Safety Scientist: LNG Terminal Too Close for Long Beach Comfort

The type of attack on a tanker carrying LNG that ABS Consulting analyzed for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission actually could be worse than outlined in the study because the ensuing fire could cause the whole ship to fail and set its entire cargo ablaze. The study presumed that an attack would breach only one of several separate storage tanks on a ship and that only half of that individual tank?s LNG would burn. A terminal 10 miles or more offshore would not raise such community safety concerns, Jerry Havens, professor of chemical engineering and director of the Chemical Hazards Research Center at the University of Arkansas, told a group of environmental and consumer advocates at the Global LNG Summit this week. ?The decisions associated with the use of the FERC report are now on the table,? said Havens, who has studied LNG safety issues since the 1970s. ?If you have to calculate the exclusion zone with the ship, I think there is not enough room there to build it.? Sound Energy Solutions (SES) is analyzing the potential for a variety of terrorist attacks against ships at its proposed terminal but believes that the berth location can be adequately protected and that its distance from developed areas would prevent any impacts. ?FERC intends to take this ABS information and make site-specific analyses,? said Thomas Giles, senior managing director of SES. ?We?re comfortable they will make a site-specific analysis and it will come out in our favor.?

Over 11K Stories!

| Independently Powered Energy News

Safety Scientist: LNG Terminal Too Close for Long Beach Comfort

vdharadmin

Related Posts

CPUC Says Aliso Canyon is Needed, Replacement Specifics Postponed

State Regulators End 50-Year Long Gas Line Hookup Subsidies

Developers Would Pay Full Freight for Gas Line Hookups Under CPUC Proposal

Lynch Questions California?s Need for LNG