Full Forecaste

Story Photos

The proposed site of the Bradwood Landing LNG terminal. Bill Wagner / Daily News file photo

Past Month's Most Commented Stories

Home > Top Story

Will new administration reshape LNG landscape?

Tuesday, December 2, 2008 11:38 PM PST

By Tony Lystra

Font Size:
 
 

Opponents of a plan to build a liquefied natural gas terminal on the Columbia River hope they have found an ally in President-Elect Barack Obama, saying the new Democratic president could reverse the Bush administration’s energy policy and perhaps even kill the Bradwood Landing project.

“I think a new administration will bring great changes to the LNG debate,” said Brett VandenHeuvel, an attorney for Columbia Riverkeeper, an environmental group fighting the terminal. “I think Bradwood is very much in the playing field for this new administration.”

Opponents of the project say the new administration could do several things in their favor, including influencing the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, a panel of five presidentially appointed members that licenses LNG terminals.

The Obama administration, opponents said, is also expected to place more emphasis on renewable energy and could ask Congress to rein in FERC’s power over LNG siting decisions.

The $650 million Bradwood Landing terminal, across the river from Puget Island, would unload liquefied gas from tankers and pump it to market through as many as two new pipelines, including one crossing Cowlitz County.

FERC approved the terminal in September but indicated last month it may reconsider its decision. Opponents hope that will buy enough time for the new administration to reshape FERC’s policies.

“Anything that throws some time impediments between NorthernStar and putting a shovel in the ground is a victory for us,” said Gayle Kiser, who heads Citizens and Landowners for a Safe Community, a Cowlitz County group fighting the NorthernStar pipeline.

NorthernStar spokesman Joe Desmond said his company is not worried Obama’s administration will block the terminal. He noted Obama has favor balancing renewable sources with stable and affordable energy such as LNG.

Still, he said, guessing what the administration will do amounts to “pure speculation.”

“We simply have to wait and see,” Desmond said.

Obama has appointed Rose McKinney-James of Energy Works Consulting in Las Vegas, Nev., as his “FERC review team lead.” A call to her consulting firm this week was not returned.

But there are already some indications of Obama’s views on LNG. The new president has backed legislation that would reverse a provision of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that gave FERC most of the power in approving LNG terminals. The legislation would take that authority away from FERC and restore it to the states.

Jillian Schoene, a spokeswoman for Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski’s office, said that’s a good indication that Obama’s policies will favor the states’ role in the approval process far more than the Bush administration’s have. Oregon, like Washington, has argued that FERC should have let the states consider clean air, clean water and Coastal Zone permits before it issued a license for the terminal in September.

“We’re hoping for a FERC that has a greater respect for state rights,” Schoene said.

Obama also could reshape FERC itself.

Terms of the four FERC commissioners who voted in favor of the Bradwood project will expire during Obama’s first term, starting in 2009, Tamara Young-Allen, a spokeswoman for the agency, said in an e-mail. The other three commissioners’ terms expire in 2010, 2011 and 2012. (Commissioners serve five-year terms.)

Obama can also appoint a new FERC chairman. That would shift the current chairman, Joseph Kelliher, into a regular commissioner seat. It’s unclear whether Kelliher would finish out his term, which lasts through 2012, if he is removed from the chairman’s position.

When asked about his plans, Young-Allen noted, Kelliher has said, “When I have something to announce, I will tell you.”

VandenHeuvel, of Riverkeeper, speculated that Obama will appoint Jon Wellinghoff as the new chairman. Wellinghoff is a Nevada Democrat who was the only FERC member to oppose the Bradwood terminal in the September vote.

VandenHeuvel said it’s uncertain whether a new chairman would substantially alter FERC’s decision on Bradwood Landing.

“Frankly, I don’t know,” he said. “It doesn’t change the make up of FERC, but a new chairman has a greater control on the policy.”

QuietMan wrote on Dec 3, 2008 6:14 AM:

" Let's Try as hard as possible to keep any jobs from coming into this area. C'mon people, don't you know we are in a recession now. There are lots of people looking for work out here. "

slanteyes wrote on Dec 3, 2008 7:48 AM:

" I remember what Bill Clinton did to the US attourneys when he took office, he fired them all. It's time to start over from scratch at all of the US agencies. "

Mr. Bastinado wrote on Dec 3, 2008 7:54 AM:

" Bye bye now. Thanks for playing. "

gimpy wrote on Dec 3, 2008 8:43 AM:

