No Place for Liquefied Natural Gas Imports, or Port Ambrose, in New York's Energy Future

NYS 2014 Draft Energy Plan points to a diminishing need for LNG imports and ignores Port Ambrose altogether

On January 7, 2014, the New York State Energy Planning Board released its Draft 2014 New York State Energy Plan for public comment. The Draft Plan, which runs to over 600 pages, is a comprehensive assessment of every aspect of New York’s energy matrix, including supply, demand, and infrastructure needs for the next twenty years.  While the Plan suggests that natural gas will play an important role in the state’s energy future, it sees no role for imported liquefied natural gas (LNG); and although other infrastructure projects are considered in detail, it doesn’t even mention Port Ambrose, the proposed Deepwater Port that would be constructed off Long Island and import LNG into the metropolitan area.

In its few remarks on the subject, the Plan notes that the need for LNG imports has diminished and that they now (in 2012) account for “less than 1 percent of total U.S. natural gas.” The Plan goes on to warn that natural gas markets are shifting to exporting LNG – which could “cause price volatility in the future” and have a disruptive impact on New York energy costs.

So where does this leave Port Ambrose? “This is further evidence, if any were needed, that there isn’t any demonstrable need for LNG imports for Port Ambrose,” noted Sean Dixon, Coastal Policy Attorney with Clean Ocean Action; “in aiming for affordable energy, resiliency, and market-based solutions, LNG facilities are clearly inconsistent with NYS’s Energy Future.”

“New York State must reject the false promise of carbon based fuels as a bridge to a sustainable future and stand as a leader in creating a new energy economy based on renewable resources,” said Jeremy Samuelson, Executive Director of Concerned Citizens of Montauk. “Our energy future will reflect exactly what we incentivize.  Economic growth, environment protection and greater national security are the inevitable by-products an aggressive transition to renewable energy.”

“New York State’s Energy Plan offers further evidence that Port Ambrose is not viable as an LNG import facility,” said Bruce Ferguson of Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy.  “In all likelihood, if this project goes forward it will be used to export shale gas and that will inevitably lead to more fracking in the Northeast, and that’s something none of us want to see.”

A State Energy Plan is required under state law and is open for a 60-day public comment period.  As noted in the Board presentation and press release announcements on the readiness of the Draft Plan, there will also be six public hearings (in Buffalo, Syracuse, Albany, Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Long Island).

In June 2013, Liberty LNG’s proposed Port Ambrose LNG import facility application became active, triggering a year-long review process under the federal Deepwater Port Act.  Liberty LNG proposes building a port about 25 miles off of Jones Beach, NY, and a 20-mile pipeline which would connect with the existing offshore Williams-Transco pipeline just 2 miles off the coast of Atlantic Beach, NY.  Liberty LNG purports to be planning to use the facility strictly to import natural gas from the Gulf of Mexico and foreign nations.  Under federal law passed in December 2012, the license for this port could be amended to allow for natural gas exports.

The groups quoted above, along with an anti-Liberty LNG coalition of organizations from across the nation, continue to call on Governors Christie and Cuomo to exercise their statutory right to veto this proposal.  Such a veto, under the federal Deepwater Port Act, can be transmitted to the reviewing agencies (the Coast Guard and the Maritime Administration), at any time.

What's Next, One Year After Sandy

Waves of Action Program Culminates with Distinguished Speakers,

Panel Discussions, and Sea Level Rise Survey Results

Full house at McLoone's Pier House in Long Branch

On Saturday, Clean Ocean Action (COA) held a conference with concerned citizens more than one year after Superstorm Sandy at McLoone’s Pier House in Long Branch, New Jersey.

A celebration of the culmination of Waves of Action “For The Shore,” the year-long Sandy response program, the conference highlighted the extraordinary success of Waves of Action volunteers and project leaders, released results of a summer-long survey on sea level rise and accountability, and included panel discussions with distinguished speakers.  Panelists and speakers discussed, ‘What Do Communities Need Now and How Can Volunteers Help?’ and ‘What Resources are Available for Resiliency and Environmental Stewardship?’

One hundred and seventy three citizens were surveyed during the Clean Ocean Action Shore Tips (C.O.A.S.T.) campaign this past summer to garner public opinion about sea level rise and climate change, the impacts from Superstorm Sandy and what citizens believe elected officials and the general public should do in response to sea level rise and climate change.  The results are clear; the majority of the public believe that sea level rise exists and that a broad array of both citizen action and government action are needed to reduce the impacts.  Sea level rise survey and report by Macailagh McCue, 2013 C.O.A.S.T. Intern, 2014 Masters Candidate, James Madison University.

“Over the course of the past summer, COA’s sea level rise survey of the people of the Jersey Shore led to one inescapable conclusion – nearly everyone agrees the climate is changing, the sea is rising and that it’s up to us to make changes in our lives, communities and laws,” said Clean Ocean Action Coastal Policy Attorney Sean Dixon.

