"Hazen asked for clarification of the pipelines and said the Palomar pipeline is separate and that Bradwood is using the pipeline going to Kelso;
Coppedge said that is correct.
Hazen asked if Bradwood would consider using the Palomar pipeline down the road if it was feasible.
Coppedge said they are not developing the Palomar pipeline and the current plan is to transport
gas through the Bradwood Landing pipeline.
Hazen asked what the reason was for the Palomar pipeline and referred to a statement in the Bradwood materials.
Paul Soanes, Bradwood Landing President, Houston, Texas, said the statement is a direct FERC quote and FERC would be the best source for an answer to the commissioner’s question."
And now, coincidentally, we know that Bradwood is indeed abandoning the pipeline crossing "The River" that goes to the "Williams Pipeline" in favor of "The Palomar Pipeline" along, obviously, with Oregon LNG/Pipeline and Northwest Natural Gas, going south and east, then connecting to Trans Canand Pipeline east of Maupin, Oregon.
To me this appears to be a blatant non-truth by Northern Star Natural Gas and not a peep out of Hazen, Lee, Samuelson, Roberts, Patrick regarding this breech.
And of Course new Commission President Roberts tells NNB's Michael Desmond it can all be undone it if all issues are not mitigated properly?
Well, Patricia what the heck are you and yours going to do about this flagrant misdirection by Northern Star?
You have been lied to right out the box and, yet, you sit there, not a peep?
I ask Hazen: Why did you not speak up when you caught the news that NSNG is working with consultants doing feasability for NSNG's use of 'The Palomar" pipeline.
No flags were raised at all?
Coppedge said that is correct.
Hazen asked if Bradwood would consider using the Palomar pipeline down the road if it was feasible.
Coppedge said they are not developing the Palomar pipeline and the current plan is to transport
gas through the Bradwood Landing pipeline.
Hazen asked what the reason was for the Palomar pipeline and referred to a statement in the Bradwood materials.
Paul Soanes, Bradwood Landing President, Houston, Texas, said the statement is a direct FERC quote and FERC would be the best source for an answer to the commissioner’s question."
And now, coincidentally, we know that Bradwood is indeed abandoning the pipeline crossing "The River" that goes to the "Williams Pipeline" in favor of "The Palomar Pipeline" along, obviously, with Oregon LNG/Pipeline and Northwest Natural Gas, going south and east, then connecting to Trans Canand Pipeline east of Maupin, Oregon.
To me this appears to be a blatant non-truth by Northern Star Natural Gas and not a peep out of Hazen, Lee, Samuelson, Roberts, Patrick regarding this breech.
And of Course new Commission President Roberts tells NNB's Michael Desmond it can all be undone it if all issues are not mitigated properly?
Well, Patricia what the heck are you and yours going to do about this flagrant misdirection by Northern Star?
You have been lied to right out the box and, yet, you sit there, not a peep?
I ask Hazen: Why did you not speak up when you caught the news that NSNG is working with consultants doing feasability for NSNG's use of 'The Palomar" pipeline.
No flags were raised at all?
10 comments:
"And now, coincidentally, we know that Bradwood is indeed abandoning the pipeline crossing "The River" that goes to the "Williams Pipeline" in favor of "The Palomar Pipeline" "
Excuse Me? Where on earth did you hear this? This statement is a complete fabrication on your part!
There has been no indication in any filings or reports that if the Palomar Pipeline goes in, that it will REPLACE the pipeline into WA.
I seem to recall that in one hearing I attended, the representative from NW Natural got up and said that they were hoping to take ADDITIONAL supplies into the Palomar Pipeline if the need was there, but that the Palomar pipeline wasn't part of the Bradwood project.
Please don't make it up as you go along Patrick...it makes you look even LESS credible than you already are.
Exceprted From The Daily Astorian
Feds launch query into ethics conflict
LNG terminal and pipeline projects both employ same environmental consultants
By CASSANDRA PROFITA
The Daily Astorian
Federal officials are worried about a potential conflict of interest for an environmental consulting group that's working on both the Bradwood Landing liquefied natural gas project and the Palomar Gas Transmission pipeline.
The two projects are linked by a segment of the Palomar line that's slated to serve the Bradwood LNG terminal, proposed for a site 20 miles east of Astoria.
According to a letter from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Natural Resource Group, a company with several offices across the country focused on energy project permitting, has even assigned some of the same staff to work on both projects.
In a letter sent to NRG Thursday, FERC official Richard Hoffmann noted the relationship between the two projects as an ethical hurdle requiring "additional measures ... to assure the public that the work is being carried out in an impartial manner."
"NRG's work on the Palomar pipeline could appear to provide it with a financial interest in seeing that the Bradwood Landing LNG Project gets approved," he wrote.
Yes, I'm familiar with that story...which, by the way, implies in no way that the Palomar Pipeline would REPLACE the original pipeline, now does it? NO, you just decided that yourself.
Well the words are there, you twist them anyway you want to but it will not change the apparent
fact Bradwood is going to Palomar, contrary to the testimony they gave to Commission and yet it is still not challenged.
I transposed their (Bradwood's) route and combined it with Oregon LNG/Pipeline's proposed route from their proposed facility to a junction near Timber, Oregon.
But, do not take my word for it, convince yourself, the information is ther for you.
Even better "Nobody" I invite Northern Star Natural Gas to come on this site, send me a Press Release, whatever they choose to clarify exactly what the situation is with the pipelines just to make sure you get a fair shake on the explanation.
Pass it on if you wish.
I'm not twisting ANY words Patrick, you seem to be the only one doing that.
Considering that the Bradwood pipeline plan hasn't changed since the beginning, why would they feel compelled to issue a press release of ANY kind? They have nothing to do with the Palomar pipeling themselves, NW Natural just saw an opportunity there.
YOU and yours are inventing a conspiracy here...from what you said above, you seem to think that Oregon LNG is in on the whole thing too? Wow...what next?
As far as inviting Northern Star to come on this site, be my guest...why would they bother even giving you a "press release", you are nobody
Oh, and by the way...if you believe every spin the Daily Astorian puts on a story, then you're as bad as they are, unwilling to open your eyes to the truth, unwilling to accept anything but YOUR own ideas. That's very sad.
Regarding what you said earlier about the commissioners:
Patricia Roberts is very careful...she never makes snap judgements, which is good, and I really respect her looking in detail at things.
I think I can say the same for Commissioners Samuelson and Hazen. They are pretty smart people, and I wouldn't want to be in their shoes.
Commissioner Lee doesn't deserve the crap that people are throwing at him just because he doesn't agee with THEM. Although I respect him less as a person than I do some of the others, I still think he looks at what is best for the COUNTY...not just himself.
As far as Sam Patrick...that man is just an obnoxious buffoon...who never has deserved to serve in the capacity of County Commissioner. I'm ashamed that I live in his district, and I'm thrilled that his term is almost over. He's nothing but an ass, as a commissioner AND as a person.
Once I got the bottom of this and saw I had to post as either a "google" or other blogger, I decided to blog as neither...I don't have a google account so am posting as anonymous.
To the admin of this forum...I've been watching many forums relating to liquefied natural gas, and yours popped up. So I've been watching.
You know? you should be careful. You accuse the "bad people" of things that you cannot prove.
I don't know who you think you are. Near as I can tell you're an architect? Great! Where does that make you an authority on LNG? Have you researched the industry worldwide?
You should look...worldwide, at how HUGE this industry is. It is a necessary industry, active in over 30 countries. to bring energy to our countries.
You may think that in your tiny little part of the world that you don't need it, but you do...
In the very near future, the Canadian supplies of natural gas to your region are going to diminish...which means, you will be paying HUGE dividends for natural gas.
Do you even know what you are up against?
"Once I got to the bottom of this and saw I had to post as either a "google" or other blogger, I decided to blog as niether...I don't have a google account so am posting as anonymous."
Of course you are and why would I expect anything other?
To answer your query:Yes, I am fully aware of what the people of this community are up against and for some, they have chosen to do something about it, win or lose.
Post a Comment