Comments expressed

Comments are are not necessarily those of station owners, managers or, staff. Listen for Tom Freel on KAST 1370 and on line at kast1370.com



September 28, 2009

AMEN

From The Oregonian September 27, 2009



Forty miles up the Columbia River from Astoria, Bradwood Landing was an industrial site from 1856 through 1965 and will be again if final state permits are issued for a liquefied natural gas terminal proposed by NorthernStar Natural Gas.

Wrongheaded recall elections looming in Clatsop County are a sure sign the fight over liquefied natural gas development there has gotten out of hand.

County Commissioners Ann Samuelson and Jeff Hazen face recall in an election Oct. 27. Their transgression? They approved land-use applications for a bitterly contested LNG terminal at Bradwood Landing on the lower Columbia River.

Opponents are collecting signatures for an election to recall a third commissioner, Patricia Roberts, who also backed the developers' application.

If any of the three had engaged in unlawful conduct in supporting the LNG project, its opponents would be justified in seeking to give them the boot. No such official allegations exist, but that hasn't stopped anti-LNG campaigners from trying to oust them having their own ideas about Bradwood Landing. This is classic misuse of the recall. It should be reserved for malfeasance, not for punishing elected officials who dare to make unpopular decisions.

Clatsop County voters would do well to consider that the three commissioners under fire appear to have voted correctly in accordance with Oregon land-use law. And then there's the fact that the big development proposed at Bradwood Landing, 40 miles upriver from Astoria, isn't at all the industrial boogeyman that its opponents would have everyone believe.

Similar LNG terminals exist all over the world, including in historic Boston Harbor. They've operated safely and cleanly for decades, importing liquefied natural gas that is degassified and piped to markets far and wide.

Northwest Natural Gas Co. projects that the LNG from Bradwood Landing would supply up to a quarter of its customers' gas needs and more later as the region grows. This gas has a net contribution to global warming that is well below that of oil or coal, making it essential for the nation's transition to more renewable energy sources.

The economic impact of the Bradwood project may be secondary, but it's still huge. Construction would provide 450 living-wage jobs over three years, and once operational the terminal would provide millions of dollars of tax revenue to Clatsop County every year.

The Bradwood facility and associated pipelines would provide a billion-dollar economic stimulus, funded privately, at a time when Oregon could sorely use it. Incredibly, however, state regulators seem hell-bent on throwing up roadblocks, even though the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has granted a permit for the project and its developers are committed to meet or exceed every environmental standard.

And now the ugly attacks on three county commissioners. Wielding the recall against them in such fashion has a corrosive effect, discouraging people from running for office and unfairly punishing those willing to stick their necks out and serve.

Clatsop County voters should reject the recall of Hazen and Samuelson on Oct. 27 and refuse to sign petitions seeking the recall of Roberts.

20 comments:

  1. Saturday, September 26, 2009
    The Oregonian Editorial Board Is At It Again And It's Got That Smell Of LNG All Over It?
    GRP: Uh-Oh!!!! The Oregonian Editorial Board Has Come Up With Yet, Another Editorial That Strangely Stinks Of What Would Appear To Be , Once Again, Obvious Input From Bradwood Landing/NSNG Because It Sure Isn't From Any On-Scene Reporter From Their Staff That Would Have A "Hoot-In-Hell's Idea" Of What Was Actually Going On Down Here. Who's their Rep Down Here, Lori Tobias Is It?

    "The Stump
    Economy, Editorials, Environment, Law, Politics, land use »
    Recall is being misused in Clatsop LNG fight
    By The Oregonian Editorial Board
    September 26, 2009, 10:02AM

    Wrongheaded recall elections looming in Clatsop County are a sure sign the fight over liquefied natural gas development there has gotten out of hand.


