Learn More
click to enlarge
NW Natural in partnership with TransCanada is proposing the Palomar Pipeline, a 211-mile pipeline project. The pipeline route begins at the Bradwood LNG terminal on the Columbia River, continues to a gas hub near Molalla, and ends north of Madras in central Oregon, where it would meet a pre-existing southbound pipeline. (1)
This huge pipeline project is necessary for the proposed Bradwood LNG terminal. Without it, NorthernStar Natural Gas (backer of the Bradwood LNG terminal) and NW Natural would be unable to deliver large quantities of gas to the California market – the only market large enough to absorb the vast quantities of gas involved in these projects. Ultimately, the Bradwood LNG and Palomar pipeline projects will have the capacity to send out 1.3 billion cubic feet per day, an amount of gas approximately double Oregon’s total average daily gas use.
As stated in the Oregonian, “No company has as much to gain from an LNG terminal, or as much to offer its developers, as NW Natural.” (2)
We don’t need more dirty energy
There is no proven need for LNG. According to a report by the Oregon Department of Energy, Oregon doesn’t need LNG. (3) Even Gregg Kantor, Chief Operating Officer of NW Natural, has said of the pipeline: ”The company isn’t about to run out of gas without it” and he added, if the pipeline doesn’t happen, “this company is going to do just fine.”(2)
Importing an unneeded new foreign fossil fuel in the Pacific Northwest would counteract the momentum we have built toward a renewable energy and energy independent future. There is no reason why we should invest in more fossil fuel infrastructure, which would harm our communities, to import resources from Indonesia, Malaysia, Russia, Qatar, or anywhere else across the globe when we have abundant resources here.
We should meet any increased demand created by population growth through conservation and efficiency.
It hurts Oregonian farmers, fishermen, and Foresters
Farmers are opposed to LNG because the Palomar pipeline threatens to use eminent domain across farmlands, creating a negative economic impact to the growing Willamette Valley agricultural economy. In many cases farmers oppose the project because of the loss to their costly irrigation systems. The pipeline infrastructure would disrupt Oregon farmers who have worked for generations to have productive farms and vineyards, and the LNG projects are opposed by Marion, Yamhill, Clackamas and Washington County Farm Bureaus.
Additionally, Fishermen oppose the project because of the impacts to salmon at the mouth of the Columbia, as well as the impacts from the Palomar pipeline to rivers and streams with historic spawning grounds. Many local salmon fishermen – with generations of experience fishing in the Columbia River estuary – oppose the Bradwood LNG project.
Foresters oppose the Bradwood LNG and Palomar Pipeline projects because of the clearcuts that will be left in forestlands currently being managed for the next generation of timber products. Unstable soils from erosion and exposed borders are not compatible with the sustainable forestry of Oregon’s small woodlot owners. Washington County’s Small Woodlands Association opposes LNG.
The environmental damage is too large
The route of the Palomar Pipeline would require massive environmental destruction in Mt. Hood National Forest, including a minimum 120-foot clearcut corridor for the pipeline and extensive new road construction for access to the pipeline. The corridor would involve hundreds of acres of clearcuts through popular recreation areas and across hiking trials, such as the Pacific Crest Trail. The Palomar pipeline is scheduled to cross Wild and Scenic Fish Creek and Clackamas River, which are key watersheds that provide us with clean drinking water.
The global warming impact of these projects is huge. According to the Oregon Department of Energy, LNG is not only dirtier than the gas we currently use, but when it is shipped from far away locations, LNG approaches coal in its greenhouse gas emissions. (3) As our glaciers melt and our rivers become warmer, it makes no sense for Oregon to commit to a high-carbon foreign fossil fuel like LNG.
It’s a bad idea
LNG costs more than domestic natural gas. According to Oregon’s Dept. of Energy, LNG is typically more expensive than North American natural gas. Indeed, the Wall Street Journal reported in 2008 that LNG was a “Bad Call” – costing significantly more than increasing supplies of domestic natural gas. At a time when Oregon and the Pacific Northwest is working intensively towards reducing our greenhouse gas emissions, imported LNG will undermine those goals.
About this Campaign
This campaign was created to serve and unite natural gas customers, conservationists, NW Natural shareholders and other Oregonians by monitoring activities of NW Natural Gas Co in order to hold the company accountable to all its stakeholders during NW Natural’s involvement in LNG.
We seek to amplify the concerns of our constituents regarding the gas company’s operations; educate the general public of NW Natural activities and decisions; and publicly pressure NW Natural to make decisions in the best interest of customers and our larger Oregon community.
NW Natural has a responsibility to serve the best interest of its customers, and the company has invested in public relations campaigns to create an image of corporate responsibility to the environment and our community.
This project has come into fruition in response to three elements of NW Natural activities that violate these responsibilities.
- NW Natural, in partnership with TransCanada, is proposing the Palomar Pipeline, which would serve to transport imported fossil fuels from the Bradwood liquefied natural gas (LNG) project. Customers have had no say in this decision, which would be costly to gas customers, invoke the use of eminent domain over Oregonian landowners, and have detrimental environmental impacts to Mt. Hood National Forest and other natural resources.
- NW Natural has been unresponsive to concerns made by customers, shareholders, and conservation groups regarding economic, environmental and community impacts.
- NW Natural has asserted its influence in Oregon politics due to campaign contributions that protect its interests, inhibiting the ability of concerned community members to achieve adequate representation by our legislators.
Defend what you love: Tell NW Natural to stop the Palomar Pipeline project by May 2010.
(1) Relationship between NW Natural and LNG. SEC filings linking the Palomar Pipeline project with Northernstar Natural Gas.
(2) Sickinger, Ted (June 22, 2008) Northwest Natural’s big pipes, big dreams, The Oregonian.
