 |
LNG: |
|
|
LNG: |
|
|
associated with an alternative fuel that's coming to California. – KNBC LISTEN UP! NOW HEAR THIS! FREMONT NORTH CANNOT WIN! In its formal application for Clearwater Port, a liquefied natural gas (LNG) regasification project at Platform Grace, NorthernStar Natural Gas Inc. would route 36-inch, 1,200 psi pipelines next to our neighborhood. One of these, marked in red on the map, begins at the Mandalay Power Plant. It doglegs on Harbor Blvd. and crosses the fields eastward to Victoria Ave. where it travels north to Gonzales Rd., turns right and goes all the way to Del Norte Blvd. The other possibility starts out the same way but continues to Doris Ave./Camino del Sol eastward to Del Norte. Please understand that there are high-pressure natural gas pipelines all over Oxnard. These are 8- to 12-inch pipes under 250 psi or less according to Ken Ortega, Oxnard's Public Works Director. A 36-inch, 1,150 psi line is a whole 'nother thing! All the proposed pipelines start off using City of Oxnard rights of way. Our City Fathers could simply say "no" right now thereby saving NorthernStar a lot of money and us horrendous dangers.  NorthernStar's full-scheme proposed pipeline map. |
|
|
PICTURE THIS HOLE AT GONZALES AND VENTURA! This 30-inch natural gas pipeline took out 12 campers in the desert. How many folks would perish, how many people burned, disfigured, and otherwise injured, were this to occur in Oxnard?  NorthernStar Natural Gas Inc. took over Crystal Energy's Clearwater Port proposal. One of their options is to run a high-pressure natural gas pipeline from the Mandalay power plant area across Gonzales Road to Del Norte Blvd. and then north to the gas pumping station north of Mesa School. This means thousands of Oxnard residents would be in constant danger from potential explosions as pictured above. The Ventura County Fire Chief has publicly stated that there are an average of six (6) natural gas pipeline accidents each month somewhere in our county. Why do we humans persist in pursuing the most dangerous methods of energy production? Southern California deserts are capable of producing enough electricty to power all energy needs (24/7/365) in the Continental United States via commercial solar operations! This technology exists: Small such electricty generating plants are now being constructed, others have been running for 20 years or so. The only real deterrents are cost and slow returns on investment. Just as with personal computers (the original IBM 8086 PC cost $4,000) these costs and returns will greatly improve as their use widens. Let's 'Go Solar' thereby saving our planet and, incidentally, saving thousands of human lives! Corrosion of Natural Gas Pipeline Rupture and Fire Near Carlsbad, New Mexico, Aug. 19, 2000 Accident Synopsis: At 5:26 a.m., mountain daylight time, on Saturday, August 19, 2000, a 30-inch diameter natural gas transmission pipeline operated by El Paso Natural Gas Company (EPNG) ruptured adjacent to the Pecos River near Carlsbad, New Mexico. The released gas ignited and burned for 55 minutes. Twelve persons who were camping under a concrete-decked steel bridge that supported the pipeline across the river were killed and their three vehicles destroyed. Two nearby steel suspension bridges for gas pipelines crossing the river were extensively damaged. According to EPNGS property and other damages or losses totaled $998,296.
|
|
No future for LNG on the West Coast Commentary by Thomas D. Elias Memo to NorthernStar Natural Gas, Woodside Energy, Mitsubishi Corp., and other would-be developers of liquefied natural gas facilities in California and elsewhere on the West Coast: Forget it. At least for another decade or two. That’s a message they should have gotten in the early days of last winter, when reports from the former George W. Bush administration’s Energy Department and the staffs of two key state agencies concluded that neither California nor the United States in general will be needing more LNG anytime in the foreseeable future. In fact, those reports predicted a huge drop in LNG imports over the next 20 years, with the federal experts expecting that LNG will account for just 3 percent of all natural gas used in America by 2030, compared with 16 percent today. — Ventura County Star – 20090403 Environmental Watchdogs Say New Data Indicate LNG 'Bubble Has Burst' Groups Draw Attention to Federal and State Reports that Downplay Need for Projects Off Local Coast While two liquefied natural gas projects off the distant Malibu coast wend their way through the bureaucratic approval process, their critics say these, and any other projects, are not needed, as the "LNG bubble has burst." Talk of LNG as the transition fuel on the path to cleaner energy is said to have run its course, the critics add. Members of California's clean energy coalition, including Pacific Environment, Columbia Riverkeeper, Santa Monica Baykeeper, and Citizens Against LNG, have been in the forefront of the charge against new LNG projects on the West Coast. A coalition of these organizations opposing dependence on foreign liquefied natural gas, called Ratepayers for Affordable Clean Energy, or RACE, responded this week to two new state and federal reports that it says contain energy projections that show "the LNG speculative bubble is over." — Malibu Surfside News – 20081225 Liquified natural gas terminal would undercut green economy Opinion by Rory Cox Back on the LNG docks, Asian demand has been skyrocketing, and the world price of LNG is now almost three times that of U.S. natural gas. New discoveries of natural gas all across North America have flooded the regional pipelines that supply the entire nation, making LNG imports obsolete. Importing LNG turned out to be the Enron scam of a new generation of energy speculators. Two LNG