Loading
|
|
"For much of the state of Maine, the environment is the economy" |
2016 | | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
2015 | | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
2014 | | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
2013 | | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
2012 | | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
2011 | | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
2010 | | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
2009 | | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
2008 | | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
2007 | | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
2006 | | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
2005 | | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
2003 2004 | |
2011 September 27 |
[Red bold emphasis added.]
Save Passamaquoddy Bay/ Canada did not hold a public meeting this year because there has been little progress on the three LNG projects originally proposed for the bay.
Webmaster’s Comments: Calais LNG is, for all practical purposes, dead, even though it is still present in the FERC permitting process. Quoddy Bay LNG is irrevocably dead. Downeast LNG is the only project with any life left, and is currently awaiting a US DOT decision regarding new vapor-gas dispersion modeling and the resulting LNG terminal Exclusion Zone. It may be that the newly-calculated Exclusion Zone will be too large for the amount of land at the Downeast LNG proposed site. If not, then we can expect Downeast LNG to continue with its federal permitting.
Webmaster’s Comments: The US now has 14 LNG terminals — including one export terminal in Alaska that is due to shut down in October, and one import terminal in Puerto Rico. That results in 12 LNG import terminals in the lower 48 states — increasing US import capacity well over 15 times the need.
Webmaster’s Comments: For once, the federal government is being appropriate regarding tribal rights and interests.
Webmaster’s Comments: The article's logic: Selling America's energy future via LNG exports would increase the cost of domestic natural gas, creating a better competitive position for renewables.
TopWebmaster’s Comments: One can find any kind of goof-ball opinion, if one looks hard enough.
2011 September 22 |
[Red bold emphasis added.]
Are there any lingering doubts that the United States will become a powerhouse in natural gas?
We'll let you in on a little secret...
Now we're producing natural gas at record levels — and there's still a lot of room to grow.
Webmaster’s Comments: Cove Point LNG has received so little LNG, due to abundance of nearby natural gas, that its LNG storage and regasification facility was in danger of warming up to the point of becoming inoperable. It attempted to get FERC to force a shipper to deliver LNG to keep the facility cooled down. The company is applying to re-export previously-imported LNG, and is considering exporting domestic source LNG.
Webmaster’s Comments: Freeport LNG import terminal is now planning to export, due to lack of domestic market.
Webmaster’s Comments: Natural gas is abundant in Maine. The problem is gaining access to it via delivery pipelines to homes and businesses.
Webmaster’s Comments: Gov. LePage made no mention of LNG import terminals. Perhaps he has finally recognized US natural gas vast supply realities and Maine's access to it.
TopBloomberg data showed yesterday that another ship, Seri Balhaf, is to reach the terminal Sept. 20.
Webmaster’s Comments: It has actually become news when a US LNG terminal is expecting to receive cargo.
2011 September 13 |
[Red bold emphasis added.]
Webmaster’s Comments: The evidence is irrefutable; there is absolutely no need for Downeast LNG.
TopWebmaster’s Comments: Center for LNG (CLNG) president Bill Cooper — the same guy who opposes public participation in LNG terminal Exclusion Zone decision making (see his 2011 May 24 filing to the US DOT) — argues out of both sides of his mouth. He delivers safety and energy security misinformation to the public when it is suits his purposes (see 2006 November 7 item, "CLNG's Cooper fears complacency as natural gas prices drop this winter [TV transcript]," and the 2008 July 30 article, "CLNG: LNG ships study reveals minimal public safety risk").
2011 September 12 |
[Red bold emphasis added.]
Webmaster’s Comments: Exporting US natural gas would deplete US energy security. Remember the energy security argument the LNG industry used when it thought it could make money importing LNG into the US? LNG industry veracity is irreparably broken.
Webmaster’s Comments: US declining demand for Trinidad & Tobago's LNG is accurate — but US natural gas consumption is declining? …Not according to data and projections from the US Energy Information Administration (see EIA's "Today in Energy," "U.S. Natural Gas Consumption" graph, and "Short Term Energy Outlook").
Webmaster’s Comments: Alarm bells should be ringing all over Maine with DEP Commissioner Brooks leaving to go to work for an industry he was responsible for regulating without having to first wait a couple of years before accepting such employment.
Prospects for conflict of interest in government regulatory bodies loom large in Maine.
"An LNG (liquefied natural gas) facility would require a response of 16 to 30 people," he said.
Webmaster’s Comments: The Passamaquoddy Bay communities' emergency responders on both sides of the international border do not have the ability to communicate with each other regarding an LNG incident — even responders from the potentially impacted communities on the Maine side of the border lack that capability.
As per federal LNG emergency response obligations, the Downeast LNG project would require New Brunswick and Maine emergency responders to have inter-responder communication capability. Since most New Brunswick communities on the bay that would be impacted by LNG transits, the Province of New Brunswick, and the Government of Canada have all indicated they will not cooperate — Downeast LNG has no hope for federally-mandated emergency management capability to coalesce.
Downeast LNG keeps on throwing cash down the project's money-pit, thinking that by doing so, somehow the results will change.
Earth-to-Downeast LNG president Dean Girdis and investor Yorktown Partners: Take a long, close look down the hole. There is no bottom.
The lure of Asian markets has oil and gas producers at home pushing for liquefied natural gas export terminals on B.C.'s West Coast - along with the associated required pipelines - and Enbridge Inc. has earned support for its proposed Northern Gateway pipeline .
As for West Coast LNG proposals in Oregon and California, BENTEK's opinion is that none of these projects will come to fruition, either as import or export terminals. [Red bold emphasis added.]
Webmaster’s Comments: The ConocoPhillips LNG export terminal on the Kenai Peninsula in Alaska has been exporting US-source LNG to Japan since 1969. The liquefaction and export terminal is shutting down in October, the company says, due to lack of market for its gas.
Osaka Gas President Hiroshi Ozaki also told reporters that prospects for shale gas projects in Canada was more feasible for exports that those in the United States. [Red emphasis added.]
Webmaster’s Comments: Not only are US LNG interests attempting to sell US energy security out from under us, LNG speculation-failure history is about to repeat itself.
TopWebmaster’s Comments: There was a flurry of news coverage in 2007 regarding Russia's proposed "World Link" project; however, the coverage then dried up. With the US natural gas supply turnaround, there is one less reason for Russia to consider actually doing this project.
2011 September 8 |
With the prospect of a liquefied natural gas terminal at Weaver’s Cove now dead, the city is trying to breathe some life into the land that Hess LNG left behind. [Red emphasis added.]
Webmaster’s Comments: It's a "pretty tough sell" because foreign-source LNG costs more than US-source.
Mexico City, 6 September (Argus) — The start-up of the 500mn ft³/d regasification terminal at Manzanillo, on Mexico's Pacific coast, has been delayed due to unfinished work on dredging a canal and re-routing a railroad line.Top
2011 September 5 |
[Red bold emphasis added.]
Here's a status update on the projects making news these days:
PROPOSED PROJECTS: Natural gas/LNG: Robbinston:
STALLED PROJECTS: Natural gas/LNG: Calais:
SCRAPPED PROJECTS: Natural gas/LNG: Pleasant Point:
Beleaguered by lawsuits, Quoddy Bay LNG’s proposal seems to be dead; it has no state or federal applications on file. [Red bold emphasis added.]
Webmaster’s Comments:
According to the US Energy Information Administration, FERC, America's Natural Gas Association, and others, the US is currently in a 100-year natural gas glut. Even Maine has no shortage of access, as is evidenced by the Baileyville and Millinocket paper mills' natural gas pipelines projects; they are building access to the Northeast & Maritimes Pipeline's copious natural gas supply. Verso Paper in Bucksport has had similar access for some years. Also, several Maine communities are adding natural gas delivery infrastructure.
Due to a lack of need for LNG imports, Canaport is operating at a mere fraction of its capacity. The same is true — with considerably less import activity — of the two newly-constructed LNG import terminals offshore from Gloucester, Massachusetts, Northeast Gateway Deepwater Port and Neptune LNG.
Dominion Cove Point LNG terminal in Maryland has received only four LNG ships this year, resulting in a near shutdown due to inability to keep the equipment cold. It is currently planning to add LNG export capability, accessing the vast natural gas supplies in the nearby Marcellus Shale fields.
Gulf Gateway Deepwater Port 116 miles offshore from Louisiana, the world's first offshore LNG receiving terminal, new in 2005, is being scrapped by its owner, Excelerate Energy, due to lack of need.
There are around 30 new pipeline and pipeline expansion projects in the works (or newly completed) to deliver abundant natural gas supply to the Northeast.
The US already has around 15 times the LNG import capacity than is needed; it is grossly overbuilt. There are no economic or energy-security reasons to construct LNG import infrastructure in Maine, the Northeast, or the lower 48 states.
Furthermore, siting an LNG terminal in Passamaquoddy Bay cannot satisfy the world LNG industry's own terminal siting best safe practices. (See LNG Terminal Siting Standards Organization for more on this issue.) Unfortunately, US laws and regulations ignore the industry's own terminal siting best practices in determining acceptable sites.
Proposed Projects: Natural gas/LNG: Robbinston
In July 2009, Downeast LNG went completely through the Maine permitting process, including week-long hearings. When the company realized it would fail permitting, it withdrew its permits before the DEP could render its decision. More than two years later, Downeast LNG has still not re-entered Maine permitting.When Downeast LNG filed with FERC, its terminal site diagram indicated the site's federal Exclusion Zones would extend halfway across highway US-1. No other US LNG terminal Exclusion Zone extends onto a US highway. The recent US DOT requirement to develop more conservative vapor-gas dispersion computer modeling makes it likely that the Exclusion Zone is even greater than Downeast LNG previously indicated. Exclusion Zones must be kept within the LNG terminal fence line, with the exception of property controlled by the terminal owner or by the government if that location is not a public gathering place for 50 or more people. To date, the US DOT has never rendered an interpretation of such a condition as Downeast LNG's Exclusion Zone extending onto a US highway.
Computer modeling for thermal radiation from a terminal LNG tank-top fire has not yet been examined — a potential fatal issue for Downeast LNG. The thermal radiation model currently in use has been demonstrated to be less than conservative, ignoring significant variables (wind speed at the tank top, flame tilt, tank wall thermal spalling causing cascading containment failure, and thermal radiation impact on a downwind LNG storage tank) that could result in a significantly greater Exclusion Zone than the Downeast LNG's site can accommodate. In Downeast LNG's case — according to the thermal radiation, fire, and explosion expert who submitted comments to FERC on this issue in 2009 — new modeling indicates Downeast LNG's thermal radiation zone would extend more than 900 feet beyond US-1 — approximately doubling the Exclusion Zone distance. Since Exclusion Zones must remain within the terminal fence line, Downeast LNG's terminal site appears to be vastly undersized, and is "painted in" by US-1. Downeast LNG has been aware of this problem for years, but has chosen not to move to a more appropriate location.
In 2006, Canada announced it is prohibiting LNG ships from transiting through Canadian waters to the proposed terminal. Downeast LNG and the US State Department have argued that such transits are protected by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) "innocent passage" provision. However, since the US is not a member of the UNCLOS treaty, and since the treaty clearly states that UNCLOS rights inure only to UNCLOS treaty members, the US has no rights under that treaty. Canada, alone, has the decision authority on LNG transits to the proposed Downeast LNG terminal.
Plus, the US Coast Guard's Waterway Assessment for LNG transits to Downeast LNG's terminal requires Downeast LNG to…
- Obtain letters of agreement from Native American Tribes regarding use of the waterway — something Downeast LNG has refused to do, claiming Native Americans do not have rights in the waterway — and
- Obtain cooperation and coordination from the Government of Canada to ensure safe and secure LNG transits through both Canadian and US waters. The Government of Canada has repeatedly and firmly stated from the highest level that they will provide no such cooperation or coordination; that LNG transits are banned.
Downeast LNG has known of these insurmountable obstacles for several years. And yet, the company has irresponsibly chosen to pick a fight with a sovereign foreign government — against the requirements of the US Coast Guard — and offending Native Americans, rather than moving the project to an appropriate site.
Stalled Projects: Natural gas/LNG: Calais
The article states that financial markets are the reason for Calais LNG's situation. In actuality, it is the US natural gas market that has been turned on its head that resulted in Goldman Sachs deserting the project. The US natural gas market has been turned on its head by a century-long natural gas glut. Goldman Sachs is an astute investor, and knows a bad investment when it sees one.Calais LNG has no financial backing. Calais LNG has lost its option to purchase the required bulk of the proposed terminal site. Calais LNG has deserted its offices in Calais.
