Study: LNG could work at CB

By Alexander Rich, Staff Writer
Friday, May 01, 2009 | 11 comment(s)

Font Size: Shrink Font Enlarge Font | Submit your news

Related Links

Federal officials have concluded the proposed liquefied natural gas terminal on Coos Bay is workable.

If Jordan Cove Energy Project builds its LNG terminal on the North Spit and a 234-mile connecting pipeline, it would damage the environment, but most of that could reduced to "less-than-significant" levels.

"If the proposed Project is found to be in the public interest and is constructed and operated in accordance with the recommended mitigation measures, it would be an environmentally acceptable action," the report said.

The project has only one more hurdle at the federal level. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission must decide whether to approve it. The five-member panel, with new head Jon Wellinghoff, hasn't set a date to rule on the application, but it is expected to happen within a few months.

The report points to concerns about earthquakes and tsunamis. It recommends design reviews to ensure the project meets FERC Seismic Guidelines and the 2007 Oregon Structural Safety Specialty Code. It said Jordan Cove has designed the terminal so its foundations would be above the run-up height of the worst-case tsunami scenario.

Construction of the terminal is expected to destroy about 50 acres of intertidal and subtidal habitat, while construction of the pipeline would affect about 3,000 acres of forest and woodland, 600 acres of agricultural lands, 500 acres of grasslands and 100 acres of non-riparian vegetation.

It expects the project would adversely affect several animal species, including marbled murrelets, coho salmon, Northern spotted owls and the Lost River sucker, a fish.

The project isn't expected to have a significant adverse impact on commercial fisherman, the report said.

Construction would last about three years, employing about 970 people, with an average of about 470 people working at the site each month. The report said 40 percent of the workers would come from the local area.

Jordan Cove Project Manager Bob Braddock looked today through the report's conclusions and recommendations and hadn't seen anything too surprising.

"No surprises whatsoever, which in itself is a surprise," he said.

He anticipated that FERC would have new requirements.

Local anti-LNG activist Jody McCaffree said she did notice differences from the initial report, and she is disappointed there are some concerns raised by state departments that don't appear to be addressed.

"At least they are admitting there are some negative environmental impacts," she said. "So that's something.

"We feel there are some major impacts, such as pollution and hazard issues, that we don't know how they can address those to be in compliance with the regulations," she added.

Martin Callery, director of communications for the Port of Coos Bay, hadn't seen the report this morning, but he wasn't expecting any surprises.

One complaint from opponents was that the draft EIS didn't give enough consideration to other power-generating alternatives. This final study includes more than 30 pages of alternatives, such as biomass, geothermal as well as proposed natural gas pipelines from the Rocky Mountains and competing LNG terminals in Oregon. It also includes four options for where the terminal could be built, including at the former Weyerhaeuser mill site and at the nearby former Henderson Ranch.

Even with federal approval, the project may not begin soon. Jordan Cove hasn't signed contracts with energy companies to use the facility - and there is the prospect of opponents suing.

Jordan Cove Conclusion



Previous
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

Common Sense wrote on May 14, 2009 12:35 PM:

TAG URIT,

Only way the container business will be here is if the California LNG at Jordon Cove is rejected & "IF" the USA citizen tax payers foot the entire bill for the rail line that the Port clowns have no experience & no $$$ to operate it...

P.S. The California LNG SCAM will actually raise Oregon's citizen's gas bill if the gas is used here, due to it being OVER 2 times more expensive, that's besides offering ZERO full time jobs to locals & polluting the air 24/7/360 days a year!

Add it up, GREAT deal for con man Bob Braddock, BAD deal for Oregon & the USA!

Tag Urit wrote on May 7, 2009 7:51 AM:

To quote The World Newspaper
October 14, 2006
"To be a star in that universe, Coos Bay needs infrastructure - a mega-terminal, deep channel and modern railroad to shuttle stacks of containers to distribution points east."

Tag Urit wrote on May 7, 2009 7:48 AM:

To Doge, I think that you meant no "juan" would want to live in?
When is the container plant opening to fit in with the Port's new railroad?
Seriously, if a person wants to see the ocean, they drive to Florence or Bandon!!

doge wrote on May 5, 2009 11:28 PM:

The real concern is that if this project is built, it would turn Coos Bay into a stinking industrial slum that no wone would want to live in, and your house and mine wouldn't be worth a crap!

