Reader comments

From Robert Godfrey

FERC's Draft Environmental Impact Statement requires throughout the life of the facility that, for safe and secure movement of the LNG vessels through the Canadian and US waterway, Downeast LNG obtain coordination with the Government of Canada.

The Government of Canada has already concluded it will not allow LNG transits into Passamaquoddy Bay, since LNG transits would place thousands of civilians in the US Federally-defined 4.4-mile diameter Hazard Zones, and since the project would endanger the environment and fisheries.

That is what is called a deal killer. Only by removing their project to a location that satisfies industry terminal siting best practices can Downeast LNG have any hope for success, regardless of any FERC decision. That means moving outside of Passamaquoddy Bay.

From Cathy Footer

Full Disclosure-I have worked for Downeast LNG for 3 years and hope to continue for many more. I respect Bob Godfrey's right to his opinion but he does not live in the real
world of working people in Washington County. Many Washington County residents work 2-3 jobs or travel 1-2 hours a day to work so they can still live in the wonderful area they grew up in. With that said I am writing on their behalf, every meeting I attend or
just going to the grocery store becomes a discussion point of what Downeast LNG could do for the area. I have full confidence in FERC, the USCG and the State BEP of a thorough review of all environmental and safety issues. I am a Robbinston resident with a long family history here, we love our town and would not want something that is going to harm the area. As I write this comment, there is currently a large ship going by the office headed to Bayside, New Brunswick with some cars slowing to watch it. For the people reading this story I felt it was important they understand there is another side to the story other than Bob's side.

From Tom

I wonder how the Canadian backed Irving import facility iknown as Canaport located in St. John would fair if we applied the same 4.4-mile diameter Hazard Zone. I am inclined to believe there might be a few more people affected there, than in rural Washington County. It seems the only reason Canada is objecting to a facility in Washington County is to protect the interests of Irving Oil. Our government needs to stand up to Canada for all the good working people who need jobs in Washington County! Allowing Canada to continue to play this game jeopardizes investment in the DownEast project. The rights of transit to Passamaquoddy Bay goes beyond LNG and it's time the people in Augusta & DC realize this. That Bay is Washington County's greatest economic development resource and Washington County & the State of Maine can't afford to give Canada veto power over how it is utilized.  

From Robert Austin (Sat 6/20/2009 5:27 PM)

It's really pretty simple. For whatever good this project might do on the US side of the border, it comes at heavy expense to the people on the Canadian side. However nice you might wish to seem by wrapping yourself in sympathy for the people of Washington County, the fact remains that you are proposing sticking it to the citizens of Canada for your own benefit. You (in Maine) benefit, they (in Canada) pay. Downeast LNG intends to force the issue down Canadian throats, if they can. Wrap that up however you like it, the fact remains: that's not nice, and it's not neighborly. Good people do not cram things down their neighbor's throats. Period.