NW Natural is holding a shareholder's meeting this Thursday. If you are in the Portland area, please pay them a visit (official if you can) and let them know you do not want the Palomar pipeline project to go through:
Thursday, May 27th 1pm
Oregon Convention Center
777 NE Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd
And please bring your friends. So, what am I on about? Oh, just the latest threat to one of the greatest mountains ever, the glorious and exquisite Mt. Hood.
There's just something magical amazing about it and the Mt. Hood National Forest is nothing to sneer at itself. Both are exquisite and eternally under siege, it would appear.
Just as we Oregonians are used to voting on cockamamie tax schemes, we are equally resigned to constant assaults on Mt. Hood National Forest. We're as used to it as we are the rain. The latest threat comes in the form of the Palomar LNG pipeline.
Palomar being a partnership between "TransCanada, a leading North American energy infrastructure company, and NW Natural, the principal distributor of natural gas in Oregon and southwest Washington." I'll say. I don't even think we have another option for gas in Portland. So that's who.
The what is the Palomar pipeline itself. Here is the vague description offered by Palomar:
The proposed 36-inch-diameter underground pipeline will be approximately 220 miles long. In addition to improving service reliability for NW Natural’s customers, the pipeline potentially opens up the entire region to new sources of natural gas via a connection to the proposed Bradwood Landing Pipeline in north-central Oregon.
And here are the devil-laden details, per environmental activists BARK:
a pipeline from the Columbia River where the LNG Terminals are proposed down through Molalla and across the national forest to meet up in Madras with existing pipeline.
This proposal would include a clearcut corridor for the pipeline, as well as new road construction for access to the pipeline. The corridor would cross Fish Creek, the Wild and Scenic Clackamas River. These are key watersheds that include already compromised older forests. The corridor would amount to an approx. 720-acre clearcut, through popular recreation areas, across hiking trails (such as the Pacific Crest Trail) and across two proposed off-highway vehicle designated areas.
New road construction in Mt. Hood National Forest. Ummmm...yeah...NO. Countless Oregonians have already voiced their opposition, including Senator Wyden.
Even better: another LNG project that was to complete the western half of the Palomar pipeline has fallen through. Yay! Delays developing the Bradwood terminal drove one of the developer companies to bankruptcy and that project is now as over as Blanche Lincoln's career in the Senate. But TransCanada insists they will continue with the eastern portion of the pipeline. The Mt. Hood part.
Well, again I say "no." Not just "no," but "hell no." Hell no you may not lay your grubby paws on my beautiful mountain to set a redundant transmission network for no other purpose than to enrich NW Natural and TransCanada, you short-sighted, self-serving, sacrilegious fuckwads. No!
Please help send that message by showing up at the event Thursday with lots of friends and cameras. If you can't make it, be sure to share your thoughts with NW Natural in other ways; TransCanada has a Portland office as well. And as always, letters to the editor rock!
Update [2010-5-25 9:49:12 by Cedwyn]: In addition to the legislation Wyden is supporting to give state's more control and FERC less, there is also a bill being worked up in the House:
U.S. REPS MCGOVERN, FRANK, KENNEDY AND LANGEVIN INTRODUCE NEW LNG LEGISLATION
U.S. Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA) today announced that he has introduced legislation to restore the ability of states to play a necessary and vital role in the process of siting Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) facilities.
The bill (HR 4922) repeals a provision in the 2005 Energy bill that gave the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) the exclusive authority to site LNG facilities.
U.S. Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA), Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) and James Langevin (D-RI) are original co-sponsors of the bill. U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) has introduced the legislation in the Senate.
FERC does not currently seek adequate input from states in LNG siting reviews, and governors lack veto authority for onshore LNG terminals, despite having that authority for offshore terminals under the Deepwater Port Act. Although states and localities face all the potential risks and impacts of a LNG facility, they lack an equal voice in the siting and approval process. Prior to the 2005 Energy Bill, such decisions had historically been made by siting agencies in each state.
..."The costs and benefits of proposed LNG facilities will be borne out by the states, so it only makes sense that states should be involved in the process of siting them," Rep Kennedy said. "In the case of Weaver’s Cove, the people of Rhode Island and southeast Massachusetts have spoken loudly against this dangerous and ill-conceived project. It is time for federal law to reflect that reality and allow states to have a greater say about those facilities they support and those they oppose
Maria DeCoste
Office of Congressman Jim McGovern
371 So. Main St. Suite 102
Fall River, MA 02721
Tel. 508/677-0140
Fax. 508/677-0992
e-mail-maria.decoste@mail.house.gov
Please call your reps and Senators and tell them to get on this!