Note: There is a maximum of 200 words per comment. If you wish to post more, please visit our forum.
curt wrote on Feb 1, 2008 11:23 PM:
I agree we should not be suckers! Oregon, and especially Coos Bay, does not need
the environmental, economic, and health/safety boondoggles presented by
LNG terminals. California, where all this gas is headed, has kicked these
speculators off its' coast, so they come up here and propose placing it on an active
fault zone, in a tsunami prone area? That's just crazy!
And that's just the beginning of a long list of problems for us, from loss of marine habitat, pollution,
potential explosions, airport interference, 231 miles of stream, river, and forest devastation 90ft wide
for the pipeline (Douglas County on record as opposed), to the demonstrated lack of need for the gas,
and the offhand rejection of the hearing officers report by our commissioners.
I dont know if that is sheer stupidity or blind greed, but we need to shelve this boondoggle and
elect some representatives with a long term vision of sustainable development in a healthy
environment, so people in the younger generation who cant even spell can live and work here
their whole lives if they wish.
the environmental, economic, and health/safety boondoggles presented by
LNG terminals. California, where all this gas is headed, has kicked these
speculators off its' coast, so they come up here and propose placing it on an active
fault zone, in a tsunami prone area? That's just crazy!
And that's just the beginning of a long list of problems for us, from loss of marine habitat, pollution,
potential explosions, airport interference, 231 miles of stream, river, and forest devastation 90ft wide
for the pipeline (Douglas County on record as opposed), to the demonstrated lack of need for the gas,
and the offhand rejection of the hearing officers report by our commissioners.
I dont know if that is sheer stupidity or blind greed, but we need to shelve this boondoggle and
elect some representatives with a long term vision of sustainable development in a healthy
environment, so people in the younger generation who cant even spell can live and work here
their whole lives if they wish.
Thomas wrote on Feb 1, 2008 7:12 PM:
SMITTY, LNG will not help our economy much at best, and all things considered will likely end up costing taxpayers a lot more than anything gained from it.
Terrorists want to terrorize, and we would be making that easy for them by putting sitting duck LNG tankers close enough to thousands of innocent people for a simple kamikaze attack to generate as much terror in America as 911.
Terrorists want to terrorize, and we would be making that easy for them by putting sitting duck LNG tankers close enough to thousands of innocent people for a simple kamikaze attack to generate as much terror in America as 911.
Michael... wrote on Feb 1, 2008 3:22 PM:
Here's a thought for ALL people that don't have an pro (For) or con (Against) opinion on LNG:
How's it is possible that an LNG storage unit is being considered in a Tsunamis zone (Jordon cove) that is "Legally" prohibited from building Schools, Police stations, Fire stations, Hospitals, Library's, etc in that Tsunamis zone according to Oregon's own law? Could that mean that Tsunamis zone is really an UNSAFE area & that's why Oregon put that law into effect long ago? No one could argue that LNG is 100% safe, without any possible risks or possible problems, thus why again would a LNG storage unit even be considered in that UNSAFE Tsunamis zone in the first place?
Food for thought for sure...
How's it is possible that an LNG storage unit is being considered in a Tsunamis zone (Jordon cove) that is "Legally" prohibited from building Schools, Police stations, Fire stations, Hospitals, Library's, etc in that Tsunamis zone according to Oregon's own law? Could that mean that Tsunamis zone is really an UNSAFE area & that's why Oregon put that law into effect long ago? No one could argue that LNG is 100% safe, without any possible risks or possible problems, thus why again would a LNG storage unit even be considered in that UNSAFE Tsunamis zone in the first place?
Food for thought for sure...
Smitty wrote on Jan 26, 2008 9:25 AM:
I was a Cryogenic Tech in the Marine Corps. Everyone thought we were a danger because we produced Oxygen. Everyone thought that if something went wrong in our plant the base would explode. Oxygen doesn't explode. I'm not too worried about the LNG. No one will want to target the Bay area. Especially since there's not as much coming through our port as it did in early years. North Bend and Coos Bay are no threat to other countries. We have nothing. Maybe that's what the council is thinking, if they deny industries coming here, we'll stay below the radar.
Smitty wrote on Jan 26, 2008 9:15 AM:
I'm tired of the opposing side to the LNG. This town has been denied many assets. First the Steel Mill, With that Mill and the American Bridge in Reedsport, they could depend on each other. Not only that but our town needs good paying jobs. After the mills shut down this town can't support the working class.
Thomas wrote on Jan 25, 2008 5:04 PM:
to JANICE W: Putting our families at risk is only considered by them as a cost of doing business.
