FOUR Liquified Natural Gas Receiving terminals now proposed for Lower Columbia River

Thanks for the article. I knew nothing of this project. I want us SW Washingtonians to be heads up about it. Columbia White-Tail Deer Refuge is in Washington. We have something to say about this. And we will say it! And show it!

I do not question that location of a Liquified Natural Gas receiving port, on the Cascadian Coast or anywhere else, will deliver very nasty environmental degradation in the immediate area of hte receiving port.
. . . But to the extent that LNG avalability would mean (relatively) reduced use of ULTRA NASTY liquid petroleum products (gasoline especially), might not an increased supply of LNG mean a relative reducton in air pollutants in the short to medium term?
. . . LNG is NOT any kind of long or even medium term solution to global warming etcetera. But given that so much natural gas is flared off to NO economic use, while still damaging the environment as much as if it were used for economic energy, would not increased capture of LNG energy be at least marginally desirable in the near term.
. . . Might not a degree of relaxation re LNG allow us to concentrate more on the truly horrendous prospect of all out drilling and polar obliteration in the Arctic Natiojnal Wildlife Reserve farther north in Alaska.
. . . If this comment is misguided or misinformed, please explain ...
.
.
.
PS: Of course wind, wave, solar, vegetable-seed-diesel and the near mythic eventual development of practical hydrogen fuel technology are preferable and worthy of our most strenuous support. But in the immediate term LNG can substitute for MUCH nastier tradional petroleum feedstocks for use in existing industrial infrastructure.

Liquified natural gas is only "natural" on Titan, the ninth moon of Saturn, where the temperature is minus290F. The LNG "train" on earth starts as natural gas, in fields primarily in Aceh, indonesia, Nigeria, Qatar, Trinidad, and lately, Barrow island, Australia and Sakhalin Islands, Russia. Indeed, the gas is "stranded" in places that are pristine(Sakhalin and Barrow islands, home of indigenous humans and other rare animals), or in places where the people are so oppressed that infrastructure does not exist to use the gas, and it is "flared off"(Nigeria and Indonesia). The gas is supercooled, for transport, and condenses signifantly in the cooled state. It is then transported in 1,000 ft long ships in Thermos tankers to (currently) four LNG receiving terminals on the east coast of the US. A great deal of the gas vaporizes and is lost in the process of shipping and handling, making LNG very ineffecient. Indeed, the only reason why there's a "gold rush" of LNG on at present is because the price of natural gas has been artificially increased, making the marketing of LNG profitable for speculators(aka pirates) at this time.

LNG is the last gasp of the fossil-fuel economy, and is a very poor basis for any economy of scale. Cascadia will not profit in any way by being a "farm" for such facilities.

David Wu, US Representative for Oregon, said today(March 12) in a town hall meeting in Clatskanie, Oregon that "the only way an LNG plant can be penciled out economically is if LNG is supplied to California". So the corporate pirates and their government handlers intend to occupy the Columiba River, for the short time that it might be profitable for them to steal natural gas from vulnerable countries and pristine places with the help of the US military, transport it thousands of miles in 1,000 foot long Thermos tankers(ships made by slaves in other countries), store it in 150-ft-tall, 250-foot wide Thermos bottles on the mouth of the Columbia River, pipe it in 36-inch pipe around Young's Bay, up the Coast Range, under the Columbia, to the PGE(look out for Enron--they are still out there!) plant at Beaver, Oregon, near Clatskanie, where it hooks up with the gas grid, which will carry it to California, where it will be converted into pesticides, plastic, and electricity to heat swimming pools, cool windowless skyscrapers, feed our addiction.

The liquified natural gas receiving terminals that are being proposed to be built in Warrenton and other places upriver are totally different than the peak-shaving storage tanks that exist in Portland and Newport, Oregon. LNG receiving terminals and docks and pipelines require large tracts of industrialized land, and are attended by massive security and industrial infrastructure. ONLY FOUR exist in the US, and three of them have been closed for the majority of time they have existed. The LNG receiving plants are located in Everett, Massachusetts, Cove Point, Maryland, Elba Island, Georgia, and Lake Charles, Louisiana. The reason that the corporations can say that "LNG is safe" is because there are so few plants. Even so, th emayor of Boston is pleading with the federal governmetn to close the plant at Everette, because it costs the city $16,000 A WEEK to provide security for the two ships that dock there weekly. There have been a few catastrophic explosions at LNG plants, the latest in Algeria, in January, 2004, when the entire terminal blew up, killing 27 and injuring 85. The plant is still closed, and will cost an estimated $800 million to rebuild. LNG receiving terminals have been absolutely rejected by most communities where they have been proposed. The areas where they have been placed are poor and vulnerable, and they do not get cheaper electricity or any other benefit from the LNG.

LNG IS A POOR BASIS FOR THE LOCAL ECONOMY:

How many jobs will be destroyed by the LNG industry on the Columbia River? What will happen to the fishermen? Real estate will be of no value, recreation and and tourism will be destroyed.

Natural gas supply is unstable, taken from countries thousands of miles away, like Indonesia, Barrow Island, Australia, and soon, from the pristine Sakhalin islands off of Russia.

