LNG study: Terminal safe from tsunamis

By Alexander Rich, Staff Writer
Sunday, October 26, 2008 | 36 comment(s)

Font Size: Shrink Font Enlarge Font | Submit your news
A recently completed study found that the berms of the liquefied natural gas terminal proposed for Coos Bay’s North Spit should be able to hold back the waves from a tsunami.

Prepared by the Center for Coastal Margin Observation & Prediction at Oregon Health & Science University, the report used newly developed earthquake scenarios. They were prepared by a team of geologists from the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, Oregon State University and the Canadian Geological Survey. These scenarios were fed into a computer that created models of how wave action would affect the Coos Bay area.

The report, which is expected to be published within the next 10 days, was made possible by advances in computer technology and improvements in the understanding of earthquakes.

Even in the worst-case scenario, the report said, the waves would only reach an elevation of 22 feet on the 55-foot elevation berms.

“With the current suite of earthquake scenarios it is found that tsunami waves do not inundate portions of the site founded above the proposed tank containment berm elevation of 55 feet ... during such an event,” a draft report of the study said.

Jordan Cove Project Manager Bob Braddock said he got the idea for the study last summer, during Coos County land-use hearings for the LNG terminal. One of the speakers mentioned tsunami studies taking place at Cannon Beach, so Braddock looked into the work.

He learned that DOGAMI had run hundreds of tsunami models in the coastal community on Oregon’s North Coast. A second study, in Bandon, began this spring. Eventually, the studies will allow DOGAMI to redraw the entire state’s coastal map with regards to tsunami inundation zones, said George Priest, a geologist who led the Cannon Beach work.

But any such mapping for the Coos Bay site is years away. Priest doesn’t even know when the work will be finished since funding for the project isn’t guaranteed.

So Braddock went to OHSU, where the DOGAMI modeling was handled, and commissioned a team of scientists to take several earthquake scenarios and apply them to Coos Bay. They included one of the larger scenarios used in the DOGAMI mapping effort published in 2002, as well as two from its latest study.

The comprehensive study will consider a couple dozen scenarios, but OHSU used an 280-year earthquake and a 579-year earthquake to represent average and worst-case scenarios, for the Jordan Cove site.

In the worst-case scenario, the first wave arrives at the beach about 20 minutes after the earthquake. Five minutes later, it slams the LNG project site. The second and third waves arrive 55 and 72 minutes after the earthquake respectively.

Such a tsunami would reach the LNG site from two directions: crossing the dunes and flowing through the entrance of Coos Bay and up the shipping channel.

“The ‘dune wave’ reaches the site first due to the shorter traveling distance from the beach,” the report said. “Stacking of waves occurs as the two first waves collide in the shipping channel, resulting in the maximum inundation near the project site (about) 15 minutes after the arrival of the dune wave.”

Braddock said he sought the study because of questions about how far a tsunami would travel inland.

“Original data was vague about the runup,” he said.

The scientific community’s understanding of earthquakes and tsunami has improved greatly in recent years, especially following the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, Priest said. And computers are faster these days.

“For the older maps, we just didn’t have the resources to do many trials,” he said.

For the Cannon Beach study alone, there were more than 200 trials, Priest said.

There weren’t as many scenarios conducted for the Coos Bay site, and the report suggests the conclusions may differ from the more conclusive DOGAMI  study.

For now, “this is the best information out there,” Braddock said.

Yinglong Joseph Zhang, an assistant professor at OHSU who helped with the hydrodynamic wave modeling, said the Coos Bay work should help DOGAMI as it explores Bandon.

“I see a lot of synergy between the two projects,” he said. “You want to test with as many scenarios as possible to see how good they are.”

Although Jordan Cove funded the research, he said it did not influence his work.

“I’m a scientist. My interest is not political,” he said. “If we did something wrong or dishonest, we will be criticized by our peers.”



Public hearing


What: Federal officials will hold four public hearings, including one locally, to take comments on the draft environmental impact statement for Jordan Cove’s proposed liquefied natural gas terminal at Coos Bay and the Pacific Connector natural gas pipeline.


When: 6:30 p.m. Monday.


Where: North Bend Community Center, 2222 Broadway Ave.


Other: The draft EIS was completed Aug. 29. Public comments will be accepted until Dec. 4. A final EIS is expected to be completed by February, with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission scheduled to decide on approval in May 2009.
Next

Have you checked out The World Link Forums?