" "Change we can believe in" should include protecting the rights of individuals from PRIVATE energy companies using Eminent Domain to put in unneccessary pipelines so they can reap the profits. And it should definitely include investing in renewable energy, rather than continuing down the path to destruction by burning of fossil fuels until the earth can't support our bad habits anymore. "

Home town Guy wrote on Dec 3, 2008 9:42 AM:

" So when did Bradwood Landing actually take Eminent Domain in Cowlitz County? Never! We could make LNG renewable. I can help dig the hole for the so called "Friends of the River"
Our whole region needs Bradwood. If it even brings 5 jobs those will be 5 families that will be able to have a decent christmas.
Ask your local emergency services what Bradwood is bring to help protect you from a non-existent threat. A lot more than taxpayers would ever support!
So go climb a tree and hug a Murlett or swim with the sturgeon but do it somewhere else! "

TDN Bad Boy wrote on Dec 3, 2008 10:19 AM:

" That sucking sound you hear are jobs and growth going down the drain thanks to a few selfish NIMBYs. "

Billy Hill wrote on Dec 3, 2008 10:29 AM:

" Thats right gimpy.....all us Democrats just say NO, NO, NO to everything in hopes most of the people of the area will pack up and leave. The fewer jobs that are available the sooner this will happen. Bub-bye now! "

rastor wrote on Dec 3, 2008 10:58 AM:

" RE: Slanteyes, watch out firing those guys. When Bush tried it they all sued the government for wrongful termination! "

Rural Citizen wrote on Dec 3, 2008 11:55 AM:

" Home Town Guy:

How many people have to suffer the loss of their property value for those five families to have their pick up trucks and motorcycles and off road scooters for their kids?

The numbers don't add up for this project. Too many people hurt for little or zero return in investment. All the profit and all the product just passes us by. We suffer the degradation of our property value while others make out on our backs.

It stinks.

Thank you Riverkeepers for coming to our area! "

grams wrote on Dec 3, 2008 12:15 PM:

" home town guy- hide and watch! eminent Domain will follow if Bradwood is allowed. Hope you don't have any land in the path of any of these new pipelines. You won't get your price for the land you will lose and if you don't agree to the pitance offered then you will certainly understand about eminent domain. --TDN Bad Boy.. that sucking sound we hear when you post is your totally inverted thinking proccess. I, as a conservative, am fed up with your
hard right attitude. The real issues here are far more important than the jobs you keep refering to and that means to me that you are part of the "Good Old Boy" thinkers who don't give a damn about the future because of the "I want it now" syndrome too prevalent in what is now accepted as a Recession. You want us to continue down the path of tangled asignations with unfriendly foreign nations who would love to see us crumble. And yes I am proud to be called a NIMBY. I think at one time in our history I would have been called a patriot. My ancestors sure didn't want the British in their back yard, I don't want Russia, Nigeria, Qutar, to name a few making that sucking sound that is our millions of tax payers dollars going bye bye, When the "new jobs" profit is greater than the pay out to foreign fossil fuel let me know. I will NIMBY no more. "

Hauskapoika wrote on Dec 3, 2008 1:17 PM:

" Hold your horses! All this is speculation. Nobody knows what will happen after Obama takes office. Does anyone know what the EXACT plans are for a LNG terminal? Does anyone even know
what LNG is and what such an operation would entail? It is easy to SAY that it will pollute, but nobody explains HOW that might occur. Does anyone KNOW - for a FACT - that there would be eminent domain? Everyone is playing "Chicken Little" here, but we all know the sky won't fall. The facts can only come to light as, or if, the exact plans of the project are presented. "

grams wrote on Dec 3, 2008 1:22 PM:

" TEN Bad Boy yatta yatta yatta! I care about my home, my neighborhood, my city, my county, my state and the United States of America. And you made my point in regard to where the money is going now didn't you! Everything starts in our own yard. That is why we are called free citizens of this country. All the back yards are the catylist that send our legislative representatives to our state and national capitols. But I must admit you have found your calling in this medium. Sour grapes and lemons. I prefer grape juice and lemonade. I also prefer looking out of my back yard at the big picture, not looking in my back yard for sucking solutions. Construction jobs for whom? River jobs for whom? Auxillary jobs for whom? and how many, and for how long? Promises, promises, promises. And I don't know what is going to happen yet with this new administration so I will not comment on that. You can believe that if I don't agree with the trend you will hear me NIMBY all over the place as to my displeasure.. My back yard influences my vote, my citizens activism, and my right to speak my mind and act on my convictions. At this point that means I am a staunch NO LNG NIMBY. "

TDN Bad Boy wrote on Dec 3, 2008 1:39 PM:

