|
Well,
I think that plan is unrealistic.
There is no doubt we need more terminals in NE. And you have the NIMBY theory everywhere. I don't have a chart in front of me but this would require some dredging and would really have to be on the Northern side. As Dave said this really would mess up the beuaty of the harbor. There is not enough room really for a tank farm so this would have to be just a pumping terminal. And the security, forgot about fishing within a half mile of it. So there goes lots of nice territory near the spit in tight. To the west in the skinny water of Flying Places at the east of GB. It is going to take allot of underground/water piping etc so why not have an offshore bouy terminal say out by the B bouy. This is done routinely for ULCC's and VLCC's that draw 80 feet of water and can never enter port unless MT. I'm just not sure about the maximum distance that you can pump it in liquid form and have it still remain a liquid without either a boil off point to keep it cool, or refrigeration. Would take a long time to move it as a gas and then condense it again. Sorry to get too technical in my thinking. I think it can be done offshore though as with crude.
LNG ships are very safe, they would be even safer if the ships were American Ships with American crews that speak fluent English, but that is another story that I could go on and on about. Basically we regulated ourselves out of the industry and made it more profitable to use foreign flag vessels.
Just really have to worry about the nut with an RPG. But if offshore 5 miles outside the outer harbor well now he needs a boat too.
|