Read Malibu City Hall's Staff Report & Their City Council's Resolution Opposing Offshore LNG FacilityRESOLUTION NO. 04-32
(May 27, 2004) -- LBReport.com posts below a link to the Malibu City Hall staff report and the text of a Malibu City Council resolution opposing an offshore Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) facility proposed (by two separate firms) near Malibu off the Ventura County coast.
As passed and amended at its May 24 meeting, the Malibu City Council resolution states:
A RESOLUTION OF THE MALIBU CITY COUNCIL REAFFIRMING MALIBU
GENERAL PLANíS VISION STATEMENT AND STRONGLY OPPOSING THE TWO LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS DEEPWATER PORTS PROPOSED OFF THE COAST OF OXNARD, CALIFORNIA
The City Council of the City of Malibu does hereby find, order and resolve as follows:
SECTION 1. Recitals.
A. Many energy companies have announced plans to build a host of new terminals where large amounts of gas could be imported by tanker in liquefied form and then distributed
by pipeline to American customers.
B. Recently, several high-profile gas projects have been canceled. For example, intense
local opposition led the Calpine Corporation to withdraw plans in March 2004 for a gas
receiving terminal at Eureka in Northern California. In addition, ConocoPhillips
canceled a terminal project in Harpswell, Mexico, for the same reason. Likewise,
Marathon Oil pulled out of a project near Tijuana, Mexico, that would have supplied gas
to Southern California after the land for it was seized by the state government of Baja,
California. Finally, Exxon Mobil suspended work on a terminal near Mobile, Alabama.
C. There are many inherent risks in liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals/ports. Liquefied
Natural Gasís ability to quickly evaporate into the atmosphere results in vapor that is
flammable and detonable when mixed with the air at certain concentrations.
D. In "Against All Enemies," the recent book by Richard A. Clarke, the Bush
administration's former counterterrorism chief, Mr. Clarke wrote that Al Qaeda
operatives may have been traveling to Boston from Algeria on liquefied gas tankers
shortly after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001; "Had one of the giant tankers blown
up," Mr. Clarke wrote, "it would have wiped out downtown Boston."
E. Two companies, BHP Billiton and Crystal Energy, have proposed offshore gas terminals
close to the coast of Malibu. These proposals envision offshore facilities that would
include underwater pipelines that would come ashore underground in Ventura County.
Specifically, BHP Billiton proposes to establish a floating terminal 14 miles off the
county's southern coast. Crystal Energy seeks to convert Platform Grace, an existing
offshore oil platform 12.6 miles due west of Oxnard, to an LNG terminal. In each case,
the liquid would be converted back to gas at the facility, then shipped through pipelines
to a Southern California Gas Co. facility near Ventura.
F. According to the Vision Statement in the Malibu General Plan adopted in 1995, the
people of Malibu are committed to protecting the environment and to preserving
Malibuís unaltered natural resources. The people of Malibu are a responsible custodian
of the areaís natural resources for present and future generations. The Vision Statement
provides: Malibu is a unique land and marine environment and residential
community whose citizens have historically evidenced a commitment to sacrifice urban
and suburban conveniences in order to protect that environment and lifestyle, and to
preserve unaltered natural resources and rural characteristics. The people of Malibu
are a responsible custodian of the areaís natural resources for present and future
generations. (Emphasis added.) [LBReport.com note: The added emphasis is part of the resolution's text]
G. The proposed LNG terminal/ports can take human and marine life, leave our ocean
forever altered and destroy properties. Specifically, a large explosion and blast wave --
set off, perhaps, by an earthquake or a terrorist attack would result in the loss of human
and marine life and property.
SECTION 2. The City Council does affirm the Vision Statement in the General Plan and
will act as necessary to protect the areaís natural resources including human, marine and ocean life.
SECTION 3. In light of the foregoing considerations, the City Council has determined that
the public welfare of the City, as articulated by the principles in the General Plan Vision Statement, will now be served and advanced by strongly opposing the two proposed Cabrillo Liquefied Gas Deepwater Ports proposed by BHP Billiton and Crystal Energy off the coast of Oxnard, California.
SECTION 4. The City Council hereby directs staff to send a letter to the U.S. Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission strongly opposing above-mentioned proposed Liquefied Natural
Gas Ports by the May 28, 2004 due date and continue to monitor the development of the any
proposed Liquefied Natural Gas project and send any and all additional letters opposing such
terminals and/or ports to appropriate agencies as necessary.
SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and
enter it into the book of original resolutions.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED on May 24, 2004.
SHARON BAROVSKY, Mayor
LISA POPE, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Return To Front Page
CHRISTI HOGIN, City Attorney
To view the report on LNG matters by Malibu city staff, click City of Malibu staff report re proposed offshore Ventura County LNG facility
LBReport.com Coverage of LNG Terminal Proposed in Port of LB
Contact us: mail@LBReport.com