Jane from NB wrote on May 5, 2009 6:46 PM:

Geeeee...

This California LNG SCAM is a great deal for the area:

1) LNG is OVER 2 times for expensive then natural gas used by Oregon citizens right now.
2) LNG pollutes the area.
3) LNG increases the USA dependence on hostile countries like Russia, Iran, Algeria, etc., which will embrago us in the future as OPEC did to the USA in the 1970's.
4) 400 Oregon property owners will be forced to give up their 80 foot wide section of land to these foreignors.
5) LNG ship has a 2 mile hazard burn zone that will come with a 1/2 mile of populated area here affecting 17,000 people living here.

Finally, the 30 to 50 full time jobs will be filled by outsiders, because no local will qualify due to education & experience requirements. Add it up & it's a ZERO for this area, Oregon & the entire USA! Say NO to the California LNG SCAM!

Common Sense wrote on May 5, 2009 6:56 AM:

What part of the following don't you understand:

1) Increases our dependence with hostile countries like Russia, Iran, etc for our future energy needs.

2) UNSAFE situation of LNG ships having known 2 mile hazard burn zone & traveling within a 1/2 mile of populated area here (affecting 17,000 people).

3) California & many areas have rejected LNG for being a air polluter.

4) LNG is OVER 2X more expensive then natural gas used today by Oregon citizens.

5) How 400 Oregon property owners will be FORCED to sell their land to foreign investors.

6) How explosion in Appomattox County, VA could happen here at Jordan Cove (Miles instead of yards).

7) How LNG ship will have negative effect on fishing boats & NEW Airport flights.

8) How no local will qualify for any of the jobs at Jordan Cove.

This LNG SCAM is not worth the little tax money collected from vs HUGE risks involved! Every poll taken & even Oregon's Dept of Energy says NO to this SCAM!

everyman wrote on May 4, 2009 1:54 PM:

You won't get much sympathy (or is that empathy) if your main arguments against an LNG terminal are the ecosystem being destroyed and the snowy plover (are you serious....is that all you've got?)

Now, about those evil federal employees...funny, but wasn't it the same type of federal organization that created regulations protecting your other two concerns (snowy plover and environment)?

Seriously, these can't be your main concerns...can they?

CBRezident wrote on May 2, 2009 8:28 AM:

I have more than a few issues with this proposal First:When should 5 federal employees be deciding what is good for the residents of the Bay area? they were listed as a last hurdle at the federal level.
2nd:The loss of habitat,not one mention to the fact that the area is also the nesting grounds of the snowy plover,which everyone who lives here knows that that area is closed during their nesting time.
3rd:This area is built around one great ecosystem that has sustained us for centuries so why would we want to jepordize any part of that for a few temporary jobs.People of this area already get freaked out over sewage spills can you imagine what would happen to our tidal flats if that crap were to ooze out? leaks happen in all pielines dont think it wont happen here too.and that pipeline all the way from the Rockies,yeah ok.
I relize the need to attract new industry to this area but does that mean that we need ones that have a negative impact on our natural resources.

Jethro wrote on May 1, 2009 7:02 PM:

40% of the workers being from the local area is one heck of a lot better than 0%, which the NIMBY squad seems comfortable with.

Let's not forget that more money than just the worker's paychecks will be flowing into the port.

I've seen tsunami concerns listed as one of the reasons not to build at Jordan Cove. I have stated this before and I will state it again: Any tsunami large enough to damage the Jordan Cove facility would make the potential damage from that facility negligible in comparison to the damage that the area will incur from the tsunami itself.

tsunami wrote on May 1, 2009 3:31 PM:

this isnt a perfect world and the bay area is far far from a perfect place

1313 wrote on May 1, 2009 1:39 PM:

Only 40% of the workers coming from locals isn't to high of a percentage. Is this worth all the safty issues, etc. etc. to give only 40% of the work to our local people ? ? ? ?
I CERTAINLY DON'T THINK SO.....!
And this is for the construction, what about after that is finished, how many locals will be working there ? ? ? ?
I'd really like to know how many, wouldn't you ??????


*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