More on liquified natural gas.
Climate Change Works Into LNG
Hil Andersen, May 22, 2007 (UPI)
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger; U.S. Maritime Administration, Sean Connaughton, head; Rory Cox, Pacific Environment, program director; Californians for Clean, Affordable Energy;
LNG terminal (click to enlarge)
Gov. Schwarzenegger included remarks affirming the value of Liquified Nautral Gas (LNG) as an energy source in his rejection of a proposed Cabrillo Point LNG terminal project.
- Project rejected the week of May 18.
- The proposed Cabrillo Point LNG facility was too near the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary.
It is considered significant that Schwarzenegger’s explanation to federal authorities about rejecting the LNG terminal project on environmental grounds contained no objections to liquified natural gas as a fossil fuel and greenhouse gas (GHG)-producing contributor to global warming. It is particularly significant because the Governor has not in previous battles been reluctant to refer to climate change.
- Schwarzenegger’s grounds for rejecting the Cabrillo Point site: 1. potential threat to nearby Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary waters; 2. air-polluting emissions from terminal regasification equipment and the LNG-carrying tankers.
- NIMBY objections to terminals raised questions about them as targets of terrorist attacks or dnagerous accident sites but LNG has been seen as a preferable power plant fuel to coal, readily delivered from Asia as well as abundant and relatively cheap.
- Environmentalists have declared that LNG production/processing/transport negates the lower emissions from burning natural gas.
calculations like these frequently fail to consider transportation and processing emissions (click to enlarge)
- Schwarzenegger: "Liquefied natural gas can and must be an important addition to California's energy portfolio…The Cabrillo Port LNG project as proposed would result in significant and unmitigated impacts to California's air quality…Any LNG import facility must meet the strict environmental standards California demands."
- Cox: "The dialogue has shifted in a huge way…This is no longer only about the safety factor. Nor can it be said to be 'just a NIMBY' issue. Rather, our critique of LNG -- that it's a setback to clean energy, that it's an unnecessary boondoggle, and that it will contribute to global warming -- has hit the mainstream."
- Californians for Clean, Affordable Energy: "While we support energy conservation and efficiency and the development of renewable energy sources, California still needs additional supplies of clean-burning natural gas…By taking advantage of a large global supply of LNG, California can avoid gyrating prices and give businesses and consumers a more stable energy market…"