What’s The Matter With Rhode Island?

Climate Witch Trials - Jim Willis reports

Jim Willis
Editor & Publisher, Marcellus Drilling News (MDN)

 

Is there any state “Dumb and Dumber” than Rhode Island? It appears not. Common sense has been traded for political correctness in the case of a LNG project.

A group of politicians from the Rhode Island Politburo are opposed to a plan by utility giant National Grid to construct a very small facility in the state to liquefy natural gas – turn it into LNG. Eight members of the Rhode Island Politburo (all of them apparently socialists) are calling on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to reject National Grid’s plan. Why? You guessed it. Because that facility will accept and liquefy evil, vile nasty “fracked gas” from the Marcellus. And everybody knows fracked gas is causing catastrophic global warming, right? What a group of dunces. Here’s who they are and what they’re claiming.

Rhode Island fpg-liquefied

The gang of eight serve in RI’s House and Senate. They claim that National Grid wants to pass along the cost of the entire project, some $150 million, to rate payers in RI–and that the state will see none of the benefit from the LNG created at this teeny tiny plant.

A group of Providence elected officials have announced their opposition to a proposal by National Grid to develop a new fracked gas liquefaction facility at Fields Point in South Providence.
National Grid submitted a proposal to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to develop a $180 million facility to produce Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) directly from a Spectra Energy pipeline that delivers fracked gas from Marcellus Shale to Providence. National Grid would then utilize tanker trucks to export the LNG produced in Providence, primarily to locations in Massachusetts.

On Wednesday, Representatives Joseph S. Almeida (D-Dist. 12, Providence), Grace Diaz (D-Dist. 11, Providence), Aaron Regunberg (D-Dist. 4, Providence), Chris Blazejewski (D-Dist. 2, Providence) and John J. Lombardi (D-Dist. 8, Providence) and Senators Juan Pichardo (D-Dist. 2, Providence), Gayle Goldin (D-Dist. 3, Providence) and Sen. Harold M. Metts (D-Dist. 6, Providence) — called on FERC to reject National Grid’s application

“No matter how you look at it, this project is a money-maker for the utility at the expense of our community and our state. National Grid is asking us, the rate payers, to foot the $180 million bill for this project, for what? So they can increase their own profits by exporting LNG out of the state! This does nothing to benefit our constituents, and it does nothing to benefit my neighbors on the South Side. All this proposal will do is transfer money from rate payers’ pockets to National Grid’s coffers, and we’re not going to accept it,” said Rep. Almeida.

OK, so we have the claim that National Grid wants to soak taxpayer. Now, it’s time for propagandist to pour on more fuel with the outrageous claim that LNG is “dangerous.” The article continues:

LNG is a stable liquid form and without air is is not flammable. However, any temperature one -260 F it converts to methane gas and expands by 600 times, rapidly pressurizing any sealed container. If LNG spills and mixes with airs, it becomes highly flammable and potentially explosive.

“LNG is a dangerous substance. Just two years ago, an LNG facility in Washington state exploded, causing an evacuation of everyone within a two-mile area. If that were to happen at this site, all of my constituents would be in danger. Why is it always our community that must shoulder the collateral damage and safety risks from these toxic projects?,” said Rep Diaz.

But finally we come to the crux of their argument. The real reason they oppose this teeny tiny LNG facility. Global warming:

The officials also urged that the climate consequences of the expand fossil fuel infrastructure be taken into account.

“The science on climate change is clear. If my generation is to have any chance of inheriting an Ocean State with any state left in it, we need to transition to a clean energy economy as quickly as possible. This proposal would sink millions of rate payer dollars into unnecessary new fossil fuel infrastructure that would be used for decades past our climate’s point of no return, and that is a betrayal of our children. Mayor Elorza and the Providence City Council have taken credit for being leaders on climate and environmental issues. But if the city awards a tax stabilization agreement to National Grid to support this project, then it is our belief that the mayor and council can no longer claim this kind of climate leadership. We hope they will do the right thing and tell National Grid that Providence will not facilitate this wasteful, rate payer-funded, environmentally catastrophic scheme” said Rep. Regunberg…

The Providence legislators reported that they are submitting letters detailing their concerns to FERC, joining a growing list of community members and neighborhood organizations opposing National Grid’s application.

As always, the truth is radically different from what the commie naysayers tell you. We pulled the following from the National Grid website, which explains the project (be sure to watch the video):

For decades, liquefied natural gas has played an important role in providing a safe, reliable source of natural gas for our customers in New England, particularly in winter months when demand for natural gas is greatest. Liquefied natural gas (LNG) is a critical part of National Grid’s ability to provide safe and reliable natural gas to the homes and businesses we serve. On the coldest winter days, when demand is at its peak, LNG can provide up to 40% of the gas supply for National Grid’s customers in New England.

Without a local supply of LNG there would not be enough gas to heat customer homes and businesses during these coldest days. Currently, LNG is brought into New England from overseas where unforeseen domestic or international events could make our supply of gas less reliable. This makes it vitally important that National Grid have a domestic source for our New England customers as soon as possible.

National Grid is proposing to build a natural gas liquefaction facility at our existing storage facility at Fields Point in Providence, Rhode Island. This facility would be a reliable, safe, cost-effective way to ensure that our customers have the natural gas they need to heat their homes and businesses, particularly when the demand is greatest.

Investing in Fields Point

Our facility at Fields Point is ideal for this proposed Liquefaction Facility for the following reasons:

1 It is already used for LNG storage, so no additional storage needs to be built at the site.

2 It has an existing natural gas supply infrastructure that can be used for liquefaction. No new gas pipelines or expansion of the delivery systems to the site is needed.

3 There is sufficient space within the existing plant to construct the new facility without the need to expand its footprint.

4 The location provides quick and easy access to major highways.

Editor’s Note: Rhode Island is the perfect demonstration of one of my theories. It is that the degree of common sense exhibited by the elected officials is inversely related to how urban it is. Put another way, the more urban a state is, the more out of touch it is with reality and the more politically correct it is. Several years ago a very condescending entitled book “What’s The Matter with Kansas” trashed the eminently sensible voters of that state, claiming they didn’t know what was good for them (letting the author and other urban voters of his ilk decide their future). The far better example would have been Rhode Island, as Jim makes clear.

There’s equally good evidence from a recent piece in the New York Times. As it reports, the state recently attempted to come up with a new slogan. They opted, if you can believe it, for “Rhode Island: Cooler and Warmer.” It was greeted so poorly it had to almost immediately be consigned to the dustbin of history. The Times reported “the debacle has ‘fed the narrative that Raimondo is too in thrall to out-of-staters, whether in New York or Davos.'” I doubt any of us could have said it better with regard to this LNG fiasco either. What’s the matter with Rhode Island anyway?

For more great articles on natural gas development every single day, subscribe to Marcellus Drilling News using this convenient link.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

4 thoughts on “What’s The Matter With Rhode Island?

  1. The root of this problem is Massachusetts. Why would they have to import LNG from Providence? It is weird because the didtance between Rhode Island and Massachusetts is 0 miles. Could it be because the pipeline is the most evil of all things related to natural gas?

    What is wrong with Rhode Island you ask – – – it is a Fifedom of Massachusetts.

  2. All of them vacous, vapid Democrats (talk about redundancy)……this is the type of frivolous, ambulance chasing legal wrangling that costs this nation billions of $$$$$$ every year. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has already ruled on such issues just last month in the case of Earth Reports (that’s the Patuxent Riverkeeper wearing its typical, hooded white sheet disguise) vs FERC & Dominion Cove Point LNG.
    ” In a painstaking opinion, Judge Rogers concluded that, under the law, FERC was not required by NEPA to consider the indirect environmental effects of increased natural gas exports, including possible effects on climate change. The Court ultimately held that FERC’s two-year study of the environmental impacts of the conversion project was sufficient, and that the FERC’s orders are not the legally relevant cause of the indirect effects listed by the petitioners. The Court also pointed out that the petitioners were free to raise these objections with the Department of Energy, which “alone has the legal authority to authorize” increased LNG exports.”
    Here’s the D.C. Circuit’s decision: https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/F6D0EA77728EE24F85257FF100520203/$file/15-1127-1624926.pdf
    As for the above mentioned Dep’t of Energy Office of Fossil Energy, what did it have to say about the matter in May, 2015…??? Have a look:
    http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/05/f22/ord3331-A.pdf

  3. https://mobile.twitter.com/johnrhanger/status/761666891949699072

    There isn’t a great mystery here. Natural gas is now seen as dirtier and worse than coal for environment, climate etc thanks to the antifracking movement. That’s what happened while certain Republican leaders and think tanks attempted to say climate change wasn’t a real concern in the last several years. This should be pretty clear to people writing about fracking and natural gas and if it isn’t well perhaps there is something ideological or otherwise that is blinding them. It was only several years ago that most environmental groups could distinguish between coal and natural gas and coal wasn’t the winner between the two in terms of climate change one of the very hot topics in the last several years. The entire world met on the issue recently.

  4. Reading between the lines: National Grid wants to enable more storage capacity because New York (read ‘guv Cuomo’) has stopped the Constitution Pipeline which would have enabled higher-capacity delivery to the area for those depths-of-winter needs. NYS’s actions are costing Rhode Island and Massachusetts rate-payers some direct pocket-book money!

    This situation is directly comparable to Crestwood’s proposed LPG-Storage facility, also being held up by the NYS Dictator Cuomo. Without it, the users on the other end pay through their noses for expensive trucked-in LPG in the depths of winter.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *