Liquefied natural gas, also known by the acronym LNG, and the placement of nearshore LNG terminals has been a controversial topic for many communities up and down the east coast in recent months. Several LNG facilities have been proposed in the region, including one in the Long Island Sound, with companies proposing them promising lower energy costs and cleaner fuel emissions. However, the environmental and safety aspects of the projects are still under scrutiny, as explored in this Newsday article. JB
The Coast Guard has told the company that wants to build a controversial liquefied natural gas terminal in Long Island Sound that it has not supplied adequate information to prove the project is safe.
In a Dec. 21 letter to Broadwater Energy of Houston, which has proposed the world's first offshore liquefied natural gas terminal nine miles off Wading River, Coast Guard Capt. Peter Boynton said the company needs to supply additional information on weather, tank size and strength, construction standards and the impact of leaks before the agency can evaluate whether the terminal would be safe environmentally and secure from terrorism.
Boynton, captain of the port for Long Island Sound, said some of the information supplied was for much smaller vessels and storage tanks than would be used at the facility, and weather information was for Baltimore and not Long Island as requested.
Boynton and the company described the letter as part of the regular give and take between an applicant on a big project and a regulatory agency. John Hritcko, a senior vice president of Broadwater, said the firm had begun compiling some of the requested information before the Coast Guard wrote the letter.
But critics of the project cite the letter as evidence that the project is unsafe and the company untrustworthy.