The only reason why LNG may be "cheaper" than other fossil fuels right now is that the gas is being taken from these areas, without adequate compensation. This situation will not last very long at all. The importation of natural gas to the US will ensure endless conflict with other countries, and will require massive military presence to secure.

Foreign natural gas supplies are expected to run out within the next 30 years. LNG only increases our dependence on the last of the fossil fuels that are available on earth, and ensures that our tax dollars will be spent on invading countries with natural gas, and securing, transporting, and storing LNG, at the expense of our communities and our environment.

We need to demand that our tax dollars are being spent on the development of renewable energy resources, and the creation of incentives for conservation, which would reduce our energy requirements by 30% or more.

LNG and its attendant infrastructure requires MASSIVE "Homeland Security" protection, which will be tax-payer funded. LNG receiving terminals in Warrenton/Astoria and upriver will turn our River into an armed camp, where movement by citizens will be restricted, where the high-intensity lights will be shining 24/7 on the mouth of the River, and the concertina wire and fences will cut off deer and elk migration routes. Helicopter gunships are already sprouting up here, and DHS cops have been sighted at area restaurants. The US Coast Guard is already a large presence in Astoria, and it's gettinga lot bigger and a lot heavier. The Coast Guard is now a part of the Department of Homeland Security, and is being managed by an outfit known as Integrated Coast Guard Systems, a composite of weapons manufacturers Lockheed-Martin and Northrup-Grumman. Interestingly, Integrated Coast Guard Systems was the largest contractor with the Department of Homeland Security in 2004, and paid $250 milion in the past three years to settle charges of improprieties with Pentagon contracts.

Be aware that LNG economy will seriously militarize the Columbia River, and Cascadia in general. If the airlines are taking people's lighters away from them, what will the presence of several LNG tanks and massive tankers bring to the people of Oregon and Washington?

Even under the most optimistic scenarios, the corporations are suggesting 300-500 construction jobs to build the plants, and 50-75 "full-time, family-wage jobs" after its completion. A vast majority of these jobs will be given to people who don't live here. Even the construction jobs will likely go to desperate out-of-towners, as they did when Wauna Mill recently retrofitted their mill to process smaller logs. It has proven very difficult to get real information about how many people are actually employed at the other four LNG receiving terminals in the US. The promised jobs will be "security" jobs, and the Port is already hiring, at $10 an hour with benefits. Hardly "Living Wage" , when you're a single mother with three kids, but better than working at a bar for minimum wage. These are the people on the other side of the barricades.



LNG importation is good for the corporate bottom line as long as it's subsidized by our tax dollars,, but it is physically and economically dangerous for us. LNG is very explosive if it comes in contact with air. There is a lot of information available about how dangerous LNG is in many different publications, including the government's own Sandia Report, published in 2005.

Large transnational LNG corporations(Shell, Bechtel, ExxonMobil) are vying for domination of the Columbia River. The LNG pirates have been kicked out of ports all down the California coast, and out of Puget Sound,and they are desperate for a West Coast LNG receiving terminal, where it will be easier to market to the vast California market. Much of LNG is made into single-use plastic drinking containers and water bottles which are thrown in the garbage, and pesticides. We need to reduce our use of these products, not make more of them.

LNG will spell disaster for Cascadia--SAY NO TO LNG!

"Reasons the corpos give for siting these massive, belching, smelly, volatile things surrounded by concertina wire and helidopter gunships and soldiers with M-16s here: The fact that Calpine Corporaation was allowed to sign a 65-year, transferable lease with the Port of Astoria without public input; Relative sparcity of population, economic vulnerability of the people(High unemployment rate, traditional resource extraction jobs pretty much gone), and social and political disempowerment of the population (low voter turn-out, high school dropout rates)."

According to whom are these reasons given? Someone actually said that the reason that they want to put the LNG terminals in at Tansy Point is because of our high school dropout rates? Where did they get these drop out rates, since I can't find them anywhere?

why such a high "suggested" price for lunch and a "whole" day of listening to people talk.

will there be a plan to DO something? lots of people griping but no one DOING anything. everyone down there is over 50 anyhow, what difference does a terminal or two make? do something or get off the pot. all you guys do is talk, talk, talk about it.

why don't i do something. you haven't said anything that convinces me you have the truth anymore then the "pirates" have the truth. you don't do anything audacious that shows you have any convictions about what you say you believe is the truth. atleast the supposed pirates do something about their convictions.

I just found this article on the net.
Can ANYONE OUT THERE TELL ME THE FINAL 'OUTCOME?'
THIS IS HORRIBLE..JUST HORRID.
Rosie

Consumer Protection Attorney Tim Riley Warns About Liquefied Natural Gas href="http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://timrileylaw.com/images/LNG%2520fire%2520vapour%2520cloud.jpg&imgrefurl=http://timrileylaw.com/LNG_LiquefiedNaturalGas.htm&h=490&w=750&sz=56&tbnid=dALbilvXHsXpmM:&tbnh=91&tbnw=140&hl=en&start=1&prev=/images%3Fq%3DLNG%2BFIRE%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26rls%3DGGLD,GGLD:2005-14,GGLD:en%26sa%3DN ">LIQUID NATURAL GAS TANKER DANGERS