[Grovenet] Gas Lines are not fun

Tue Jan 29 15:14:46 PST 2008

We already have LNG facilities in Oregon. There's one right here in Newport,
and another in Portland, both operating efficiently, cleanly and safely for
decades. 

Neither is considered a danger or 'dis-amenity' to the local properties. The
Newport facility is close to new million-dollar homes, a huge marina filled
with yachts and fishing boats and surrounded by businesses. The other in
Portland is only five miles from downtown in an industrial area where
businesses have eagerly added new construction. 

The issue today is that there's not enough local natural gas, or it's not
cheap enough, to compete with gas brought in by ship, so the obvious,
sensible thing to do is to bring in gas and the safest, most efficient
proven way to do that is LNG. Northwest Natural is meeting its obligation to
the public with the safest technology known: a technology with a
near-perfect track record working with a fuel, LNG, that is inherently far
less dangerous in the event of a problem than either gasoline or propane. 

For facts about the new facility whose pipeline would run west of Forest
Grove, there's a web site that will pop up in any web search:

http://www.oregonlng.com/

For facts about the new facilities planned for Coos Bay see: 

http://www.scdcinc.org/documents/ECONW-SCDC-LNG-Impacts.pdf

Okay, maybe it's not good to take their word for what's so. There's a wealth
of LNG safety information on the WEB based on actual experience with the
stuff that documents an excellent safety record for LNG that far exceeds
many other energy sources, including coal, oil and gasoline. It's a proven
technology with proven regulatory standards that have protected the public
for decades. There are some links to on-line information below. 

Let me be clear that I don't like using LNG, just like I don't like using
fossil fuels including natural gas in any form such as liquefied gas,
ethanol, oil in all of its forms, wood, or any other carbon-based fuel, but
not for the idiotic reasons given by many of the naysayers. I don't like
using those fuels because they all produce greenhouse gasses and represent
limited, non-sustainable energy sources. But I am grateful we have them and,
like most Oregonians, use them every day because my options are very
limited. Like the rest of us, some mix of all of the above is economically
and functionally essential for me to earn my way in society. 

I agree that we need to pursue alternative forms of creating energy. Pumping
and importing oil and gas are only  stop-gaps to meet critical energy needs.

I have a hard time being patient with those who simply say "No". Any darn
fool can offer a reason why not to do something. And sometimes their reasons
are as foolish and nonsensical as their thinking. 

For example the claim that LNG will increase greenhouse gasses in Oregon
while saying that most of it won't be used here in Oregon. Say again? If we
don't burn it, it won't add to greenhouse gasses! And why would our energy
consumption go up? More industry, more jobs, more incomes, that's what will
increase energy demands here. If so, is that bad? 

And what's wrong with bringing industry to Oregon to bring our people money?
Would the naysayers rather we opened up the forest preserves for
clear-cutting to produce wood products and then strip the lands looking for
coal? 

No, they do not. Indeed that's the problem. The naysayers have no
alternatives to offer. All they know how to say is NO! 

Any idiot can make a case for not doing something. It takes brains and
expertise to offer a solution with a careful assessment of the risks and
benefits, such as those below. 

Ron D'Eau Claire

Just a few studies by various universities and other agencies include:

http://www.beg.utexas.edu/energyecon/lng/documents/CEE_LNG_Safety_and_Securi
ty.pdf

http://www.energy.ca.gov/2005publications/CEC-600-2005-002/CEC-600-2005-002.
PDF

http://www.energy.ca.gov/lng/documents/2004-05_FERC_CONSEQUENCES_ASSESSMENT.
PDF

http://www.energy.ca.gov/lng/documents/2004-12_SANDIA-DOE_RISK_ANALYSIS.PDF 

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Vickie Madeoneup
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 8:28 AM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Gas Lines are not fun

I have not been able to find much concrete information on the pipeline, but
surfing the web this is what I did find. It is all fairly one sided as I did
not find any information for the pipeline. I will add that a personal friend
of mine that will have the pipeline going through his land said the high
pressure pipe that this pipeline will have is 36" where as the pipeline that
exploded in Washington was much smaller, so he feels if there was an
explosion it would have a far greater impact. He also said he will not be
able to build or grow anything on the easement of the pipe which would be
50-100'. One of his objections is that he doesn't feel as if he has a
choice, even though it is a private, for profit company it can claim eminent
domain.

