Posted on 06/30/2005 7:28:37 PM PDT by Dog Gone
WASHINGTON — Plans for new liquefied natural gas terminals in Massachusetts and Texas won federal approval today. An LNG project in Rhode Island was rejected as regulators said they tried to balance energy needs with public safety.
It was the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's first such rejection. Seven other projects have been approved since 2003.
The commission unanimously approved construction of the Golden Pass LNG terminal and 120-mile pipeline in Jefferson County, Texas, on the Gulf Coast. Jefferson County, east of Houston, includes Beaumont and Port Arthur.
The commission chairman, Pat Wood, who said he owns property less than three miles from the site, said environmental concerns were handled well. The company agreed to restore wetlands to offset those lost due to the project.
Commissioners approved the Weaver's Cove Energy project for Fall River, Mass., by a 3-1 vote. They said the plan met safety standards and would provide critically needed energy in New England. Residents and government officials have said the project would put the community at risk.
Commissioner Suedeen Kelly, the lone dissenter, said the project would damage the environment. She said tanker traffic along the narrow Taunton River would raise safety concerns and disrupt the community.
By a 4-0 vote, the commission rejected the KeySpan LNG proposal to convert its existing LNG storage tank in Providence, R.I., into an import terminal. The commission said the project did not meet current safety standards.
Company officials have said they meet applicable safety standards and that further upgrades would be costly.
Massachusetts and Rhode Island officials, who vigorously opposed the New England projects, said they would go to court if necessary to fight the Fall River approval.
"We'll kill this project with a thousand paper cuts," said Fall River Mayor Edward Lambert. "We'll use every avenue, legal, political, public relations and regulatory."
Wood said the commission needs to better educate the public on the benefits of LNG and the commission's role in the approval process. He said he knew the Fall River vote would not be popular, but the commission was "looking at the long range economic health of the oldest region in our country."
Thanks!
"We'll kill this project with a thousand paper cuts," said Fall River Mayor Edward Lambert. "We'll use every avenue, legal, political, public relations and regulatory."
Oh. They will enjoy taking the buckboard to the general store once a week once they have destroyed every sign of progress since 1750.
They're talking about killing the one that got approved in Massachussetts. New England won't take yes for an answer.
New England is a funny place. Some towns consider you a newcomer if your family hasn't been there for at least three generations.
There are several others in the works.
All of these will combine to reduce natural gas prices in the US by increasing imports brought in by tankers. Liberals, anti-freetraders and other kooks oppose them, but they will happen and America will benefit.
they want to build one of these in the long island sound.
New England needs a supply of natural gas. The safety hazards of these terminals are very manageable. If you feel comfortable with natural gas pipes running to your appliances, you should be okay with an LNG terminal in your neighborhood. It might be a little unsightly to have it as a direct neighbor, but safety isn't the primary problem.
Can happen. Twelve Corners in upstate New York has blown up. A whole block of houses, one after the other. They fixed the problem. It blew up again.
It's one of those things. They're all preventable in hindsight.
They are the descendants of those same people. Going on 400 years in the same town, on the same farm. They are also the same ones who nearly busted up the Union between 1776 and 1787.
Making us more dependent on foreign sources of energy.
In recent years, electric utilities have been building natural-gas fired plants.
This not only adds to demand, it drives up the price for other gas uses: industrial, chemical, commercial, residential, etc. etc.
Instead, we SHOULD be building power plants utilizing nuclear and clean-coal technologies, reserving natural gas for the other applications that are more widespread.
Vermont carries the same clout as Texas or Florida. I'm not sure the founders envisioned that.
Anchorage is starting to be a little concerned about their natural gas. That has been extracted for many years now in the Cook Inlet, but some fields are getting low and they have some industry dependent on natural gas. I assume they have other reservoirs to tap and the holdup is mainly bureaucratic.
With all the environmental restrictions on other fuels, I can't blame people for wanting to jump on the natural gas bandwagon. But all that increased demand is gonna wind up doing nothing but drive up the price for everybody. As a national energy policy, I'd rather see a commitment to double our nuclear generating capacity within the next 10 years. That would certainly help assure that natural gas is available for other uses.
Strip the hydrogen off the gas for the motor fleet and the methane and heavier components would find plenty of use besides combustion. Fertilizer plants, for example.
I, agree we should assure that USA natural gas is available for other uses. With over 100 trillion cubic feet of natural gas out west, that is our future.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.