    GRP: Fitting irony that the comments to this...this...piece of...Seemingly pro-lng propaganda, from The Oregonian, seems to match the majority of sentiment of the citizens of Clatsop County and The Lower Columbia River region, as it has from day one and that is, they do not appear to be in favor of it or the elected and appointed officials serving in their trust colluding with these private "Energy Speculators" to ram this stuff down their throats as the record should clearly show.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous8:41 PM

    And the OREGONIAN knows so much about Clatsop County because.......?
    They didn't even cover the recall of that other hard working commissioner....Richard Lee, so that must have been for the wrong reason also

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous9:33 PM

    Has anyone else read the anti-LNG literature?
    It's kinda laughable.
    They complain about billions of gallons of Columbia River water being taken for ballast and dumped into the ocean... I guess they down know where the Columbia river goes...
    And they don't want to use foreign LNG, becuase we have plenty in this country, because of the added expense in transporting it here. But ours is on the other side of the Rocky Mts. Is it really shorter to ship it around the bottom of South America, (the Panama Canal isn't big enough), than to just come across the Pacific. Or do the people who don't like "pipelines in parks" want a pipeline coming to us from the East Coast???
    Maybe NW Natural should discontinue service to anyone who is anti-LNG.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Anonymous said...
    Has anyone else read the anti-LNG literature?
    It's kinda laughable."


    And this character, obviously of the Pro-LNG ilk, is loading us up with accurate, concise information?

    Yeah, it's laughable alright, the whole damned affair, which tells us all we need to step back and take another serious look at this LNG issue in our futures before we make one helluva mistake.

    Let's take it to a vote now and settle it shall we?

    ReplyDelete
  5. A fellow at the last Commissioner meeting said very briefly that the people who seem so opposed to the LNG efforts don't seem to stand FOR anything, but find just about everything to stand AGAINST. Yet undoubtedly they voted for Hope & Change. Why not just come out of the socialist closet, People, and stop pretending otherwise? Then we can more openly discuss the merits of your arguments rather than having to fight proposal by proposal. Seems like a more efficient way to get at the bottom of our differences.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Tom, BTW, the On Demand portion of the options we can go to on the KAST site doesn't seem to be updated. The latest CoastWatch episode I show as available is Aug. 8. Perhaps I'm doing something wrong, but I can't figure out what that might be. I'm registered and logged on when I access it, so it seems like it should come up. Anyway, this is just an FYI in case any others are having similar problems but don't care to let you know. Also, other than by phone, I don't know how to contact you. Perhaps you could have a box within the CoastWatch portion where information or issues of interest not previously discussed could be suggested by readers. Really enjoy listening to you on air, although can't always do that live, which goes back to the above concern. Thanks, Art Hyland

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous9:45 AM

    The "anti-LNG/Pro-poverty" crowd are laughable... they are now importing people from out of the area and out of state to help them protest. The Oregonian article points out correctly that the recall is a misuse of this law.
    One can't argue with these people (anti-LNG/Pro-poverty) because its the same as arguing with an idiot... they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous9:07 PM

    NW Natural will never use Bradwood or Oregon LNG because they are running ads everywhere saying they have centuries of DOMESTIC natural gas supplies. Bradwood can you say Allumax?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous9:46 PM

    AMEN AGAIN!!! ISN'T EVERYBODY SICK AND TIRED OF THIS........................................... THERE IS ALOT MORE THAN LNG GOING ON IN THIS COUNTY...

    ReplyDelete
  10. ArtH- regarding the OnDemand section of the site..I'll get on that for you today and see what's wrong with it. Thanks for listening!

    ReplyDelete
  11. "ArtH said...
    A fellow at the last Commissioner meeting said very briefly that the people who seem so opposed to the LNG efforts don't seem to stand FOR anything, but find just about everything to stand AGAINST... Yet undoubtedly they voted for Hope & Change. Why not just come out of the socialist closet, People, and stop pretending otherwise? Then we can more openly discuss the merits of your arguments rather than having to fight proposal by proposal. Seems like a more efficient way to get at the bottom of our differences."


    So, Art, what you are inferring is that if you are Anti-LNG your are a Flaming, Socialist, Elitetist, Progressive, Liberal, Tree Hugging, Democrat?

    Is that correct?

    There, contrary to your local position, are the same as me, lifelong or longtime Republicans who do not believe LNG speculation and siting is the best solution to our future in Clatsop County.

    Of course you wouldn't know this because the County Republican Party, if you look at the Web Site is dead, or at least inactive and doing absolutely nothing but chasing the windmill of Tax Tea Parties when we need to be out selling this community to cohesive and compatibale industry that can put hundreds, thousands of our county citizens to work in sustainable, family wage jobs.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Steve8:27 PM

    Tom, is there a way to E-mail you instead of writing a comment?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous12:15 PM

    Sorry to have to correct you Patrick (not really), but the majority of the anti-LNG crowd around here are democrats. (Dominey, Caplan, Marquis/Price, Rocka, Mitchell, etc etc)

    I'm a democrat too so I'm not saying that being democrat means you have to be anti-lng. I think there are a wide variety of attitudes (and parties) on both sides.

    I do agree with Art however, in that most of them ARE anti-everything to do with progress.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous9:00 PM

    Way to go, anon 8:27. That must sting, McGee, to be clearly WRONG, once again. Is you name really McGee?

    ReplyDelete
  15. "I do agree with Art however, in that most of them ARE anti-everything to do with progress."

    Or could it be they are just against "Bad Business" and "Bad Governmet" as there seems, in many's view, to be plenty of both around these parts these days and it seems to prevail over everything else so I would imagine it could be construed to be "everything" by those critics, especially those with their asses in the ringer and under the scrtutiny of all those "Anti's".

    Progress?

    Perhaps you could define "Progress" for me from our perspective here on the North Coast.

    Let's see now, at least a 1.6 Billion dollar investment, at the least, in a technology many say we not need and there is no proof that we do, with an end job count of only and allegedly so, 65 jobs, miles and miles of piplelines with the possibility of some of it being wrested away from its owners by Emminent Domain and for a pirvate business at that, dramatic infrastructure upheaval for 65 years for a commodity we are supposed to weanng ourselves off of?

    Would this be "Progress"?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Patrick McGee says above: "So, Art, what you are inferring is that if you are Anti-LNG your are a Flaming, Socialist, Elitetist, Progressive, Liberal, Tree Hugging, Democrat?

    No Patrick, but it's incontrovertible that the "Flaming, Socialist, Elitetist, Progressive, Liberal, Tree Hugging, Democrat"s ARE opposed to LNG and almost any privately financed corporations and businesses. But it would be difficult to accurately describe any group of Republicans or conservatives in the same way. Of course it's possible for a non-Democrat to oppose LNG ports, but what's the point in finding those needles in the haystack? What I suggested can be stated slightly differently: the anti-everything crowd are the same people opposing LNG, and who oppose just about any business proposition unless it fits within their definitions of "responsible," "sustainable," "green," "diverse," and tolerated by a "consensus" of like-minded granola crunchers who think that the world was a better place at some unspecified period in our history, yet all prefer expensive coffee, iphones, and Volvos with CoexisT & Obama '08 on the bumpers. Other than that they're normal everyday people who seem content to see our way of life disappear with the ever-growing tax burdens promoted by liberal Democrats currently in charge of Oregon and the Federal government.

    In any event, you don't see conservatives here in Clatsop going nuts about liberal representatives; we're planning to replace them, in due time, at regular elections, without the absurd expense of a special election served up to placate the emotions of a whining bunch of crybabies who want their candy right now.
    Art Hyland, Astoria

    ReplyDelete
  17. But I do, Art, see many "Republicans" against this project in Clatsop County, The Lower Columbia, The State, The Region simply and like the Skipanon Lease, because it's a bad deal in the overall picture and I am very surprised, considering your community position, you don't see that.

    Patrick McGee - Republican
    Astoria

    Aren't you involved in the local GOP?

    What is it you do with that party?

    Are you part of that leadership?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous said...
    NW Natural will never use Bradwood or Oregon LNG because they are running ads everywhere saying they have centuries of DOMESTIC natural gas supplies. Bradwood can you say Allumax?


    And Bradwood Landing/NSNG says on their own site something to the effect.."But Oregon and Washington "IMPORT" almost 100% of their Natural Gas"...Import 100% of their Natural Gas? From where? Canada and The Rocky Mountains?

    So Clatsop County imports its Natural Gas supply frome where? Columbia County maybe?

    Jeeeesh!!!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous8:05 AM

    Well said Art!

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anonymous5:42 PM

    It's unfortunate McGee can't get his act together so he can make his point concisely and in one piece. But, then, it's unfortunate that McGee writes anything. The information that he provides misleading polls is certainly something to consider. Only a dishonest person would do that.

    ReplyDelete