was highest."It's no secret the winter 2013-14 was an exceptionally cold season, and that resulted in volatile pricing and significantly higher natural gas prices in the northeast United States than had ever been previously experienced."While the winter of 2013-14 was colder than other recent winters, it did not reach extreme levels," according to the study. "We believe that using the most recent time frame for which data is fully available most accurately reflects the current market dynamics."PennEast did not indicate how much it paid for Concentric to do the study."I have no concerns," said Toby Bishop, Concentric vice president. "We are in no way affiliated with PennEast or any of the sponsors of the pipeline. We conducted an independent assessment."One group opposing the pipeline had its concerns about the data."This seems to be very flawed," said Karen Feridun, of Berks Gas Truth. "They keep coming with these super-hyped numbers based on things that are highly questionable. The last study, done by Drexel University, used PennEast's own data. When you choose your own data, of course you will get the outcome you want to get."Concentric examined four areas of potential savings including:• Consumer savings associated with lower electric prices due to lower fuel costs for natural gas-fired electric generation,• Savings due to natural gas electric generation displacing more costly oil-fired electric generation,• Savings by industrial customers purchasing natural gas, and• Savings by customers of local distribution companies."The biggest savings," Bishop said, "would have come from lower electric prices due to the savings achievable by natural gas-fired electric generation, where Concentric estimated electric savings in excess of $400 million due to lower market area natural gas prices."Feridun said what PennEast always overlooks in these studies is the alternatives."The cost is going to far outweigh the benefits," she said. "The consumer is the one who will be paying for the pipeline explosion or the climate that is not livable. The public should really understand that we need to be transitioning off of this. If you want to create jobs and a real sustainable energy platform, you move to renewables and don't keep relying on fossil fuels."Specific details of how much Carbon County energy consumers, or the average consumer in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, would have saved was not a part of the study."Individual consumer savings are entirely dependent on the energy loads they are using," said Melissa Bartos, Concentric assistant vice president, in a conference call held Tuesday morning.Natural gas demand in Pennsylvania and New Jersey has increased from around 1,400 billion cubic feet annually to 1,600 billion cubic feet annually from 2009 to 2013, according to the study."The findings of Concentric's report underscore the enormous and broad positive impacts of the proposed PennEast Pipeline," Peter Terranova, chairman of the PennEast Pipeline board of managers, said. "When you combine the estimated economic impact of $1.6 billion from construction with $23 million in annual operations, and then add potential annual savings of nearly $900 million resulting from increased supply for the 2017-18 winter, PennEast's value to the region is easily more than $2 billion. This augments our long-term vision of continued savings and support to the communities where we live and work."The full report is available at http//penneastpipeline.com/ConcentricEconomicStudy.