NO LNG Rally at the Capital in Salem 
    Wednesday, February 6, 11:00 am - 2:00 pm
Lobbying: After the rally Oregon residents will fan out into the Capitol
building to lobby legislators. Meet Oregon friends there and ask them to
make an appointment with their representatives and senator. Appointments are
very important because construction apparently has the Capitol in a mess.
Can't Make the Rally? On February 6, CALL Governor Ted Kulongoski at
503.378.4582. Demand that he stand up for Oregonians, and to veto all LNG
terminals. Tell him that you would rather see an investment in clean,
renewable energy for Oregon. Also contact: Tim McCabe, Gov.'s Energy Advisor
(503) 9866520
tim.mccabe at state.or.us      (503) 378-5690
Michael Carrier, Gov.'s Natural Resource Policy Advisory (503) 9866525
michael.carrier at state.or.us

   Sponsoring Organizations: Citizens Against LNG, Columbia Riverkeeper,
Friends of Living Oregon Waters (FLOW), Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center,
Landowners and Citizens for a Safe Community, No California Pipeline, Oregon
Citizens Against the Pipeline, Oregon Wild, Pacific Green Party, Pacific
Environment, Ratepayers for Affordable Clean Energy (RACE), Sierra Club of
    Oregon, Southern Oregon Pipeline Information Project/No California
Pipeline, Wahkiakum Friends of the River.
   For more information: Pacific Environment website announcement, RACE
website or email nolngrally at verizon.net.
http://www.willamette-riverkeeper.org/documents/WRK_LNG_ALERT.pdf 
"The proposed LNG projects would use supertankers to ferry natural gas from
countries such as Russia, Iran and Peru in supercooled liquid form. At the
processing plant, the imported LNG would be offloaded, revaporized and as
much as 1.5 billion cubic feet per day would be pumped in a new pipeline
across six Oregon counties to a point on the main transmission line serving
California. This project threatens the environmental health and safety of
Columbia River and Willamette Valley residents, as well as habitat for all
species in the area. There is no demonstrated need in Oregon for this new
gas, which has up to 40% greater carbon impact than domestic natural gas.
This pipeline would cross over 1000 creeks, streams and rivers, cut swaths
of ancient forest, and destroy Willamette Valley farms." Come to an
informational session about LNG with Dan Serres from Columbia Riverkeeper
January 29 at 7 pm, Willamette Riverkeeper Office, 1515 SE Water Ave, Suite
102

http://www.friendsoffrenchprairie.org/pdf/Pipelinetapsresidents_11-16-07.pdf
"Many landowners fear the property and environmental damage that could come
with a 50- to 100-foot right-of-way across their property. Their concerns
range from the increased risk of wildfire and introduction of noxious weeds
to destruction of valuable farm and timberland."

http://groups.google.com/group/cascadeclimate/browse_thread/thread/f6186bef2
dc356b0
"NW 
 Natural has become an active participant in this scheme by proposing to 
 build the 220-mile long Palomar pipeline that would rip across Oregon from 
 the key salmon habitats of the Columbia Estuary, across the family farms of

 the Willamette Valley, through the wildlife habitats of the Mt. Hood 
 National Forest and over the Wild and Scenic Deschutes River *- all this in

 order to send gas from the proposed LNG terminals on the Columbia River to
a 
 California-bound pipeline near Madras. *"www.lngpollutes.org

Why should you care about this?
   . There are 3 LNG projects proposed for the Oregon coast.

  . If even one should get built, it will increase Oregon's greenhouse gas
emissions by millions of tons per year.

  . These projects will cost billions, money that could be spent on clean,
renewable energy.

  . The terminals and pipelines linking them to California will endanger
communities, cross and condemn hundreds miles of land, and destroy habitat.

  . LNG is not needed in Oregon; even the Governor admits that most of the
gas is going out of state.

  . Ask yourself: Why is Oregon being chosen for LNG that will go to
California?

Newstimes:
Citizens Against the Pipeline
"At least one city councilor said he'd like the chance to weigh in. Pete
Truax, in an interview after the meeting, noted that the proposed pipe-line
paths would cut a swath between the city and its municipal watershed in the
coast range." " Do you know that the proposed path for the pipelines
carrying this very explosive fuel lies just west of Forest Grove and will
run though Gales Creek and Gaston on its way to California? 
 Do you know that about 90 percent of this gas is destined for California?
Do you know how dangerous this fuel is? Do you understand the impact the
construction of these projects on our land/water/wildlife?"