If a liquefied natural gas terminal gets built on Coos Bay’s North Spit, some argue it would breathe life into the area’s static industrial sector. Others say it would make it harder for people to breathe.

There is little debate the terminal would produce air pollutants. The question is: How much?

In its federal application, Jordan Cove Energy Project details potential emissions for the terminal, as well as pollutants from LNG tankers coming to port. Added together, they account for hundreds of tons of pollution entering the air every year.

But those numbers are misleading, said Bob Braddock, project manager for Jordan Cove.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission asks that companies predict how much their facilities could pollute if they run at full capacity — 365 days a year. Braddock expects the plant would operate on average at 75 percent capacity.

The federal government uses those highest-output scenarios to determine environmental quality standards. If emission levels exceed a certain threshold, the government can require very stringent permits and pollution controls on companies.

At first, it looked like Jordan Cove would avoid those federal standards, though its emissions for nitrogen oxide were close. The federal mandate is 250 tons per year, and Jordan Cove could put out 248 tons from its plant. Then, when federal and state officials were reading the draft Environmental Impact Statement, they noticed a discrepancy.

One section of the document suggested ship engines would be turned off while in port, using onshore power to unload LNG. Elsewhere in the document, the engines were said to be idling.

Both FERC and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality require Jordan Cove to include the emissions from tankers produced during cargo unloading.

The thinking had been that the engines would be idling using onshore power, Braddock said, through a process called “cold ironing.” But after inspecting the fleet of tankers currently in service, it was determined that some ships didn’t have the equipment to operate that way.

The project manager said he still believes Jordan Cove can keep its emissions below the 250-ton level, meaning it will only have to seek permitting from DEQ, which enforces the federal Clean Air Act.

At the same time, attorneys for Jordan Cove have filed documents with FERC suggesting the company will pursue a Prevention of Significant Deterioration permit.

Martin Abts, a natural resource specialist for DEQ, said this means Jordan Cove would have to do more modeling to determine the impacts on local air quality and potentially spend more on pollution-reduction equipment.

He noted that Jordan Cove’s initial studying, which took into account meteorology, local topography and existing polluters, suggested the LNG plant wouldn’t violate air quality standards. Braddock said there are ways for the plant to reduce its emissions. They include having the LNG tankers use a fuel mixture with a higher concentration of natural gas or generate less energy from the terminal’s turbine generator.

“We can meet the standard,” Braddock said. “It’s a question of how to achieve it.”

He expects Jordan Cove to complete emission studies by the end of next week and submit amended air permits to the state within a month.

At least one local allergist thinks people will suffer despite the assurances of state and federal regulators. Dr. Joseph Morgan has argued the plant’s arrival might bring some jobs to the area, but it also will drive away retirees and tourists.

“There will inevitably be a significant detrimental effect on air quality and on the health of residents of the area to be felt acutely by some and chronically by others,” he wrote in a letter to FERC on Nov. 13, 2008.

 Morgan noted some patients couldn’t stay in the Bay Area when sawmills spewed smoke into the air. He believes that time might be coming again if an LNG plant is developed in the area.