This incident illustrates how secrecy in the name of security increasingly overrides safety protections and the public's right-to-know, while doing little or nothing to improve security. The regulations requiring that natural gas pipelines be clearly marked were established to prevent accidental rupture that often causes injuries and deaths to residents, contractors, and emergency responders. Ironically, removing such information puts the public in greater danger of lethal accidents.
Reports by the Council on Foreign Relations and the National Academy of Sciences identify city power gates and compressor stations as the most vulnerable points to a potential attack that would leave a local power system down for several weeks. Since 9/11 some utility companies, such as Consolidated Edison, have addressed this threat by increasing fencing, security cameras, patrols around facilities, and inspections of pipelines.
Yet public disclosure of information is also a key part of the solution. A public that understands the risks around them can take steps to reduce them. Firefighters understood this when they opposed recent proposals by the U.S. Departments of Homeland Security and of Transportation to remove placards from hazardous materials containers. They noted that such placards help prevent accidents and inform first responders so they can properly assess and address emergencies involving toxic, explosive and hazardous materials.
National security is best enhanced, and harm from potential attacks minimized, by fixing problems and reducing risks at potential target sites. Moreover, while terrorist threats remain hypothetical, lethal accidents are certain to increase should safety warnings be eliminated. Foregoing safety in an elusive quest for security seems pennywise and pound-foolish. Policies must address both safety and security, and inform the public to improve the net protection of the public.