Help !! Decision on Natural Gas Port off LBTS is close.

[tropicaledit]

The decision to go ahead with the building of a huge liquified natural gas port off LBTS and Galt mile will most likely be made in the next two or three weeks by Florida Governor Charlie Crist. We, the community, have a say in this.

This port, or project called (The Calypso Project) will be constructed 8-10 miles offshore. It will consist of the construction of two deepwater loading docks, each the length of three football fields and towering 12 stories high.

It is sponsored the giant international energy conglomerate called Suez Energy. They've hired paid lobbyists and launched expensive advertising campaigns on behalf of the project.

At this 11th hour, It is crucial that people speak out against this, that is ... if you are against it. I for one, am against it. There will be alot of points that Suez Energy will try to claim as to why it would be beneficial for this community. It is in my opinion, that as much as they claim it can benefit the community, it will not be worth the potential risk of a environmental catastrophy. All it takes is just ONE incident, and the effects on this South Florida coastline will far excede anything that a giant international energy company can handle, explain or clean up in a short time frame.

There is a meeting that will take place tomorrow night (Monday, Aug 11) at 5pm - 7pm:

(located along the Galt Mile)
Beach Community Center
3351 NE 33rd Ave
Fort Lauderdale,

I know this is on short notice but its worth a shot. If you are against this, please try and make it to the meeting to show support and give your opinion on the matter. If you cant make it, there's also an alternative, here are 2 emails where people can express there opinions on the issue.

1. Governor Charlie Crist email: Charlie.Crist@myflorida.com
2. redirect : Click on "search for dockets," enter docket ID 26009, click on USCG 2006-2009, then go to "views"

Finally, think about what the communities along the Mississippi are thinking right now. That (July 24,2008) Oil spill ranges from New Orleans to the mouth of the Mississippi, a distance of 100 miles. If that were to happen to South Florida it would destroy the local tourism. These accidents do happen.

Best - Patrick

 

[Charlie99]

What would you rather do than have an offshore LNG terminal.

Would you prefer to put the LNG terminal onshore? If so, where?

Or would you rather that natural gas be rationed in S. Florida?

Maybe you would prefer to convert a few power plants to coal or oil instead of LNG ?? (I'm not sure about Florida, but in the NE, the largest use by far of natural gas is for electric power plants. Significantly less greenhouse emissions than coal or oil powered plants.)


Opposing a facility like this sounds like a nice environmentally friendly thing to do. That is, until we start looking hard at the alternatives and the consequences of doing nothing.

Charlie Allen

 

[ronbeau]

The decision to go ahead with the building of a huge liquified natural gas port off LBTS and Galt mile will most likely be made in the next two or three weeks by Florida Governor Charlie Crist. We, the community, have a say in this.

This port, or project called (The Calypso Project) will be constructed 8-10 miles offshore. It will consist of the construction of two deepwater loading docks, each the length of three football fields and towering 12 stories high.

It is sponsored the giant international energy conglomerate called Suez Energy. They've hired paid lobbyists and launched expensive advertising campaigns on behalf of the project.

At this 11th hour, It is crucial that people speak out against this, that is ... if you are against it. I for one, am against it. There will be alot of points that Suez Energy will try to claim as to why it would be beneficial for this community. It is in my opinion, that as much as they claim it can benefit the community, it will not be worth the potential risk of a environmental catastrophy. All it takes is just ONE incident, and the effects on this South Florida coastline will far excede anything that a giant international energy company can handle, explain or clean up in a short time frame.

There is a meeting that will take place tomorrow night (Monday, Aug 11) at 5pm - 7pm:

(located along the Galt Mile)
Beach Community Center
3351 NE 33rd Ave
Fort Lauderdale,

I know this is on short notice but its worth a shot. If you are against this, please try and make it to the meeting to show support and give your opinion on the matter. If you cant make it, there's also an alternative, here are 2 emails where people can express there opinions on the issue.

1. Governor Charlie Crist email: Charlie.Crist@myflorida.com
2. redirect : Click on "search for dockets," enter docket ID 26009, click on USCG 2006-2009, then go to "views"

Finally, think about what the communities along the Mississippi are thinking right now. That (July 24,2008) Oil spill ranges from New Orleans to the mouth of the Mississippi, a distance of 100 miles. If that were to happen to South Florida it would destroy the local tourism. These accidents do happen.