“New Jersey Recovery Fund grantees have been doing amazing work throughout the state of NJ to promote a recovery process that is transparent, sustainable, creative and equitable. They are currently serving as watchdogs, healers, educators and leaders to better prepare NJ for future disasters. I look forward to sharing more information about their work with conference participants,” stated Emilio DeLia, New Jersey Recovery Fund Project Manager.

“As the founder and editor of Jersey Shore Hurricane News, I not only report the daily news, but I'm also at the helm of a community of people primarily in Ocean and Monmouth counties. The platform is a community resource and has been intimately involved in the post-Sandy recovery. Accordingly, with the long-term recovery still in its early stages, our communities will continually require a strong communications coalition,” explained Founder of Jersey Shore Hurricane News Justin Auciello.

“Nature is tremendously resilient if given the chance and volunteers can make a big impact,” stated Save Barnegat Bay Executive Director Britta Wenzel.

“The challenge for homeowners that want to rebuild in a more sustainable manner is a lack of resources to support that decision. Many residents are struggling just to rebuild what they had, and often the additive cost of building a more resilient home is prohibitive. Government programs and flood insurance payments should provide additional resources to assist homeowners and businesses build a more sustainable shore community,” said Sea Bright Volunteer Coordinator Frank Lawrence.

"The need was unprecedented, as was the response. But we may just be looking at the tip of an iceberg in future years, an iceberg quickly melting into higher sea levels as it rushes our way," stated NJ Reporter for NBC New York Brian Thompson.

“As time goes on, Superstorm Sandy won’t be given as much media attention, which is why it is important that groups like Clean Ocean Action continue to advocate for what needs to be done in the future.  It is important to restore the shore, but it is most important to think long-term and prevent future damage,” explained US Representative Frank Pallone, New Jersey, 6^th District.

"Clean Ocean Action's comprehensive response to Hurricane Sandy, sea level rise, and extreme weather is impressive.  COA has been front and center engaging shore lovers at the grassroots, businesses, and elected officials to be proactive about our resiliency in the midst of climate change," said Lauren Townsend, NJ Director of US Strong. “Congratulations to COA's board, staff, and activists for accomplishing so much throughout 2013's Waves of Action, and thank you for your counsel and partnership advocating for national action, and the creation of a federal extreme weather relief and protection fund," added Townsend.

“Waves of Action ‘For the Shore’ was Clean Ocean Action coalition’s response to Superstorm Sandy. It has been a remarkable year of challenges and achievements, and there are thousands of stories of tenacity, compassion, resiliency and hope.  We believe the program must now evolve to help move toward restoration—minding the rules of Mother Nature and encouraging environmental stewardship.  Indeed, it’s not really a choice, it’s a mandate,” said Clean Ocean Action Executive Director Cindy Zipf.

Through Waves of Action “For The Shore,” almost 14,000 volunteers have helped to improve and protect the marine environment through 281 projects, with more than 125 different organizations, in over 70 towns in New York and New Jersey.  For more information, visit www.ForTheShore.org.

The Waves of Action Conference was sponsored by Whole Earth Center of Princeton, Montecalvo Recovery Facility, New Jersey 101.5 FM Radio, Barefoot Wine and Bubbly.

The Waves of Action program was sponsored by Aveda, Bloomberg, Dave Matthews Band, Provident Bank Foundation, LUSH Cosmetics, Rebuild Recover, Mickey Hart Band, Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation, All-State Foundation, Spinach for Rip & Joe Schiavone Foundation, Eileen Fisher, Inc., The Harriet Greenfield Foundation.

Waves of Action Culminates with Conference

Highlights Year-Long Spirit of Volunteerism
 and Collaboration Responding to Sandy 

WHAT: A conference to celebrate the culmination of Waves of Action For The Shore, Clean Ocean Action’s year-long Sandy response program.  Almost 14,000 volunteers (and counting) have helped to improve and protect the marine environment through 281 projects, with more than 100 different organizations, in over 70 towns in New York and New Jersey.  The conference will highlight the extraordinary success of the volunteers and project leaders, include panels on unmet community needs in the aftermath of Sandy, resources to move forward with resiliency and environmental stewardship, and the results of Clean Ocean Action’s sea level rise survey.  Reflections will be made by Monmouth County resident, Brian Thompson, New Jersey reporter for NBC New York.

COA’s Student Ocean Advocates helped Conserve Wildlife Foundation
of NJ replace osprey nests damaged by Sandy in Stafford Twp NJ on March 23!

WHO: Citizens, volunteers, businesses, groups, and elected officials organized by Clean Ocean Action to show their support for coastal communities one year after the launch of the Waves of Action For The Shore program.

WHEN: Saturday, December 7, 2013                       
8:30AM-12:00PM

WHERE: McLoone’s Pier House
1 Ocean Ave, Long Branch, New Jersey

                                

WHY: After a year of service and action, the conference will highlight the spirit of volunteerism and collaboration projects, and discuss the state of our shores one year after Sandy, and look ahead to 2014.

For more information and to reserve your seat at this breakfast event, click here.

Sandy Hook volunteers with Presidential Inaugural
Committee representatives on January 19, 2013

Conference Sponsors: Whole Earth Center of Princeton and Mimosa Bar by Barefoot Wine and Bubbly

To find out more information on sponsoring the event and supporting thousands of volunteers who have helped protect and improve the marine environment, contact Diana Reinhardt Paradis at (732) 872-0111.

Landslide Citizen Opposition to Liquefied Natural Gas

Detailed Analysis Demonstrates Strong Support for Ocean,
Timeline for Project Not Stopped Despite Government Shutdown

Overall, out of a sea of over 25,350 comments submitted to the Liberty LNG - Port Ambrose docket, only 16 comments supported industrialization of the ocean. This broad opposition to Liberty LNG’s Port Ambrose came from concerned citizens across the United States whose input was solicited by the Maritime Administration and the U.S. Coast Guard as part of the federal government’s project review process. 

Since the close of the public comment period on August 22, Clean Ocean Action has been documenting and sorting through comments to quantify the overwhelming opposition.  Environmental concerns topped the list of reasons for opposing Port Ambrose with threats to marine life, water pollution and air pollution imminent with the construction and operation of the port. 

“We're not going to trade the future of the ocean, or for that matter the planet, for dirty, cheap energy; not on our watch,” proclaimed Rav Freidel, Director of Concerned Citizens of Montauk.

"WATERSPIRIT believes that water as the sustainer of all life is sacred. The risk of devastation to the life of the ocean and its inhabitants from Port Ambrose is high. The risk of LNG facilities in the ocean, in particular in the NY/NJ Bight, is a threat to important habitats of fish including endangered species. Additionally, this facility will likely be exposed to more frequent hurricanes, nor'easters, and wind and wave risks because of climate change, creating a significant security risk to the ocean, the NY/NJ Harbor and the people who live in these coastal areas. WATERSPIRIT agrees with the 25,000+ people and organizations whose comments were in opposition to the Port Ambrose Project," said Suzanne Golas, csjp WATERSPIRIT Director. 

In addition, “The partial shutdown of the federal government has shuttered the Coast Guard office handling Port Ambrose, yet the fast tracking of the project continues.  When Coast Guard officials return to work, they should immediately extend the 240 day project review period to account for the days lost to political gridlock,” said Jill Wiener of Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy, a grassroots organization that submitted more than 5,400 letters opposing Port Ambrose.

“The fact that a whole month after the public comment period had closed the federal government is still uploading letters and comments speaks to how opposed to this project the public really is,” stated Clean Ocean Action Ocean Advocacy and Education Fellow Catie Tobin. 

Skepticism regarding the number of jobs that will be created and the desire of Liberty LNG to export natural gas were also major concerns raised.  By Liberty’s own projections, just 6 permanent jobs would be created for manning the port, even though impacts to tourism, fisheries, renewable energy jobs, and commerce would be put on the line.  Although the company claims the port will be used solely for imports, the overwhelming majority of project scoping comments argued that it will eventually lead to exports and increased hydraulic fracturing – two impacts that should be analyzed front and center.

“This project will adversely impact people throughout the region because there seems to be little doubt that if Port Ambrose is built it will be used to exported shale gas, and that means increased fracking in Pennsylvania and Ohio, and it could well open up New York State to fracking”, said Bruce Ferguson of Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy.

“After all that the Jersey and Long Island shores have been through since Hurricane Sandy, that last thing costal residents need now is the prospect of a huge natural gas disaster looming just offshore,” said Jim Walsh, Eastern Region Director of Food & Water Watch. “Further, this proposal will undoubtedly lead to gas exportation, which would require more dangerous and destructive fracking here at home; it's not fair to the residents of our region,” Walsh concluded.

“If energy independence is our national goal, then neither imports nor exports are in our national interest,” said Bob Bennekamper, concerned citizen from Brick Township, New Jersey.

Environmental, economic, and security concerns were raised by New Jersey Governor Christie when he vetoed Liberty Natural Gas’s last attempt to construct an LNG facility offshore in 2011, and reaffirmed his veto for an alternate location (Port Ambrose’s current proposed location) in 2012.  Both Governor Christie and Governor Cuomo can veto the current project, which is governed by the federal Deepwater Port Act.  Groups are now mobilizing to put pressure on both Governors to veto.

