All Posts Tagged With: "Port of Coos Bay"
County votes two to one in favor of flooding Kentuck Golf Course
Bob Main was the lone voice of dissent expressing valid concerns about washing toxic chemicals both from fertilizing the golf course and from a former methamphetamine lab being washed into the bay. Commissioners Whitty and Stufflebean were unconcerned about potential damage to the bay. The flooding is necessary for Jordan Cove to offset wetlands lost to the proposed LNG terminal.
The commissioners added three conditions to the project to limit costs to the county and damage to the environment, but the three-person vote was divided. Commissioner Bob Main voted no, in light of concerns he said he had about pollutants washing into the bay. Commissioners Nikki Whitty and Kevin Stufflebean voted yes.
Jody McCaffree recommended an oversight committee to avert a similar disaster as the Mas-Tec pipeline.
The port agreed that there should be a technical advisory committee, such as the one it already has, including leaders from the South Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve and Coos Watershed Association.
The applicant gets to be its own advisory committee. That will be like listening to foxes discuss how to guard the hen house.
Stufflebean assured everyone … “Regulatory agencies tend to pick on government entities more than private companies.â€
It is anyone’s guess where that pearl of wisdom came from or what evidence there is to support that statement but meanwhile, Stufflebean is once again backpedaling on earlier statements made to the press about his bankruptcy. Today, a county citizen asked him why he hadn’t reported his personal contributions to his campaign that forced him into bankruptcy. Failure to report contributions is a clear violation of election laws.
His explanation was that there were non-reportable expenses such as gas and mileage to speaking events. So given the campaign cost less than $6,000 and Coos County is not that large it would seem that it didn’t take much to tip the financial scales for the commissioner. Now he has also blamed his wife’s job loss and his own, heretofore unconfirmed, claim of a $28,000 a year salary cut when he took on the commissioners seat.
Either way, Stufflebean doesn’t appear to have much of a handle on his personal finances and was irresponsible toward his debtors if he, indeed, did take a lower paying job. So why are we letting someone with such a track record of inconsistencies and poor judgment make decisions for the County?
LNG – National Insecurity
Many thanks to Pat Reid, for sharing this article written for The Sentinel this week, so I can offer it here. Pat has written very eloquently and professionally for our community before talking about ethanol and this week he turns his analytical skills to LNG.
On the energy front, this nation is at a crossroads. Do we continue to throw money at the fossil fuel industry (represented in large part by the API – American Petroleum Institute) or do we finally awaken to stand up against this fossil fuel lobby and the interests that they represent and just say NO. No to greater dependence on foreign sourced fossil fuels which only enrich the oil/gas corporations, undermines our national security and provides funding to our enemies. We the people need to start saying YES to renewable, domestically produced, and sustainable sources of energy that increase the wealth and stability of this country – allowing for an overall national way of life that models sound energy policy for the rest of the world to emulate. In my view, we must come to grips with the reality that there is only a relatively modest amount of fossil fuels left here on our own shores and begin in earnest to invest in & develop our own sources of RENEWABLE energy. Wind, solar and biofuels are viable right now and will only enhance the health of the economy, environment, and national security. The use of fossil fuels, especially supertanker shipped LNG, increasingly makes us less secure as we are forced to rely on countries that are ruled, in large part, by unfriendly dictators who despise countries with democratic forms of government. These dictatorships have and will continue to use a certain percentage of these petroleum/gas dollars to pose a threat to our national security.
LNG is 100% foreign sourced from many of the same volatile countries that provide much of the oil to satisfy our current addiction. We are setting ourselves up for an unhealthy dependence to yet another fossil fuel that undermines our overall security, adds to the global climate change problem, and does nothing to help wean us off our oil habit. LNG coming into Coos Bay, or any other U.S. port, is just a bad idea if looked at with any kind of long term perspective.
Our federal, state & local dollars would be much better spent by developing and establishing industries that harness the renewable power of the wind, the sun, biomass derived fuels (ethanol & biodiesel) and even the tremendous potential energy of wave/tidal action just off the coast. These energy sources would provide many good paying jobs that enable us to use our existing electrical grids and power our cars with very little modification needed. Every state in the union has the potential to harness at least two of these renewable sources of energy and do it reliably within 5 to 10 years. We must commit to stop throwing our money at fossil based fuels (especially those 100% foreign sourced) and demand an Apollo type program be launched that breaks this country free of our crippling dependence on dwindling supplies of fossil fuel and moves us toward renewable energy independence and greater national security.
Ten years from now, I am one who would like to see the goal of having at least 50% of our energy coming from wind, solar, advanced biofuels, and other sources of renewable energy. Tell your elected officials that you want this kind of future and urge them to work toward this goal. Remind them to say no to things like LNG that ultimately undermine our overall prosperity & security.
Some questions to the port director
Below follow some of the questions recently sent to Jeffrey Bishop, Executive Director of the Port of Coos Bay by Citizens for no LNG.
3) Thirty three LNG import terminals have been approved already in North America. Some of these terminals that have been built have been unable to get supply contracts. If Jordan Cove was to be approved by FERC and built but they were forced to shut down or never operate due to market conditions (i.e. they filed bankruptcy, dissolved, etc), who then would pay the payments on the tugs, the slip dock, the dredging of the access channel, the property, etc, since these are to be owned and/or controlled by the Port? (Emphasis mine)
4) I understood that even though APM terminal is not coming for a least 5 years and possibly not at all, we are still going to pursue the bay dredging project. This is at the request of APM? Do we have a signed agreement with APM terminals? Can I get a copy of this agreement? Who is paying for the proposed dredging?
5) I thought I heard you say that the dredging would also benefit Jordan Cove in that you could work harbor disruptions so that they would not be so impacting to other bay users. Correct?
6) I am still rather confused as to how the dredging project can go forward without the agreements in place that are required of the legislature before bonds are to be sold? I am also still rather confused as why the Port approved over a million dollars in September to begin working on the bay dredging project without these agreements in place first? Doesn’t this put our Port at an extreme liability?
It should be noted that of the 33 LNG terminals approved by FERC much of the land was acquired by eminent domain for both the terminal and the supporting pipeline from property owners. Eminent domain was used to secure property even in the terminals that have been moth balled… those people lost their property for nothing.
Port of Coos Bay commissioners meeting
Well, all hell appears to be breaking loose at the Port of Coos Bay as all the deals concocted appear to be falling apart. Between the railroad embargo, the integrated LNG slip dock ballast issue and the lack of any firm deals between Maersk, or Jordan Cove or anyone else, it is hard to understand how the Port operates at all. They did approve a 5% increase in docking fees at the Marina.
May take me a few days to absorb everything plus the information packets supplied to the commissioners are not readily available to the public. How the public is expected to contribute to decisions investing their tax dollars is hard to understand without adequate time to review paperwork and assess the merits of data presented. Nevertheless, several of us will dig in and see if we can make sense of the $1M already spent on dredging for a slip dock that has now been put on hold.
Thank you for this M. I've been asking on The World and The Forum for the Editorial Board at The ...
http://www.larryvanelsberg2010.com/index.html 
Thanks, Den, this is very useful 