Norwalk's Shellfish Commissioner Thinks a New Sound Cable Will Damage Oyster Beds

The underwater cable that Bryan Brown wrote about, here, a few of weeks ago, is the subject of a Stamford Advocate story, here. In particular, John Frank, Norwalk's Shellfish Commissioner, isn't convinced that the project won't damage the area's oyster beds. He says he'll force a public hearing -- all he needs is 25 signatures on a petition, he says -- unless Northeast Utilities works a little harder to minimize the damage.

Questions About a New Power Cable that Will Cross the Sound from Norwalk to Huntington

From Bryan Brown, on Long Island:

Tom,
I recently found out about another cable project to span Long Island Sound from Huntington to Norwalk. There's a 2MB PDF at this link that is the joint proposal between the Long Island Power Authority, the Town of Huntington and Connecticut Light & Power.

The proposal includes a discussion of the environmental impacts, at least as presented by LIPA. I raise a few questions in bringing this matter to your attention:

(1) Is anyone paying attention to this project?

(2) If so, how have the impacts of this cable project been rationalized vis-a-vis the outcry against the pipe associated with Broadwater and other pipeline projects?

(3) Are people willing to accept at face value LIPA's take on the environmental impacts?

The background info will, in part, answer some of my own questions. The proposed cable (a single cable) will replace seven cables that lie directly on the seabed and have been problematic. Some of the cables are not working because they were damaged by an anchor a few years ago. The damage resulted in the release of mineral oil to Long Island Sound. The old cables are supposed to be removed and replaced with this single cable that will be buried up to 10 feet below the seabed. The new cable doesn't require dielectric fluid (i.e., mineral oil). So, in essence, LIPA is replacing an old, frayed "extension cord" with a new, perhaps better extension cord.

It's not a new crossing per se but it will require the use of a sea plow to bury it, with the attending seabed disturbance. This replacement extension cord will allow Long Island to continue to purchase power from Connecticut in the same way that the new "extension cords" connecting Long Island to New Jersey will enable that market.

The joint proposal includes a discussion of the alternatives, including a HVDC cable (the proposed cable is AC), new local power plants, new local distributed generation and additional demand-side management and "Surprise! Surprise!" (spoken in my best Gomer Pyle voice), the cable comes out as the best alternative, even better than finding ways to consume less energy.

So I'll add a fourth question: Will LIPA's evaluation of the economics of this project receive any local scrutiny?

(I should also add that the project has been on the drawing board for a few years but only recently was reactivated. There is a public hearing coming up on May 15 in Northport, so unless one is checking the New York State Department of Public Service filings (my source) or was aware of it before (not me), it is news. I don't know what the regulatory process is for Connecticut and whether hearings will be held there.)

Bryan.

On the Broadwater Issue, the Long Island Association is an Arrogant Meddler

The annoyance at the Long Island Association's announcement last week that it was giving its conditional support to Broadwater's LNG proposal for Long Island Sound wasn't limited to just environmentalists. One of the association's board members, Richard Kessel, chief executive of the Long Island Power Authority, thought the association's announcement was just slightly premature too, particularly since one of its conditions was that Broadwater provide gas at a discount to the Long Island Power Authority. Here's what Newsday reported today:

Kessel said he was especially rankled by plans for the association to negotiate with Broadwater on the conditions that the LIA board has set for the board's full support.

The first meeting was Tuesday.

Among the LIA's conditions is a long-term contract between Broadwater and LIPA for natural gas at "significantly discounted" prices.

"The LIA is certainly free to say what it wants," Kessel said, "but it should not put itself into a position of negotiating benefits for LIPA; that's LIPA's job."

Someone else made an interesting point to me yesterday about the chutzpah of the Long Island Association. The group's president, Matthew T. Crosson, said last week that that association wants to meet with the Broadwater people:

Crosson said in the association's statement that the group would meet with Broadwater executives to discuss specifics of its conditions. "If we are unable to negotiate those conditions to our satisfaction, the LIA board of directors will reconsider its support of the project," he said.

That's nice that he wants to be involved but on the other hand what makes him think anyone wants his pro-business group negotiating with Broadwater, or that it has any right to negotiate with Broadwater?

As it was expressed to me yesterday, who are they to act as brokers to sell off Long Island Sound?

Long Islanders might be impressed with the Long Island Association, but I'm not. Whatever they might have done or not done in the past, the association ought to pipe down on the Broadwater issue until it knows what it's talking about and has something useful to say. Until then I can only think of it as a arrogant meddler.