Jordan Cove Terminal/Pacific Connector Pipeline
Update August 2018
The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have extended the comment period during which members of the public can offer input on clean water permits that the project must obtain in order to proceed.
If you care about our future, now is a great time to get involved by submitting comments on this project. The deadline for both targets is 5:00 pm on August 21st.
For tips on comments, visit our friends at Rogue Climate who have been leading the opposition on this project: https://www.rogueclimate.org/write_comments. In addition, it is reasonable to make the case that increased greenhouse gas emissions contribute to global warming. This, in turn, causes climate change consequences that include reduced high elevation snowpack and subsequent stream flow plus earlier snowmelt, all compromising stream flow patterns and water temperatures to the detriment of aquatic communities.
To submit your comments, visit https://nolngexports.good.do/stopjordancove/CleanWaterComments/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=actionkit
[from Oregon DEQ]
Public comment period opens for Jordan Cove Energy Project 401 water quality certification application Opened May 22, 2018
Statewide, OR—The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are accepting public comments on an application from the Jordan Cove Energy Project. The project calls for building a liquefied natural gas facility on the North Spit of Coos Bay near North Bend and a connecting roughly 230-mile pipeline near Malin that would cross Klamath, Jackson, Douglas and Coos counties. View the full news release at: http://www.oregon.gov/
Comments may be submitted to via email: JCEP401PublicComment@deq.state.or.us. These will be stronger if they stress water quality issues.
The 60 day comment period was extended to August 21.
Tips for commenting can be found here.
Comments submitted by Alan Journet on behalf of SOCAN can be found here: Jordan Cove Water Quality Application Comments 2018
Fossil (Natural) gas is NOT ‘the clean fossil fuel.’ While burning fossil gas emits less carbon dioxide than burning oil and coal, it does emit carbon dioxide. This means that when utilities convert to gas, they lock in these emissions for the 30 – 40 year leaf-span of the plant. Furthermore, fossil gas is 90% methane, and methane is far worse as a warming agent than carbon dioxide – and from source to sink methane escapes; it’s called fugitive emissions. Additionally, fossil gas is often extracted through hydraulic fracturing (fracking). Thanks to the ‘Halliburton Loophole’ introduced into the 2005 Energy Plan by Dick Cheney, fracking companies are exempt from environmental regulations – thus are permitted to insert carcinogenic chemicals into the ground in their extraction process.
Gas companies have been working for years on a massive fossil fuel infrastructure plan called Jordan Cove to export fracked gas from Canada and the Rockies through southern Oregon and onto ships bound from Coos Bay to Asia . This plan would involve construction of a new 230-mile 36-inch Pacific Connector pipeline and permanent 95-foot wide clear-cut through southwest Oregon’s forests, farms and salmon filled rivers. – See more
Other groups working to stop this project
- Rogue Riverkeeper
- Rogue Climate
- Hair on Fire Oregon
- Stand Up for Oregon! No LNG. No Pipeline
- Cascadia Wildlands
How to take action
- Phone Calls
- Letter to the Editor
- Political (Non-partisan) Legislation Development
Information from other groups ( & )
The LNG Export Project: Two Companies Profit, The Rest of Us Lose
Out-of-state energy speculators want to put a pipeline across public and private lands in Jackson County and many other communities to transport 1.2 billion cubic feet of fracked natural gas per year from the Rockies to Coos Bay, where it would be shipped overseas from a giant new terminal.These companies would make massive profits, while the rest of us would pay the price.
Huge backward step on climate
In the process of liquefying and transporting the gas, the terminal would become the largest emitter of carbon-filled greenhouse gases in Oregon, according to the Oregonian. Businesses, elected officials, and community residents in the Rogue Valley have been working together to speed our transition to cleaner energy like solar and greater energy efficiency. This project threatens all the progress we are making.
Oil Change International undertook an assessment of the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the project: Oilchange International 2017 This report reveals that, through full life-cycle assessment, the project would annually result in 36.8 Million Metric Tons (MMT) of Carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gas emissions. Currently Oregon’s In-boundary emissions are about 60 MMT, meaning emissions from the project would be equivalent to over 60% of Oregon’s total current in-boundary emissions. The report’s high end estimate is 52 MMT of carbon dioxide equivalent or over 85% of the state’s current in-boundary emissions.
Higher energy prices
Exporting liquefied natural gas (LNG) “puts pressure on prices and that wouldn’t be good for consumers,” according to Avista senior v.p. Jason Thackston.
Threats to existing jobs and businesses
The pipeline will affect farms and fishing businesses as it disturbs more than 400 waterways and brings added damage to salmon and steelhead habitat. Tourism will drop as coastal communities become less attractive.
Major local impacts, few jobs
More than 1,000 temporary residents from outside our local communities will descend on coastal towns during the construction phase. A recent federal report described how energy boom-bust towns experience increases in crime, drug dealing, alcohol abuse, and prostitution. Corporate CEOs promise that dozens of jobs will remain after construction, but history has proven that such promises are rarely kept.
Trampling on farmer and landowner rights
Landowners are being told that if they don’t accept a small one-time payment for permanent use of their land for the pipeline, the government will use the power of eminent domain to force them to anyway. “When did we decide a big enough corporate interest becomes a public project given eminent domain?” asks conservative radio host Bill Meyer.
Serious safety risk
LNG is highly explosive. The Williams Co., the key corporate driver of the project, has already had four explosions at other facilities or pipelines, injuring workers and endangering communities. The terminal will be in a region vulnerable to tsunamis, while the pipeline adds to our wildfire risks.
A supposed “environmental impact statement” by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) was labeled “incoherent” by the Oregonian, especially since it deliberately left out the climate impact of fracking, transporting, and liquefying the gas!