noLNG

VISIT US AT THE FAIR

Come by our booth at the Wahkiakum County Fair. You'll find lots of good information. See you there!

articles about the 20 million

Longview Daily News
Daily Astorian

Both sites have comment areas at the end of the articles if you'd like to add to the discussion. The Daily News site has a number of comments already.

Don't forget to stop by our booth at the Wahkiakum County Fair, open now until Sunday.

Coalition Blasts LNG Developers Payouts as a “Cheap Insult”

Columbia River Clean River Coalition
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 17, 2006

Kelso- Longview, WA - Texas energy speculator Northern Star, which has proposed construction of an LNG mega-port and pipeline in the Columbia Estuary at Bradwood, OR, gave $ 100,000 to the Wahkiakum Community Foundation it what it claimed was a no string attached gift for the betterment of the community. Community members and others working to stop the pipeline, however, blasted the payment and promise for future payments as an insult to the integrity and intelligence of the communities around the Estuary that would be put at risk by LNG project. 

“Now we know what Northern Star thinks it will cost them to buy off Wahkiakum County,” says Terry Kriesel Chair of Wahkiakum Friends of the River. “What’s unbelievable is that they think we would trade off our safety, our economy and our community for little more than a bag of peanuts each year.”

George Exum who lives on Puget Island agrees, “This is an incredible insult to our community and one that is so juvenile and unsophisticated it really makes me wonder who is advising Northern Star. We knew that they would try to buy us off just because of the risks this project poses to our economy and our families, but we just didn’t know it’d be for so little”

“Northern Star is on one hand refusing to go through the basic local land use permitting process and then at the same time trying to say they want to support the local community,” explains Brent Foster, Executive Director of Columbia Riverkeeper. “This type of payoff is something I’d expect to see in a third world country and I think it’s really going to backfire on Northern Star.”

“This attempt to basically bribe our community is as outrageous as it is cheap,” adds Longview resident Vonda Brock, a grandmother whose land Northern Star has threatened to condemn for the LNG pipeline.   “If they think that we would put our families and our land at risk for such a small amount of money they’re just crazy!”

Sandra Davis with Landowners and Citizens for a Safe Community also reacted strongly to the proposed payoff. “This is really a sad statement about how much Northern Star thinks our community is worth.  They stand to make billions of dollars by putting our community, our economy and our families at risk and yet they think they can buy our support for this high risk project for a $ 100,000 or even $ 500,000 a year?”

Columbia River Clean River Coalition
433 13th Street
Astoria, Oregon 97103
cleanColumbiaEnergy@gorge.net

Contacts
Brent Foster, Columbia Riverkeeper (541) 380-1334
George Exum (360) 431-8679
Terry Kriesel (360) 849-4334
Vonda Brock (360) 636-1766
Sandra Davis (360) 577-1043

Download a PDF of this press release

State Agencies Want Voice in Bradwood Landing LNG

From the Clatskanie Chief

A meeting called by Clatsop County, six state agencies, plus two federal agencies, left no doubt that they want their say over issues related to the proposed Bradwood Landing liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal and the 34 mile bi-state pipeline through portions of Clatsop, Columbia and Cowlitz counties.

    Held Thursday, Aug. 3, at Knappa High School, the meeting was called by the Oregon Department of Energy (ODOE), Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL), Oregon Department of Water Resources, Clatsop County, the National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Department.

The article includes a list of concerns voiced by the National Marine Fisheries Service, including:

• Alternative locations for the Bradwood facility have not been explored to prevent a significant loss of floodplain habitat, off-channel waterways, and wetlands...
• The site configuration of the terminal does not appear to avoid or minimize environmental effects to the maximum extent practicable.
• The site configuration of the terminal does not provide significant setbacks from adjacent waterways and displaces riparian habitat.
• The effect of the railroad realignment on the bank stability and water quality of Hunt Creek has not been provided in the resource reports.
• The fate of riparian areas crossed by horizontal directional drilling or boring  (needed for the pipeline to cross the various waterways) is not clear.

Kitimat, British Columbia LNG importation facility approved

The Canadian has given final approval to a proposed LNG importation site in Kitimat, BC, Canada (click for map) giving the Kitimat LNG company a head start over the other proposed west coast LNG sites. Kitimat is a truly remote location (really, it is...did you click the map?) with no apparent cluster of people who would be put at risk by the construction of such a facility.  This is a significant difference from Northern Star's proposed Bradwood siting which, as you know, puts a number of people at risk and would also interfere with merchant shipping for upriver cities like Longview and Portland.

Kitimat LNG's director of communications and consultation Patti Schom-Moffat was interviewed for the BC North Sentinel:

“I think we’ve got a very strong argument that Kitimat is the gateway to the North American market and the Alberta oil fields,” Schom-Moffat emphasized.

Despite the fact the project is currently running six months behind the original schedule, it is still the LNG project closest to becoming a reality on the west coast of North America.

“If you look at the map, it is absolutely pimpled with proposed LNG projects,” Schom-Moffat said. “It’s a race and, while we didn’t come in as early as we would have liked to, we’re still first.”

Rival LNG projects include Westpac in Prince Rupert and Bradwood Landing near Knappa Oregon.