" Grams, I know you are smart enough not to ask the jobs for whom stuff. Come on. This is considered at least a million dollar project in our community alone. That would mean all sorts of construction jobs for local workers while the pipe is being laid and the terminal is being built. River jobs. Every ship will require local (probably Cathlamet or Longview) tug boat crews and dock workers to tie the ships up. The extra shipping will mean more jobs for river captains. Auxillary jobs could be delivery trucks, maintenance, pipe fitters, electricians -- various types. So send the jobs to California. We don't need them. You need your little part of the world and those that have to work for a living well they can just go to. Right? And yes you have your rights. No one can or should take that away from you. But at least be honest about it. You know there are jobs that will be lost. And right now this region needs every job it can get. Pretty soon our unemployment rate is going to be in the teens. Is that good enough for your part of the world. I don't like to see people suffer when jobs can be made right here. "

gimpy wrote on Dec 3, 2008 2:11 PM:

" Welcome back, Home town Guy. Haven't seen your diatribes lately. Glad to hear you could dig a hole for all of us "Friends of the River". That means you will be eminently qualified to get a job working for NorthernStar, because any local jobs that result from their facility will come with a shovel or a broom. And in case you didn't know it, we all got letters "explaining" the Eminent Domain process before any permits were issued. Gives you a nice warm feeling to know that your family's land can be commandeered against your will to make some Texas speculator happy. TDN Bad Boy, pardon me, but your ignorance is showing. This thing is going to cost jobs, not create them. There will be two tug boats to crew, but other than that, shipping companies who know time is money, will pull out of our port and go where the shipping channel is not restricted by LNG tankers. "

grams wrote on Dec 3, 2008 2:21 PM:

" TDN Bad Boy.. Check out those tug boat jobs friend. No local tug boats there. Pipeline? check out the credentials for those jobs, no locals need apply, they don't have the expertise. Dock workers. How many and from where? From Cowlitz County? Auxillary jobs. These types of specialized construction jobs attract specialized workers that follow the construction of these facilities from site to site. As to tying up the ships that would be one tie up and one release every 24 hours. Only one ship at a time and no more than three to five a week. You and I agree completly on wanting jobs for the good people of this region. I however want that to be "for the people of this region" and on a long term basis. The people who will benifit from a three year construction proccess are the motels, the resturants etc.. that will be good for them in the short term but what about the long term buddy? The big picture? One of my sons is a consruction job forman for a well known local construction company. He can't find enough workers with enough expertise to fill most of the jobs he oversees. And do check out those specialized tug boats please. We can agree on needing and wanting industry here. But lets get those who stay here, keep their money within this country and export clean energy products rather than import foreign fossil fuels. "

grams wrote on Dec 3, 2008 2:34 PM:

" Hauskapoika -I can only assume that you have not long been in this area or have not long been reading the local papers. The exact plans for Bradwood landing are on line and have been for almost three years now. LNG has been defined over and over again every time an article is written about NOrthernStar/Bradwood Landing/ Oregon LNG etc etc etc. Yes we know for a fact there will be eminent domain. Just check out FERC and if you don't know who or what FERC is then perhaps you should do some research before you call people chicken littles. It is ok if you are just uninformed , but an uninformed opnion is in fact a little dangerous on this posting site. Just read all the back and forth between TDN Bad Boy and some of the other posters who don't agree with him.. You will certainly read both sides of the issue. Then you may decide not to cast aspersions on one side or the other without a little research. But, welcome aboard. "

TDN Bad Boy wrote on Dec 3, 2008 2:39 PM:

" Gimpy, at least you have the intelligence to know that tug boats will be involved. However, your argument about the disrupted shipping doesn't hold water. Under the Coast Guard regs in effect now yes that is true. But even you are smart enough to know that those reg and restrictions can be changed and would be while the terminal is being built. And Grams are you saying that no construction jobs will be available. I know you aren't senile. If this was worth jobs and value to an area then why is Liberal puppetmaster in Congress interested in it for her region? She must be smarter than you. Grams, believe the local tug boat companies will jump at this chance. "

grams wrote on Dec 3, 2008 3:07 PM:

" TDN Bad Boy As I said, Check out the tug boats required for the facilitation of LNG tankers. They cost millions of dollars because they are specialized and required. Check out Brian Bairds statements in regard to the entire Water Suitability Report put out by the Coast Guard.. We only got five pages. Baird read it all. He states that there will be congestion and potential for economic set backs for Shipping transport impacting our Columbia River ports. And that would be the CEII reports. you know the ones that are considered Criticle Energy Infrastructure Information so not available to the gerneral public for reasons of national security! Northernstar admits that there "could be" shipping layovers outside the bar due to tide issues while LNG tankers are at port side ,or on their way back over the bar. AND TIME IS MONEY IN THE SHIPPING INDUSTRY. TACOMA AND SEATTLE BECON! You are an elequent writer but not a very good debate challenge. You don't have the facts. If anyting you have the spin privided for people who want to believe that Good Old Boys always tell the truth. "

