Acceleration of gas infrastructure in draft NYS Energy Plan

[Shaleshock] Acceleration of gas infrastructure in draft NYS Energy Plan [3 Attachments] – mary.beilby@gmail.com – Gmail.

The information below from Bruce Ferguson is further evidence that the proposed Port Ambrose facility is a “bait-and-switch” proposition intended for the eventual EXPORT of FRACKED liquefied natural gas (LNG).
Everyone should be aware that despite some pretty pictures and ambiguous references to “clean energy”, Governor Cuomo’s proposed energy plan actually calls specifically for the ACCELERATION of gas infrastructure and the expanded use of natural gas throughout New York State. This is described withinInitiatives #8 and #9. (See pages 42 and 43 of the draft NYS Energy Plan here: http://energyplan.ny.gov/ )
THE DRAFT PLAN IS NOW OUT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, AND THOSE COMMENTS ARE DUE IN LESS THAN 60 DAYS)
The plan also purports to strive toward reducing emissions, but read carefully how that is proposed…
On page 29, the plan says that this will occur by reducing the intensity of carbon emissions 50% by 2030.However as stated in the plan, that will be measured as a reduction in CARBON DIOXIDE emissions only! The plan further claims that this will then put New York on a “pathway” to achieve an 80% reduction in total emissions by 2050.
Apparently, fuzzy math is involved. How can a 80% reduction in TOTAL carbon emissions be met if New York State fails to commit to any measurable reduction in METHANE emissions whatsoever during the next 16 years while this rapid ACCELERATION of natural gas infrastructure takes place which the energy plan advocates? …especially considering that methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas.
Again, the draft energy report can be found here… http://energyplan.ny.gov/
I urge people to respond strongly by objecting to the plan’s proposal to expand natural gas infrastructure and disingenuous commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Keith
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: Bruce Ferguson <bafbafbafb@gmail.com>
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 11:13 AM
Subject: [sustainableotsego] Fwd: [PRESS RELEASE] NO PLACE FOR LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS IMPORTS, OR PORT AMBROSE, IN NEW YORK’S ENERGY FUTURE

PRESS RELEASE
                  
**For Immediate Release**
January 14, 2014
Attachment: COA, CCSE, CCOM Logos
Contacts:
Bruce Ferguson, Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy, (845) 468-7063
Jeremy Samuelson, Concerned Citizens of Montauk, (631) 238-5720
Sean Dixon, Clean Ocean Action, (732) 872-0111
 
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
Albany, NY – 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.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: