|
$4,479,085,539.15
Recent Comments
The Bahamas should say yes to LNG
25 July 2008
Anthony Howarth
THE PROPOSED LNG PLANTS ON OCEAN CAY, 35 MILES SOUTH OF BIMINI, AND IN FREEPORT. AND THE FINANCAIL CRISIS LOOMING WITH BEC FUEL SURCHARGE INCREASING BY 73% PER ANNUM IN MAY AND GAS AT THE PUMP BY A SIMILAR AMOUNT. If ever the Bahamas has an opportunity to secure for its citizens an income stream that will be the envy of the region for very little effort this is it. Did Saudi Arabia refuse to let their oil be drilled and processed and sold world wide because it was too risky to the environment? Did the Cayman Islands turn down the oil transhipment terminal in Little Cayman that gave them a large income for many years? Why would the Bahamas turn down such a golden opportunity, or put off the proposal at a time like this when the country so badly needs new industries to feed its families. If opportunity knocks why miss the boat. Technology is changing the world so fast, that this opportunity may not continue or be available in ten years time. Events could overtake it. So now the decision needs to be taken. The offer is on the table. If the offer is withdrawn we may never see it again. The facts The BEST Commission has been set up by the Government to consider the environmental risks of building transshipment plants on Ocean Cay and in Freeport for holding and transshipping via pipe line LNG gas to Florida. In the case of Ocean Cay, the existing Island will be more than doubled in size by dredging and enlarging the existing harbor and the entrance channel to permit tankers with 16 meter draft to unload the LNG gas. The BEST Commission is staffed by well qualified Bahamians who have the job of reviewing the environmental impact studies performed by AES, the proposed LNG plant operating company, one of the largest such corporations in the world. The Government has employed ICF Consulting to act as Project Manager. ICF has raised over 200 questions on the proposal and these have all been answered. In some cases recommendations have been made to satisfy certain concerns. These include setting up appropriate control mechanisms to ensure the project is properly monitored at all times. Training of Bahamians will be included in any such plans. If Bahamians can succeed as North Sea Divers in the oil industry, where the dangers are much more acute, then surely they can be trained to handle a plant of this nature. Safety is always a big issue, and this has received specialized attention. All of these concerns have been addressed in the 8 volume report submitted by BEST to the Minister of Trade and Industry, and made public. If you have had the opportunity to read this report, you will be impressed at the detail and the care taken by AES and BEST to cover every conceivable aspect of the proposed dredging operation and the building of the LNG conversion plant, the docks, an airstrip, and other buildings, as well as the pipeline that will take the gas to Florida through Bahamian waters. For example the run off of the dredged sand material will be carefully controlled. The noise made by the compacting machine has been measured and its effect on the nearest inhabitants 8 miles away carefully considered. The effect on the marine habitats, the breeding grounds for crawfish, conch and grouper all carefully reviewed and found to be minimal. As to safety, there is a complete misunderstanding by many of the dangers of such a plant. Ask any fireman, and he will tell you that the possibility of fire, and the seriousness of the fire are far less for an LNG plant than an oil or practically any other industrial chemical plant. LNG has a short fire ball, and a low fire rating. It is difficult to ignite unlike petroleum or diesel products. If LNG escapes it evaporates in the air, being lighter than air. The recent explosion in Liberia was at one of the oldest LNG plants in the world at an industrial complex with many different production units. Lack of adequate maintenance and replacement of old parts which had been urgently requested for many years by the engineers was never carried out by the Government who owned the plant. The transport of LNG gas by tankers, and the building of plants, is progressing in the USA, England and Europe in order to meet the demands of the power supply industry. One such plant is planned for the Thames estuary in England. Our good Caribbean neighbours Trinidad, have profited immensely from the oil industry. It is gas from their oil and gas fields that is available to be shipped to the USA via the Bahamas. Both Trinidad and ourselves will profit immensely from this trade. Economic Advantages for the Bahamas As Consultants to the Government, ICF must have been asked to advise the Government on the comparative fees or royalties that would normally apply to such a plant operating on foreign soil. Based on the expected through put figures have been mentioned in the press of around USD$25 million a year. But nobody has asked the Minister of Trade and Industry what this figure is or might be. Twenty five million dollars is approximately $84 per head of population, or say five times that or $420.00 for each wage earner. Or if the real contract revenue should be three times that at $1,260.00 per person per year. And now the additional savings from the BEC conversion to LNG proposal. The figure for the thru put charge may be a closely guarded secret. But our US friends should be able to confirm that the figure five years ago was more realistically US$75 million per annum. It should be a lot more than that in today’s market. In the event that the Government needs to replace certain customs duties to meet the proposed EPA requirements, such additional income for the country would go some way to cover say one fifth of the present customs duties. In addition there will be additional income from the jobs created by the project. Not only during the construction phase, the operations phase, and the general maintenance and supplies business. There will be work permit fees for the foreign staff and consultants. There will be much new business created for the people of Bimini and Freeport, as these workers will spend money on their days off in recreation and supplying their daily needs. Boatmen and light aircraft pilots and owners will be in constant demand. So the additional economic benefits for one plant will be considerable, for two plants, significant, and for thee such plants, truly amazing. Any economist should be able to assess the advantages to the Bahamas of such a new Industry that has fallen into the laps of Bahamians just because of our geographical situation, at the edge of deep water. Both at Ocean Cay and in Freeport, the same factors are in our favor. Small risks to any large populations of any dangerous effluent, and ease of access by large tankers. The risks are minimal. Another possible economic benefit should be considered. That is the possibility of converting the existing Electricity Power generating plants in Nassau and Freeport, as well as in smaller communities like Bimini, from the bunker C fuel power plants that exude black smoke into our atmosphere into clean gas fueled power plants. The present oil shipments must add to the risk of pollution, as has been seen at Clifton Pier recently. As part of the LNG contract, consideration must be given to supplying Nassau and elsewhere in the Bahamas with this alternative fuel supply, hopefully at much less cost that the present gasoline supply. The UK supplied Natural Gas to millions of households by pipelines all over the UK from the North Sea Oil fields. On the 7th July 2008, AES proposes to complete a pipeline direct to BEC’s plant in Nassau, saving as much as $210 million dollars a year in fuel costs. In this advertisement they do not reveal the other fees and benefits accruing as stated above. The residents of the Albany Project must be aware of the terrible pollution caused at present by the BEC plants. Golfers playing golf on the Blue Shark golf course can often see the black smoke pouring out, and if the wind is in the wrong direction some of this obnoxious dust will alight on their expensive real estate homes. So tourism and the real estate market will suffer if this continues. As for the environmentalist activists, they are trying to ensure the best for the Bahamas. But we could all be swimming in debt if such technology does not improve our lives. And why did they make so little noise on the Disney Island project in the Berry Islands where a new dock was built in shore? What happened to the craw fish dislocated there? Why do we not re-cycle waste? Why do the cruise ships belch black smoke in Nassau harbour and no one complains? One last thought. The LNG project could be so immensely profitable for the Government, that thoughts should be given to a partial public offering at some time in the future. This could be written into the agreement now. It happened with Cable Bahamas, who dug up our roads and caused all sorts of environmental damage too! There are still holes or ruts in the roads caused by their trenching. The views expressed are those of the author, and not necessarily those of the Nassau Institute (which has no corporate view), or its Advisers or Directors. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comments
Sam Duncombe - 28 July 2008 11:03- The Bahamas should say NO to LNG
- Alternative Energy - the time is now and there's no looking back.
By Sam Duncombe
Director reEarth
July 28 2008
After last weeks message coming from the Caribbean Regional Sustainable Energy Conference put on by the US Embassy and Hosted by The Bahamas government, reEarth hopes Aaron Samson of AES Corp. has realized that although we may be a small nation we are certainly not a stupid one.
Mr. Samson has been promoting his fossilized LNG product over our radio waves over the last month, promising that he can lower our energy costs by addicting us to natural gas instead of oil. That logic is tantamount to trying to wean a cocaine addict by addicting them to heroin. Thanks but no thanks Mr. Samson. Natural gas addiction is no solution for our current or future energy problems.
The message that resounded out of that conference was overwhelmingly loud and clear - the way forward for producing energy, reducing our dependence on fossil fuels, keeping millions of dollars in the country, lowering our energy bills, creating new jobs, protecting the environment from global warming green houses gasses, is to dive straight into the renewable energy market, not LNG, not coal, not oil.
The change to the renewable market they said is "as great as the Industrialized Revolution" and that "leadership should be energized not intimidated".
Technology is no longer and issue, solar, wind, biofuels, tidal power are all proven technologies that can provide the Bahamas with power for us and future generations . It was shown by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's director Dan Arvizu, that the Bahamas has the wind and solar capacity to generate enough energy to power the Bahamas.
On July 7 2007 reEarth joined 2 billion viewers for the Live Earth concert - the brain child of Vice President Al Gore and called on Bahamians to purchase compact fluorescent bulbs to help lower their energy costs, and reduce the amount of global warming gasses entering the atmosphere. Last week reEarth called on the government to consider providing soft loans for consumers to be able to install solar water heaters thereby reducing their energy bills, and that of BEC, and start the process of weaning The Bahamas from fossil fuels.
During the conference Minister of the Environment Earl Deveaux echoed reEarth's sentiments saying the Bahamas could reduce its fuel import bill by $11 million dollars per annum simply by converting to compact fluorescent bulbs and solar water heaters. Replacing four 60 watt bulbs with 13 watt compact fluorescent bulbs would reduce fuel consumption by 44,000 barrels of oil per year and a savings to the country of 2 million dollars per year.
Minister Deveaux went on to say that replacing 80,000 water heaters with solar water heaters would result in an annual reduction of fuel of 175,000 barrels of oil (resulting in) representing a savings to the country of 11 million dollars. This was based upon usage of an electric water heater being on for 2 hours a day. Practically, there are a handful of people who routinely turn their heater off when not in use, so the savings at the end of the day stands to be considerably (higher ) more than 11 million.
The ball lays squarely at Government's feet. The Bahamas should follow New Zealand's lead by forbidding any future fossil fuel based projects. They must now officially turn away the LNG proposal put forward by AES and any others that may be lurking in the shadows, they should extricate The Bahamas from all oil exploration licenses, then they must make compact fluorescent lights and solar water heaters duty free, laws must be changed that allow individuals to install alternative generating power for their homes and businesses, and they must vigorously pursue other initiatives that will secure our energy future with clean, reliable, available, renewable alternatives.
The time is now and there's no looking back.
END
Sigmund Willis - 26 July 2008 18:06- The Bahamas should say yes to LNG
- THIS LETTER SAYS ALOT ABOUT THE TOPIC AND IS VERY CLEAR. THE PROBLEM AT THIS TIME SEEMS TO BE, THAT THE SIDES ARE NOT ON THE SAME PAGE. THIS NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED AND THESE PROJECTS APPROVED AND WORK GET GOING. WE CANNOT CONTINE TO BE BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL, WE NEED TO BE PROACTIVE AND NOT WAIT TO BE REACTIVE.
Add new comment: