OPINION: Liquid-Gas Terminal Bad for Columbia
By Tom Koenninger, The Columbian, Vancouver, Wash.
May 16–Anyone with a glimmer of vision and the barest knowledge of the Lower Columbia River knows it must not become an industrial estuary.
Yet, that is exactly what will happen if NorthernStar Natural Gas is allowed to build a liquefied natural gas terminal at Bradwood Landing.
Some places on this planet should remain near to their vestigial state — lightly settled if at all — and the Lower Columbia is one of them.
A few places remain today as they were in the time of Lewis and Clark. The natural beauty of this area- — a myriad of secondary channels to the river, forested hills and rugged, unbroken landscape — is still dominant.
Bradwood Landing, which appears to be the most active of five proposed sites in Oregon, could be built on an old sawmill site opposite Cathlamet, near lower Puget Island. It would be 20 miles upstream from Astoria, Ore. Once operational, it would unload 125 shiploads of liquefied natural gas annually.
NorthernStar, in a presentation to The Columbian’s editorial board April 11, stressed a salmon-enhancement initiative of $46 million to $59 million, and 450 construction jobs in a project that could start next year, given permit approval. The Houston company’s literature pledged millions in construction funds, healthy tax payments and stated: “we put a high value on the quality of life we enjoy in the lower Columbia and aim to improve and protect it.”
NorthernStar said a poll taken in January favored the project. Steve Forester, publisher of the Astorian and Matt Winters, editor of its sister newspaper, the Chinook Observer at Long Beach, confirmed the poll. They said 42 percent supported the project and 40 percent opposed it. Critics scoffed that supporters lacked information.
Long-term damage
Sure, there is a short-term economic gain in building the terminal and pipeline, and a promise of 65 permanent jobs for the facility. Then what? A certainty of long-term agony and regret.
This region will be changed forever, tainted and sullied by the intrusive natural gas operation. Peace and tranquility that exist now will linger as memories.
“It would vastly disrupt things,” said Robert Michael Pyle, author of 14 books and resident of Grays River since 1979. Pyle holds a doctorate from Yale University’s School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. Besides books on the natural environment and other studies, he has written hundreds of papers, essays, stories and poems.
His list of concerns from an LNG site includes pollution of the Columbia; noise pollution, visual pollution, cultural damage and disruption through digging a 36-mile natural gas pipeline to connect with another pipeline five miles north of Longview.
He also sees the operation as a terrorist target.
Earlier this month, NorthernStar asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to disregard Oregon Department of Energy concerns. “NorthernStar clearly cares more about turning a big profit than the safety of the community,” George Exum, director of Wahkiakum Friends of the River, told The Daily Astorian for a story May 8.
U.S. Rep. Brian Baird, D-Vancouver, whose 3rd District includes this area, has maintained steadfast opposition.
Detailing many reasons to oppose the terminal, Baird said the most compelling is not expressed in words: “It comes when you stand on the western tip of Puget Island, look across and downriver, listen to the quiet and realize, all this will be changed, gone forever, if this project goes through. The lower Columbia is a special and all-too-rare place that we can either preserve or sacrifice. If this project goes through as proposed, it will be the beginning of the sacrifice. This is not the legacy I want to leave our children and grandchildren. We need natural gas, but this is not the place for a terminal now and never should be.”
Baird is correct. As one who has canoed the quiet and wildlife-enriched Grays and Deep rivers, tidal channels and the lower Columbia, I can state that the price for this industrialization is too high. The LNG terminal must be rejected, and federal protection similar to the Columbia River Gorge Act considered. Otherwise, this land of peace and incredible beauty will cease to exist in its present condition.
Tom Koenninger is editor emeritus of The Columbian. His column of personal opinion appears on the Other Opinions page each Wednesday. Reach him at
tom.koenninger@columbian.com
.
—–
Copyright (c) 2007, The Columbian, Vancouver, Wash.
Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.
For reprints, email tmsreprints@permissionsgroup.com, call 800-374-7985 or 847-635-6550, send a fax to 847-635-6968, or write to The Permissions Group Inc., 1247 Milwaukee Ave., Suite 303, Glenview, IL 60025, USA.