Westpac is projected to start operations in 2011 and Bradwood Landing in 2010.

KLNG is scheduled to come on-line in 2009.

The complete article from the BC North Sentinel

Press release from Kitimat LNG
Announcement of decision from the Canadian Environment Minister

Letter to Brian Baird

Wahkiakum Friends Of the River
P. O. Box  273
Cathlamet, WA. 98612

8.10.2006

Dear Representative Baird,

Thank you for taking  time to meet with the citizens of Wahkiakum County on July 7, 2006 in a town hall meeting.

As a follow up to the  meeting and per your request, we  submit, from Wahkiakum citizens the following comments and concerns.

Please note, these questions were also submitted to the Wahkiakum County commissioners on June 6, 2006 and have not been addressed as of this date.

1. If the LNG facility is built at Bradwood, OR. , who will handle the local complaints about air and noise pollution? Where will calls be directed and who will be in charge of resolving the complaints during the construction phase and then during the plant and vessel operating phase?

2. How much toxic waste will be forced into the air or the river from this facility? Many of these toxins are cancer causing agents. In the past, Wahkiakum County has been reported as having the highest per capita rate of cancer in the U.S. Is the LNG facility going to make it even worse?

3.With a proposal or study submitted by , Senator Patty Murray,  Senator Gordon Smith, and yourself consider the Lower Columbia River Estuary for National Heritage Area status, how will a LNG facility and the related vessel traffic with armed escorts and thruster tugboats fit in with the plan?

4. Since a LNG plant across the Columbia  River  will have a big effect on us for years and years, how do you stay updated on the politics, economics, and  safety issues surrounding this site?

5. FERC asked NorthernStar to “Provide a map and table that illustrates and lists all residences and commercial structures within 2.0 miles of the LNG terminal.” This 2.0 mile area is important because the federal government has recognized safety and exclusion zones around a LNG terminal. How can the Bradwood LNG terminal be sited and still comply  with the “Separation Distance” as per 49 CFR, Part 193?

6. What is the purpose of the exclusion zone? To protect the LNG carrier and facility  or to protect the people in the nearby areas and their properties. How can either one be realistically  achieved on this narrow river?

7. Can one be on the Puget Island beaches or at Skamokawa Vista park during LNG carrier transit?

8. NorthernStar submitted to FERC comments related to Columbia River bank stabilization of the shoreline, but there was no mentioning of the Puget Island shoreline which will be exposed to the thrust of these super tugs. Who will be taking care of and paying for the erosion?

9. How can the government ensure the safety of our citizens in case of an event or accident at the proposed facility? Who will take care of our elderly in case of an evacuation? Can  immediate medical care be provided to potential victims of such an event? Wahkiakum County infrastructure cannot support or respond to an event of this magnitude or scale. How will our infrastructure be enhanced to accommodate these needs and who will pay for material and staffing?

10.How will our home owners and the County be compensated for the decrease in property values and reduction of the tax base?

11. Will there be an Early Warning system in place for tracking of vapor clouds of Methane gas? Will CAMEO (Computer Aided Management of Emergency Operation) or a similar system be provided? Who will manage this system and pay for training and staffing?

12. The proposed facility will be using a tremendous amount of water from the Columbia River for hydrostatic testing of storage tanks and pipeline, ship ballast, ship equipment cooling, fire suppression testing, well water during construction, etc.   How will this  affect  the Lower Columbia River Estuary?  Is there a need to spill more water at the dams during fish migration?

13. The Submerged Vaporizers will create 160GPM, which equals 84,000.000GPY. Treated for acidity and dumped into the Columbia River at 0.4 of salinity, this be 10 times the current salinity of the river water at this location. What effect will this have on the estuary? 14. Dredging of the turning basin will be very controversial because of previous comments from Puget Island residents and submittal of data to FERC pertaining to a study in 1993 for the Lower Columbia River Bi-State Program, (eventually became known as the Lower Columbia River Estuary Program) which details heavy contaminants in the vicinity of Bradwood. Although a private company tested the dredge spoils and found no contamination or found contamination within acceptable limits, other river testing over the years has proven that the current state of science cannot detect contamination in dredge spoils as precisely as testing contaminant levels in benthic organisms and fish. As the dredge spoils are being used for fill on the proposed site, how will this affect the down wind residents of Puget Island and beyond?

15. It strikes us that, when comparing Bradwood to other U.S. LNG facilities by capacity v.s. total facility footprint, Bradwood would be the smallest in acreage with a very limited buffer zone to aquatic or natural zoning.   What would be the impact on this environmentally sensitive larger area?

We as concerned citizens of Wahkiakum County thank you for being receptive to take our comments and opinions. We look forward to answers  as these issues will affect our way of life.

Sincerely,

Wahkiakum Friends Of the River

George Exum, Co-Chair
Dr. Terry Kriesel , Co-Chair
Frans G. Eykel, Puget Island,WA.

