"This is clearly a case of Not in My Backyard" says
an environmental researcher. "With the growing needs of Southern
California for energy the energy companies have exported the problem to
Mexico where environmental resistance to the project is weaker." He
added, "Imagine how far they would get if they wanted to put such a
terminal on Anacapa Island or Catalina? I don't think a great number of
the Americans investing in the area are aware of the plans for this
industrial facility."
Still, there are concerns about how the fuel is shipped
and stored. LNG cannot explode and is not flammable as a liquid.
But a government study by the Sandia National
Laboratory concludes terrorists could blast a hole into a LNG vessel. That
would release millions of gallons of fuel that would quickly turn to gas
and ignite.
The fire would be so intense that it could cause major
injury and burn buildings one-third of a mile away. Within seconds, the
fire could give second-degree burns to people who are a mile away.
"The risks of a catastrophic accident ... is a real
one. Far too little is known about the vulnerability of LNG terminals and
ships to terrorist attacks," says Philip Warburg, president of the
Conservation Law Foundation. The group has lobbied against putting LNG
terminals in populated areas in the Northeast.
Industry officials say there has never been a leak of
LNG from a double-hull tanker and that protection of LNG shipments has
improved since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Former Surfer Magazine photo editor Jason Murray says,
"If the construction of the LNG terminal goes ahead, we are going to lose
one of the most dynamic and beautiful waves in the North Pacific."
The
islands shelter the
For years the Mexican government has protected these
islands, not even allowing the small number of pleasure boaters ashore.
