Posted on 04/13/2007 8:41:43 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
The California Coastal Commission dealt another, if not fatal, blow Thursday to the Australian mining firm BHP Billiton's proposed $800 million floating natural gas terminal offshore of Ventura County.
The unanimous rejection of the plan, at a meeting in Santa Barbara, came just three days after the State Lands Commission nixed a lease for the company to run its pipelines from the offshore site 13.8 miles to the coast at Oxnard.
The company had tried to postpone the meeting, with officials saying they needed time to digest the State Lands Commission's 2-1 vote, but the Coastal Commission went forward with its vote anyway.
The 12-0 decision leaves the company with limited options.
"We will need time to assess our next steps," said Patrick Cassidy, the company's director of public affairs.
The company could challenge the State Lands rejection in court. It could ask the U.S. secretary of commerce to overturn the Coastal Commission's decision.
Beyond those two options, the company also needs a favorable decision from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Federal Maritime Administration to move forward with its plans.
But it's unclear how vigorously it will pursue those options after Thursday's vote.
"I'd say they're in deep trouble," said Susan Jordan, of the California Coastal Protection Network, which has lobbied against the plan for the past three years.
Jordan said she hoped Schwarzenegger would also oppose the plan. The governor has indicated that he sees the use of liquid natural gas as a bridge to renewable fuels of the future.
Assemblyman Pedro Nava, D-Santa Barbara, a former commissioner who is also married to Jordan, noted that the governor was in New York City talking before the Council on Foreign Relations about California's leadership role in the environment.
He said that while Schwarzenegger is there, the commission was discussing a project that would alone pump out 23 million metric tons of carbon dioxide a year, or about 40 percent as much as New York City.
He said the company's plan was fatally flawed because it also failed to meet local air pollution standards.
"It doesn't satisfy air quality standards," Nava said. "Instead of trying to meet the standard they went and got a Bush administration exemption from local air pollution standards."
Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Sherman Oaks, is holding hearings into whether political pressure was put on the EPA to reverse itself and exempt the company's project from Ventura County air pollution standards.
By specifically looking at greenhouse gases along with all the other environmental review, this process and Thursday's vote also entered into some new territory, officials said.
Commission Executive Director Peter Douglas said it was the first time the state agency had looked at greenhouse gases and the impact on global warming.
Douglas cited newly signed legislation, AB32, that gave the commissioners and the agency's staff the authority to consider the amount of carbon dioxide that would be produced processing the natural gas and by the diesel-powered tankers that would be used to transport the liquid gas to California.
"Not only because of the Coastal Act but because it's our obligation to the planet," Douglas said.
BHP spokesman Cassidy noted that this was something new. The company had also argued that the commission was pushing into "uncharted territory" by proceeding with the meeting even after the company had asked for a postponement.
At the start of the marathon session Thursday, BHP International President Renee Klimczak said there was no reason for the commission to continue the proceedings.
"We're withdrawing our request for consistency certification; therefore, there's nothing to act on today," Klimczak said.
The commission's attorneys disagreed, saying that because the federal permitting process was going on they were compelled to act. The decision by the company to simply sit back and listen and not participate didn't go over well with commissioners.
"It's frustrating to have to expedite this process only to have the applicant not responding," said Commissioner Mary Shallenberger.
Dozens of people spoke out against the project, many echoing what had been said at the even more packed State Lands Commission meeting Monday. Along with several public officials and environmentalists, actor Pierce Brosnan and several Oxnard residents spoke.
One in particular, Erika Fernandez, 16, a Hueneme High School student, moved several people to tears, prompting one commissioner, Khatachik Achadjian, to single out her comments.
Fernandez told the commissioners that it was her generation that would have to deal with the pollution from an LNG facility and that they should think of the future before they vote.
First Achadjian made a nod to Brosnan's role as James Bond, and Schwarzenegger's role in the Terminator movies in talking about how one should "think globally and act locally."
"The Terminator doing his job internationally while we have 007 doing it locally," Achadjian said. "But Erika did inspire me. We did not inherit this Earth from our ancestors, we're borrowing it from our children."
After the meeting, Fernandez, who said she had worked opposing the plan for several years, touched her heart with her hand and said, "this is something I'm going to remember all my life. It was a life lesson."
You had to ask?
No one.
The comments to this article are laughable.. Big GREen in your face.
Enjoy the higher costs of energy and an economy that reflects it down the road.
Morons.
and this is a gem.. Thanks Gub! for AB32
—
Commission Executive Director Peter Douglas said it was the first time the state agency had looked at greenhouse gases and the impact on global warming.
Douglas cited newly signed legislation, AB32, that gave the commissioners and the agency’s staff the authority to consider the amount of carbon dioxide that would be produced processing the natural gas and by the diesel-powered tankers that would be used to transport the liquid gas to California.
“Not only because of the Coastal Act but because it’s our obligation to the planet,” Douglas said.
They only answer to their socialist and communist masters in the democrat party and the liberal media.
You do know that these members were and are appointed by state leaders including the Gubinator? ;-)
12-0?
wow
W.A.S.S.
Meanwhile the push for natural gas fired power plants continues.
So build the terminal in Mexico, export the jobs there, and the problem is solved.
As far as I know, there have been NO fatal incidents associated with a LNG tanker. All the speculation is based on an event that many believe is impossible to occur, namely the explosion of the supercooled liquid natural gas. Oil tankers have created far more damage over the years.
The more I learn about the goof balls in California, the more I look at the people as cult members; Jonestown and the Applegate star travelers come to mind.
Bad State! No Power!
Exactly. Build the LNG plant there, in fact they should and probably will build power plants to consume the gas and just build a high-line corridor and send the electricity across.
In fact, to go another step, if we build our manufacturing plants on the Mexican side of the line, we don't have to send neither gas, nor electricity across, you just send the finished products across. Then everyone is happy. Californians don't have to be bothered with power plants or ugly carbon-producing manufacturing, or the jobs or the technical expertise that goe with them.
I swear, why anyone would build anything in California is beyond me. I wouldn't. If I had a billion to invest in an industrial facility, I'd invest it where they wanted me. If thats China, or Mexico, so be it.
Helen Clark would love your billion in New Zealand...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.