RE: LNG Terminal NIMBY

From: Glenn Morton <>
Date: Fri May 14 2004 - 21:45:57 EDT

Darn, you beat me to it. The Wall Street Journal had an article on this
as well. It seems that we don't want energy in this country. Hope
everyone remembers the NIMBY when the politicians start roasting the oil
companies for not providing energy.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> [] On Behalf Of Kenneth Piers
> Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 6:39 AM
> To:
> Subject: LNG Terminal NIMBY
> According to an interesting article in the NY Times this
> morning(
> pagewanted=2&th
> the NIMBY phenomenon may be a major obstacle to the
> construction of additional LNG facilities in the US (the
> article has a picture of an LNG carrier and these things are
> really HUGE), so it looks like we should get ready to bear
> the brunt of increasingly limited supplies of natural gas
> with all that entails for the home heating and food
> preparation sectors of our society.
> A couple of quotes form the article:
> "More alarming [than the risk of additional LNG facilities]
> to federal
> officials and executives in the energy and chemicals
> industries are the
> prospects of prolonged natural gas shortages in the United
> States, because production in North America is not keeping
> pace with demand." "Alan Greenspan, chairman of the Federal
> Reserve, has spoken in favor of terminal development. "If
> North American natural gas markets are to function with the
> flexibility exhibited by oil, more extensive access to the
> vast world reserves of gas is required," Mr. Greenspan said
> in a speech in April. ""
> It seems clear that NG production in North America will soon
> become insufficient to meet demand. Last fall the National
> Petroleum Council ( )
> published a report in which they state that without a major
> program of expansion of LNG facilities in this country, there
> will be NG supply shortages before 2010.
> So indeed there is little good news on the energy front,
> neither in oil supplies nor in NG production. But the Senate
> has passed a portion of the Administration's energy bill.
> This legislation contains something like $18 B in tax
> incentives to industry mostly targeted toward renewable
> energy initiatives (mainly wind, but also solar, biomass,
> geothermal, etc). It also contains provisions to encourage
> the construction of a NG pipeline from the Alaska north slope
> to the lower 48 and to encourage the construction of new
> nuclear power plants. While I support this legislation, given
> the sporadic nature of wind and direct solar energy, it is
> still difficult to see how these technologies can form the
> backbone of an energy system for a modern economy. ken piers
> Ken Piers
> "[We are all creaures of faith. As such] we must either
> choose to be religious or superstitious; to believe in things
> that cannot be proved or to believe in things that can be disproved."
> Wendell Berry
Received on Fri May 14 21:46:30 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri May 14 2004 - 21:46:30 EDT