It’s Getting Hot In Here

Tuesday and Wednesday of this week, staffers from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) were in Oregon to assess the environmental impact that proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals will have on our region.  When they got here, the youth climate movement of my home state was waiting and ready to let them know that LNG compromises our future.

The two-day visit with FERC began Tuesday morning when fifteen students from Linfield College in McMinnville, Oregon, headed out to meet the FERC staff in a chilly hotel parking lot.  Also present was a good-sized group of impacted landowners and community activists, who like us youth were there to ask FERC some hard questions about the approval process for LNG facilities.  FERC has a years-long history of ignoring many of the most serious impacts LNG pipelines and import terminals will have on Oregon’s communities and environment; as community organizers have fought to protect Oregon residents from wasteful and destructive LNG projects, FERC has been uncooperative throughout.  As just a couple of examples, the commission has granted their approval to the hideously flawed Bradwood Landing LNG Terminal, and environmental groups had to sue FERC just to get the commission to publicly release the names of landowners who would be affected by a proposed LNG pipeline.

The FERC staff who visited Oregon this week had come to gather information for the Environmental Impact Statement on a major LNG pipeline proposed by the company Oregon LNG.  To their credit, the staff stood in the hotel parking lot Tuesday morning taking questions for nearly an hour before they and some of the concerned citizens left for the McMinnville site visits.  Issues that came up during this initial questions period ranged from the impact construction of LNG pipelines will have on Oregon forests, to the carbon footprint of LNG (which is up to 30% larger than that of North American gas).  There’s no doubt in my mind that the large contingent of students complete with signs calling for a clean energy future for Oregon made a big impact on the FERC staff.  The only people present at the gathering in favor of the LNG pipeline were three representatives from Oregon LNG and CH2M Hill – the contractor that the company has hired to do much of the engineering work for this project.  The three industry reps, including Oregon LNG CEO Peter Hansen, eyed our banners rather suspiciously.

 After the parking lot gathering, most of the students from Linfield who’d already taken time out of a school day to meet with FERC had to head back to campus for classes.  The rest of us gathered, including two Linfield students ready to report back to the rest of their campus group, piled into cars to follow FERC to four site visits.  We drove through the semi-rural land surrounding McMinnville, Oregon, and I couldn’t help but reflect on the impact Oregon LNG’s project would have on this country landscape.  The Oregon LNG pipeline would cut through miles of forest, streams, wetlands, and fertile farmland throughout this area; and as local residents understand all too well, there’s no way to install a miles-long 3-foot wide pipeline through delicate local ecosystems and carefully tended crop fields without damage that will take years or decades to heal.

Peter Hansen listens attentively to landowners impacted by his project

Despite the fact that his pipeline project threatens the livelihoods of literally hundreds of Oregon farmers, Peter Hansen and the other industry reps seemed remarkably uninterested in the concerns of affected landowners.  At each site we visited, owners of the affected property described in detail the effects LNG development would have on their ability to continue using their land.  All through the morning, however, I saw Hansen make almost no visible attempt to address a landowner’s concern when a question was not directed specifically at him.  He spent most of the first few site visits standing off to one side looking bored, making no eye contact with the landowners addressing the group, and giving no appearance of paying much attention to the conversations unfolding a few yards away. 

One of the remarkable things about the coalition of Oregon activists dedicated to confronting the LNG industry is that it is not a movement confined by the boundaries of traditional environmentalism.  Conservative landowners with farms slated to be plowed under for LNG pipelines have joined forces with liberal-leaning environmentalists concerned about the impact of LNG on our climate.  Nowhere was the diversity of this coalition more evident than during Tuesday’s last site visit, when the FERC staff inspected an alternative pipeline route for Oregon LNG that cuts through Stimson Lumber forestland in the community of Gales Creek.  Now when it comes to some issues, Stimson Lumber and local environmentalists are, well….not exactly on the same page.  Yet faced with the common threat of an LNG pipeline that would require a clearcut through Stimson’s forestland, the lumber growers and environmentalists have joined hands to fight a greater enemy.  From the forested ridgetop overlooking Gales Creek, I could see miles of forest, fields, and rural farmland.  Western Washington County, where Gales Creek is located, is a major farming region and one of the area’s greatest economic assets.  Yet not one but two LNG pipelines – Oregon LNG’s and the Palomar Pipeline – would cut right through it, devastating tens of miles. 

