Area Politicians Speak Out Against LNG Proposal
Daniel Fowler, Herald New Staff
Reporter - 1/27/2004
A number of area politicians testified at a Statehouse hearing on liquefied natural gas Thursday, where they voiced their opposition to Weaver's Cove Energy's plan to construct an LNG import terminal in Fall River.
Rep. David B. Sullivan, D-Fall River, and Director of Municipal Services James Smith, who spoke on behalf of Mayor Edward M. Lambert Jr., testified at the House Committee on Homeland Security and Federal Affairs hearing. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., submitted written testimony. The hearing was held to address safety and security issues relating to the LNG facility in Everett and LNG tankers traveling through Boston Harbor, but local politicians ensured that the proposed Fall River LNG terminal came up as well.
"The message on Fall River was given loud and strong from myself and Jim Smith," Sullivan said. According to Sullivan, he wants the state to get involved in the fight to prevent the LNG facility from coming to fruition. "The state has a responsibility according to the (Massachusetts) constitution to protect the citizens and their property from outside dangers," Sullivan said. "It does not matter if this danger is coming from another individual, a company or even an agency within our own federal government. The elected officials of this commonwealth have an obligation to fight against all possible dangers." In his testimony, Sullivan told the committee that his "opposition stems from the enormous environmental and safety risks that will be brought upon the residents who live and work in the vicinity" of the proposed facility.
Weaver's Cove Energy hopes to construct a $250 million LNG terminal on 68 acres of land at the former Shell Oil site off North Main Street.
"Allowing the LNG facility to be built in this area would be forcing residents to take a needless risk," Sullivan said in his testimony. "The only alternative to this risk would be to move their homes and businesses, an alternative not feasible to most." Like the proposed Fall River terminal, Everett's LNG facility is located in a densely populated urban area and the two sites could face similar threats, Lambert said. "For all those who have said it's a sky is falling approach for us to talk about potential terrorism -- and I understand the risks may be minuscule in that regard -- but the facility here in Fall River is going to be larger then Everett's," Lambert said. "Today you had everyone -- the Legislature, the Boston Fire Department," representatives from Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino's office "and people involved in homeland security talking about the risks of the Everett facility. Obviously that all applies to this proposal in Fall River." In his testimony, Lambert told the committee "that the proposed site poses a significant danger to the citizens of our city and LNG facilities the size and scope of this project simply do not belong in dense urban, residential environments."
While the committee was just recording testimony Thursday, Lambert said he hopes it uses the submitted information to oppose the Fall River facility. Lambert wants the committee to express this opposition to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and to state agencies involved in the permitting process. "Protecting our current urban LNG terminals is of the utmost importance, but we cannot forget that an integral component of Homeland Security is to mitigate future threats, and allowing the construction of LNG facilities in urban areas is at best reckless, and at worst a disaster waiting to happen," Frank said in his written testimony.