“Given the myriad reasons this Port shouldn’t be built, the scores of data gaps, inadequate studies, and outdated energy analyses identified by thousands of concerned citizens across the nation, the federal agencies reviewing this proposal should stop officially processing the application until these questions are answered,” said Sean Dixon, Coastal Policy Attorney with Clean Ocean Action, who, with other organizations in this coalition, has submitted multiple requests to the federal government for a ‘stopped clock’ on this proposal’s review.  Under the Deepwater Port Act, application review, once initiated, is only open for public involvement for a 240 day clock.  “We’re over 100 days into this Port’s processing, yet the ‘clock’ wasn’t stopped on this project before the federal government shut-down,” continued Dixon; “this is a significant failure in good governance that will lead to the voice of the public being curtailed and ignored.”

For more information, visit www.cleanoceanaction.org. 

What's Going on With Bottlenose Dolphins in the Mid-Atlantic?

NOAA Declares 'Unusual Mortality Event' for Bottlenose Dolphins in the Mid-Atlantic

Danielle Monaghan, a staffer at the Marine Mammal Stranding Center in Brigantine N.J.,  photographs a dead dolphin that washed ashore Wednesday, Aug. 21, 2013, in Spring Lake N.J. This dolphin was the 63rd to die on New Jersey's shores since early July. (AP Photo/Wayne Parry) / AP

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) declared an Unusual Mortality Event for bottlenose dolphins in the Mid-Atlantic region from early July 2013 to the present. An Unusual Mortality Event, as stated by the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, is defined as a “stranding that is unexpected; involves a significant die-off of any marine mammal population; and demands immediate response.” This declaration will provide scientists with additional research funding in order to find the root cause of the deaths.

NOAA Graph: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/health/mmume/midatldolphins2013.html

Since early July, there has been 71 dolphin strandings along the Jersey Coast. Strandings have been reported along the Mid-Atlantic coastline with almost 300 washups from New York to Virginia.  Virginia has reported the highest numbers of strandings at 64.

NOAA Graph: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/health/mmume/midatldolphins2013.html

According to NOAA, “all age classes of bottlenose dolphins are involved” and, “Currently, there are no unifying gross necropsy findings although several dolphins have presented with pulmonary lesions.”

Preliminary results indicate that some of the dolphins had pneumonia, while another tested positive for Morbillivirus, a measles-like virus.  However, the underlying cause of the deaths is still under investigation.  Other potential causes that are being researched include “other diseases or pathogens caused by viruses or bacteria; biotoxins caused by harmful algae blooms; pollution or chemicals, especially from concentrated spills; ship strikes; or acoustic trauma from ships or other infrastructure.”

The symptoms of Morbillivirus involves deteriorating body condition along with prominent lesions on the lungs and central nervous tissues. This disease also causes secondary infections, such as pneumonia.  What is most concering about Morbillivirus is that it is an airborne virus. This means the virus is easily spread between dolphins, who generally stay together in pods, through their normal breathing activities. The Morbillivirus has been known to affect species of dolphins in the past 20 years with one notable event occurring along the Mid-Atlantic coast in the 1980s in which 742 dolphins presented with the virus.

Matthew Huelsenbeck, a marine scientist at the nonprofit Oceana, pointed out that “most of the East Coast dolphin deaths have occurred in areas with heavy human footprints, like the Chesapeake Bay.”

The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection has stated that there is no correlation between the deaths and the water quality which “has been excellent this summer,”suggesting that instead, it is an indication of a “natural disease cycle.” However, dolphins are known to accumulate toxins into their bodies, and NOAA’s marine mammal biologist, Trevor Spradlin, pointed out that “many bottlenose dolphins live on the same coasts and eat the same fish that we do,” so this could mark something greater than a natural disease cycle and is cause for concern.

Perry Habecker, chief of large-animal pathology at the University of Pennsylvania, stated that “’human interaction’- such as aggressive commercial fishing, toxic wastes, and even plastic bags- can contribute to spikes of mortality in marine-mammal populations such as whales, seals and dolphins.” But, for now, the primary cause of the deaths has yet to be identified.  Scientists will know more once they run diagnostic tests on tissue and blood samples.  Click here for updates from NOAA.  

How can you help? 

If you see a stranded dolphin, do not touch it.  Alert local officials and keep pets away from the animal.  Also, in NJ, contact the Marine Mammal Stranding Center at 1-609-266-0538 or click here for other statesin the Mid-Atlantic region.  

This blog post is an updated version of an entry posted by COA on Tuesday, August 13.  Read that post here.

Port Ambrose (US) & Port Meridian (UK): The Untold Tale of Two Ports

Despite Claims about Imports, Corporate Connections Expose Export Future for Proposed Facility Offshore of New York & New Jersey Coast That Would Devastate the Region

Groups urge companies to come clean about their intent to export

A triangle of corporate connections makes clear the link between natural gas imports and exports for the proposed Liberty LNG Port Ambrose facility off the New York and New Jersey coast.  That was the evidence presented today by Clean Ocean Action, Catskills Citizens for Safe Energy, and the Coalition of Nassau County Civic Associations, along with many others in the broadly-based Anti-Liberty LNG coalition. 