terminals built on the Gulf Coast just went online, but are not attracting cargoes. Things are so bad at one LNG company that it laid off 200 workers and is trying to resell the one load of LNG that it has accepted. — The Oregonian – 200812082003 Proposed Offshore LNG Terminal Earmarked for Downsizing Project that Seeks to Anchor 22 Miles Off Point Dume to Eliminate One Processing Vessel The multinational oil company behind a proposed floating liquefied natural gas terminal 22 miles off Point Dume has asked officials to allow a half-year delay so it can downsize its plans. A spokesperson for Woodside Natural Gas says the firm will eliminate one of the two processing ships it had originally proposed to permanently station in Santa Monica Bay, and scale back the pipelines it will ask to lay across the floor of Santa Monica Bay and into Los Angeles. ... Doll said the downsizing is not a reaction to world economic catastrophes, or the recent price and supply trends that have made LNG cost nearly triple the price of domestic natural gas. ... Although LNG is touted as a clean fuel, substantial energy is needed to compress natural gas and move it across the Pacific, and some studies show importing LNG is not such a source of clean energy when the worldwide "life-cycle" impacts are factored in. A major opponent of West Coast LNG projects noted that Woodside is dramatically cutting the size of its import terminal one week after Solar L.A. was unveiled, an ambitious plan to generate one tenth of Los Angeles's electricity with the sun. "If this LNG project didn’t make sense in the first place, it makes even less sense now," said Rory Cox at Pacific Environment in San Francisco. — Malibu Times – 20081204 Add 'unreliability' to LNG Commentary by Tom Elias The poll numbers on liquefied natural gas this fall were startling, especially to individuals who attended the only large-scale public hearing ever held in California about LNG. By a 63-to-19 percent margin, the usually reliable Field Poll found, Californians favor importing LNG and using it as part of the state's energy supply. The result certainly did not reflect the feeling in an Oxnard civic auditorium just 18 months ago, when the state Lands Commission heard from almost 2,000 individuals overwhelmingly opposed to siting an LNG importing terminal off the coast of Ventura County. ... The Ventura County project did not go forward mostly because its sponsors could not prove any need for LNG in California. But if the poll finding is accurate, most Californians are so rattled by recent high prices for gasoline they are willing to let energy companies do almost anything, so long as those companies claim it will somehow add to fuel supplies. But what if voters were to learn those supplies are unreliable? And at least half of the supply scheduled to come to the only LNG plant now prepared to supply California turns out to be precisely that - completely unreliable. — Press-Telegram – 200810270007 Is LNG flame burning out? Critics say liquefied natural gas is difficult to secure, expensive to produce and not much cleaner than coal-generated power Domestic production of natural gas is falling as demand continues to shoot up, a situation that over the past few years has positioned liquefied natural gas as an energy saviour. Have no fear, the industry has argued, there are massive reserves of clean-burning natural gas around the world just begging to be tapped. If that gas can be cooled to the point where it becomes a liquid, is shipped across the ocean to North America and turned back into a gas, then worries about domestic shortages become a non-issue in the context of global supply. LNG, according to a recent white paper from the Canadian Gas Association, "is becoming an increasingly effective part of the Canadian and Ontario natural gas supply bundle." Such overseas supply will meet 15 per cent of North American natural gas demand by 2020. The National Energy Board, at the same time it announced an anticipated 15 per cent decline in domestic natural gas production between 2007 and 2009, confidently asserted last October that over the long term, "Canadians should rest assured" that their natural gas needs will be met as unconventional sources, including LNG, enter the market. Or maybe not. — Toronto Star – 200804120130 Instead of fossil fuels, invest dollars in clean-energy supplies Commentary by Rory Cox and Robert Freehling Re: Joe Desmond's March 2 commentary, "Radicals, energy policy don't mix." Pacific Environment has just published a new report called "Collision Course" that makes a case for what is really common sense: California cannot reduce greenhouse gases while at the same time increasing its commitment to consuming fossil fuels. Importing liquefied natural gas from overseas would be a huge commitment, tying us to long-term fossil-fuel purchase contracts amounting to many billions of dollars. A better choice is to invest these same dollars in clean energy, and state law already commits us to do this. The main problem is that many people think that needing energy means that this need must be met with fossil fuels. But there are other options. — Ventura County Star – 20080311 LNG harmful energy choice, group says In a full-frontal attack on the dozen liquefied natural gas terminals proposed along the coast of California and Oregon, a Bay Area environmental group says the purported "clean energy" is as bad as coal and will harm the state's much-vaunted push to cut greenhouse gases in the coming decades. The authors of the report — "Collision Course: How Imported Liquefied Natural Gas Will Undermine Clean Energy in California" — said Tuesday that importing the superchilled fuel is too costly, will cause too much pollution and ultimately, they say, the fuel is unnecessary. "LNG is the wrong choice," said