Pros of allowing LNG terminal outweigh the cons
Tuesday, January 15, 2008 8:34 AM PST
By Gordon Sondker / for The Daily News
Printable version
E-mail this articleShould the LNG facility be built? Would it help our country in a crisis time?
n The LNG plant gives us an alternative energy source and would make us a bit more self sufficient, which I believe is good and is important.
n For five years during World War II many items were rationed -- gasoline, shoes, butter, sugar, meats and tires -- and to conserve gasoline the speed limit was 35 mph. Hard to imagine now, but it could happen again.
Would the LNG gas help our ecology goals?
n Natural gas burns cleaner than coal, fuel oil or gasoline; it produces no smoke, ash or smog.
n Natural gas is a wasted product, often buried at oil fields just to dispose of it, so why not salvage it?
n If a tanker of LNG is ruptured, the LNG will vaporize and will not foul beaches or harm marine creatures, as does crude oil from a ruptured tanker.
n The 36-inch pipeline will be a cheap and safe way to transport natural gas.
In my home state of Kansas, a 42-inch diameter gas pipeline is being built to transport natural gas from the Rocky mountains to Ohio. No tree or buildings are allowed on the 50-inch easement, but crops can be planted. (This 42-inch pipeline has a 36-percent greater cross-section than a 36-inch line, and will transport 1.8 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day.)
Would the LNG plant help reduce the increasing cost of energy for us?
n Would not competition from the additional natural gas keep energy products (crude oil) cheaper? What better alternatives do we have with an increasing population that needs more energy?
Our highways, our dams and many other important structures only came into being when a vital need was recognized and adjustments were forced. When we travel nonstop on Interstate 5, our travel is safer, cheaper and quicker than on old 99 -- and eminent domain was sometimes needed to get it done. This is also true for the dams built, which protect us from floods, provide us clean, cheap power and provide irrigation water for wonderful fruits and vegetables.
Making no changes has risks and costs. What is best for our children and grandchildren -- in the long run?
A thoughtful, honest, far-sighted discussion of the facts needs to take place.
Gordon Sondker resides in Longview.
Past Month's Most Commented Stories