Monday, March 31, 2008
Saying No to Shell Broadwater (NY Times Editorial)
NY Times March 31, 2008
Here is our position on Broadwater, the quarter-mile-long floating energy barge in Long Island Sound that could supply New York and Connecticut with a billion cubic feet of natural gas a day — provided it wins regulatory approval, is built as planned and doesn’t get blown up by terrorists or sunk by market forces:
Let’s not.
It is not necessarily the most obvious call. But the benefit that Broadwater promises — convenient satisfaction of the region’s ravening energy appetite — is overcome by more pressing long-range concerns, like finally curbing the addiction to fossil fuels and preventing another industrial incursion into Long Island Sound.
Despite having been instantly and nearly unanimously condemned by public officials and environmentalists on both sides of the Sound, Broadwater has passed several tests since it was introduced in 2004. It is now up to New York State to determine whether the project meets environmental standards under the Coastal Zone Management Act and the Clean Water Act.
New York regulators and Gov. David Paterson may be the last hope for scuttling the project, although officials in Connecticut have promised federal lawsuits, too, if that is what it takes. The battle will certainly go on for a while. Anti-Broadwater activists have expressed serious doubts about whether the federal review of environmental impact was thorough enough. They have also raised credible doubts that the market will even support this huge commitment to new infrastructure.
Long Island Sound could probably survive the addition of a permanent industrial barge the length of four football fields, and fishing boats and pleasure boaters could probably learn to cope with gas tankers, and everyone could probably live with the remote possibility of a big gas explosion on the Sound. But it’s not worth the accumulation of these insults to the Sound and its stressed ecosystem. Natural gas is cleaner than oil or coal but still a globe-warming fossil fuel.
One crucial caveat remains: By steadfastly opposing this project over the gas industry’s insistence that the region needs it, Broadwater’s critics are committing themselves to bearing the cost of the cleaner, greener way. This means a serious commitment to energy conservation and serious investments in wind and solar power, and in retooling existing power plants for efficiency and cleanliness.
Here is our position on Broadwater, the quarter-mile-long floating energy barge in Long Island Sound that could supply New York and Connecticut with a billion cubic feet of natural gas a day — provided it wins regulatory approval, is built as planned and doesn’t get blown up by terrorists or sunk by market forces:
Let’s not.
It is not necessarily the most obvious call. But the benefit that Broadwater promises — convenient satisfaction of the region’s ravening energy appetite — is overcome by more pressing long-range concerns, like finally curbing the addiction to fossil fuels and preventing another industrial incursion into Long Island Sound.
Despite having been instantly and nearly unanimously condemned by public officials and environmentalists on both sides of the Sound, Broadwater has passed several tests since it was introduced in 2004. It is now up to New York State to determine whether the project meets environmental standards under the Coastal Zone Management Act and the Clean Water Act.
New York regulators and Gov. David Paterson may be the last hope for scuttling the project, although officials in Connecticut have promised federal lawsuits, too, if that is what it takes. The battle will certainly go on for a while. Anti-Broadwater activists have expressed serious doubts about whether the federal review of environmental impact was thorough enough. They have also raised credible doubts that the market will even support this huge commitment to new infrastructure.
Long Island Sound could probably survive the addition of a permanent industrial barge the length of four football fields, and fishing boats and pleasure boaters could probably learn to cope with gas tankers, and everyone could probably live with the remote possibility of a big gas explosion on the Sound. But it’s not worth the accumulation of these insults to the Sound and its stressed ecosystem. Natural gas is cleaner than oil or coal but still a globe-warming fossil fuel.
One crucial caveat remains: By steadfastly opposing this project over the gas industry’s insistence that the region needs it, Broadwater’s critics are committing themselves to bearing the cost of the cleaner, greener way. This means a serious commitment to energy conservation and serious investments in wind and solar power, and in retooling existing power plants for efficiency and cleanliness.
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Monday, March 24, 2008
Feds Approve Shell Broadwater: who are these five people?
Joseph T. Kelliher
In the late 1980s, Mr. Kelliher worked for the American Nuclear Energy Council, where he was responsible for nuclear licensing reform and various regulatory issues.
In the mid-1980s, Mr. Kelliher served on the staff of Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. In the early 1980s, Mr. Kelliher worked at the law firm of Preston, Thorgrimson, Ellis & Holman. Mr. Kelliher has worked on energy issues for over 20 years.
Born: January 17, 1961.
Education: Georgetown University, School of Foreign Service, B.S.F.S., 1983; American University Washington College of Law, J.D., Magna Cum Laude, 1994.
Profession: Lawyer
Marc Spitzer
Marc Spitzer was nominated by President George W. Bush to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and confirmed by the U.S. Senate for a term expiring June 30, 2011.
Commissioner Spitzer was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and grew up in Philadelphia.
After graduation from Dickinson College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, he attended the University of Michigan, School of Law.
Suedeen G. Kelly
Suedeen G. Kelly is a Commissioner at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, who has served since November 2003. In December 2004, she confirmed to a second term that expires June 30, 2009. Previously she was a Professor of Law at the University of New Mexico School of Law. Prior to joining the faculty of the Law School, Ms. Kelly served as Chair of the New Mexico Public Service Commission, which regulated New Mexico’s electric, gas and water utilities. She had been a lawyer in the Office of the New Mexico Attorney General and with the New Mexico firm of Leubben, Hughes & Kelly. She also worked for two years in Washington, DC, upon her graduation from law school.
Education: University of Rochester, B.A. with Distinction in Chemistry and a J.D. cum laude from Cornell Law School. She is admitted to the bars of New Mexico and the District of Columbia.
Philip D. Moeller
Commissioner Philip D. Moeller was nominated by President Bush, and sworn into office on July 24, 2006, by Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts, for a term expiring June 30, 2010.
Prior to joining Senator Gorton’s staff, he served as the Staff Coordinator for the Washington State Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities and Telecommunications, where he was responsible for a wide range of policy areas that included energy, telecommunications, conservation, water, and nuclear waste.
Before becoming a Commissioner, Mr. Moeller headed the Washington, D.C., office of Alliant Energy Corporation. Prior to Alliant Energy, Mr. Moeller worked in the Washington office of Calpine Corporation.
Mr. Moeller was born in Chicago, and grew up on a ranch near Spokane, Washington.
He received a B.A. in Political Science from Stanford University.
Jon Wellinghoff
Commissioner Wellinghoff is an energy law specialist, with over 30 years of experience in the field. Immediately before joining the Commission, Commissioner Wellinghoff was in private practice where focused exclusively on client matters related to renewable energy, energy efficiency and distributed generation. While in the private sector he represented an array of clients from federal agencies, renewable developers, and large consumers of power to energy efficient product manufacturers and clean energy advocacy organizations.
Born: May 30, 1949.
Education: Antioch School of Law, Washington, D.C., JD, 1975; Howard University, Washington, D.C., M.A.T., Mathematics, 1972; and University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada, BS, Mathematics, 1971.
Profession: Lawyer.
In the late 1980s, Mr. Kelliher worked for the American Nuclear Energy Council, where he was responsible for nuclear licensing reform and various regulatory issues.
In the mid-1980s, Mr. Kelliher served on the staff of Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. In the early 1980s, Mr. Kelliher worked at the law firm of Preston, Thorgrimson, Ellis & Holman. Mr. Kelliher has worked on energy issues for over 20 years.
Born: January 17, 1961.
Education: Georgetown University, School of Foreign Service, B.S.F.S., 1983; American University Washington College of Law, J.D., Magna Cum Laude, 1994.
Profession: Lawyer
Marc Spitzer
Marc Spitzer was nominated by President George W. Bush to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and confirmed by the U.S. Senate for a term expiring June 30, 2011.
Commissioner Spitzer was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and grew up in Philadelphia.
After graduation from Dickinson College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, he attended the University of Michigan, School of Law.
Suedeen G. Kelly
Suedeen G. Kelly is a Commissioner at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, who has served since November 2003. In December 2004, she confirmed to a second term that expires June 30, 2009. Previously she was a Professor of Law at the University of New Mexico School of Law. Prior to joining the faculty of the Law School, Ms. Kelly served as Chair of the New Mexico Public Service Commission, which regulated New Mexico’s electric, gas and water utilities. She had been a lawyer in the Office of the New Mexico Attorney General and with the New Mexico firm of Leubben, Hughes & Kelly. She also worked for two years in Washington, DC, upon her graduation from law school.
Education: University of Rochester, B.A. with Distinction in Chemistry and a J.D. cum laude from Cornell Law School. She is admitted to the bars of New Mexico and the District of Columbia.
Philip D. Moeller
Commissioner Philip D. Moeller was nominated by President Bush, and sworn into office on July 24, 2006, by Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts, for a term expiring June 30, 2010.
Prior to joining Senator Gorton’s staff, he served as the Staff Coordinator for the Washington State Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities and Telecommunications, where he was responsible for a wide range of policy areas that included energy, telecommunications, conservation, water, and nuclear waste.
Before becoming a Commissioner, Mr. Moeller headed the Washington, D.C., office of Alliant Energy Corporation. Prior to Alliant Energy, Mr. Moeller worked in the Washington office of Calpine Corporation.
Mr. Moeller was born in Chicago, and grew up on a ranch near Spokane, Washington.