(Download pdf)

DEQ Fact Sheet on Bradwood

Excerpt -Updated 8/1/06 by Pete Dalke

LNG TERMINAL

Northern Star proposes to construct and operate an LNG import and storage terminal at Bradwood, located about 38 miles up the Columbia River from its mouth in Clatsop County. Facilities would include:

• Two insulated LNG storage tanks
• Boil-off gas management system, and sendout pumps
• Ambient air vaporizers to convert LNG into natural gas
• Electric substation and distribution lines and emergency diesel-fueled generator at the terminal
• Ancillary terminal facilities
• Measurement controls and natural gas metering facilities

LNG PIPELINE

The proposed 36 inch diameter natural gas sendout pipeline will extend approximately 34 miles from the terminal through Columbia County to an interconnection with the Williams Northwest Pipeline system in Cowlitz County.

REGULATIONS & PROCEDURES

The Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005 overrides states' siting authorities and confines most authority for siting decisions to FERC. However, states retain authority for several environmental issues. The 2005 Act specifies that states retain authority to:

• Certify water quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
• Determine that LNG facilities are consistent with a state's adopted program under the Coastal Zone Management Act; and
• Issue permits for air emissions

Oregon's Governor has designated the Oregon Department of Energy (ODOE) as the lead agency to work with FERC.

DEQ's ROLE

Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is the agency for drafting, issuing, and ensuring compliance with the necessary Air Quality and Water Quality permits. DEQ regulatory considerations will be coordinated with ODOE.

Kulongoski Supports LNG

It is also important to write and/or call the Governor expressing your dismay at this statement.

Tuesday, August 01, 2006

JEFF MAPES

The Oregonian

Gov. Ted Kulongoski proposed increasing the state's tax credit for energy efficiency and alternative fuels on Monday, an idea quickly seconded by Republican rival Ron Saxton.

The Democratic governor told a forum on the "hydrogen economy" that he wants Oregon to be a leader in developing alternative energy, including fuel cells powered by hydrogen.

Kulongoski said he wants the next Legislature to increase the tax credit for energy projects to $10 million over five years, from the current maximum of $3.5 million. Businesses would be allowed to take a credit on as much as half of a project's cost, compared with 35 percent now.

Michael Grainey, director of the state Energy Department, said the bigger tax break would cost state government an estimated $6.5 million by the 2009-11 budget cycle.

Saxton's campaign manager, Felix Schein, said his candidate backs the more generous tax break, believing that the "more the state can do to encourage alternative fuels, the better."

Kulongoski promoted his record on alternative fuels, noting that he has ordered state government to meet all of its electricity needs with renewable energy by 2010.

He said the bigger tax credit could encourage development of hydrogen fueling stations in Oregon for a new generation of cars. The National Hydrogen Association says there are 62 hydrogen fueling stations in the U.S. and Canada, largely to serve test fleets.

Responding to audience questions, Kulongoski said he doesn't know whether he would support locating a hydrogen pipeline in Oregon. He noted that he has opposed offshore drilling and siting an oil refinery in the state. But he said he would support locating a liquefied natural gas terminal in Oregon, preferably in the Coos Bay area.

The hydrogen economy meeting was part of the HydroVision 2006 conference, sponsored by the hydroelectric industry, at the Oregon Convention Center this week.

Jeff Mapes: 503-221-8209; jeffmapes@news.oregonian.com

©2006 The Oregonian

Calpine LNG Proposal Decision Contested

Groups Take Calpine LNG Proposal to Court of Appeals

August 3, 2006

Warrenton, OR – Two organizations filed an appeal today with the Oregon State Appeals Court contesting a decision by the Oregon State Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) that allowed the City of Warrenton to re-zone waterfront conservation lands to industrial zoning as a part of their effort to allow Calpine Corporation to develop a Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) import facility near the mouth of the Columbia River.  People For Responsible Prosperity and Columbia Riverkeeper filed the appeal based on LUBA’s ruling that the City did not have to evaluate the serious economic impacts the LNG mega-port would have on the local fishing economy or the project’s public safety threats. 

Cheryl Johnson, an Estuary Coordinator for Columbia Riverkeeper, criticized the City of Warrenton’s decision to move forward with the project.  “If LNG tankers were to come in to our River the economic impact of this project will reverberate through every community around the Estuary.  The LUBA decision allows a bankrupt company to move forward with this high-risk project before even trying to address how it would hurt local economic interests like shipping, crabbing and fishing.”   

Brett VandenHeuvel, attorney for the appellants, summarized the main challenge for the appeal, “We are challenging LUBA’s ruling that Warrenton did not have to consider the negative economic effects on fisherman and others that will be caused by the LNG terminal.  LUBA found that Warrenton could defer this analysis until some uncertain point in the future, but we believe Warrenton had a legal responsibility to consider the impacts of the zone change before it adopted it.”

Dale Beasley, local crab fisherman, gave his perspective on the likely impact of LNG development on his industry.  “LNG traffic will impact our historic freedom of movement in the future, or even immediately.  Our industry is highly dependent on access, and in the winter any disruption could cost us a whole day of work, which is unacceptable.”  Beasley also cited Calpine’s bankrupt status as a reason for concern, and questioned Warrenton’s decision to push the project forward despite negative impacts to the local economy.

The appeal will be formally filed today with the Oregon State Court of Appeals.