Be the Spark!

contribute now

Anne Berblinger's comments:

on Are You Down With LNG?

On Monday, OPB news reported that Popular Science magazine had given Portland the title ?America?s greenest city.? Commissioner Dan Saltzman pointed out the advantage that a green reputation has for our economic future: "I think it's an important economic development tool for attracting more businesses and encouraging small businesses to expand here as well. I mean they come here for livability and they stay here for livability and this meshes well with that reputation."
For the last few years, outside investors have been proposing LNG terminals and tankers which will have horrible impacts on Columbia River salmon, dredge a turning basin in the neighborhood of Bradwood Landing which will likely dredge up dioxins, eliminate NOAA Fisheries? best site for assessing Columbia salmon runs, suck up billions of gallons of water for ballast, and impose 300 foot towers on a rural landscape.
Construction of the associated pipelines will cut a 200+ mile, 150? wide swath through public and private forest land, farm land, and vineyards. Each of the proposed pipelines will involve scores of stream and river crossings. The pipeline rights-of-way will be permanent clearcuts, with no replanting of trees, berries, or grapes; and with long-term degradation of soil structure and fertility on farm land. If the supine FERC approves these pipelines, the outside energy speculators can grab the rights-of-way through eminent domain, and destroy working landscape sustained by the devotion, care, and hard work of farmers, wine gowers, and foresters.
There has been no independent assessment of the true costs, the need, and the actual benefit of importing this fossil fuel from overseas. There has only been a faith-based assertion by the investors and their industry associations that the ?market? will determine if the projects will be needed and built. As if our landscape is not cluttered with massive investments that were only used of a few years, and some (remember PAMCO?) not at all
Suppose that we did determine that, if present trends in energy use and the pace of development of renewable energy in our region continued, there would indeed be a period of some years in which we would not have enough energy in Oregon or the West.
Wouldn?t we take all possible action to change those trends rather than further endangering our Columbia River salmon? Wouldn?t we invest in insulating our buildings more effectively rather than inflict a permanent clear-cut through Northwest Oregon?s public and private forests? Wouldn?t we accelerate the pace of wind, solar, geothermal, and ocean energy development rather than assume the risk of a catastrophic pipeline explosion and fire in one of the many communities through which these pipelines will pass?

If we allow LNG?s environmental damage (or if it is forced on us), what will that do the green reputation which is the key to our future regional competitive advantage?

The governor has done the right thing in insisting that FERC cease its review and hearings until the need for LNG is rigorously established.





posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context

Thanks to our Sponsor:
become a sponsor
Web Analytics