He received a B.A. in Political Science from Stanford University.
Jon Wellinghoff
Commissioner Wellinghoff is an energy law specialist, with over 30 years of experience in the field. Immediately before joining the Commission, Commissioner Wellinghoff was in private practice where focused exclusively on client matters related to renewable energy, energy efficiency and distributed generation. While in the private sector he represented an array of clients from federal agencies, renewable developers, and large consumers of power to energy efficient product manufacturers and clean energy advocacy organizations.
Born: May 30, 1949.
Education: Antioch School of Law, Washington, D.C., JD, 1975; Howard University, Washington, D.C., M.A.T., Mathematics, 1972; and University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada, BS, Mathematics, 1971.
Profession: Lawyer.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Oh my! FERC approves Broadwater!
FERC unanimously approves Broadwater. Who exactly are those guys?
Last chance to take action:
http://www.fraudwater.com
Last chance to take action:
http://www.fraudwater.com
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Chance to tell the FERC how you feel about Broadwater
The Docket Number for Broadwater is: CP06-54
Take action: click here to contact the FERC
Tell them:
"Broadwater sets a bad precedent. I oppose the project and I don't like oil companies commandeering public waterways like Long Island Sound."
The Broadwater Docket Number is: CP06-54
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
Take action: click here to contact the FERC
Tell them:
"Broadwater sets a bad precedent. I oppose the project and I don't like oil companies commandeering public waterways like Long Island Sound."
The Broadwater Docket Number is: CP06-54
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
Rell rips into FERC, condemns Broadwater
Rell's Long Island Sound LNG Task Force issued its final report Thursday, charging that FERC neglected its role by creating a flawed, inaccurate and vague analysis of the project while ignoring viable alternatives.
Read full story
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
Click here to let the FERC know how you feel
Read full story
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
Click here to let the FERC know how you feel
Role of New York State Up in the Air
The dramatic downfall of New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer will have impacts far beyond the Empire State, and one of them might be in the middle of Long Island Sound. The governor's voice was expected to be vital in the decision over a proposed liquefied natural gas terminal in New York waters, and his sudden resignation leaves his state's role up in the air.
Read Article Here
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
Read Article Here
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
What We've Heard: "Rudy Giuliani's, consulting company may get an anti-terrorism contract from Broadwater if it is approved."
The Facts
Rudy Giuliani already has the contract. Giuliani Group LLC and a company headed by retired Brigadier General Kenneth P. Bergquist have been retained by TransCanada Corporation and Shell US Gas & Power Company to provide security and strategic consulting services for Broadwater. If this project is so safe, what's the Brigadier General for?
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
Rudy Giuliani already has the contract. Giuliani Group LLC and a company headed by retired Brigadier General Kenneth P. Bergquist have been retained by TransCanada Corporation and Shell US Gas & Power Company to provide security and strategic consulting services for Broadwater. If this project is so safe, what's the Brigadier General for?
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
What We've Heard: "Broadwater technology is safe."
The Facts
This statement is untrue. LNG terminals are so scary there's actually a law preventing new ones from being sited near populations of 1 million or more. Terrorism is such a possibility that Shell hired a company headed by a retired brigadier general to hopefully protect it. Somewhere in the world one commercial ship a day is lost. Marine transport is an error-inducing system, where interconnections often defeat safety goals as well as operating efficiencies.
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
This statement is untrue. LNG terminals are so scary there's actually a law preventing new ones from being sited near populations of 1 million or more. Terrorism is such a possibility that Shell hired a company headed by a retired brigadier general to hopefully protect it. Somewhere in the world one commercial ship a day is lost. Marine transport is an error-inducing system, where interconnections often defeat safety goals as well as operating efficiencies.
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
What We've Heard: "Broadwater will be located too far away to see from shore"
The Facts
This statement is untrue. The Broadwater processing facility will be clearly visible more than twenty miles away and even further on a clear day. Broadwater's bright industrial lights will look like a city at night.
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
This statement is untrue. The Broadwater processing facility will be clearly visible more than twenty miles away and even further on a clear day. Broadwater's bright industrial lights will look like a city at night.
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
What We've Heard: "Oil companies are often given sections of the open water body."
The Facts
This statement is untrue.There are currently no gas supply and storage facilities in the middle of Long Island Sound; Broadwater would be the first and it will set off a "land and water grab".
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
This statement is untrue.There are currently no gas supply and storage facilities in the middle of Long Island Sound; Broadwater would be the first and it will set off a "land and water grab".
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
What We've Heard: "There isn't a ban on LNG facilities in New York City"
The Facts
There is a ban on LNG facilities in New York City and the ban should be extended to Long Island Sound.