Comments

The comments below are from users of theworldlink.com and do not necessarily represent the views of The World or Lee Enterprises. Participation Guidelines

Note: There is a maximum of 200 words per comment. If you wish to post more, please visit our forum.
Comment Policy

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

Coos Bay Resident wrote on Nov 2, 2008 11:58 AM:

How much did Professor Zheng get paid from Bobby Boy and Jordan Cove?

Just curious wrote on Nov 1, 2008 1:44 PM:

Did anybody study what a tsunami would do to an LNG tanker if it hit us while the ship was somewhere else in the bay?

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:

I'm still waiting for the engineering drawing to be made public by Bob Braddock of his QUOTE made at a meeting last year with the public:

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:

Let's sum up this Lng at Jordan Cove in a Tsunami hazard zone:

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:

I agree with Richard and Bob that this is just another, of the many, reasons that LNG should be here.

HHS wrote on Oct 30, 2008 7:36 PM:

Just one simple question: What advantage does this project provide the area and is any risk justifiable in one of the best estuary systems remaining on the west coast?

I remember when Bob Braddock said quote wrote on Oct 30, 2008 3:39 PM:

Another example of Bob Braddock's "word" of honest truth:

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:

Looks like a very in-depth report. I'm excited for the new LNG plant. Infrastructure in our neighborhood is going to be a long term win for Coos County.

bob wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:52 PM:

sure its safe. It must be when you pay for a report to tell us so.

Rally wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:15 PM:

I always find it interesting that a person, or company, will pretend to answer something by just putting down words. This practice is called Double Speak and it is used a lot by people who want to get their way without much resistence. Government officials (yes --- politicians) use this technique a lot. It is, therefore, up to the "consumer" to try and find the answer but to otherwise disregard the response. So far, most of the responses from Braddock are Double Speak.

Jane wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:50 AM:

Easy one to answer on state vote for LNG vs Home Depot:

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:

Wow Just A Thought, spoken like a true shill for Bob Braddock.

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:

There are those on one side of the debate who say that the LNG facility should be put to a "vote" --- thumbs up or thumbs down... let's just say that with this precedent setting event... are we now going to vote on whether or not we are going to allow any business to exist in our area? How about a Home Depot - should we have put that to a vote? Walgreens? Fred Meyer's potential new store? Mom & Pop's tourist trinket store and art gallery? --- explain to me why we should hold an expensive public vote on whether there should be an LNG facility and not on any other business venture wanting to come to the area... there are rumors all the time about one business or another wanting to come to this area and they all stay "rumors" - because of the negative political climate created by ill conceived barriers created by those wishing to impinge on someone elses rights... ideas like putting the LNG facility to a vote is exactly the reason why this country's energy policy is completely broken.

Heres a thought for everyone citizen in Oregon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:31 AM:

If this Lng structure at Jordan Cove in a Tsunami zone is so safe why does the county, LUBA, Oregon's appeal court & finally Bob Braddock ignore DLCD requirements? Something says this project is NOT safe or why would everyone that is PRO Lng not address DLCD's requirements? Another thought, why is Oregon state leaders not allowing a state vote on this issue, so they could get that needed info to represent the majority of Oregon's citizens decisions/wishes? I use to be on the fense (Hadn't made up my mind for or against), but now there's something not right about this project at Jordan Cove & now I'm convinced it's very risky & unsafe by how it's been handled in it's approval process! I now understand why some call this Lng project some kind of "scam" by the obvious back door deals that have already happened by ignoring DLCD requirements & not having a Oregon state vote on it!

Ed wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:32 AM:

...as someone with a masters degree in geology and geophysics, I find it amusing to hear the ignorance from the anti-LNG side of this issue. Folks, if you can't trust your local OREGON tsunami experts (DOGAMI and OR State), then you have a problem that only medication can help.

CB Citizen wrote on Oct 26, 2008 7:31 PM:

Dept of Land Conservation....
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:

A 100 foot tsunami is flat-out NOT going to happen in this area, unless we're talking about an underwater landslide event (won't happen off of our coast).

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:

I don't buy anything Bob Braddock says, because one time last year at a meeting with the public, he said his project at Jordan Cove would withstand a 9.3 earthquake & when someone asked him, can you prove it, Bob said he can but forgot to bring his engineering drawings with him! I don't believe a word this used cars salesman is trying to sell...

Dave in CB wrote on Oct 26, 2008 8:09 AM:

I am for the LNG plant.

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:

I heard Bob Braddock is working on a report building a 230 mile long bridge over the 400 (Oregon citizens going to be forced to sell 80 foot wide section of their land so a 36 inch pipe can go through it so Northern California can get some gas) so they can keep their land & Bob Braddock & his foreign investors can become richer....a real win win report coming SOON!