TDN Bad Boy wrote on Dec 3, 2008 3:48 PM:

" Grams, you are assuming that every rule and reg as they are now practiced would remain exactly the same. They do not have to. The shipping rules can be relaxed. They are the way they are now because that is what is needed to suffice the current traffic. But if they need to change, they can change. They are not the 10 Commandments from Moses. Growth requires change. Growth in jobs requires change. You are afraid of change, that is it. You don't have to be but you are. If we want this area to grow and for people to prosper with good jobs we have to accept that we have to change. Being a NIMBY is nothing more than be an obstructionist. Look at the Seattle corridor. A few years ago, a plan was floated to build regional airports south of Olympia and north of Everett to relieve the traffic congestion to Sea-Tac. The NIMBYs in each area fought until they won. So there will be no growth in those areas and the corridor gets worse by the day. It's completely stupid. And so is the argument against LNG. This is a chance for our region to grow, bring in a new market and maybe open up something for the future. You have to have vision. I'm sorry you don't have any, except gloom and doom. Well Pelosi will take those jobs you don't want. They will be in America and they will go elsewhere. That's dumb. "

Hauskapoika wrote on Dec 3, 2008 4:29 PM:

" OK, Grams, so YOU know what the LNG terminal will entail by the PROPOSALS, but final action never matches the proposals. As far as safety is concerned, I lived next to an LNG terminal in Virginia - which has been there for decades, and never one accident, and never any pollution. I cannot understand the opposition having seen an LNG operation first hand. Of course, we can always transport natural gas (gaseous state)via trucks and rail, where there have been numerous accidents and explosions and people killed. Of course, if people don't want natural gas, they can always cook, heat, and use other methods in manufacturing, such as more electricity which may be generated by wind, sun, coal, and even natural gas. If you don't want natural gas - tell your gas company that you are switching to electricity. "

grams wrote on Dec 3, 2008 5:57 PM:

" OK TDN. I can't argue with you much longer as I have to attend a NO LNG Meeting tonight. You are right about change with need. With the terrorism situation at the fore front right now, hide and watch how that changes the rules. And as far as being an obstructionist (how ever you spell that word) I am not against streamlining our vehicular, or our rail transport systems. We need to get rid of the bottle necks in the national freeway systems in order to better transport our import and export items from ,and to our ports, both airports and sea ports. Don't even begin to assume what I think in regard to anything but the issue we are addressing , which is LNG on the columbia River. I want our Columbia river ports to grow and thrive, that is where a lot of new industry will come from. I want our transport systems to be upgraded. That is where our tax dollors should go but not as bail outs as it will now occure. You are tunnel visioned when it comes to this particular industry. When the major issue is energy itself. We can be the leaders in renewable and sophisticated industry. look at the market and the money that is now being invested in green energy. Out with the old in with the new. "

grams wrote on Dec 3, 2008 6:03 PM:

" Hauskapoika- I really do have to attend a meeting tonight but we all know that there are LNG facilities in on the East Coast, and there have been very few incidents in regard to their safety record. That does not mean we have to encourage such a facility in a region where it is not needed, not wanted, and will obstruct other economic profit. ANd where it will be a detriment to a wonderful and bountiful piece of nature. The Columbia River. Domestic natural gas is not a problem for me, even coal is not a problem if the effluent can be nuetralized. We have access to a great deal of domestic natural gas. Why should we continue to patronize foreign fossil fuel when we can do with out it. Gotta run. "

all-right wrote on Dec 3, 2008 8:46 PM:

" there are gas lines under us already,give up people "

country gal wrote on Dec 3, 2008 9:37 PM:

" I'm really enjoying reading the debate on the subject of LNG. I'll admit I have mixed emotions and I admire Grams knowledge on this particular subject. I feel like she does about job growth. It'll be great at first but after that, then what? What I would like to know also is if they put the pipelines in, would LNG pay the property owners some kind of a monthly fee for it? After all, they should be compensated for using their land. "

see the light wrote on Dec 3, 2008 10:01 PM:

