Posted on 06/08/2005 12:27:59 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
LONG BEACH, Calif. (AP) - The city voted Wednesday to continue negotiations with a Japanese company that wants to build the first West Coast terminal for liquefied natural gas.
During a session that lasted until after midnight, the council voted 5-4 to continue talks with a Mitsubishi subsidiary on a deal that would involve building a pipeline and selling supplies of LNG to the city, said Chris Garner, director of Long Beach Energy, the city's gas utility.
No date for the talks was scheduled but Garner said he believed "some kind of business deal" could be crafted by midsummer.
In May 2003, the Port of Long Beach agreed with Mitsubishi's Sound Energy Solutions to give the company exclusive rights to develop the terminal. Also that year, the city's energy department began holding what became more than 50 hours of nonbinding talks on a pipeline and supply deal. However, it halted those negotiations last year, Garner said.
The council doesn't have final approval of the terminal. That is up to the city's Harbor Commission. But a council decision to scrap talks would have gone a long way toward effectively killing the terminal.
"The city does not go forward unless the city is satisfied," Garner said.
The terminal has drawn national attention at a time when domestic supplies of natural gas are shrinking and prices are rising. It would be built less than two miles from downtown. The terminal would receive super-cooled natural gas, warm it and send it out through a pipeline to the city and beyond.
About 400 people packed City Hall for the debate that started Tuesday night but extended through Wednesday morning.
Opponents argued that storing the explosive gas in an urban area could pose an environmental and safety threat, especially if the terminal or LNG tankers become terrorist targets.
Proponents noted that the $450 million project could create 1,000 construction jobs and that a deal could provide a secure, long-term supply of clean-burning natural gas.
In approving continuing negotiations, the council ordered a "risk and hazard assessment" to be conducted. In addition, an environmental impact report on the project is expected to be completed this fall.
Sound Energy Solutions is developing the project with ConocoPhillips.
There are only five LNG terminals in the United States, all on the East and Gulf coasts. The Long Beach terminal is one of four proposed for the California coast, including two off Ventura County and one off of Camp Pendleton in northern San Diego County.
Long Beach better get on board before this terminal gets built in Tijuana.
Si! :)
Dumb! Long Beach has two Naval stations on either side, one of which is a weapons storage facility.
Proponents noted that the $450 million project could create 1,000 construction jobs and that a deal could provide a secure, long-term supply of clean-burning natural gas.
Yep!
Of course Long Beach is nothing but a town built over a giant oil field (derricks pumping in the middle of shopping ctr parking lots and in front of restaraunts)
CA dosen't need any stinking gas. They got wind power. Millions of blowhards.
Last I checked, Sempra was getting one built in Ensenada in the Baja!
***********************************
Sempra Energy's LNG locations
Sempra Energy is strategically positioned with one site on the West Coast and two on the Gulf Coast. Together, Cameron LNG, Port Arthur LNG and Energía Costa Azul translate into up to 5.5 billion cubic feet per day of new gas supply capable of serving the North American market.
Locations of Sempra LNG's terminals under development
Ya never know these days who will get what built first. We need it now, not 5 years from now. just like nukes..
I guess it depends on how many envirowacko resources are working at any time against a project somewhere.
There never seems to be a shortage of them, that's f'r sure.
;-)
This is a bad deal for Long Beach. I'm opposed to the terminal strictly for fiscal reasons. Long Beach has a long, sordid history of being screwed and for screwing the taxpayers. They are promising lower gas rates, which may be true in the short run but it is doubtful in the long run. The pipelines would generate a modest new revenue stream but our city council WILL end up pissing it away, just like they've burdened us with outrageous pensions. We can't afford them and city hall is now angling for a ballot measure to raise taxes. On top of that, the Long Beach Police union rejected a very generous new contract offer from management...this is more money the taxpayers can't afford. I'm not that concerned about the safety aspect of the LNG terminal but it seems rather odd to locate it smack dab in the middle of the nation's largest port.
BTW, last night's decision was pre-ordained and well-orchestrated. As usual, councilmembers gave in to the unions and special interests on a 5-4 vote. Follow the money...2 of the councilmembers will be angling for state assembly seats next year and will be able to count on union support. The promise of 1000 short-term construction jobs is a piss-poor reason to sell your soul to the union devils. When it's built, the LNG terminal will employ a lofty 60 employees.
My BIL keeps telling me that long Beach is one of the richest cities in the USA because of all the revenue they receive from the oil wells in the harbor. He was in the Oil business....any truth to that?
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.