Amid all the controversy over the siting and building of liquefied natural gas terminals in Rhode Island and across New England, there is only one certainty – the region needs access to more natural gas. That’s why we support Gov. Donald L. Carcieri’s push to consider Canada as an alternate LNG source.
Carcieri, a strong opponent of the plans to build a terminal in Fall River and upgrade the gas terminal in Providence, believes the region’s natural gas requirements could be met by the two LNG terminals under construction in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. Of course, it’s not as simple as that, but given the controversy and the need, it is a proposal worth serious and public consideration.
Seifert Systems Invests in Energy Efficiency to Strengthen Operations
For manufacturers, energy is more than just another operating expense. It plays a critical role…
Learn More
The need has been defined by a New England Governors’ Association study, which found that the region would outstrip its natural gas delivery capacity by 2010. The controversy comes from a public that fears that LNG tankers would be targets for terrorists with potentially catastrophic results.
While we’re skeptical of those doomsday scenarios, we do not believe that either Providence or Fall River are particularly good for an LNG terminal, given all the boat traffic, fishing and – yes, it matters – widespread community opposition.
But Canada may not be the best alternative either. Thomas M. Kiley, president and CEO of the Northeast Gas Association, told PBN’s Ryan McBride that relying on Canadian supplies is not prudent. He argues that new domestic LNG terminals are needed to maintain price levels of the commodity as well as ensure the region’s gas supply in case of disasters like the recent Gulf Coast hurricanes. That’s why the industry has suggested seven additional sites for LNG terminals in New England.
Unfortunately, there are still too many questions and too many unknowns to proceed with confidence. For instance, are the supply and demand projections realistic? And while gas from Canada is more expensive today, is it possible that the region can negotiate a more competitive price once the two terminals are completed and the pipeline from New Brunswick is enlarged to handle the increased volume?
We don’t know enough to pass final judgment. Nor does the public. And that is simply unacceptable.
What we do know is that New England’s impending energy crisis is too serious to ignore. And we agree with the governor that LNG is a regional issue. This is a conversation for all of New England, New York, and everyone else affected – including the LNG companies – to have together.
It should have happened a long time ago, but it’s better late than never.