Kari wrote on Oct 26, 2008 7:50 AM:

We get it because the people of Tijuana wouldn't allow it?

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:

Sorry Bob, the majority of Oregon citizens aren't buying your PAID reports on this SCAM, but you & Gov Ted & the rest of the goodoleboy's know that on why there's no statewide vote!

best report money can buy wrote on Oct 26, 2008 7:43 AM:

They ought to call it the Bob Braddock con man report on desperately seeking this California LNG SCAM Oregon doesn't need or want!

Cassandra wrote on Oct 25, 2008 7:53 PM:

Kewl news this, but the LNG scam is dead in the water now.

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:

Funny they would consider the project safe at 22ft. Why does science tell us to expect a 100ft wave. Bob you need to reshoot the shows on TV that predict a 100ft scenario. Then you can once again tell us how safe we will all be.

Scams abound wrote on Oct 25, 2008 5:52 PM:

I see once again if you do not agree with the anti-lng group you are part of the scam. That list is getting long. Now we can add Oregon State University and DOGAMI. Pretty soon there will be more on the list that there are folks in town. The Department of Land Conservation and Development are planners not Tsunami experts (nor are they really planning experts).

Jane wrote on Oct 25, 2008 3:24 PM:

Just another FLAWED report bought & paid for by Bob Braddock! I noticed Department of Land Conservation and Development didn't run the report or get their approval? Until DLCD approves this LNG SCAM at Jordan Cove it's just more of the same from a desperate rich foreignor trying to con some in believing him, in this case Oregon!

The best report money can buy just ask Bob braddock wrote on Oct 25, 2008 3:13 PM:

Until Bob Braddock gets DLCD ok that it meets their requirements of withstanding a 9.0+ Earthquake producing up to 100 foot Tsunami waves, his money bought reports are flawed & useless SCAM/CON to citizens of Oregon!

Kurt wrote on Oct 25, 2008 1:40 PM:

To "Department"

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:

If you look at the Indonesia Tsunami, you will see that the waves never reached above 20 feet and that was a very large earthquake. What more evidence do you need to realize that the LNG terminal is safe? Did all the structures on the beaches of Indonesia come down? No. Do they have the engineering and constrution codes we hav in place? NO!!! It will be built to withstand a earthquake and Tsunami. The laws will not allow anything less. Your agruements have no merit as far as it's concerned with the LNG Terminal.

Ray wrote on Oct 25, 2008 1:02 PM:

The anti-LNG folks have been arguing against science all along, so why would they accept new findings from DOGAMI and several tsunami expert institutions. I bet they believe that the dinosaurs were planted by the devil to fool the christians, too!

North Bend Resident wrote on Oct 25, 2008 11:28 AM:

I wonder if Mr.Rich and THE WORLD NEWSPAPER is for or against this scam. It sure would be nice to know..

everyman wrote on Oct 25, 2008 9:39 AM:

Well, well, well...yet another example of letting people who know what they are doing make sure this plant will be as safe as it can possibly be (not risk-free, but risk-managed)...

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:

A lot of power even in a 22 foot wave, but I'm definitely glad to see that studies have been done! I notice that none of the anti-LNG folks have commented. I'm sure they hope this goes quietly away!

Department of Land Conservation says different wrote on Oct 25, 2008 8:12 AM:

Better pick up one of those pamphlets that says an earthquake off the coast of Oregon will produce a Tsunami wave of UP to 100 feet high. I noticed Bob Braddock didn't get with Department of Land Conservation and Development on this Tsunami zone issue, because he obviously couldn't buy his way in as he did with this report done? Another SCAM by con man Bob....

CBNative wrote on Oct 25, 2008 7:33 AM:

If Mr. Braddock wants this terminal so bad why dont he put it in his families front yard. He can study this area all he wants the outcome will be the same. We dont want that albatros uglying up our beautiful coast.


*Member ID:
*Password:
 

Not already registered?

Do not use usernames or passwords from your financial accounts!

Note: Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required!



*Create a Member ID:
*Choose a password:
*Re-enter password:
*E-mail Address:
*Year of Birth:
 

(children under 13 cannot register)

*First Name:
*Last Name:
Would you like to be added to our mailing lists?
Daily Headlines
Breaking News
Special Offers
 
Advanced Search
Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH

Blogroll

Most Popular

Polls

» View Past Poll Results
» Suggest a Poll

Marketplace

Special Sections

More Special Sections