Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : LNG -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dennis Roth who wrote (375)	4/18/2005 6:01:28 PM
From: Dennis Roth	Respond to of 919

A Draft EIS for ExxonMobil's offshore Pearl Crossing LNG Deepwater Port was released today. Plug docket number 18474 into this form for confirmation. dms.dot.gov

To: Dennis Roth who wrote (375)	5/20/2005 9:26:22 AM
From: Dennis Roth	Respond to of 919

Firm dismisses fears about LNG terminal Open-loop system hurts fish, critics say Friday, May 20, 2005 By Jan Moller Capital bureau nola.com BATON ROUGE -- ExxonMobil said Thursday that it would press ahead with plans for an offshore liquefied natural gas terminal despite opposition from Gov. Kathleen Blanco and others who contend it would jeopardize the state's fisheries. Bob Delaney of Pearl Crossing LNG, a division of ExxonMobil that wants to build a gas terminal 41 miles south of Cameron Parish in the Gulf of Mexico, told a legislative committee that the facility would be away from redfish spawning grounds and would not have the devastating environmental impact that critics claim. "The environmental impact is minimal, minor and insignificant," Delaney told the Joint Committee on Natural Resources. Pearl Crossing is one of eight terminals being planned off Louisiana's coast that would use a controversial "open-loop" process for heating liquefied natural gas from a temperature of minus 256 degrees by running hundreds of millions of gallons of seawater per day through radiator-type racks. The chilled water would then be let back out into the Gulf. Two others have already received permits. Environmentalists, sportsmen and commercial fishers oppose such systems on the grounds that the process kills millions of fish eggs and larvae. They want the gas companies to use "closed-loop" systems in which liquefied gas is heated by natural gas, not seawater. "The local impact to fish and shrimp would be devastating," said Mike Lane, a fisher who publishes rodnreel.com, a Web site for anglers. But the companies said switching to closed-loop systems would be too expensive. On Wednesday, Blanco wrote the federal Maritime Administration, which is reviewing the license applications, saying that the state opposed open-loop terminals because of the potential threat to commercial fishing. But it's not clear whether her opposition will be enough to kill the applications that are pending. Lawmakers who heard presentations from supporters and opponents of open-loop systems appeared skeptical about the companies' claims that the systems are needed because they're more cost-effective. Delaney, for example, said switching to a closed-loop system would increase costs by $61 million a year. "You all making any money?" Rep. Jack Smith, D-Patterson, asked the energy executives. When it was time for environmentalists and sportsmen to speak, Smith said: "Did you make as much money as Exxon and Shell last year?" . . . . . . . Jan Moller can be reached at jmoller@timespicayune.com or (225) 342-5207.