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
There is a ban on LNG facilities in New York City and the ban should be extended to Long Island Sound.
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
What We've Heard: "Discharges from the Broadwater facility won't raise temperatures in Long Island Sound "
The Facts
Thermal discharge associated with the Broadwater facility will come from LNG carriers while they are moored at the facility.
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
Thermal discharge associated with the Broadwater facility will come from LNG carriers while they are moored at the facility.
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
What We've Heard: "Broadwater won't affect Long Island's commercial fishing industry."
The Facts
If fishing is affected, Shell will share a portion of their profits with the local commercial fishing industry based on any demonstrated loss of fishing, as well as any gear damage.
If fishing is affected, Shell will share a portion of their profits with the local commercial fishing industry based on any demonstrated loss of fishing, as well as any gear damage.
What We've Heard: "Broadwater wont be a visual blight and wont light up the night sky."
The Facts
Locating a massive industrial plant in the middle of Long Island Sound doesn't make it smaller. Based on Broadwater's own data, it will be visible for more than twenty miles.
Locating a massive industrial plant in the middle of Long Island Sound doesn't make it smaller. Based on Broadwater's own data, it will be visible for more than twenty miles.
What We've Heard: "Broadwater wont require any dredging or new pipelines"
The Facts
Broadwater will require a new pipeline located in some of the deepest sections of the Sound. It will damage the sea floor and take years to recover.
Broadwater will require a new pipeline located in some of the deepest sections of the Sound. It will damage the sea floor and take years to recover.
What We've Heard: "Broadwater is a crazy idea and will never get approved."
The Facts
Broadwater is a crazy idea that's being sheparded through the approval process by very well connected people such as Rudy Giuliani. Eliot Spitzer's troubles are a great distraction and make it even more likely the project will sneak through. Click here to find out what you can do.
Broadwater is a crazy idea that's being sheparded through the approval process by very well connected people such as Rudy Giuliani. Eliot Spitzer's troubles are a great distraction and make it even more likely the project will sneak through. Click here to find out what you can do.
What We've Heard: "The choice is between Broadwater or coal."
The Facts
The choice is between existing natural gas from North America or imported Broadwater gas from unstable and often unfriendly countries.
The choice is between existing natural gas from North America or imported Broadwater gas from unstable and often unfriendly countries.
What We've Heard: "If Broadwater isn't built we will be out in the cold"
The Facts
If Broadwater isn't built, Long Island, New York City and southern Connecticut will continue to enjoy an abundance of domestic natural gas from North America instead of gas from unstable and sometimes unfriendly foreign countries. In addition, if Broadwater isn't built, Shell will not enjoy more than $2.5 billion in expected profits.
If Broadwater isn't built, Long Island, New York City and southern Connecticut will continue to enjoy an abundance of domestic natural gas from North America instead of gas from unstable and sometimes unfriendly foreign countries. In addition, if Broadwater isn't built, Shell will not enjoy more than $2.5 billion in expected profits.
What We've Heard: "Broadwater will save the average household $300 per year in energy costs."
This statement is untrue. The region will spend more or less on natural gas and electricity costs depending on factors such as price speculation, the economy, and events in the Middle East. Experts can only guess what future gas prices will be. There is no way of knowing how much the average household will pay for energy in the future.
What We've Heard: "Relocating Broadwater in the Atlantic isn't feasible."
The Facts
Shell isn't comfortable with Broadwater alternatives being proposed by competitors.
Shell isn't comfortable with Broadwater alternatives being proposed by competitors.
Friday, March 14, 2008
What We've Heard: "The Sound has been "industrialized" for quite some time"
The Facts
This statement is untrue. There's a world of difference between delivering concrete, lumber, steel and fruit to Bridgeport and building a large scale industrial complex in the middle of the Long Island Sound estuary. There are currently no gas supply and storage facilities in the middle of Long Island Sound; Broadwater would be the first and it would be massive (8 billion cubic feet of storage). There's a coal plant in Bridgeport but that doesn't make Broadwater a good idea. In fact, it's an example of the "they did it, so we should be allowed to do it too" point of view that will turn Long Island Sound into a mess.
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
This statement is untrue. There's a world of difference between delivering concrete, lumber, steel and fruit to Bridgeport and building a large scale industrial complex in the middle of the Long Island Sound estuary. There are currently no gas supply and storage facilities in the middle of Long Island Sound; Broadwater would be the first and it would be massive (8 billion cubic feet of storage). There's a coal plant in Bridgeport but that doesn't make Broadwater a good idea. In fact, it's an example of the "they did it, so we should be allowed to do it too" point of view that will turn Long Island Sound into a mess.
Broadwater or Fraudwater? You decide.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