" Speaking of local jobs, the construction of the KB pipeline was performed by workers...ALL were from out of state. I know, as they worked on my property and I talked to them every day. How many of you have experience working in the LNG business or laying pipelines. Not many, I assume. "

Home Town Guy wrote on Dec 3, 2008 10:35 PM:

" According to the announcemnet the meeting tonight was for information. Yet again let us go against something that can be even a remote benefit. Also, since when is drilling locally for LNG not domestic? Might want to rethink/restate your postings Grams.
Sorry couldn't make the meeting tonight. So of us have to work. "

grams wrote on Dec 3, 2008 11:26 PM:

" home town guy. Drill locally for LNG? No, no. When one can drill locally for domestic natural gas there is no need for the liqufaction proccess. The deal is that we have been told we are running out of natural gas so it has to be imported and in so doing it has to be compressed into a liquid form which will allow tankers to carry 600 times the liquid amount as the gaseous amount. We do have peak shaving plants in Oregon which store domestic natural gas for peak use seasons but that is an expensive proceedure not needed to supply our infrastructures with domestic natural gas in its natural state. "

grams wrote on Dec 3, 2008 11:32 PM:

" All-right What does that have to do with this issue? The lines we now have are sufficient for the time being and if we get our rears in gear with renewable energy there should be no need for these huge gas lines that are not for our use anyway. Remember, this stuff is going to California. In fact Sempra's Costa Azule which was supposed to supply Southern California is having a problem as most of that product is being used in Mexico. California needs this product. They just won't allow the infrastructure in their state to provide it. Now why should we be their pawns? "

grams wrote on Dec 3, 2008 11:37 PM:

" Country Gal. No there will be no royalties with this pipeline. And very little compensation for the property grabbed because it is considered a "utility." A property owner either accepts the offered price or the property will be aquired by eminent domain. there is no legal recourse. Unless one wants to spend their entire life savings in court and they will still not win. "

Home town Guy wrote on Dec 4, 2008 7:34 AM:

" Ok that makes little sense. So domestic isn't domestic? You must be a lawyer! Since everyone else but Grams is done with this article so am I. Come on TDN give us something new. "

golfer wrote on Dec 4, 2008 9:07 AM:

" Rules & regulations being relaxed is a joke at best. Shipping & anything else on the river up to Bradwood will be curtailed. I hope you people that are in favor of it aren't out in your little boat at the time & have to pull anchor & run into a slough to be far enough away when they pass.

As to jobs being created, that would be another laugh. I would be willing to bet all construction jobs would be from out of state, like almost all other ones are. Try living within eyesight of the proposed site, maybe then you would change your views. "

gimpy wrote on Dec 4, 2008 9:28 AM:

" Okay, just a few facts, then I'm gone...if a pipeline is put through our property, we will be "compensated" for the easement. We lose the control over the right-of-way, meaning there can be no activity such as logging, or even growing Christmas trees, performed on a strip 50 feet wide for the length of the pipeline, only shallow-rooted vegetation, like grass will be allowed. But guess what, we still get to pay property taxes on it! And the gas company will not be paying any form of royalty to the landowner. If you take time to read the DEIS on this project, there are a total of 10 temporary jobs projected for Cowlitz and Wahkiakum County combined, and that is during the construction period. I attended the meeting in Cathlamet last night and the only reason we are concerned about this exploration for domestic gas is the possibility of using the caverns to store gas for NorthernStar. Other than that, it is up to the individual landowner to decide whether to sign a lease allowing gas drilling on his property. But the DNR has really dropped the ball by not holding any informational meetings on this subject. The only info that people are getting down there is coming from industry and that is why they are suspicious. "

country gal wrote on Dec 4, 2008 12:06 PM:

" It's getting mighty tiring reading about these so-called arrogant snobs thinking they're doing good for the community and yet have no remorse for taking over property owners' rights. I'd be fighting, too. "

grams wrote on Dec 4, 2008 12:32 PM:

" Home Town Guy
GOOD. And what don't you understand about the difference between domestic and foreign fossil fuels? If we ever developed our own reliqufaction facilities we would be doing so to export just as Alaska does now. You know from their domestic product. Our domestic product IS domestic and the best , worse case for using fossil fuels in this country. Natural gas and coal are still fossil fuels and do pollute, but at least we are only chained to ourselves in that regard and not foreign and mostly anti- American countries. And advertising has taught us that one has to repeat a message at least three times in a row bofore people tend to pay attention. I will be happy to repeat ten times that many if it gets the message across to other citizens who wonder about this issue. "

Top Jobs
More Top Jobs
Top Garage Sales
More Top Garage Sales
Top Rentals
More Top Rentals