Rory Cox, of Pacific Environment and a co-author of the report with Robert Freehling of the group Local Power. — Ventura County Star – 20080227 • LNG and Clean Energy Laws on Collision Course in Calif. — California Progress Report – 20080227 US LNG tankers vulnerable to attack The powerful US Government Accountability Office has questioned whether the US Coast Guard can adequately monitor the safety of LNG tankers supplying the US. In a special report on maritime security and federal efforts needed to address challenges in preventing and responding to terrorist attacks on energy commodity tankers, the GAO says the Coast Guard lacks the means to meet its own criteria for protecting LNG tankers. The report comes as the US Coast Guard is in the process of assessing Woodside's innovative OceanWay LNG receival proposal off Los Angeles. The GAO study results from the US's heavy dependence on ship-based energy imports and the aftermath of September 11, 2001. The GAO report said the LNG supply chain faced three main types of threat: suicide attacks, such as by explosive-laden boats; "standoff" attack with weapons launched from a distance; and armed assaults. In the past five years, Australia has been stressing to US authorities the safety record of the industry as the US looks to increase LNG imports to meet its growing demand for natural gas. — The Australian – 20080111 • MARITIME SECURITY ... Preventing and Responding to Terrorist Attacks on Energy Commodity Tankers — GAO • U.S. lacks resources to guard LNG tankers — Reuters UK – 20080109 • Sempra puts LNG terminal project on hold — SDU-T – 20080110 NorthernStar LNG plan suspended Coast Guard seeks answers to 400 questions Stopping the clock in what was to be an accelerated environmental review process for a proposed offshore liquefied natural gas terminal, the Coast Guard has asked the company behind the Clearwater Port plan to address more than 400 safety and environmental issues before restarting the review. In a letter to Houston-based NorthernStar Natural Gas, Coast Guard and U.S. Maritime Administration officials who oversee deepwater port reviews said the company needed to provide more information on such things as why an offshore natural gas facility is needed and to what extent it would affect the environment. ... A joint state and federal environmental review and risk assessment for the proposal is currently under way. The public weighed in during meetings on issues the environmental review should explore, and the public will have a handful of other opportunities to comment on the proposal. Kira Schmidt, executive director of the Santa Barbara ChannelKeeper environmental group, said the decision to stop the clock was welcome news, giving her organization and others time for a more complete review. Under the accelerated review process, a final decision on the project could have been made by next summer, Schmidt said. That seems highly unlikely now. "Given the number of questions and the depth and difficulty of what was brought up, I don't see how those issues could be addressed in a short time," she said. — Ventura County Star – 20071103
|
|||||
|
Does NorthernStar have the money to build an LNG project? New Sandia Report of 7 Mile LNG Vapor Cloud Leaks in new LNG fleet spur fears MUST READ! USGS Comments on Potential Geologic and Seismic Hazards Affecting Coastal Ventura County, California (USGS)  USCG Standards/Links FERC Gas Pipelines FERC Consequence Assessment Methods for Incidents Involving Releases from LNG Carriers CA Energy Commission CA LNG Projects State Lands Commission Public Utilities Commission NorthernStar's Clearwater Port LNG Law Blog NASA Flywheel Battery Project Tribology Systems, Inc. (Flywheel Batteries) Eaton Powerware (Flywheel Batteries) Pacific Environment's California Energy Program LNG: County caught in the crossfile Decision means natural gas stays high LNG: Danger to our Communities LNG-related Links Ratepayers for Affordable, Clean Energy The Methanol Economy LNG no early gas savior A new fuel fix: boon or bane? NPR: Oil vs. Alternatives? Risks/Reward of LNG Competing for Energy Resources, Part 1 Competing for Energy Resources, Part 2 LNG: Energy source, or target? FERC backs bogus study — The bogus study itself (note long disclaimer at beginning!) Hazardous Seas Engineer lays out LNG risks LNG: Impact on Prices LNG liability limited Wildfires, Inversions, and LNG Spills Fiction: How it could happen... US lags on solar Hydrogen closer? Too much LNG?
|
Some quick thoughts and some The current Administration wants more natural gas to meet more than current and anticipated demands. The state likewise is leaning in that direction despite the absolute fact that California has no need for additional natural gas supplies. The Administration wants to fuel its hydrogen power program. Power cells and all that. Well, natural gas, by itself, is a cleaner and safer vehicle fuel than processed hydrogen. Go figure! Some other ponderables:
|
 |
 Firemen try to douse LNG-caused fires at an Algerian reliquefication plant in January 2004. There's no hiding land-based accidents. . .  
The cooling field. Initially thought to have been non-LNG related, officials later confirmed this blast was due to a leaking LNG tank that was ignited by an non-LNG related operation. Well, gee, let's see: Both local proposals have their pipelines entering Oxnard at electric generating plants. Both will have ground level structures for metering and the clean-out pig access. Surely there's not a spark to be found around them! 
 LEFT: Algerian fires at night. CENTER: Fires from an LNG blast rise over Ath, Belgium, on July 30, 2004. RIGHT: Blast pit from Belgium pipeline blast.
| ||||
| Page Originated: 12 Aug 04 | |
|
Fremont North Neighborhood Council / LNG: More Harm Than Help / Webmaster 706,520 |
|
