.

Senator Beck Rallies Against LNG Port

Beck's resolution was advanced last week by the Senate Environment and Energy Committee.

Clean Ocean Action rallies against LNG port (Photo: Clean Ocean Action)
Clean Ocean Action rallies against LNG port (Photo: Clean Ocean Action)

Senator Jennifer Beck (R-11) has taken a stance against a proposed liquified natural gas (LNG) port that would be located roughly 20 miles off the coast of Sea Bright, Sandy Hook and Long Branch shorelines.

Beck's resolution against the proposed port was advanced Thursday by the Senate Environment and Energy Committee and must now go before the full Senate for a vote, according to a release from the senator's office. A resolution is not a law, it is a measure to officially show support for an issue.

“As a representative of Long Branch and other shore towns, I can’t accept inviting this type of risk and potential for decades of trouble to our communities that have already been through so much,” Beck said in the release.

Liquified natural gas is natural gas that is chilled nearly 300 degrees below zero to substantially condense its volume to 1/600th of the original, Clean Ocean Action research shows. 

The Liberty Natural Gas (LNG) Port Ambrose Project would be a deep-water port bordering New York Harbor in "federal waters" roughly 20 miles off New Jersey and New York shorelines. The terminal would deliver an estimated 400 million cubic feet of gas supplying about 1.5 million homes, according to Port Ambrose's description

The main supplier of the gas would be the Caribbean country of Trinidad and Tobago, which, according to the company, has been a main exporter of liquified natural gas to the United States. 

The proposal requires approval from the U.S. Maritime Administration, the Coast Guard and the governors of New York and New Jersey. Governor Chris Christie rejected a similar proposal in 2011.

“The Governor was right to deny this potentially catastrophic project once and we can’t afford to let it move forward now either,” Beck said. “The environmental and ecological impacts this port could have on the shore and accompanying tourism, shipping and fishing industries are far too great to ignore. Besides the inherent risk, there’s no evidence of a shortage of natural gas that would necessitate having this import facility in the first place.”

The port would discharge 3.5 million gallons of chemically treated sea water and requires 20 miles of sea floor dredging to accommodate the pipeline, according to the release.

For more on the proposed LNG project click here.


Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something