This coalition called on Liberty LNG’s owners, West Face Capital (a Cayman Islands investment account), and project lead Roger Whelan, to come clean on the corporate energy interests of Liberty LNG’s owners that have not been disclosed to the public or to the federal agencies reviewing the port in the application.

Across the nation, energy companies by the dozen are lining up to export U.S. domestically produced natural gas – over two dozen companies have already been granted authorizations by the Department of Energy – and, under the law governing Port Ambrose simple written permission from the federal government is all that would be needed to change an import facility license to an export license.

West Face Capital, and Port Ambrose project lead Roger Whelan, have thus far failed to disclose a significant interest in another port – a facility that appears to have been built with Port Ambrose exports in mind.  Last November, Roger Whelan announced, on behalf of West Face Capital, the purchase of “Port Meridian” – a deepwater port of the exact same design as Port Ambrose.  This port, already approved for construction, anticipated to come online around the same time as Port Ambrose, would be operated by Höegh LNG – the exact same company and fleet of LNG vessels as Port Ambrose.

Höegh LNG, the partner in operations with West Face Capital, is the self-proclaimed global leader in floating liquefaction (“FLNG” - the technology needed to liquefy natural gas on a vessel moored at a Port Ambrose- and Port Meridian-style “turret buoy”); the Höegh LNG website claims: “no FLNG service provider has the same competences and capacity” and that Höegh LNG has invested over 400,000 engineering man-hours in developing this technology.

“West Face Capital bought a facility in the United Kingdom (a nation starved of natural gas supplies), and a facility in the United States (a nation where exports are being approved at a staggering rate), and set up Höegh LNG (a company leading the world in liquefaction at-sea from the same turret “STL” buoys which would be in place at both Port Ambrose and Port Meridian) to operate both ports,” summarized Sean Dixon, Coastal Policy Attorney at Clean Ocean Action.  “The evidence clearly points to this Cayman Island bank account’s plan to send U.S. natural gas overseas through its own energy bridge.” 

“While Port Ambrose and the federal government continue to claim that the sole intended use of the facility would be imports, reality is that this is a ‘bait and switch,’” warned Clean Ocean Action Executive Director Cindy Zipf.  “For the American people, our safety, our quality of life, and our environment, the stage is set for disaster if Port Ambrose is licensed.”

“Although Port Ambrose is being sold to the public as an LNG import facility, there is abundant evidence that it will actually be used to export fracked gas overseas, given that there is no viable market for imported LNG in New York City or on Long Island - I have no doubt that the current license application for an LNG import facility is a Trojan horse,” stated Bruce Ferguson with Catskills Citizens for Safe Energy.  “If Port Ambrose is licensed and used to export fracked gas, the ‘upstream impacts’ of fracking will devastate a broad swath of the Northeast, leaving Americans with contaminated drinking water, contaminated air and the destruction of important, sustainable economic industries such as agriculture and tourism. And for what? So other countries can be supplied with cheap energy, and so a foreign corporation can make a killing.”

“Keeping in mind that Nassau's south shore communities are still struggling to rebuild after Superstorm Sandy, situating an exporting liquefaction facility less than 19 miles off our southern coast would stress recovering communities to the breaking point if the facility were to be damaged by a severe storm, cautioned Claudia Borecky, LNG Port Committee Chair at Coalition of Nassau Civic Associations.  “In recent weeks, LNG facilities in Yemen were reportedly on Al Queda's target list.  Situating an exporting liquefaction facility at the entrance of one of the busiest harbors in the United States would place our entire region at risk for a terrorist attack.”

Comments on the proposal are due Thursday, August 22, 2013, to the federal docket (USCG-2013-0363-0181) at www.regulations.gov.

Related Links:

1.       Read an article about the sale of Port Meridian by Höegh LNG to West Face Capital (along with quote from Project Lead Roger Whelan), HERE

2.       Read a story about the sale price of Port Meridian, HERE

3.       See Höegh LNG’s claims about floating natural gas liquefaction (including at “disconnectable turrets” like those proposed at both Ports Ambrose and Meridian), HERE

Oppose Offshore LNG: Public Comment Deadline August 22 - Sample Comments Below

CLICK HERE to submit your comments to the federal government opposing Liberty Natural Gas's offshore LNG facility called Port Ambrose.  See below for sample topics and comments opposing the project.  Feel free to use the language and facts and make sure to personalize it.  Share this link with friends and family.

For organizations:  we also have a sample newsletter written below to include in your group's newsletter or online publication.  Please feel free to share!

Template 1: Security

To whom it may concern:

My name is ___________ and I am a resident of ____________.   I am writing to express my opposition to Liberty Natural Gas’s application to create a dangerous LNG port just offshore of the most densely populated metropolitan area in our nation.

In addition to the impacts Port Ambrose will have on the environment, commercial and recreation fishing industries, and the coastal tourism industry, my main concern is the security and safety of region.  Tankers filled with explosive gas just miles offshore would no doubt be recognized as a potential target and threat to national security.  An attack on a floating LNG vessel or port at the entrance to one of the busiest ports in the world would cripple the region and put countless lives in danger. 

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie recognized this threat when he vetoed a previous identical proposal from Liberty Natural Gas saying, “the Liberty project would create a heightened risk in a densely developed region, including potential accidents or sabotage disrupting commerce…” Please heed Governor Christie’s warning and reject Liberty’s application for the safety and security of the region.  I appreciate your time and attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Template 2: Jobs/Coastal Economy

To whom it may concern:

My name is ___________ and I am a resident of ____________.   I am writing to ask that you reject Liberty Natural Gas’s application to create a hazardous LNG port just offshore of the most densely populated metropolitan area in our nation.

While Liberty Natural Gas claims the Port Ambrose proposal will create thousands of jobs, I believe this to be misleading.  According to Liberty’s application, Port Ambrose would generate only six to 10 permanent land-based jobs after the port’s construction.  I don’t believe putting our environment and coastal economies at risk are worth 6 permanent jobs, four more if the port gets deliveries (which similar ports in Boston haven’t gotten in years, and one just shut down because of inaction).

The coastal economy from Cape May, New Jersey to Montauk, New York is dependent upon a clean, pollution-free ocean.  By building a dirty fossil fuel facility, Liberty Natural Gas will put the recreation and commercial fishing industries as well as the local tourism industry at risk.  For example, the port will exclude commercial and recreational fishermen from high-value ocean areas during both construction and operation.  Also, in the event of a spill, accident, or explosion, there would undoubtedly be effects on the boating, diving, shipping and tourism uses of the ocean.  All of these industries, on top of this Liberty Natural Gas threat, are still struggling to get back on their feet after Superstorm Sandy.

Please don’t let the Long Island South Shore and the Jersey Shore become the next Gulf Coast: riddled with failed fossil fuel facilities and diminishing coastal economies.

Sincerely,

Template 3: Environmental Impacts

To whom it may concern:

My name is ___________ and I am a resident of ____________.   I am writing to express my opposition to Liberty Natural Gas’s application to create the first dirty fossil fuel facility in the New York Bight. 

In addition to land-based environmental implications, security concerns, and economic shortcomings of this project, I oppose Port Ambrose because of the detrimental effects construction and maintenance will have on the marine environment.  First, the creation of the pipeline connecting the port to the existing transcontinental pipeline will dredge up over 20 miles of seafloor that contain critical marine life on which the ecosystem relies.  Additionally, the proposed port would discharge 3.5 million gallons of chemically-treated seawater used for pipe tests back into the water.  With the seawater intake for ballast, potential open loop thermal pollution, closed loop thermal pollution, and the potential for wastewater, stormwater, and accidental or incidental discharges ever-present in addition to dredging and chemical pipe test discharges, the negative impacts on the offshore environment are clear. 

Lastly, I would like to raise the issue of the increasingly intense and frequent storms that the New York Bight is exposed to.  If LNG tankers were offshore when Superstorm Sandy barreled up the Atlantic, devastation from the storm could have been made much worse, considering wave heights offshore reached over 30ft, near the proposed location of the port.  The people of New York and New Jersey need to be exposed to the potential dangers of what an offshore LNG facility in the middle of a Hurricane could mean.

I appreciate your time and attention to this matter, and ask that you reject Liberty’s proposal.

Sincerely,

Template 4: Bait and Switch

To whom it may concern:

My name is ___________ and I am a resident of ____________.   I am writing to express my opposition to Liberty Natural Gas’s application to create the first dirty fossil fuel facility in the New York Bight. 

 Liberty Natural Gas, despite being proposed as an “import” facility, can legally petition the government to switch to exports once it has a license for imports – this bait and switch process wouldn’t trigger any public input, any further review, or any notice.  It is for this reason that I believe Liberty Natural Gas CEO Roger Whelan’s claims and Liberty Natural Gas’s application to be disingenuous.  With the price of natural gas overseas skyrocketing to levels six times higher than prices here, it only makes financial sense that a natural gas company would want this facility to export natural gas.  Liberty switching to exports, or even selling to another company that switches the license to exports, would lead to an increase in local demand for shale gas and ramped-up fracking in the region. 

Our nation is too dependent on fossil fuels and dirty energy instead of focusing on renewable energy sources.  This port, if for imports, would lead to higher gas prices as we would have to compete with higher buyers overseas.  If for exports, which could be easily achieved once a license was secured, this port will surely drive up our gas prices and trigger an explosion of fracking – and the environmental impacts that result therefrom.  Neither use of the port is in the interests of the people of the region.

I appreciate your time and attention to this matter, and ask that you reject Liberty’s proposal.

Sincerely,

Template 5: Energy Costs

To whom it may concern:

My name is ___________ and I am a resident of ____________.   I am writing to express my opposition to Liberty Natural Gas’s Port Ambrose application and to ask you to reject the proposal based on economic reasons.

