2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

Question to Riverkeepers?

If no LNG and no domestic gas, what should back up renewables?

Coal?  Wood?  Nuclear?  What?

posted 3 years ago
view in context

Exporting gas would require triple the footprint that Bradwood has.   It is impossible to do and just more misinformation.

posted 3 years ago
view in context

The environmental community hates LNG because it is an imported fossil fuel.   What they fail to mention is that 2/3 of our natural gas now is imported from Canada.  What is the difference?

Also, the environmental community talks about all the domestic natural gas we have, but when you talk about moving it in a pipeline (Palomar East Side) they oppose that.  How do they want the gas to get here?  Magic?

When they say LNG is not needed, they are saying natural gas is not needed and that is not true.  Check out the energy white paper for Dem candidate for Gov John Kitzhaber....He says natural gas and pipeline infrastructure WILL be needed for Oregon to grow.

posted 3 years ago
view in context

It is amazing to me that with 11% unemployment in Oregon, people don't want to explore all options for energy.  It is not about the jobs that come with building the LNG terminal or the pipeline, but the economic development that comes with more natural gas and reliability in the state.  As we move from 40% coal powered electricity to cleaner natural gas and renewables, we WILL need more infrastructure in the region.  Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of people who will move to Oregon in the next few decades. We have ONE pipeline serving Oregonians currently and we must provide options in order to make Oregon appealing to businesses.  We can protect the environment and create a cleaner energy environment at the same time.   I ask this question.....if not natural gas and more infratructure to move it to the people, what will this growing region use to back up renewables and keep our homes warm?  If no infrastructure is built, what will entice business to move to Oregon?  

posted 3 years ago
view in context