Best - Patrick

It sounds like your reasoning to support your opposition to the LNG facility is based on a an apples versus oranges comparison based on your quotation that follows:

Finally, think about what the communities along the Mississippi are thinking right now. That (July 24,2008) Oil spill ranges from New Orleans to the mouth of the Mississippi, a distance of 100 miles. If that were to happen to South Florida it would destroy the local tourism. These accidents do happen.

LNG and crude oil are not even close to being the same.

 

[deepstops]

I've been watching the Calypso Project develop for years and it seems like it's well thought out and something we need with minimal impact to nature.

SUEZ Energy North America - Calypso

A list of all the LNG accidents worldwide (very few and even fewer in the US):
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspubl...678dd4&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf

Calypso LNG LLC is proposing the development of a submerged buoy system known as a "Deep Water Port" (DWP) and located approximately 8 to 10 miles off the southeastern coast of Florida. The Calypso DWP will serve as an offshore delivery point for connection to specially built LNG tankers. The LNG tankers will vaporize stored LNG and send it through the buoy system into the FERC-permitted Calypso U.S. Pipeline, which will transport the natural gas onshore to Florida customers.

Florida's unique geography and mounting energy needs demand an innovative solution that will reliably diversify its energy portfolio. Natural gas is used in Florida almost exclusively to generate electricity, and demand for electricity is expected to increase by more than 37% between 2005 and 2015. Calypso will be capable of delivering over 1 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day directly into the fastest growing portion of the Florida market. This represents approximately 25% of Florida’s peak demand on a hot summer day.

Florida is currently 100% dependent on Gulf Coast sources for its natural gas supply. This lack of diversity can put Florida customers in a vulnerable position, particularly during hurricane season. Calypso's ship-based deliveries of LNG not only offer real geographic diversification, but are also designed to rapidly detach from the buoy and move out of harm's way in the event of severe weather conditions. After a storm passes, Calypso's ships will reconnect to the buoys and immediately resume natural gas delivery into the pipeline system.

If everyone that moved over the last, let's say 25 years, moved away, we probably would not need this but I don't see that happening

I'm not seeing any good reasons to oppose this. LNG is pretty friendly to the environment when compared other energy forms available today.

 

[Divergirl4U]

Why here on our beautiful reef?
Florida has so much coastline....

 

[Charlie99]

Why here on our beautiful reef?
Florida has so much coastline....

I was unaware that it was being built on a reef. That would change my opinion about the project dramatically.

The last time I checked, though, 3rd reef was only about 1/2 mile offshore and there wasn't any reef out 8-10 miles where the facility is being built.

Perhaps someone knowledgeable (Divergirl4u ??) can confirm the relative position the LNG facility compared to the nearest reef.

Normally, the location of an LNG deepwater port is greatly affected by things like where the consumption is located (SE Florida) and vicinity to pipelines and onshore storage facilities.

The Neptune facility Suez is building near Boston/Gloucester area was picked to 1) be outside of shipping lanes, and 2) for being close to an existing undersea pipeline.

The Neptune facility makes a lot more sense than the Everett facility (also run by Suez) located right in Boston harbor that forces LNG ships to go right past downtown Boston. I'd be all for building yet another offshore terminal if that meant we could shut down the Everett facility -- even though it has a good safety record for the 35 years or so that it has operated.
http://www.suezenergyna.com/ourcompanies/lngna-neptune.shtml

 

[Divergirl4U]

And when spills .... Charlie where will it go?

 

[deepstops]

And when spills .... Charlie where will it go?

It's a liquefied gas, when you take away the pressure to make it a liquid (a leak or a spill), it simply evaporates.

 

[Charlie99]

And when spills .... Charlie where will it go?

Not onto the reef.

There are significant hazards in LNG. Having spills that hang around for a long time are NOT one of the hazards. Catastrophic explosions are.

Using the LNG tankers as offshore storage/vaporization facilities IMO makes a lot more sense than building them onshore.

Of course, if you South Floridians would just use less electricity the LNG facility wouldn't be needed. Maybe a better alternative to the LNG facility would be to just shutdown your electric power for a few hours each day. Maybe we should build some coal-fired power plants instead --- those terminals would be onshore and coal is a relatively low hazard substance to handle. Unfortunately, coal fired electric power plants generate both more CO2/greenhouse emissions and more of other pollutants.

Too bad you Floridians can't use the California solution --- we just import electricity from coal fired power plants in the states downwind of us. That way we get clean electricity while the pollution is elsewhere.

 

[ReefHound]

Unless you're living a zero carbon lifestyle you have no rational basis to oppose this development. Why here? Why there? Why anywhere? That kind of NIMBYism is part of the problem, not the solution.