It was while tramping through Stimson’s forest that Peter Hansen finally seemed to perk up.  At this point he began joking about how his coming with FERC for these site visits proved Oregon LNG wants to “do the job right” and look closely at the needs of local communities.  Aside from the fact that he could have done a more impressive job appearing to engage with landowners that morning, I at least found his joking a bit insulting, and possibly even offensive.  Oregon LNG hopes to seize private lands without the owners’ permission through eminent domain, and forcibly overturn several hundred livelihoods.  Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t consider that a laughing matter.

 On Wednesday, the FERC staff set out to visit additional sites in Gales Creek.  That morning, the student group which came to greet them was from Pacific University in the nearby town of Forest Grove.  Eight students from Pacific – a campus that’s been working on LNG issues for at least a couple of years – arrived to meet them that morning with a new set of signs and questions.  Our group of students, landowners, and environmental activists again set out with FERC and the industry reps to look at another set of impacted properties.

It was during one of the Gales Creek site visits that things got, well, rather interesting for Oregon LNG’s public image.  We arrived at a certified organic farm where the owners have for years had trouble with LNG company staff attempting trespass on their land to gather information about the site.  On our arrival, the owners made clear that FERC staff and Oregon LNG representatives were being granted permission to come onto their land only once, purely to gather visual information.  On the tour site that followed, one of our landowner guides described the years-long process of building up a sustainable home business that now supplies organic food to nearby communities while fostering the type of localized economies needed to radically decrease the carbon footprint of our society. 

Then, near the end of this particular site visit, someone noticed Peter Hansen and one of the other LNG reps taking GPS readings on the property in direct violation of the limited permission they’d been given on arrival.  They of course were required to delete any information saved on the device, while two members of our group watched to make sure the readings were erased.  Neither Hansen nor the other industry rep offered an apology for this behavior, and none of the FERC staff spoke out to criticize the violation.

After two days of following FERC around my state, I can say this at least about the flawed process through which FERC considers LNG infrastructure projects in Oregon:

1) The large carbon footprint of LNG and this project’s impact on the climate are not in any way considered in FERC’s Environmental Impact Statement.  When asked about LNG’s contribution to global warming, FERC staff repeatedly denied that FERC could consider the impact on climate in an EIS.  By the admission of FERC’s staff, the commission does not consider global warming in a quantitative way when approving a project.

2) The process FERC currently uses to collect information about a project forces local communities to pay huge costs before the need for the project has even been considered.  As of now, the need for a project is one of the last things the commission looks at when making a final decision.  This means that landowners, environmental groups, and local governments are potentially forced to waste huge amounts of time and money negotiating with (and sometimes suing) FERC and the LNG companies – all before the need or demand for a proposed project has even been looked at.  By considering need BEFORE anything else, FERC could save local communities thousands of dollars. 

3) FERC has not done an adequate job engaging with impacted communities.  I’m grateful to the FERC staffers who came out to Oregon for this week’s in-person site visit – even though I have some hard questions about their process.  Yet it became apparent during FERC’s visit that the staffers here to work on the EIS were not qualified to answer all the questions students and community members have.  Many issues with this project may only be addressable by the FERC Commissioners themselves.  However only one, Commissioner Jon Wellinghoff, has visited Oregon in person to look at LNG sites. 

4) LNG hurts students.  The decision to build a LNG pipeline or import terminal in Oregon would impact the energy future of the Northwest for years or decades.  The youth of today are the ones who will have to live with any decision FERC makes – and the current decision-making process is clearly and fundamentally flawed.  At the very least, FERC should set a moratorium on approving LNG projects until guidelines are in place to address the impact on our climate in a quantifiable manner.

 Fortunately, this fight is far from over.  As clearly demonstrated by the students who turned out in force to this week’s site visits, the youth of Oregon continue to engage in this struggle that could define the economic and environmental future of our region.  The decision-makers who would grant our generation insufficient consideration haven’t heard the last from us – not by a long shot.