We caught up with John, AKA Smerf, about a year ago at one of the Maupin public meetings for the Palomar Pipeline. Not only is John one of the premiere flyfishing guides on one of the premiere rivers in the country, but he also has serious concerns about the impacts that the Palomar Pipeline would have on the Deschutes River and the community of Maupin. Being a member of Maupin’s city council means that John’s concerns go beyond just his favorite fishing spots; he’s also wondering what it means for his community to have a 36”, high-pressured gas pipeline going down Main Street.

When the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) raised concerns to Palomar about the proposed crossing of the Wild & Scenic Deschutes River at a point on the river that is popular for rafting and fishing, Palomar came back with an alternative; Main St., Maupin. Risk a community’s safety or the river that the community is culturally and economically connected to? We think that’s a question nobody should be forced to answer for development that has so much opposition.

Since 1985, John has operated the Deschutes Canyon Fly Shop. Next time you’re driving out to the Wild & Scenic Deschutes River, stop in and thank John for standing up for Oregon’s rivers. He might even give you some of those coveted fishing tips.

We asked him a couple questions to get some thoughts from one of Palomar’s many opponents:

Why do you oppose LNG development in Oregon?
For starters, there is no genuine need for foreign liquefied natural gas in Oregon. In a 2008 report, the Oregon Department of Energy found that imported LNG was not necessary to meet Oregon’s natural gas needs, and would likely cost ’substantially more’ than domestic sources of natural gas.

At a time when affordable domestic supplies of natural gas are becoming more available to Northwest markets and there is an increasing desire for energy independence in the U.S., it simply does not make sense to invest in expensive foreign fossil fuels like LNG. By requiring proof of a demonstrated need for LNG in Oregon, we should not needlessly tie ourselves to 30 more years of dependence on foreign sources of energy.

Further, LNG terminals and pipelines will have an irreversible and detrimental impact on Oregon’s rivers and streams, fisheries, farmland and forests.

What concerns do you have about the threats posed by the Palomar Pipeline?
It is very obvious that any of the Palomar Pipeline projects will have a negative impact on our quality of life. Energy speculators from Texas, New York and California want to make Oregon the back door for the very type of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) import terminals that California itself won’t allow. Why should Oregonians and Oregon’s treasured rivers, Wet Lands, and Protected Lands, be put at risk for California Gas? California’s Lieutenant Governor has openly said California doesn’t need to approve any LNG terminals because if they need the gas they can just get it from Oregon, but does Oregon want to be known as host to the industries that are too risky for California?

We need to protect our quality of life, clean water, and healthy rivers in Oregon and say no to LNG which has up to a 40% higher carbon impact than domestic natural gas and would directly undermine Oregon efforts to fight global warming.

When was the moment you knew you wanted to get involved in the resistance?
After the first meeting they held here in Maupin, when the project was first being introduced.

*********************************
Outdoor enthusiast clubs, civic groups, unions, and industry groups all have reasons to be involved in the anti-LNG movement. Are you involved in any organization that may be willing to take a stand? Perhaps your hiking club, or women’s group. Let us know any organizations you think should hear about LNG? Email oliviariver@gmail.com and we’ll find a way to plug them into the movement.

Yesterday, the Palomar Pipeline project submitted a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission essentially pulling their application and indicating that the pipeline in its entirety is on indefinite delay. This is a great victory for the Hey NW Natural campaign and all coalition partners calling for a complete cancelation of the Palomar Pipeline project.

The letter said,

“This is to advise FERC that our project plan to transport gas from Bradwood Landing now makes no sense because NorthernStar is bankrupt.  Therefore, our pipeline, if built, will be empty.  Not a good plan.  Palomar continues to seek additional commercial underpinning for the project, which means that we are talking to Oregon LNG about being their pipeline, but we’re not so sure that project is going to fly.  We already lost $17,200,000 on Bradwood so we’re a little gun shy.

As much as we hate to say it, FERC might as well stop reviewing our project. We may amend our application if we can find someone to put gas in our pipeline.  In the meantime, we will continue to go through the motions so we can pretend our project isn’t dead.”

OK, so maybe those weren’t the exact words. But, the meaning of the letter is essentially the same. (Read their exact language at the bottom of this post).

Now that Bradwood LNG is off the table after filing for bankruptcy, there is no source of gas for the Palomar Piplein the project is desperate for additional financial backing. The project backers, NW Natural and TransCanada, plan to amend its application to make significant changes to the pipeline project, and are suspending the premitting and surveying process. This comes hand in hand with the US Forest Service ceasing its processing of Palomar’s application through Mt. Hood National Forest.

This is a huge victory for us, and a huge blow to Palomar. We’ll continue to fight until the Palomar Pipeline is officially canceled and there are no remaining applications for LNG projects or pipelines.

The reason behind this victory is trifold: market conditions to import LNG don’t make sense, the Palomar Pipeline is a bad project with extreme negative environmental costs, and hundreds of Oregonians and Southern Washingtonians actively opposed this pipeline and worked to stay involved in the process! You’ve sent letters to your representatives, contacted NW Natural, talked to your neighbors and brought an awesome energy to the Rally at the NW Natural Shareholder Meeting. Lets keep it up!

Thank you for everything you have done. You are part of a diverse coalition with strong grassroots organizations like Bark and Columbia Riverkeeper as our backbone. Be sure to check out Bark and Columbia Riverkeeper and make a donation to assure we can keep these victories coming!

To read more about this victory, see this article in Blue Oregon by the dedicated Hey NW Natural campaign volunteer, Nick Engelfried, read this article at the Daily Astorian, or watch this news segment on KGW.

Thanks for all you’ve done!

Photo by Martin Evans

Today, approximately 300 people joined together outside the Oregon Convention Center to rally against the Palomar Pipeline at the NW Natural Annual Shareholder meeting. Rally participants were protesting a proposed 217-mile pipeline that would have connected the proposed Bradwood Landing LNG terminal on the Columbia River to the existing TransCanada pipeline in eastern Oregon. The crowd was made up of many impacted landowners, as well as people who have stated concerns about the impacts from the pipeline on Mt. Hood National Forest. Using colorful flags to represent three of the most prevalent reasons for opposing LNG, protestors held images of salmon, forests and farms. At a point when the shareholders were entering the meeting, a fabric “pipeline” dramatically snaked through the crowd pretending to knock down the “Oregon Values” flags.

Inside the Shareholders Meeting attendees were met with vague answers and misleading information about the NorthernStar Natural Gas bankruptcy and how that would affect shareholder investments. Greg Kantor, CEO of NW Natural, stated that the $17.2 million in debt owed to Palomar by NorthernStar Natural Gas would be “covered.” This gave cause for one participant in the meeting to stand and voice concerns about the reality of the impacts of NorthernStar’s Bankruptcy and the Palomar Pipeline. Olivia Schmidt, Community Organizer for the Anti-LNG Coalition and an invited guest of a shareholder in the meeting, stood and began asking questions.

“How is it possible that the $17 Million owed by NorthernStar will be repaid when we see from the bankruptcy filings that there are less than $1 Million in assets to liquidate to close that gap?” Schmidt continued to press on the issue, raising concerns about additional ambiguities in the stated plans of the company. “You say that you will continue permitting for the entire Palomar Pipeline despite the absence of the Bradwood Landing LNG terminal; does that mean that your pipeline will be re-routed to connect to the proposed Oregon LNG terminal?”

When Kantor gave Schmidt the option of either silencing herself and sitting down or leaving the room she chose to depart the meeting stating “I can only listen to so much dishonesty from this company and I’ve had my fill. There are 250 protestors outside this meeting demanding the cancelation of Palomar Pipeline because of the harm it will cause to Oregon families, our economy and Mt. Hood. You as shareholders are responsible for holding this company accountable.” She left the meeting willingly, but was escorted by 5 security personnel.

Farmers, foresters, fishers, environmentalists, students, and gas ratepayers have created a broad  NO LNG movement in Oregon. Now, we are calling out to anyone who wants to protect Oregon’s farms, forests and clean energy future to join us and push back on the corporate gas industry.

NW Natural cannot dictate our future. They have spent millions on creating a “green” and sustainable image, they have created a huge and powerful gas lobby in our state by sitting on government panels and offering large campaign contributions, and they have abused landowners threatened by their pipeline. Now, we will stand up as an organized, broad coalition and say no to corporate abuse of power!

Join the celebration and Rally at the NW Natural Shareholder Meeting on May 27th in Portland to become part of this diverse and passionate movement against LNG!

Rally at NW Natural Shareholder Meeting

Thursday, May 27th 1PM – 4PM

Oregon Convention Center

777 NE MLK BLVD, Portland

After a five-yearlong grassroots organizing push by a broad coalition, NorthernStar, the Texas-based company proposing the Bradwood LNG terminal on Columbia River, has indefinitely suspended development of the LNG terminal and filed for bankruptcy. This is wonderful news for anyone in the region concerned with climate change, protecting forests, and preserving rural farmland. Its great news for local communities threatened with eminent domain and huge victory for the people vs. Big Energy.

But, it’s not over yet. There are still two LNG terminals proposed in Oregon (On the Columbia River and in Coos Bay) as well as hundreds of miles of pipelines. Now, the No LNG coalition is turning its attention toward pressuring NW Natural to completely cancel the Palomar pipeline, which still threatens to clearcut through 47-miles of Mt. Hood National Forest, and brings heavy construction to 300 rivers and streams and 1500 landowners.

Are you committed to stopping new fossil fuel development? Please join over 30 organizations for a celebration and Rally at NW Natural Shareholder Meeting at the end of this month.

We need your help to fight corporate power and hold NW Natural accountable to stop the Palomar pipeline.

Can’t make it to the rally? No Problem, click here to sign up for other volunteer opportunities.

This rally is supported by: Columbia Riverkeeper, Bark, Oregon Sierra Club, Hey NW Natural campaign, Friends of Living Oregon Waters, Pacific Environment, Oregon Citizens Against the Pipeline, Oregon Wild, Sierra Student Coalition, Cascadia Rising Tide, Cascade Climate Network, Northwest Property Rights Coalition, Students Against LNG, University of Oregon Climate Justice League, Greenfield at Linfield College, Real Wealth of Portland, Alliance for Democracy, Wahkiakum Friends of the River, Columbia Pacific Common Sense, Landowners and Citizens for a Safe Community, Economic Justice Action Group of the First Unitarian Church, and more.

Brett VandenHeuvel, executive director of Columbia Riverkeeper, explained the significance of the groups’ victory over the Bradwood LNG project. “LNG has no place in Oregon.  This is a tremendous victory for family farmers, fisherman, and Columbia River salmon.  This is proof that Oregonians will fight to protect our resources and our livelihoods.”

According to a NW Natural statement released this morning, “NW Natural learned late yesterday that NorthernStar Natural Gas, the company developing the Bradwood Landing liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal along the Columbia River, has decided to suspend work on their project, and they notified us that they intend to file for bankruptcy protection. Palomar Gas Holdings, of which NW Natural is a fifty percent owner, is evaluating the impact of NorthernStar’s decision on the development of the west segment of the Palomar project.“

Farmers threatened by the proposed LNG pipelines rejoiced after hearing that Bradwood LNG had suspended its project. “Thousands of us have been living under a cloud of having our farms condemned for these wrong-headed LNG schemes. We look forward to being able to work our lands without interference from LNG speculators,” said Steve Wick, a Yamhill County filbert grower.

Now, more than ever we can tell NW Natural to follow the lead of Bradwood LNG on this decision, and cancel the Palomar pipeline. It is time to mobilize!

Join the Rally at the NW Natural Shareholder Meeting on May 27 to send a clear and LOUD message to the company: PALOMAR: BAD FOR BUSINESS, BAD FOR OREGON!!!

RSVP now to attend the Rally at the NW Natural Shareholder Meeting by clicking here.

Dear NW Natural,

I am closing my account and shutting off NW Natural gas to my house in opposition to the proposed LNG pipeline. This pipeline would destroy private farmland, cut a huge swath of the Mt. Hood National Forest, and be potentially hazardous to the rivers and fish. For environmental and safety issues, I urge the company to drop this proposed project. I don’t want to support any company that is not in line with my values. When the Palomar pipeline has been cancelled, I will consider turning the gas back on.

Sincerely,

Kima Garrison

Last week Kima Garrison, a Portland-area volunteer with the No LNG campaign, took a bold action and turned off her NW Natural gas in protest of the Palomar Pipeline. She is refusing to give any money to a company so out of line with her values of smart land use and environmental protection.

Kima understands that shutting off gas in protest may not be the right action for many people. There are complexities involved if you use gas for hot water or cooking for example. Kima is hoping that her action will inspire others to take action against NW Natural’s profit-driven pipeline in whatever way works for you.

Will you take a bold stance against the pipeline this month? Join hundreds of other Oregonians taking action and attend the Rally at the NW Natural Shareholders Meeting. And, be sure to sign up to volunteer for the Hey NW Natural campaign this month.

This leaves NW Natural in the odd position of pushing the Palomar pipeline with no gas source. The company is clearly gambling with the increasingly unlikely LNG hook up, as statewide opposition to LNG continues to successfully push back development.

NW Natural’s Palomar project relies on a Columbia River LNG terminal

According to NW Natural’s annual report,

“The east segment would extend approximately 111 miles west from an interconnection with GTN’s existing interstate transmission mainline near Maupin, Oregon to an interconnection with NW Natural’s gas distribution system near Molalla, Oregon.  The west segment would then extend approximately 106 miles further west to other potential additional interconnections including a possible connection to one of the two liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals proposed to be built on the Columbia River.”

“An inability to obtain the necessary state permits, or arrange for sufficient supplier commitments could impact the viability of an LNG terminal on the Columbia river and may mean that we would not proceed with the western portion of Palomar.One or more of these events may mean that our equity investments could become impaired and such impairment could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.” NW Natural 10-K, 2/26/2010

Its time NW Natural give up on Palomar. Lets help them make that decision by attending their annual Shareholders Meeting on May 27th. Not a shareholder? You are still invited to join hundreds of other NW Natural ratepayers and landowners threatened by the company’s pipeline plans.

Join us in urging the company to do the right thing: Stomp the Pipe Plans at the Rally at NW Natural’s Shareholder Meeting on May 27th, 2010.

Take action: Click here to tell NW Natural “Global injustice is not a fair trade for their profit!”

LNG in the Peruvian Amazon, by Nick Engelfried.

When a violent police crackdown on non-violent indigenous rights activists in Peru left around 100 people dead, the human rights abuses of government-backed corporate ventures in the Amazon exploded into the concsiousness of the international community.  Many factors – most notably implementation of the US-Peru Free Trade Agreement – contributed to the impasse which prompted 30,000 indigenous Peruvians to take non-violent direct action against seizure of their traditional lands for private profit.  Yet when Peruvian police fired on protesters outside the city of Bagua, it was in some ways the predictable result of an economic model which has long shunted human rights and environmental concerns to the side while paving the way for industrial projects like LNG.

While the “Bagua massacre” cannot be linked directly to the LNG industry, what’s clear is that pro-industry policies in Peru have consistently put the needs of local people in the backseat while extracting the natural wealth of the Amazon for private gain.  Oil, timber, and gas companies have all taken their toll on the Peruvian Amazon and its inhabitants, yet the situation is poised to get even worse.  If companies like Northwest Natural get their way, LNG from the Peruvian Amazon could soon be headed by tanker straight for the Oregon coast – the fruit of industrial practices that are systematically destroying one of the most biologically and culturally diverse areas on the globe.

Gas at the Center of Amazon Destruction

The Camisea Gas Project in the southeastern Peruvian Amazon straddles some of the most biodiverse rainforest on the planet, including large sections of a reserve supposed to protect largely uncontacted indigenous tribes.  Referred to by the environmental group Amazon Watch as “arguably the most damaging project in the Amazon Basin,” Camisea Gas is an extraction endeavor designed to pump gas from the Amazon through two massive pipelines that connect to the Peruvian coast.  Despite assurances during the project’s construction that it would be built and operated in the most responsible manner possible, Camisea’s history has been rife with environmental and safety violations, with the original pipeline rupturing five times and undergoing three major spills during the first 18 months of operation alone.

