To: NormsRevenge
Here in CT a proposed LNG terminal 11 miles offshore is meeting fierce and futile resistance. Futile because the terminal is in NY state waters... Doesn't stop people from complaining though. Yes, it's 11 miles offshore and they are concerned about terrorism, supposedly. Like the blast radius would be 11 miles.
2 posted on
03/16/2006 9:48:44 AM PST by
Koblenz
(Holland: a very tolerant country. Until someone shoots you on a public street in broad daylight...)
To: NormsRevenge
NIMBY - The entertainers will be able to see it using a powerful telescope.
3 posted on
03/16/2006 9:51:41 AM PST by
Mike Darancette
(In the Land of the Blind the one-eyed man is king.)
To: NormsRevenge
No way. It's Intntl. waters and also, still very visible.
Would ruin Babra Striesand's view.
Move it north to offshore Ventura County...out past the Naval Station at Port Huenme.
Rule of Thumb: Suspect all Australian proposals. It's still a penal colony.
7 posted on
03/16/2006 10:36:01 AM PST by
CBart95
To: NormsRevenge
The larger pipe would come ashore in an industrial area near Los Angeles International Airport, said Jane Cutter, president of Woodside Natural Gas... I wonder what "industrial area" they are talking about.
To: NormsRevenge
I like it.
14 posted on
03/16/2006 11:45:55 AM PST by
Carry_Okie
(There are people in power who are truly evil.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson