|
|
| Representative
Vic Gilliam Issues: Natural Gas Pipeline Projects and Related LNG Issues
Vic Gilliam There is a vital principle that should be at the center of the debate on whether Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) facilities should be built. So far, this principle has been swept aside amid a debate filled with more heat than light. But the issue is crucial. Private companies want to build LNG facilities here with one site on the Columbia River near Astoria and proposed pipelines coming through my district. I believe this principle should be put at the center of the debate. The principle is Oregon first. Oregon should have the right of first refusal for the natural gas flowing from the LNG facilities and pipelines located here. Proponents argue that the federal government, in the form of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), alone should or will decide how much gas from Oregon-based terminals and pipelines should be distributed to Oregonians – and how much to our largish neighbors to the south. Guess who wins this debate in Washington DC? Over time, the winner will be the State with more people than common sense – California. It is argued that interstate law must prevail and natural gas should simply find the best market. But is this always true? The answer is – absolutely not. For example, under federal law citizens of the Northwest have first right to hydropower from federal dams on the Columbia River. California has been trying to get its hands on this vast clean, low-cost power since Franklin Roosevelt was President. Why? Columbia River hydropower is the crown jewel of the nation’s natural energy resources. The power is worth billions of dollars each year to Northwest consumers. This crucial renewable energy has been the greatest underlying source for regional prosperity – not to mention clean skies -- in the last 70 years. The power of the Columbia River dams first goes to regional public utilities. Beyond that, any leftover hydropower is claimed first by the Northwest under Northwest preference legislation. This bill was passed by some of the region’s political giants of the last fifty years -- U.S. Senators Hatfield, Magnuson, Jackson and others. But with today’s new energy resources and pressures our platform is shifting. Instead of applying this key principle – regional resources first for regional citizens – we do the opposite. Energy infrastructure is built and passes through Oregon for the benefit of California. We ship thousands of megawatts of Oregon-based wind energy to California consumers. In the long run, are our natural wind resources any less valuable than our natural hydropower resources? Are Oregon consumers benefiting from, for example, billion-dollar solar power resources located in California and the Southwest? The answer is -- not so much. The Oregon First principle is simple and fair. Oregon consumers are bearing the impact and hardship of the LNG facilities in our state. There are job benefits to be sure but there are also jobs at risk on valuable farm land. Oregon consumers should, therefore, be assured the resource is first dedicated to Oregon consumers. Once there is an independent determination that Oregon needs are met, the excess natural gas and wind generation can be sold out of the State. But the out-of-state contracts should not exceed a few years per agreement. The energy can be recalled to Oregon as our population grows and new needs arise. This is precisely the principle embodied in regional hydropower preference and it should apply to future wind energy production in the State. I hope others will join me in challenging our Congressional delegation to insist that a state preference principle be applied to all state-sourced energy, including natural gas from the LNG project. Another requisite of this principle is honest debate. Despite serious economic downturn, the region will grow rapidly again in the coming decades. The truth is we are going to need natural gas to heat our homes and back up wind power electric generation. We’re also going to need all the reasonable-priced energy conservation we can get. Our power grid has been called the world’s biggest machine – running on the speed of light. It is the backbone of modern civilization. It cannot deliver energy anytime you flip a switch through intermittent renewable energy alone. But even with these efforts, I believe we will still need natural gas as a bridge to a renewable energy future. Saying otherwise is simply not being truthful with our citizens. But the LNG investment must clearly be for the long-term benefit of Oregon citizens. Assuming state-preference language can be adopted into the LNG debate, I will support construction of the project. The other principle that is bedrock to my approach is protection of individual property rights and our area’s natural beauty. Despite local protests, and confusing gubernatorial signals it seems likely that the federal government will okay construction of the LNG facilities. With this threat, property owners – and many others –in my district are seriously steamed. They worry the federal government will push the LNG pipeline down their throats. They also know if the pipeline is built it will seriously disrupt their lives, their land and their communities. Many of these folks -- like other Oregonians – are facing the bleakest economic outlook in years. We all know Oregon’s 12% unemployment rate is only rivaled by Michigan. Now, on top of everything else, these landowners are likely to get a knock on their door. Strangers from out of town or their agents will smile and tell them a pipeline is going through their back yard or small farm. They’ll be told that they’ll get compensated and I hope that they will. But just in case, I want pipeline project partners to give assurances that compensation will be fair. I want answers to questions like: Will it compensate them over the long term? Will it be sensitive to the environmental and economic disruption caused by construction? Or will these out-of-state economic or government interests steamroll the little guy in an unfair process? They won’t if we work together. Should the pipelines be built, protecting key local property and environmental rights threatened by this construction, will be at the top of my agenda in Salem. I offer this small start to protecting them by pledging to start a list on my website for residents of District 18 that are potentially directly affected by natural gas pipeline projects should they be built. I want this list to help in organizing landowner interests – to make sure local property and environmental rights are fully protected. It will also help to insure the maximum compensation possible for private landowners if and when eminent domain is invoked. If you are a resident of House District #18 and your property will potentially be directly affected by proposed natural gas pipelines, please click here to register your concern. If you are not from House District #18, I would encourage you to contact your legislator with your concerns. http://www.leg.state.or.us/findlegsltr/
|