In order for Calais LNG to refile its state applications, it would have to obtain financial backing, and then obtain a terminal site. Since the previous site is no longer unavailable, Calais LNG would have to begin anew with a different site, requiring starting over at FERC in addition to the State of Maine. "Stalled Project" in this case really should be "Dead Project, but unwilling to admit it."
Scrapped Projects: Natural gas/LNG: Pleasant Point
On October 17, 2008, FERC kicked Quoddy Bay LNG out of the federal permitting process, killing the project. On June 9, 2009, the Pleasant Point Tribal Government cancelled its lease agreement with Quoddy Bay LNG. Prior to July 29, 2009, FERC removed Quoddy Bay LNG from its maps of potential and proposed LNG projects. On April 23, 2010, the Bureau of Indian Affairs cancelled its approval of the ground lease between the Passamaquoddy Tribal Government and Quoddy Bay LNG, although the tribe had already cancelled the lease.For Quoddy Bay LNG to have a project, it would have to somehow acquire a site. There is no project site and no agreement with anyone to develop the project. Quoddy Bay LNG has no permit applications anywhere, and no agreements with anyone; although it is being sued for breaking agreements to pay suppliers. Quoddy Bay LNG is unquestionably dead.
Top
2011 September 2 |
[Red bold emphasis added.]
Webmaster’s Comments: Calais LNG still claims backing by financial vampire Goldman Sachs even though that bank deserted Calais LNG on 2010 July 21. Here's the Calais LNG website homepage statement…
"Calais LNG has secured the financial support of Goldman Sachs http://www.goldmansachs.com as a key investor and put together a group of highly experienced industry and regional experts dedicated to bringing Maine a state-of-the-art LNG facility that will provide a reliable, safe source of energy." [Bold emphasis added.]
Note: The Calais LNG website contains several dead links that originally pointed to company information, evidencing Calais LNG's pale ghost is fading into oblivion.
TopThe market for most of the natural gas is in California, but it lessens the need for a liquefied natural gas terminal in Oregon. [Red emphasis added.]
2011 September 1 |
[Red bold emphasis added.]
Webmaster’s Comments: Who still needs convincing that there is enough natural gas in Maine? — despite Downeast LNG's claims that only a Maine LNG terminal can supply enough affordable natural gas to the state. Verso Paper in Bucksport has had a natural gas pipeline for years, now. The Woodland paper mill in Baileyville is currently constructing a 4-mile pipeline to access natural gas. And, now the Millinocket mill is getting natural gas.
The argument that a Maine LNG import terminal would be required for Maine or New England to have adequate natural gas supply was false even before now-defunct Quoddy Bay LNG began, since the Canaport LNG, Neptune LNG, and Northeast Gateway LNG terminal projects were already in progress, years ahead of the projects proposed for Passamaquoddy Bay. Plus, other import terminals were popping up elsewhere in the US. US LNG import capacity is now around 15 times the need, and that need is declining as domestic natural gas production increases.
Downeast LNG and zombie-project (no money, no site) Calais LNG fell into the same money pit that swallowed up Quoddy Bay LNG. When will Downeast LNG's backers, Yorktown Partners, finally get the picture and move on to something actually needed?
Imports fell to 20.2 bcf, the slowest since December 2002 and down from 36.3 bcf in July 2010.
Webmaster’s Comments: Downeast LNG's "The Need for LNG" webpage first paragraph claims…
"The Northeast and New England market will see a continuing demand for natural gas, according to several studies. Estimates are that by 2015 there may be a total peak supply/demand deficit of up to 1.25 billion cubic feet per day (bcfd). Because of the forecasted demand and limited alternative supply options, an additional land-based LNG terminal is needed in New England."
Credibility is not Downeast LNG's strong suit.
Environment. The 350 delegates voted for a major turn to “green energy,” including:
…
….
Progress Energy has amassed an estimated 900,000 net acres of land within the commercially productive Montney fairway of northeastern British Columbia and northwestern Alberta, which gives it one of the largest land positions among North American natural gas resources players. In the North Montney fairway of B.C., Progress controls 680,000 net acres of largely contiguous rights, and in the first half this year struck a joint venture with Malaysia state oil company PETRONAS to develop a significant portion of these North Montney assets and evaluate the feasibility of a liquefied natural gas export project.
Webmaster’s Comments: LNG export projects also reduce North America's energy security.