Liquid Natural Gas Proposed for Long Island Sound: Update

by Nancy Seligson

Editor's Note: Officials from the waterside communities of Larchmont and Mamaroneck have been keeping an eye on a proposed project that would locate a liquid natural gas facility the size of the Queen Mary II in the Long Island Sound. The proposal is complex and will be wending its way through the approval process for many months, but Town Councilwoman Nancy Seligson, also the NY Co-chair of Long Island Sound Study Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), filed the following update:

(June 1, 2005) In the fall of 2004, the public started to read about a liquid natural gas (LNG) facility proposed for Long Island Sound. The proposal raises many questions and concerns about the safety, environmental impacts, security, and navigational impacts of the facility, as well as the potential dredging, the permitting process, and alternatives – not to mention the need - for the project.

Although the project would not be located close to the shores of Larchmont and Mamaroneck, its impact on the Sound and its precedent-setting use of the Sound could affect our area.

Illustration from www.broadwaterenergy.com

The proposal is sponsored by a company named Broadwater formed by Trans Canada and Shell Oil to provide new energy supplies of liquid natural gas to the region. Broadwater proposes a ship-like LNG facility permanently moored in Long Island Sound. The location would be in New York State waters about 9 miles from the NY Long Island shoreline off of Wading River, and about 11 miles off the Connecticut shoreline offshore from Branford. The facility would be approximately 1,200 feet long and 180 feet wide – about the size of the Queen Mary II. The facility would receive, store and convert LNG to gas. Liquid natural gas is natural gas that has been cooled to -260 degrees Fahrenheit, which shrinks its volume allowing it to be more efficiently stored and transported.

The LNG product would be imported from various places and several tankers per week would deliver it to the facility. A 25 mile underwater pipeline would be constructed from the facility to join the existing Iroquois natural gas pipeline in the Sound from which it would be distributed to the NY and CT energy markets. Broadwater suggests the Coast Guard would require a 500 yard security and no-navigation zone surrounding the facility, about a quarter of a mile.

The no-navigation zone would be a first for the Sound. The Sound has many commercial uses from barge transportation to commercial fishing, but none of the uses permanently prohibits people from entering or using a part of the Sound.

See: www.broadwaterenergy.com for larger map.

It isn’t clear yet what one would see from our shores looking out to the east in Long Island Sound if this project were built. There are questions about the how the lighting of it will look at night.

The Long Island Sound Study LISS Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) initiated action to analyze the impacts of the LNG proposal. The CAC invited Broadwater officials to attend the December 9, 2004 LISS CAC meeting and present the LNG proposal in more detail. Susannah Pierce, external affairs officer and Sandra Barnett, environmental affairs officer of Trans Canada and Broadwater Energy attended.

Although the CAC learned much about the proposal, Ms. Barnett and Ms. Pierce were not able to address several technical questions. The CAC decided to form an ‘ad hoc’ subcommittee to address the LNG facility questions and issues in the long term.

The CAC then invited representatives from the Coast Guard and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to its following meeting. Again, much was learned and discussed at the meeting, but much more information is needed to truly analyze the proposal.

Some of the key questions the CAC will consider include:

1. Water quality impacts of the facility. Intake and discharge volume, velocity and temperature and its affect on fish.
2. Siting of the facility.
3. Environmental impacts of construction of the pipeline.
4. Implications of precedent of industrial use of LIS.
5. Navigational hazards and exemptions.
6. Risks of leaks, spillage and catastrophic failure.

Broadwater has responded to a list of specific questions from the ad hoc committee, but many of the responses were not adequate and many questions remain unanswered.

Several organizations and groups have taken stands on the proposal. The LISS however, is a coordinating body for the federal, state and local governments as well as the nongovernmental organizations, academic institutions and nonprofit organizations studying and working to restore and protect Long Island Sound. As such, the LISS itself will not take a stand on the proposal, but will comment and offer opinions on environmental impact statements and permit decisions.

The CAC recognizes that the Broadwater LNG facility is a very ambitious and untested proposal. Much information gathering, analysis, and testing must be done in order to move forward with the environmental review and permitting timetable. At this time we are still compiling information. Upon analysis and much discussion, the ad hoc subcommittee will help the CAC develop a policy stance in regard to the proposal. This is expected to be formulated over the next several months.

Broadwater has a web page at www.broadwaterenergy.com and can be reached at 1-800-798-6379 for more information from the company. Connecticut Fund for the Environment/Save the Sound has a position at www.savethesound.org and (203)354-0036.

Front Page

Print This Page
Email this page