Note: There is a maximum of 200 words per comment. If you wish to post more, please visit our forum.
Coos Bay Resident wrote on Nov 2, 2008 11:58 AM:
Just curious wrote on Nov 1, 2008 1:44 PM:
Who knows where that wave might take it?
I would like to know how this structure would withstand a 9.0 earthquake wrote on Nov 1, 2008 7:55 AM:
Bob Braddock said quote:
"This structure at Jordan Cove will withstand a 9.3 Earthquake in that Tsunami zone"
Then someone asked him immediately, can you prove it & Bob said he could, but forgot to bring the engineering drawing of the structure!
Have DLCD or any other independent expert look at that so called engineering drawing of that structure at Jordan Cove (If one exists?) proving this can withstand a 9.3 Earthquake as you said to the public! Better yet spend your money on a Oregon state run vote & if the majority say NO, then you agree as you have said in the past, cancel this LNG SCAM at Jordan Cove & LEAVE forever!
Dave from NB wrote on Oct 31, 2008 3:26 PM:
DLCD says Up to a 100 foot Tsunami wave after an earthquake, Bob Braddock's PAID report says it will reach 22 foot?
DLCD requirements were ignored by county, LUBA, appeal's court & now by Bob Braddock?
Does anyone see the obvious here? I see this report & the rest hiding the fact that this Lng SCAM at Jordan Cove is NOT safe & will NOT meet DLCD requirements on why is it being ignored?
I agree with the posts below, stop with the "best reports money can buy" Bob Braddock & have a Oregon state vote, since you did say "If Oregon doesn't want Lng or Me, I'll be Gone"!
coos bay native wrote on Oct 31, 2008 1:14 PM:
HHS wrote on Oct 30, 2008 7:36 PM:
I remember when Bob Braddock said quote wrote on Oct 30, 2008 3:39 PM:
Quote: "If Oregon doesn't want Lng or me, I'll be GONE"
Every poll taken says NO to Lng (Including Oregon's Dept of Energy), this project has been appealed every inch of the way through the courts, most counties in Oregon are against it! Yet Bob Braddock is still here & trying to sell his SCAM here!
If you (Bob Braddock) are still not convinced the majority of Oregon citizens aren't against your Lng SCAM at Jordan Cove, then have a Oregon state vote on it, since you don't mind spending your $$$ on reports???
Richard wrote on Oct 29, 2008 9:23 PM:
bob wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:52 PM:
Rally wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:15 PM:
Jane wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:50 AM:
1) Home Depot is not a risky, explosive, air polluting business that is not going to take 80 foot wide section of land away from 400 Oregon citizens & has a LNG ship (Having a known 2 mile hazard burn zone) delivering LNG (Within a 1/2 mile of populated area here) to Jordan Cove!
2) Home Depot wouldn't place their business in a Tsunami zone due to safety issues to their employees/products due to insurance reasons!
Bottomline: LNG project is a safety issue & Home Depot is not, thus LNG vote needed along with meeting DLCD requirements!
I agree ignoring DLCD requirements & NO Oregon state vote equals SCAM to every Oregon citizen!
Kari wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:00 AM:
Shame on every one of you sucking a paycheck to put peoples' lives in danger for a few shekels from Braddock.
Shame.
Just a thought... wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:39 AM:
Heres a thought for everyone citizen in Oregon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:31 AM:
Ed wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:32 AM:
CB Citizen wrote on Oct 26, 2008 7:31 PM:
That brochure used exactly the same modeling (DOGAMI), and if you actually READ the brochure you would have seen that it said, "In a few rare cases, local conditions amplified the height of a tsunami to over 30 m (100 ft)." Amplifying conditions are NOT crossing a series of dunes or traveling up a river channel. In general, the historic height over the last few centuries on the Oregon Coast is 45 feet, and again would not reach that height after crossing dunes.
Of course, none of the anti-LNG folks has let facts or science stand in their way so far, why should you be an exception?
Mr E wrote on Oct 26, 2008 3:03 PM:
However, I want more study on this. The shifting sand and the subsidence that will take place in this area make me question if their estimated tsunami height may be a bit too short.
I heard bobs next report is proving lng is not a fossel fuel that pollutes the air wrote on Oct 26, 2008 8:43 AM:
Dave in CB wrote on Oct 26, 2008 8:09 AM:
BUT I refuse to subscribe to scam research.
ANY research that conveniently omits key data (Dept. of Land Conservation & Development as but one example)AND is funded by a single side of the "argument" for/against LNG siting here begs significant questioning.
Let us please use reasonable research and address both sides of the issue with ALL available data so we do not mislead curious citizens.
This "report" is simply the use of supportive data in such a way as to present terribly erroneous conclusions. SHAME!
I heard bobs next report is a 230 bridge over the 400 land owners wrote on Oct 26, 2008 8:02 AM:
Kari wrote on Oct 26, 2008 7:50 AM:
G R E A T ........
Who knew they were smarter than us?
Like anyone could believe this report paid by Bob Braddock wrote on Oct 26, 2008 7:47 AM:
best report money can buy wrote on Oct 26, 2008 7:43 AM:
Cassandra wrote on Oct 25, 2008 7:53 PM:
So is the railroad.
So is the ship scraping.
So is the container terminal.
So is the coal bed methane.
So is the chrome mine.
What's next EVERYMAN; more money into the airport?
bob wrote on Oct 25, 2008 6:27 PM:
Scams abound wrote on Oct 25, 2008 5:52 PM:
Jane wrote on Oct 25, 2008 3:24 PM:
The best report money can buy just ask Bob braddock wrote on Oct 25, 2008 3:13 PM:
Kurt wrote on Oct 25, 2008 1:40 PM:
If we have a 100 foot tsunami, the LNG plant will be the least of our worries.
Scam wrote on Oct 25, 2008 1:16 PM:
Ray wrote on Oct 25, 2008 1:02 PM:
North Bend Resident wrote on Oct 25, 2008 11:28 AM:
everyman wrote on Oct 25, 2008 9:39 AM:
Ahhhh, Jane, Common Sense....Don't you just love it when a plan comes together!!!
CB Citizen wrote on Oct 25, 2008 9:14 AM:
Department of Land Conservation says different wrote on Oct 25, 2008 8:12 AM:



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