Thursday, December 21, 2006

Massachusetts Approves Two LNG Terminals, Which Might Be Good News For Broadwater Opponents

Two offshore liquefied natural gas terminals proposed for Massachusetts have gotten state approval and are expected now to be approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission as well.

Why do those of us down here in Broadwater Country care? Because it’s been acknowledged that the need for new LNG terminals in limited, that many more are being proposed than will ultimately be built, and the more that get approved before Broadwater, the lower the chance that Broadwater will be built. I admit that’s a house of cards, but it may be all we have.

I’m not against LNG terminals per se. Burning liquefied natural gas releases about 28 percent less carbon (greenhouse gases) into the atmosphere as burning oil, which releases about 21 percent less than coal ( did the math myself, based on a table on this page, so the calculations could easily be wrong). So assuming that LNG actually replaces those other fuels, we all get a big greenhouse benefit. Of course that’s a big assumption. Energy use is rising, so LNG won’t completely replace oil or coal. But it’s still better.

It’s just that for reasons I’ve state plenty of other times, Long Island Sound is the wrong place for it.



Post a Comment

<< Home

eXTReMe Tracker