One of Camisea’s pipelines is designed to deliver gas to the coast so it can be converted to LNG, and shipped to energy markets in North America.  According to Business Monitor Online, the companies controlling the gas project hope to find a market for Peruvian LNG in the west coast of the United States.  If Oregon’s Bradwood Landing LNG Terminal and the connecting Palomar Pipeline are built, it would open the doors of the US market to Peruvian LNG, putting still further pressure on the Amazon and its inhabitants.

Foreign Companies Benefit While Locals Suffer

Just as LNG projects in Oregon will largely benefit out-of-state companies and energy speculators, the Camisea Gas Project is owned mainly by transnational corporations with little or no interest in Peru’s environment and local economy.  Major investors Camisea include European, Japanese, and South Korean corporations as well as Dallas-based Hunt Oil – a company with ties to Halliburton and the former Bush administration.  Peru LNG, the LNG export facility connected with Camisea, is the biggest direct foreign investment project in the history of Peru.  Half of the export operation is owned by Hunt Oil, the rest split between South Korean, Japanese, and Spanish companies.

Meanwhile local communities are suffering the effects of Camisea’s presence.  For centuries the Machiguenga people have lived along the Urubumba and Camisea Rivers in southeast Peru, living by hunting and fishing in the forests that are now being destroyed by the Camisea Gas Project.  Since the gas industry’s arrival in the area, the Machiguenga have suffered from illness and malnutrition caused in part by Camisea’s destruction of their natural heritage.

The Camisea Project has also broken Peruvian law by forcibly contacting Amazonian tribes like the Nahua which are attempting to live traditional lifestyles in voluntary isolation from the outside world.  Intrusion into indigenous lands is not only disrespectful of the choice these peoples have made to live a traditional lifestyle, but carries a danger that the Nahua and others will be exposed to deadly disease.

Importing LNG in Oregon Will Put Further Pressure on the Amazon

The extraction-based economy ravaging the Peruvian Amazon thrives on transferring the natural resources of Peru’s forests to foreign markets – a bad deal for both the environment and Peru’s indigenous and rural communities.  Today the main foreign market for Peruvian LNG is Mexico, and there are no LNG import facilities on the western coast of the United States.  But the Palomar Pipeline, backed by Northwest Natural, is a critical piece in a proposed network of LNG pipelines and import terminals which would throw open the doors of the US market to LNG from Peru and other countries in western South America.

The people of Peru are already well aware of the impact extractive industries are having on their country’s forests, and the way major energy companies are invading indigenous lands.  Since the Bagua massacre of last year, the protests against foreign companies that pilage the Amazon has only grown louder with mass demonstrations in Lima, Arequipa, Iquitos, and other Peruvian cities.  Yet pro-industry policies like the US-Peru Free Trade Agreement will make it difficult to save Peru’s natural forests and biological riches without an international push to end destructive investment practices.

By rejecting LNG in this state, Oregon is perfectly positioned to tip the balance away from increased destruction in the Peruvian Amazon.  California has already shut the door on LNG off its coasts, meaning the Pacific Northwest is the LNG industry’s last hope of penetrating the western US market.  Oregon has a chance to say no to projects like Northwest Natural’s Palomar Pipeline.  In so doing, we can stop a proposal that’s bad for Oregon, and bad for Peru as well.

Wherever you are, you can take action.

Click here to tell NW Natural “Global injustice is not a fair trade for their profit!”

Tell your friends in Oregon what’s up: Click here to make this movement the most effective, share this article with a friend on the West coast.

The Citizens’ Utility Board is a consumer protection organization founded by voters in 1984 through a ballot initiative. CUB has saved consumers over $3.9 billion and won important policy victories that have protected consumer privacy, the environment (particularly through our work on global warming issues) and low-income Oregonians. After following the LNG issue for years, they have released this statement of opposition:

CUB is opposed to the development of these terminals for numerous reasons. At present, there is no market need to warrant the construction of these terminals. Further, with additional investment, these terminals could be used to send domestic natural gas to the high-priced global LNG market. This international connection would therefore not serve any local energy needs, yet could significantly drive up natural gas prices. The terminals would also bring with them serious environmental dangers, while the energy benefits of the facilities would most likely go to residents of other states or foreign nations.

To read more about their position, including why LNG is a bad investment, visit their post here: http://oregoncub.org/archives/2010/03/all_new_energy.php

Part of an action by Pacific University, Cascade Climate Network