Support Grist
Support nonprofit, independent environmental journalism.
Donate to Grist.
Daily Grist

Tools: print | email | discuss | write to the editor | subscribe | RSS
Daily Grist

Terminal Killness

City officials' reluctance may halt LNG terminal in Long Beach, Calif.

The debate over a $700 million liquefied-natural-gas terminal in Long Beach, Calif., may be coming to an end. City officials have long been squeamish about the proposed facility due to its proximity to the urban center. "It's a risk for accident and terrorist attack, and it's not a good business deal for the city," says Mayor Bob Foster. "Putting an LNG terminal in the port is like putting a giant kick-me sign on the back of our city." Harbor officials, overworked and tired of waiting for City Hall to make up its mind, may halt an environmental impact report, which would effectively shut down the process. But Sound Energy Solutions -- the Mitsubishi-ConocoPhillips venture behind the proposal -- is still trying to woo the public. At a recent forum in a church basement, SES safety manager Peter Micciche went so far as to toss a lit cigarette into a small container of the fuel, saying, "LNG has never and cannot explode." Even if it's targeted by smoking terrorists? We feel unconvinced.

straight to the source: Los Angeles Times, Gary Polakovic, 12 Dec 2006
straight to the source: Long Beach Press-Telegram, Kristopher Hanson, 07 Dec 2006


Comments: (2 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Username: Password:

Forgot your password? Enter your username and click:

Add global warming and it's neutral, right?

So, I can't help but think that many will jump on this report to support claims that global warming is not a problem.  If we have just the right amount of nuclear war (or just some nuclear engineering) then we should be able to compensate for any warming and make the planet whatever temperature we like.  Some like it hot, some like it cold, how will we ever agree?

Asst. Prof. of Physics Univ. of Wisconsin-River Falls
Livestock ID not really "off the table"

As usual, the Feds pretend to be backing down; however, although they claim not to be making livestock identification mandatory at the national level, the individual states are going to mandate it, enticed by large Federal grants. In Texas where I live, USDA is giving around 1.4 million dollars to implement the livestock ID plan. Also, farmers and ranchers will be eventually forced to comply in order to conduct business, esp. if exporting. Just because the Feds have backed down, it doesn't mean that the plan is dead! According to Derry Brownfield, www.derrybrownfield.com, it's being forced by the cattle producers/meat packer monoply, the only segment of livestock that hasn't been totally monopolized by corporate agriculture, unlike poultry and hog production has been. It's not for food safety as there are already adequate laws in place; it's about control of the market. Small producers are getting caught in the battle and will be forced out of business. Also, visit www.nonais.org for more information.

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?


ADVERTISING POLICY


About Grist | Support Grist | Jobs Board | Archives | Grist by Email | RSS | Podcasts
Gristmill Blog | In the News | Ask Umbra® | Muckraker | Victual Reality | 'Tis the Season | The Grist List | The Bottom Line



Grist: Environmental News and Commentary
a beacon in the smog (tm) ©2007. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with a sense of humor®.
Webmaster | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Trademarks