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

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

The LNG Kiss Goodnight

Controversial natural-gas terminal in Long Beach, Calif., gets the boot

Friends, we are gathered here today to wo0t the death of a planned liquefied-natural-gas terminal in Long Beach, Calif. Citing a city attorney's conclusion that the environmental review of the project "is and in all likelihood will remain legally inadequate," Long Beach officials yesterday unanimously voted to pull the plug. The death of the project, sited in the busiest port in the nation, comes after years of controversy; concerns largely centered around safety in the event of a terrorist attack or earthquake. "This project would have put over 140,000 people who live and work within three miles of that LNG terminal at risk," said Harvey Morris, an attorney for the California Public Utilities Commission. An executive with Mitsubishi-ConocoPhillips, the partnership backing the project, said of the decision, "We're very surprised. ... We assumed things were going through a normal environmental review process." Uh, yes, they were -- and sometimes it actually works.

straight to the source: Los Angeles Times, Gary Polakovic, 23 Jan 2007
straight to the source: Long Beach Press-Telegram, Kristopher Hanson, 22 Jan 2007
see also, in Grist: Terminal Killness


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:

New LNG terminal

Seemes like they have given up trying to put one of those in California because of public outcry and serious dangers. They're now planning on putting one in Coos Bay, Oregon, where there's a lot less people who will raise a stink. I know this because my Mom lives a few miles from where they intend to put it.

The impacts of this new terminal will also include a very long pipeline from Coos Bay to Klamath Falls, to connect with another pipeline into California. Of course, the folks from Oregon are incensed at this installation which they apparently won't benefit from. They already despise the stereotypical Californians and prefer that they take their LNG terminal and shove it up their port (cities).  <GRIN>

Scenic pics at http://Lhfotoware.blogspot.com

LNG - good; dangerous - NO

It is silly to cheer on irrational decisions such as this.

LNG is safe, and a great way to replace much dirtier coal and oil projects.  Cheering when these siting decisions go against them just makes the environmental community look bad.

Better to point to the need for laws that provide compensation for energy facility siting, to reduce what is essentially simply a NIMBY problem.

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