Call for complete assesment of Tacoma LNG project
Dr. Lisa Johnson speaks at a rally at the LNG project hearing on October 30th.
Puget Sound Energy is currently building a liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility in Tacoma on Puyallup Tribe ancestral lands despite lacking a final permit from the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency. The Puyallup Tribe is strongly opposing the project, which is currently being built adjacent to tribal land. An estimated 87 million gallons of LNG would be produced at the facility per year. The significant majority would be used as a fuel source for marine vessels, while a smaller percentage would be a diesel fuel replacement and distribution for utility customers.
We know that most “natural” gas is fracked, and building this facility locks us in to more fossil fuel infrastructure as the IPCC urgently calls us to transition to renewable energy in every sector.
In April, 2018, the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency announced that they would complete a supplemental Environmental Impact Statement analyzing greenhouse gas emissions for the project. PSCAA released their analysis on October 8th. Experts point out that their assesment misses the mark and doesn’t account for the true cost of methane leaks and climate impacts.
PSCAA is accepting comments on their review until Nov. 21st. Join us and stand with the Puyallup Tribe in calling for a more complete picture of this project’s true costs to our climate and communities. Email your commments: firstname.lastname@example.org
WPSR Talking Points: Tacoma LNG
Developed with guidance from Sierra Club, Puyallup Tribe, and STAND.earth. Coalition talking points here
Identify yourself! Are you a physician? A grandparent? A person with asthma?
Thank you for your decision to assess lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions for this project
We support the position of the Puyallup Tribe in encouraging a Supplemental EIS with more complete and accurate information.
The modeling of global warming potential for methane emissions uses a 100-year timeframe, but we know methane’s impact is most important over a 20-year timeframe. The SEIS should rely the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change analysis, which assesses methane as 86 times more potent than Carbon Dioxide over a 20-year timeframe.
The estimates of methane leaks from fracking in British Columbia are likely very conservative. Reports cited in the SEIS use industry-reported information. Recent studies tell us that wells and pipelines in B.C. may leak as much as 6 times more than previously reported.
As an organization of health professionals, we are concerned about any increase in demand for fracked gas and health impacts in B.C. communities including air pollution that exacerbates asthma, heart disease, contributes to premature births and affects the brain and nervous system. The construction of additional pipelines and increase in gas volume also raises concern. Though the fracking may occur beyond Washington’s borders, we have a duty to consider the health and well-being of others in our region.
With this newer evidence, we are concerned that this project could actually be worse for air quality than the “No Action Alternative.”
Though outside the scope of this SEIS, as health professionals we are additionally deeply concerned about safety risks posed by this facility. Flammable emissions released as a normal and daily component of LNG bunkering in close proximity to other heavy industry at the busy port pose risk of explosion.
Climate change is already impacting our health in the Puget Sound region. We see the health impacts of extreme heat events and air pollution exacerbated by climate change.
Climate change is widely believed to be the largest public health challenge of the century.
In light of the recent IPCC report, allowing further build-out of fossil fuel infrastructure and increasing demand for fracked gas is unconscionable given our climate crisis. Building this facility deepens our addiction to fossil fuels in a time when we must urgently convert to renewable energy in every sector.
With this in mind, we ask that you revise this draft Supplemental EIS with the latest science and accurate accounting of lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions.
Email your comments: email@example.com
For more information see the PSCAA website page here.