Dan's Papers - April 18, 2008 - Dead in the Water

In his first major environmental policy decision, Gov. David A. Paterson has blocked the planned Broadwater Energy floating liquefied natural gas plant that had been proposed for Long Island Sound. The creation of the $700 million plant, he said last Thursday at Sunken Meadow State Park, would close a large section of the Sound to boaters and could not guarantee low-cost gas for Long Island:

"One of my goals as governor is to protect Long Island Sound, by preserving it as a valuable estuary, an economic engine for the region, and a key component to making Long Island's quality of life one of the best in the country. Broadwater does not pass that test. Shame on us if we can't develop a responsible energy policy without sacrificing one of our greatest natural and economic resources."

Several environmental groups, community watchdogs and New York State elected officials including Reps. Tim Bishop (D-Southampton) and Steve Israel (D-Huntington), plus Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Charles Schumer, have strongly opposed the plan to construct a 1,200-foot-long, ship-like floating platform that could hold as much as eight billion cubic feet of imported natural gas. Across the Sound, members of the Connecticut state government have also expressed the need to stop the project.

"This is exactly the news we hoped to hear today: That New York's Department of State has recognized the peril that the Broadwater project represents," said Connecticut Governor M. Jodi Rell in an issued statement. "Not surprisingly, the New York Department of State was able to see what federal regulators refused to see - that Broadwater is a tremendous peril and, what is worse, there is no compelling reason for risking that peril."

The proposed terminal, if completed, would stand eight stories over the waterline, anchored in the widest part of the Sound, nine miles north of Long Island and ten from the Connecticut shoreline. Although the project appeared to be gaining momentum when the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved it last month, Governor Paterson's decision now makes it unlikely for construction and implementation to ever move forward. Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr. (R-Sag Harbor) agrees that Broadwater needed to be blocked.

In an exclusive statement issued to Dan's Papers, Thiele said, "The Broadwater project would have a very direct and adverse impact on the East End of Long Island. Our economy and our environment are inextricably linked - our environment is our economy. Clean water, recreational opportunities and quality of life are key assets for our economy. They help to sustain agriculture, fishing and our second home industry. Broadwater, by threatening those resources, threatened our entire economy."

Meanwhile, the Broadwater Energy consortium has expressed that there would not be a major environmental negative. According to the statement posted at broadwaterenergy.com, they estimate the gas plant would "result in fewer environmental impacts than any alternatives considered" and "would not impact sensitive onshore or near shore resources." Local opponents disagree, stating that among other damage, thousands of square feet of lobster habitat would be destroyed by the floating structure's permanent moorings, that 1.5 square miles surrounding the terminal would become off-limits to public access, and also that Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) tankers would serve as a frequent disruption to the Sound's waterways.

Through their website, Broadwater also claims there would be financial benefits for residents on both sides of the Sound, stating that "the project would reduce future natural gas and electricity prices by an average $680 million per year in the New York, Long Island and Connecticut region."

Once again, there's disagreement and opposition from Island representatives. Former LIPA CEO Richard Kessel has been quoted as saying that Long Islanders would only receive 20-percent of the total savings, and according to Adrienne Esposito, Executive Director of Citizens Campaign For The Environment, it's simply not possible to guarantee long-term low prices, because the fossil fuel market is unpredictable and dependent on the ever-fluxing costs set by foreign suppliers. Thiele also failed to see the advantage.

"I don't feel there is any financial effect from the State's denial of Broadwater. We need alternative energy sources. However, Broadwater was not the answer. It is more of the mistakes of the past, depending on foreign sources of energy. It was also the wrong location. The NYS Department of State has identified better locations for an LNG facility in the Atlantic Ocean, away from Long Island Sound. While Broadwater provided incredible environmental risks, it provided only meager benefits. The bulk of the gas would have been distributed outside of our region."

Now that the governor has blocked the project, Broadwater executives have told the press that they will consider their regulatory and legal options. Thiele expressed his final thoughts on what may happen now that the governor has blocked the project.

"The next step is up to Broadwater. They have the opportunity to appeal the State's decision. I would hope they would keep their word and not appeal. When directly questioned by me several years ago, Broadwater representatives stated they would not pursue their project if they were not wanted in New York State. The State has made a decision and they should proceed with another alternative. If not, the result will be a long and costly battle that they will ultimately lose."