Ed wrote on Jan 25, 2008 4:36 PM:
Janice, I know there is a lot of propaganda out there to weed through, both for and against LNG. I always believe an industry can be judged by its track record. The bottom line is that the LNG industry has proven itself time and time again. Japan is more prone to geologic disasters than we can even imagine here, yet they welcome LNG with open arms. It fuels their country safely, year after year. Tsunamis, volcanoes, earthquakes, etc are a way of life there, as is LNG. Don't believe the propaganda...search out information for yourself.
Janice W wrote on Jan 25, 2008 2:35 PM:
Terrorists aside....what about human error with ship captain or pilot or damage to the LNG tanks from earthquake and tsumani. It is my understanding that when LNG is released it becomes vapor and this is when it can be ignited from various possible sources. Our prevailing winds come from the North and blow over most of the population. This risk is too great for 50-60 jobs...it's too great for any number of jobs.
Ed wrote on Jan 25, 2008 11:05 AM:
Thomas, do you honestly and truly believe that Mr. Terrorist is going to spend years of planning and years of preparing to die, only to target Coos Bay, a little town that the rest of the U.S. could care less about, let alone Mr. Terrorist the mideast. Sadly, even the terrorists know that LNG does not explode, detonate, or anything remotely similar to a stunt from the latest action movie. Burn, yes...explode, no. And for a terrorst, a slow burn isn't nearly as exciting.
the younger generation wrote on Jan 25, 2008 10:50 AM:
if 9-11 never would have happened then you wouldn't be worrying about the LNG. Yes i worry about the LNG, but have you forgot there are LNG pipes buried all through out the area...mhm and to think no one really protested the LNG pipe coming in...thats weird....mhm that could just blow up and take out the neighborhood...
Thomas wrote on Jan 25, 2008 10:12 AM:
ED, Japan is an improbable terrorist target, Boston has extraordinary security for its little LNG facility, and Savannah doubtless can and will do the same. What do you think Coos Bay can do to stop a Lear jet full of explosives from diving into an LNG tanker as it slowly makes the turn near Charleston or elsewhere along the bay? Terrorists want the easiest big bang for their buck, and will look at us like low hanging fruit ready to be plucked. If LNG tankers come into our unprotectable harbor, then the only unknown is on which day one will certainly be attacked.
Grant freman wrote on Jan 25, 2008 10:09 AM:
i find it interesting that lyn could only comment on the secret meetings, and not the point of my comment...that we (as a country and community) need to redirect our efforts towards sustainable non polluting energy sources... i smell a tiny brain in that head of lyn's
Ed wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:42 AM:
Coos Bay...terrorist target #1! OH NOES!!! Savannah, Boston, every major city in Japan be darned!
Thomas wrote on Jan 24, 2008 2:35 PM:
to THE YOUNGER GENERATION: Those adults who are really concerned for your best interests worry about the very real threat to many people from an LNG tanker hit by terrorists in Coos Bay, which other adults say is worth that danger to us for the sake of some business. Acting according to ones own perceived interests without consideration or feeling of guilt for its affect upon others is sociopathic and wrong. They might be willing to risk death in hopes of benefiting somehow from LNG, but by what ethic or logic can that sacrifice be demanded of everyone else here? Please check out the Disney version of PINOCCHIO and watch it all the way through several times for some easy to grasp lessons in how the real world operates.
The Younger Generation wrote on Jan 23, 2008 7:10 PM:
Well you want to talk about Katrina...you know whos falt that was? well it wasn't Mr. Bush like everyone wants you to think...It was the governors falt! If her would have declared a state of emergcy then bush could have sent in the nation guard and FEMA, and other federal help...you have to act fast, like Arnold in Cali. he declared a state of emergency and federal aid was quick to come in. But thats only if u act fast. But your forgeting the facts that makes are area so good for shipping. It is the largest deep-draft port between San Francisco and Puget Sound. So maybe some MEGA factories need to come to the area
Tina wrote on Jan 23, 2008 1:07 PM:
To Younger Generation...Older people have more life experience and they have learned to recognize a mega energy corporation preying upon a town in need. They know the people of this area want to work and they also know that they couldn't locate this LNG in California where the gas will ultimately be sold so, our so called leaders offered this huge energy corporation a free ride if they locate here. They will not pay taxes in the North Bay Urban Renewal District and the taxpayers will end up footing the bill for much of the dredging of the bay and more. In the end they will probably sell this facility to another foreign energy company and take their profits and run and if there is an accident here with LNG don't expect any help from the company or the federal government. We can expect the same help the people of New Orleans received after Katrina.
the younger generation wrote on Jan 23, 2008 10:50 AM:
why dose everyone look at the bad in stuff??? when is the last time one exploded in the US???? IT HASN'T!! If the LNG comes in its going to create jobs and spur other companies to look at the north spit. that would create more jobs. plus where going to get tax income, if every time something tries to come in the "older folks" try to stop it?? i don't understand why you don't want jobs to come in??
cliff wrote on Jan 23, 2008 7:24 AM:
It shocks me how the voices of the people are muted by political power and industry dollars. Big business has proven over and over again, its willingness to sacrifice lives in the name of progress. This will make this area a terrorist target and will likely book us for a future episode of "Worst Engineering Disasters". I wonder how much protection a 20 foot sea wall will provide these storage tanks after an earthquake had destabilized there foundations.
Holly wrote on Jan 19, 2008 7:38 AM:
Lyn, you are correct. The SCDC meetings are not secret IF you have the $10,000 membership fee. Since you as a taxayer have paid this fee several times over, why don't you try to attend one of these meetings and see just how far into the door you get? Maybe you could be the one to see what they are up to.
Janice W wrote on Jan 18, 2008 8:10 AM:
How do we know that the LNG terminal and pipeline will bring good-paying jobs? What proof do we have? A promise? 50-60 jobs in exchange for the privilege of living downwind of LNG ships that belch out plenty of pollution for us to breath. The taking of privately owned land by eminent domain for a pipeline that will carry gas to California??? Don't be a sucker, ask questions and demand the real facts and do your own investigation. Don't believe everything you are told. Afterall, that's how our nation bought the lies that sent us into this illegal war in Iraq. Why don't we have good paying jobs here could it be NAFDA and the policies of this and other administrations?
lyn wrote on Jan 18, 2008 7:18 AM:
hey Grant Freeman if these meetings are so secret how do you know about them?
lyn wrote on Jan 18, 2008 7:14 AM:
First off LNG opponents need to get a life, second, if anyone has noticed (obviosly the LNG opponents have not noticed) This area IS IN NEED OF GOOD PAYING JOBS. As far as the dangers the opponents are making a mountain out of a molehill. I feel that if it were another big outfit other than LNG the opponents would fight that as well. So LNG opponents just leave well enough alone you will probably end up losing this fight anyway.
Janice W wrote on Jan 17, 2008 4:07 PM:
The problem here is we have a few people in elected and appointed positions in our county government and Port of Coos Bay, as well as the SCDC who represent a narrow business view of what our area should be. No one has evaluated the needs of the Bay Area and the diverse resources we have available and put a comprehensive plan together for growth and development that involves industry, tourism, art and culture, education, transportation and innovation. All of these thing make a desirable community. LNG alone...just like retirees alone won't solve the problem. We need a city planner and a committee made up of a wide variety of citizens to work on a plan for our future.
Marie wrote on Jan 17, 2008 2:18 PM:
This in my opinion has gone on for far to long. We had to pack up and leave our families children to relocate to beable to make a living. When are the people in Coos County going to wake up either bring industry in or classify Coos Bay as a retirement town. There is room there for the enviromentalist and working people. I would love to come back but there is no jobs to support a family.
Sea Sprite wrote on Jan 16, 2008 5:26 PM:
Besides jobs-which are VERY important-what is the long-term benefit of the LNG depot? How many people who live here WANT it? Why don't we just vote on it? Coos Bay and North Bend voters should decide if the risk is worth. There are a lot of people who would be willing to relocate out of the danger zone. Then who'll fill those jobs?
FUTURE ? wrote on Jan 6, 2008 2:43 AM:
I'm for bringing jobs into the area, but are we not growing more concerned with the use of fossil fuels and trying to shift gradually to other sources? Long term isn't this natural gas thing going in they opposite direction of the newly evolving, changing policies on carbon emmisions? In ten-fifteen years are we going to be left with a terminal that is no longer as useful because of laws governing the use of natural gas??
Thomas wrote on Jan 5, 2008 1:23 PM:
Reply to GRANT FREEMAN: If an LNG terminal is allowed to be sited in Coos Bay, then the next step they'll take will be to also build a facility for receiving all the nuclear waste transported by ship that is destined for burial at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. That's the only product which makes any economic sense at all to import into this very mysterious container project the port is pushing too.
Tina wrote on Jan 5, 2008 12:15 AM:
I believe the No California Pipeline group would be considered a "property rights" group. The pipeline threatens to take property from Oregonians by eminent domain and this group is using whatever means necessary to protect an owners right to keep and do what they want with their own property.
Who would have a problem with protection of personal property rights!
Who would have a problem with protection of personal property rights!
Grant Freeman wrote on Jan 4, 2008 4:07 PM:
Hmm...is there a reason all the other targets for LNG terminals have fought against it? Maybe we should think of that. I am all for bringing in new industry, but something definitely smells in Denmark when there are such secretive meetings and the public has so little say about what is going on here. Who is REALLY going to benefit? who is really going to suffer. Noone seems to be able to give a clear answer....I would like to see us being a bit more progressive in the pursuit of renewable enrgy sources by inviting wind power industries etc to our beautiful coast.
Jim wrote on Jan 4, 2008 4:48 AM:
I just dont like special interest environmental groups having as much sway as they seem to, especially if they are from nowhere near the place. You dont enjoy "authoritarian" behavior by "corporate shills", I dont like "my god we are going to die if this goes in" panic and scare tactics. Maybe we are not so different...
Steve wrote on Jan 3, 2008 11:01 PM:
Lets make sure that LNG never comes to the bay area. What about METH? Could all the money spent on fighting for and against this new business have been spent eliminating METH from our community?
As for the environmentalist issue... These people are no different from anyone else. They are not a breed apart. This area has been bleeding jobs since the late 70s and we all know what happens when the sharks sense blood in the water. This area is seen as easy prey. The we did it before we'll do it again mentality kicks in and becomes the wind beneath their wings.
Where is the line drawn. Can we know that and work from there? Or do we continue to ruin the lives of people just trying to make a living. Perhaps the environmentalists could send us all to school to learn other skills and support our families while we do, rather than dump all the donated money and tax dollars in the laps of legal teams.
As for the environmentalist issue... These people are no different from anyone else. They are not a breed apart. This area has been bleeding jobs since the late 70s and we all know what happens when the sharks sense blood in the water. This area is seen as easy prey. The we did it before we'll do it again mentality kicks in and becomes the wind beneath their wings.
Where is the line drawn. Can we know that and work from there? Or do we continue to ruin the lives of people just trying to make a living. Perhaps the environmentalists could send us all to school to learn other skills and support our families while we do, rather than dump all the donated money and tax dollars in the laps of legal teams.
Thomas wrote on Jan 3, 2008 3:12 PM:
Jim, you know full well that blaming the timber industry woes on the spotted owl is a Red Herring debunked by numerous studies, but that is getting too far off the current topic of putting a life-threatening LNG terminal in the middle of Coos Bay. Thoughtful people do not embrace simplistic propaganda from corporate shills to support dubious schemes that are against their best interests. I wish the WORLD's comment feature was a real-time forum so that we could really argue about the nonsense which repeatedly is foisted upon us with almost no chance for locals to do anything about it other than take it to the courts. Most strange how much those on YSOTA like authoritarianism?
Jim wrote on Jan 3, 2008 2:46 PM:
Thomas, your comments smacks of condescencion, which does not surprise me. Ever occur to you that people can disagree with you and still be thoughtful?
I recall that every time something would come up that might actually spur the economy and give Coos Bay a chance, some external environmental group would throw in so many roadblocks and lawsuits that the things never happened.
This is a problem that goes way back - OUTSIDE environmental wackos coming down and getting in the way of things in an area where they dont live. Can you say "spotted owl?" Spotted owls dont have to have old growth forest to survive but folks like you buy everything the environmental nuts toss your way.
Tell the people in Coos Bay who have lost their jobs that they are not thoughtful. Many, many, many, many have lost their livelihoods thanks to the irresponsible intervention of the far left environmental nuts.
Think about that.
I recall that every time something would come up that might actually spur the economy and give Coos Bay a chance, some external environmental group would throw in so many roadblocks and lawsuits that the things never happened.
This is a problem that goes way back - OUTSIDE environmental wackos coming down and getting in the way of things in an area where they dont live. Can you say "spotted owl?" Spotted owls dont have to have old growth forest to survive but folks like you buy everything the environmental nuts toss your way.
Tell the people in Coos Bay who have lost their jobs that they are not thoughtful. Many, many, many, many have lost their livelihoods thanks to the irresponsible intervention of the far left environmental nuts.
Think about that.
Beaver Hill Bob wrote on Jan 3, 2008 11:33 AM:
http://timrileylaw.com/LNG_LiquefiedNaturalGas.htm
Read it and YOU decide.
Personally speaking, I would NOT want to be living down wind from one of these things.
Read it and YOU decide.
Personally speaking, I would NOT want to be living down wind from one of these things.
Thomas wrote on Jan 3, 2008 9:40 AM:
Reply to JIM: Nobody did anything about the fish processing deal, though the commissioners really should have been hauled into court over the illegal way they pulled that scam on us. Only 20 minutes public notice is OK with you? Having the county own a business in competition with private business is fine by you? We're just lucky to have passed that fiasco on to the Port of Coos Bay, so that strange entity can aborb the costs into their odd budget. Maybe if most of the schemes foisted upon us here weren't such obviously bad ideas, then there wouldn't be opposition to them by the thoughtful portion of our population?
Holly wrote on Jan 3, 2008 9:29 AM:
I'm sure I don't know what is "extreme" about wanting to protect your property rights like "No California Pipeline Inc." is doing. This LNG proposal affects property owners all the way to the California line because of the threat of eminent domain for the pipeline route.
Jim wrote on Jan 3, 2008 8:05 AM:
you could just as well call environmental extremists "corporate." A FEW people seem to think they can dictate things...how many times have I seen someone try to develop something that would benefit the entire community (jobs, economics, etc)such as a fish processing plant, coal mining, etc, only to have some environmental group from SOMEWHERE OTHER THAN THE BAY AREA come in and raise such a fuss that it never happens.
Holly wrote on Jan 3, 2008 7:35 AM:
"Just an Observer" might prefer the corporate or dictative structure to democracy, but having "one guy" make the decision that affects thousands of folks just isn't the way it works in America. Maybe "Observer" could try moving to Iran. They have lots of natural gas and LNG there and "one guy" to make decisions.
Jody wrote on Jan 2, 2008 11:15 PM:
Yes, it is a shame that the investors in the Jordan Cove proposal are wasting so much money that could be going to alternative renewable energy solutions that would not only be profitable but would take us far into the future. You have to wonder about these people when a simple third grade math equation is all that is needed to show them that this LNG terminal is inevitably doomed to be a failure!
The news today that PG&E (a partner in the Jordan Cove Project) has signed a letter of intent to acquire 25.5 percent interest in El Paso's Ruby Pipeline project seems to indicate that at least one of Jordan Cove's partners has gotten a clue.
The Ruby Pipeline project is proposed to go from the Rocky Mountain Basin west to Malin, OR and will be transporting of course, "cheaper" domestic gas!
The news today that PG&E (a partner in the Jordan Cove Project) has signed a letter of intent to acquire 25.5 percent interest in El Paso's Ruby Pipeline project seems to indicate that at least one of Jordan Cove's partners has gotten a clue.
The Ruby Pipeline project is proposed to go from the Rocky Mountain Basin west to Malin, OR and will be transporting of course, "cheaper" domestic gas!
Fred wrote on Jan 2, 2008 7:47 PM:
The county has spent more than $2 million of your tax dollars (that could have been spent for deputy sheriffs and other public safety) preparing to fight in court almost $14 million in claims that have been asserted against the county by MasTec the last natural gas pipeline contractor. If Mastec prevails in court, where is that $14 million coming from? Isn't it time that we sent the whole bunch of county commissioners packing?
Just An Observer wrote on Jan 2, 2008 6:40 PM:
Nothing like bureaucratic bloat and too much procedural stuff to make everything grind to a halt or at best, add substantial costs. I'd have ONE meeting PERIOD. The person or persons having the final say are there in attendance. They give the thumbs up or thumbs down and the deal is done so we can all move on. We all know FERC is the 800 pound gorilla in the mists here folks, so why have all this unneeded waste of money on lawyers and appeals that are going nowhere? FERC should send their guy, listen to our concerns and then have that guy make the needed adjustments, approve a plan and get on with the project. If we did things like this in World War II, we'd all be speaking Japanese in Oregon...LOL!
Thomas wrote on Jan 2, 2008 4:18 PM:
Reply to GENE: This lousy LNG scheme is anything but "inevitable", especially now that we've lost the railroad and America's economy is heading for a serious recession at a minimum. Playing for time is a time-honored strategy when everything appears to be stacked against you beforehand ........ including the votes of those we elected to office supposedly to represent our best interests in times like this.
The World welcomes your comments about stories, and we encourage a robust dialogue on this site. All comments must meet reasonable standards of decency and civility.
Please follow these basic rules:
- No defamatory comments about individuals or businesses.
- No deliberately false information.
- No obscenity or racially offensive language.
- No harassment, verbal abuse, threats or personal attacks.
- No information that invades another person's privacy.
- No business solicitations or charitable solicitations.
Comments that violate these standards will not be posted. Users with repeated violations may be banned from future posting.Comments will be approved throughout the day during business hours. After hours and weekend comments may not appear until the following business day. It may take a couple of hours before comments are approved.
The World generally does not edit comments, but we reserve the right to edit any comment that does not meet our standards.
Close Guidelines