Liquified Natural Gas Facility Proposed for LI Sound

[Danmel]

Are any of you aware of the massive proposed LNG plant proposed for Long Island Sound? It would be off shore north of Wading River and be the size of the Queen Mary. It would involve the shipment of massive quantities of flammable LNG brought in on tankers and shipped through a pipeline. The sound will have to dredged, potentially killing off shellfish and other marine life and the area is also an estuary. The OMNIBUS bill pushed thru in November included a provision taking such facilities out of the state and local government control and leaving up to the feds! (who of course have never met an energy proposal they didn't like. It is being proposed by Braodwater, a HOUSTON based energy company and Shell.

Here is a link to an article in the Long Island Press:


http://www.longislandpress.com/v03/i03050120/coverstory...

[eg101]

1. I am in favor of industrialization, but it should be...

...carefully controlled. I live in Houston, and I can tell you that industrialization has severely damaged the natural environment, and needlessly.

[KamaAina]

2. Why is this even necessary?

Didn't they just shove that Iroquois pipeline underneath the Sound so that LI would have access to natural gas?

Updated link:
http://www.longislandpress.com/v03/i03050120/coverstory_01.asp

:grr: from this So. Conn. expat!

[Eugene]

3. The alternative is docking HUMONGOUS LNG tankers in ports

like Newark, Providence, or Boston.
Here in Boston, we would love the Everett
LNG terminal to be relocated off shore.

[KamaAina]

4. Another alternative: Not sucking up more gas than your continent produces

so that you have to bring it in from overseas via LNG.

I was not aware that there was an LNG terminal right in Boston Harbor. Kinda makes ya wonder, with all the hooraw about the alleged terror plot against Boston last week... :scared:

[Danmel]

5. There is a story about it on the ABC News homepage today!

Seems they want to place one in Fall River Mass. as well.

WASHINGTON Jan 24, 2005 — When an explosion flattened a liquefied natural gas plant in Algeria, killing 30 workers, one might say the heat was felt half a world away in coastal towns in New England, Alabama and California. The Algerian inferno a year ago undermined industry arguments that the modern era of LNG transport is inherently safe. It also became rallying point for groups fighting proposed new LNG terminals in their towns.


http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=438380

[KamaAina]

6. That may be the dumbest idea I've heard

that didn't originate directly from repuke HQ.

FERC officials acknowledged in a report that a tanker would have to maneuver up the Taunton River, which cuts through the heart of Fall River, and under four bridges, including one carrying an interstate highway. But the report also said risks from a possible terrorist attack on a tanker "can be managed." The commission has yet to rule on the project.

Come to think of it, it actually may have originated at repuke HQ...

Vallejo, Cal. (outer Bay Area) ran one of these suckers clear out of town a couple of years ago. No doubt this is what prompted Bush**co to take away all state and local controls over siting them. (Remember, these are the guys who are for "states' rights" when a state wants to screw its people.)

edit: Per Post #3, there is already an LNG terminal in Mass. Is every state going to get more than one? Yikes!