Thursday, April 19, 2007

Rejection hurts Broadwater plan

4/19/07
For opponents of a natural gas terminal proposed in Long Island Sound, it was heartening news. A major off-shore facility similar to the local project was rejected in California, signaling that public outrage can effectively be mobilized to block powerful, well-funded opponents.
Citing environmental concerns, California’s State Lands Commission two weeks ago turned down a lease for a proposed liquefied natural gas facility off the coast of Southern California. The move seriously damages prospects the facility will go forward. Officials with Broadwater, the joint venture behind the local plan, say the West Coast events change nothing here. But it could be a sign that public opinion has shifted against these monstrosities.
The case against the Sound plan makes sense for many reasons. The top concern is the need for a 7-mile "no-go" zone around the terminal and any ship delivering frozen natural gas there. This isn’t the middle of the Pacific Ocean, and the Sound just isn’t all that big. At only 11 miles off Branford and 9 miles away from Long Island, the facility would cut off huge swaths of otherwise navigable water.
Then there’s the safety factor. Apparently, no one has looked into what exactly would happen in the event of a worst-case cascading fire encompassing all five proposed storage tanks. Unlikely though that might be, we ought to know how much danger we — and anything else alive in the area — could be in.
Also, the question of how much the state will benefit if this is built has remained unanswered. The promise of hundreds of dollars off utility bills seems ludicrous — the project has been geared from the start toward Long Island and New York City. The happy talk on savings calls into question the credibility on all aspects of the plan.
Since Connecticut has virtually no sway over the various boards and panels whose approval the terminal requires (it will be planted conveniently just over the imaginary line in the middle of the Sound dividing us from New York) it’s unclear what the next step is. But the lesson of California is a strong one. Connecticut and New York opponents would do well to listen.

No comments: