Selectmen Expected To Adopt Resolution Opposing Long Island Sound LNG Station

By John Voket

Members of Newtown’s Board of Selectmen are expected to lend their support to a growing list of Connecticut officials, municipalities, and environmental organizations opposing a mammoth floating liquid natural gas (LNG) fueling platform being proposed for Long Island Sound. The board discussed the plan to adopt a resolution of opposition to the facility last Monday, and will likely support a resolution offered by the Connecticut Fund for the Environment (CFE) at its next scheduled meeting August 15.

According to information provided by both the CFE and Broadwater Energy, a company formed to operate the facility if it is built, the offshore liquefied natural gas regasification terminal would be capable of receiving, storing, and regasifying imported LNG with an average send-out capacity of approximately one billion cubic feet a day of natural gas.

Moored in the center of Long Island Sound, the terminal would stand approximately ten stories high, and would occupy a footprint 180 feet wide and 1,200 feet long — roughly the length of four football fields. If permitted, the project would bring some of the largest ocean-going tankers on the planet into the sound, requiring up to a mile-wide safety zone around the platform, as well as a moving safety zone around each of the two to three tankers per week that would dock and load or offload at the terminal.

It appeared that the Newtown officials were on the cusp of adopting the resolution this week, but Selectman Joseph Bojnowski, who said he works in an energy-related field, suggested the board table the measure creating time to gather more information about possible benefits of the proposed gas pumping station.

“I thought a bit about this, because as you know I’m deeply involved in the energy field — not here in Connecticut but outside of Connecticut,” Mr Bojnowski told fellow selectmen William Brimmer, Jr, and First Selectman Herb Rosenthal. “When you get into these things there are two issues to put the problem in perspective. Is Long Island Sound recreational totally, or like a national park?

“Or is it a commercial area?” the selectman queried again. “And if it is a commercial area, you need to consider LNG just like you would commercial fishing, for example.”

Mr Bojnowski suggested that he did not want to act prematurely to support a resolution being presented by an environmental organization opposed to a development of this nature, without hearing both sides of the story regarding the proposed LNG platform.

“This is just this group’s opinion on that,” Mr Bojnowski said. “When you get into [discussions about] LNG you get into a huge amount of emotional consideration.”

The selectman said that the United States is facing a severe shortage of energy, and that renewable energy sources like wind and solar power will take years to put in place.

“Meanwhile the price of fuel and energy is going up, and up, and up,” Mr Bojnowski said. “Long Island Sound may not be the right place for an LNG plant, but personally I don’t know if we should go along with this [resolution] or not. I’m a bit on the fence about this.”

It appeared, however, that Mr Brimmer was prepared to sign the resolution on the spot.

“I’m definitely against this,” Mr Brimmer said. “I think it’s near a highly populated area. I’ve spent many weekends on the sound, and it’s a treasure. To put something like this in the sound that can have so many ramifications with such a high population close by, if there is any chance this could be a danger, or spilling into the sound, I’m against it.”

But Mr Brimmer acknowledged the opinion of his fellow selectman and acquiesced to Mr Bojnowski’s request for more information on any potential benefits the project might bring to the state and possibly to Newtown directly.

While Mr Rosenthal admitted he had not spent as much time at or around the sound as Mr Brimmer has, he expressed concerns about the proximity the facility had to large population areas in Connecticut and New York.

“I haven’t seen anything on what kind of benefit Connecticut would get from this thing,” Mr Rosenthal said. “We already have two natural gas pipelines going through the state, so I don’t know how this would benefit us.”

Mr Bojnowski said that, in fact, Connecticut and the rest of the country is experiencing a significant shortage of natural gas, which explains why the cost of energy is so high.

“I’m not strongly opposed to signing this resolution, I just think it’s important to provide another perspective on the thing,” Mr Bojnowski said. “In the end, the United States will have to import LNG until we have a good energy policy. We’re the energy addicts of the world, so that’s what we have to do.”

The Industry View

According to a recent release from TransCanada, one of two energy companies along with Shell, that would operate and receive service from the platform, the project is a positive opportunity for the New York and Connecticut markets. The release states industry analysts agree that gas demand in North America will exceed traditional supply by the end of the decade.

“New York and Connecticut are regions specifically identified as needing additional energy supplies,” says Hal Kvisle, TransCanada’s chief executive officer. “TransCanada is in the business of connecting gas supply to markets and the Broadwater Energy proposal is a demonstration of this commitment to delivering this safe, clean, reliable energy source for the future.”

The proposed location for the platform is about nine miles (15 kilometres) off the Long Island coast and 11 miles (18 kilometres) off the Connecticut coast. Broadwater Energy LLC will operate the facility, while Shell will own the capacity and supply the LNG.

The estimated cost of construction is approximately $700 million, the TransCanada release states.

A fact sheet provided by Save the Sound states that “common sense alone would dictate rejecting this monstrosity.

“Water quality in the immediate area would be threatened. Potential explosions from platform operations, other technical malfunctions, and tankers that take shipments of liquid natural gas to the facility would also pose a significant threat to human and ecological safety. Finally, to protect against possible terrorist activities, a large portion of the sound surrounding the platform and fuel tankers would have to be designated ‘no boating’ and ‘no fishing,’ limiting public access to these waters,” the release states.

If Newtown adopts the resolution, it would join communities including Fairfield, Chester, Branford, Bethany, Ansonia, Norwalk, and Milford, as well as groups as diverse as the League of Women Voters of Connecticut, The Madison Beach Club, and the Yale Corinthian Yacht Club that have already signed on opposing the project.