Offshore opportunities
PROMISING PLANS are emerging offshore for buoy-based, liquefied natural gas terminals. Such technology is not the only answer to the state's natural gas needs, but it's a lot safer and more sensible than other proposals to build land-based LNG facilities near housing units in Fall River or on protected park land on Outer Brewster Island.
The state has given preliminary approval to Excelerate Energy LLC to build an underwater pipeline that would connect to the region's distribution network for natural gas. Tankers carrying supercooled gas, instead of passing through populated areas or damaging a national park, would dock 13 miles off Gloucester, regasify the liquid, and deliver it into the underwater pipeline. The system does not have the advantage of storing LNG, but the increased capacity will help lessen energy shortages in New England and supplement new LNG terminals planned in Canada.
Natural gas is indispensable. It heats 44 percent of Massachusetts households and generates half the state's electricity. But LNG tankers are also a potential terrorist target. A breach, according to a 2004 Energy Department study, could generate a blast that would ignite buildings more than a third of a mile away and burn people a mile or more away. The value of the latest offshore proposal can be appreciated most clearly by the fact that public officials and environmentalists are focused on safeguards for fish and the economic impact on fishermen, not on the potential loss of human life.
Excelerate Energy is not the only company eager to establish an offshore terminal. A company that owns the Distrigas LNG terminal in Everett is just a few weeks behind in the quest for state environmental approval for a similar project 10 miles off Gloucester. Many questions about the impact on the environment remain.
But looking ahead, state Environmental Secretary Stephen Pritchard wisely recommends that both companies reduce the environmental impact by sharing a single pipe to reach the distribution network. And more could be done in this area. Positioning the two docking facilities near each other could eliminate the need for two restrictive security zones.
The prospect of competition between the two offshore projects is already working in the environment's favor. Excelerate, for example, has already shaved its estimate of the number of gallons of seawater needed to cool the ships' engines in the unloading process from 54 million gallons per day to 5 million gallons. And the fewer gallons used, the less marine life must be sacrificed.
Many questions remain about regional demand for gas, terminal needs, and pipeline capacity. But the conversation at last is turning in the right direction -- offshore.