This port, be it for imports or exports, would raise energy costs in the region.  The price for imported LNG is higher overseas, so If Liberty imports natural gas, they will be paying more for foreign fossil fuels.  To make a profit, they would have to sell the gas in the region at a higher rate.

If the port eventually exports natural gas, as is most likely because of the price tag for LNG overseas,  the demand and therefore price for domestic gas would increase as most of the gas would be shipped overseas.

The bottom line is, if this port is for imports: we don’t need it.  If it is for exports: we don’t want it.

I appreciate your time and attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

___________________

Sample Newsletter Article - August 2013

This past June, the United States Maritime Administration announced that Liberty LNG has again applied to build a Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) facility off the coast of New York and New Jersey.  The project, called “Port Ambrose,” would host massive natural gas tankers and will  lead to an acceleration of hydraulic fracturing in the northeast by opening up a gateway for LNG exports.  This project is the same project previously vetoed by Governor Christie in 2011; it may have a new name, but it is in the same place, and has the same impacts, dangers, and drawbacks. (Clean Ocean Action’s factsheet on the port is attached.)

The proposed location for the LNG port would directly interfere with the proposed New York State offshore wind lease area identified by the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.  Additionally, in the past, LNG ports proposed in the NY/NJ Bight were met with vehement opposition from community and civic organizations, commercial and recreational fishing interests, faith based organizations, conservation and environmental groups, and thousands of concerned members of the public, including New Jersey’s Governor.  For this latest application, the coalition of interests aligned against Liberty LNG has grown.  During the July public hearings, hundreds of concerned citizens filled hearing rooms in Long Beach, New York, and Edison, New Jersey, and the beach in Sea Bright, New Jersey to voice their continued opposition to offshore industrialization.

If you are interested in joining thousands of citizens and the Governor of New Jersey in opposing Liberty LNG’s plans to put a hazardous industrial facility just off our beaches,  we ask that you go on the record in opposition of “Port Ambrose” by submitting official “comments” to the federal agency in charge of licensing these ports.  Comments and statements in support of clean ocean uses like fishing and tourism, and in opposition to this specific threat to our region’s economy, security, and environment, will be considered until August 22nd.  Public comments can be submitted online at http://goo.gl/7ye6uh or submitted by mail to the following address: Department of Transportation, Docket Management Facility, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590–0001.

If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to call Clean Ocean Action at 732-872-0111 or email citizens@cleanoceanaction.org.  Thank you for your time and attention to this urgent matter.

NRDC "Testing the Waters" Report Released: How Does Your Beach Rank?

Today, the NRDC published their 23^rd annual beachwater quality report. The report analyzes water quality and number of beach closings and swimming advisories at 3,000 US beach locations. Closing and swimming advisories are caused from polluted water and threat of contamination. Stormwater runoff and sewage are sources of contamination.  The NRDC also rates the 200 most popular beaches based on water quality, testing practices, and public notifications over the last five years. No NY/NJ beaches received a perfect rating; however, 14 did receive 4:5 stars. Two of NY/NJ beaches were within the top 11 beaches that violated standards.

Each of the 30 states evaluated for this report were ranked according to the number of water quality samples violating the EPA’s federal standards. The lowest ranked state has the fewest violations. Based on data for 2012, NY is ranked 22^nd and NJ is ranked 7^th. Last year, NY and NJ had 1,871 closing and advisory days. Violations per county were evaluated for each state: Monroe County, NY and Ocean County, NJ had the most violations.

One strategy to reduce water contamination is green infrastructure, which reduces stormwater. New York has already finalized a plan for green infrastructure projects and we hope New Jersey will do the same.  

Click here to read the press release. 

The Project that Rose from the Dead to Threaten the Shores

Massive LNG Tanker Port proposed off
Sandy Hook, NJ and Jones Beach, NY

Today, the Maritime Administration (MarAd), part of the US Department of Transportation, announced Liberty LNG’s Port Ambrose application, 13 miles off the coast of Sandy Hook, NJ and 17 miles southeast of Jones Beach, NY. Liberty LNG has applied in the past for an LNG port off the NY/NJ coastline – though in 2011 New Jersey Governor Christie vetoed the port saying that it was bad for the region’s economy, tourism, fisheries, environment, security and commerce. This is the exact same port application that Governor Christie vetoed, just reshuffled and resubmitted.

“It is a gross misconstruction of the federal Deepwater Port Act to say that a Governor cannot veto an LNG application after the public review process, as Governor Christie did in 2011, and reaffirmed in 2012,” concluded Andrew J. Provence, Litwin & Provence LLC. “Fortunately, we have a Governor who stands his ground.”

The Liberty LNG Port Ambrose project, if licensed, would allow both exports and imports of natural gas, resulting in accelerated hydro-fracking in the region and higher energy costs. The project boasts that it would create only 6-10 permanent jobs. MarAd, according to the notice (see attachment, note 1), has the authority to “license the construction of Deepwater Ports for the export [or import] of oil and natural gas from domestic sources within the United States to foreign markets abroad” under the Deepwater Port Act of 1974 – indeed, the Port Ambrose notice of application doesn’t even contain the word “import” (in the project description, or anywhere else).

“This is a bad science fiction movie,” said Cindy Zipf, Executive Director of Clean Ocean Action. “The Liberty Natural Gas tanker project was dead - Governor Christie vetoed this proposal in 2011. Liberty has crawled out of the grave to violate our ocean, citizens and shore economies at a time when New Jersey and New York are focused on restoring our shore from Super-storm Sandy. Liberty Natural Gas is trying
to take advantage of our weakened state to jam this project through—it’s hard to image a more deplorable corporate tactic. We may be down, but we will fight.”

"The South Shore Audubon Society is dismayed that the recently announced ‘notice of application’ makes Liberty's LNG proposal official. We must all work to defeat this threatened industrialization of our ocean!" noted Jim Brown, President, South Shore Audubon Society.

“We've seen a lot of really dumb ideas over the years, but this one takes the cake. Hurricane Sandy really walloped the New York coastline and having a facility like this off of our coastline exposes us to unimaginable damage, not just during hurricane season, but all year long,” said Ida Sanoff, Executive Director, Natural Resources Protective Association. “I can't recall when we've heard of a more dangerous, ill-advised proposal. The only people who will benefit from this project are the big money, big energy companies.”

“A deepwater port in the ocean off the coasts of New Jersey and New York is a threat to the ocean and marine life, to coastal economies, the environment and to the people living along coastal areas. Port Ambrose poses risks to the environment from chemical pollution, noise pollution, and dredging of the seafloor,” said Suzanne Golas, csjp, WATERSPIRIT Director. “From the perspective of faith communities like WATERSPIRIT, such risks to water and all life are not justified in order to bring profits to Liberty Natural Gas from their exporting of liquid natural gas to the highest bidder in European and Asian markets. Policy preserving and conserving waste and policy replacing fossil fuels with sustainable energy should be our priorities.”

“Expanded exportation of natural gas will be bad for domestic consumers, bad for our climate and bad for public health here at home,” said Jim Walsh, Eastern Regional Director, Food and Water Watch. “Gas exportation relies on fracking, which poses dreadful health and safety risks to all those connected to it. Governors Cuomo and Christie, if they are truly serious about climate change and public health, will fight the oil and gas industry and its latest profit-driven escapade on our shore.”

“The last thing our still suffering Sandy damaged NJ Shore needs is an LNG export facility. We know the process of fracking to extract the gas destined for export risks our drinking water, air, and ocean as it is not even regulated,” said ocean advocate and paddler Margo Pellegrino. “With this proposed terminal we increase this risk to our own drinking water and ocean, our own health, and pay more for our own ‘home grown’ energy as prices skyrocket with European demand for our dirty fuel. To say the idea of such a facility anywhere on the East Coast, but especially here in this most trafficked of all waterways is a ‘bad idea’ is an extreme understatement.”

“This proposal will not only harm the critical marine habitat of this coastal area and create a significant safety and terrorist threat to the adjacent communities but will also create a surge in the cost of natural gas for those in the NY area due to the export potential that this facility will ultimately accommodate,” said Dan Mundy, President, Jamaica Bay ECOWATCHERS.

“Port Ambrose LNG Import Terminal proposal is likely to be transposed into an Export Terminal so industry can gain higher gas prices for their gas abroad” asked Mary Anne Sullivan, Environmental Researcher. “This would increase the demand for our country's natural gas and water supply and would result in the environmental impacts from industrialization of the entire Marcellus Shale region. Isn't it time for our country to invest in green energy, energy that does not cause climate change?”

“Gov. Christie’s veto was premised on the need to protect our commercial and recreational waterways and beaches, the fact that we have sufficient natural gas resources for the next 50 years without the need to compromise our environment and local natural gas production and the very real terrorist threat LNG promotes.  His logic is sound, not just for New Jersey or the LI Sound, but for Long Island’s south shore as well,” said Legislator Dave Denenberg  (D-Merrick).

Start Off Your Summer Right: Volunteer to Help Communities Affected by Sandy

Calling All Volunteers!

Help Make a Difference in Coastal Communities After Sandy

Join Clean Ocean Action and over 15 other organizations, businesses and municipalities on Saturday, June 22nd for the Sixth
Wave of Action "For the Shore."

There are still projects in need of volunteers for June 22!

Projects in New Jersey:

Middlesex County
Old Bridge

Monmouth County

Sandy Hook
Spring Lake
Aberdeen

Long Branch

Neptune City
Bradley Beach

Ocean County

Island Beach State Park
Island Heights

Cape May County

Cape May

Projects in New York:

Staten Island