Despite an earlier resolution against the Jordan Cove LNG project the Central Committee of the Coos County Democrats are set to consider a competing resolution proposed by “bird flipper” and labor union representative, Bob Westerman at tomorrow night’s meeting.
Read the IBEW resolution in full Resolution jordan cove signed adopted-1
There are several factual flaws within the resolution’s WHEREAS assumptions, like actual net jobs created and more, and I will try to update this post with some specifics before the meeting tomorrow at 7 p.m. at the Labor Hall building – 3427 Ash Street in North Bend, OR (corner of Ash St and Newmark St, across from Kentucky Fried Chicken).
UPDATE Contributed by Wim de Vriend
WHEREAS, the Jordan Cove terminal and the Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline project will create an average of 1,750 construction jobs over 42 months (with peak manpower being 3,400 construction jobs) under a signed Project Labor Agreement;
I think this is all they are interested in. Sure, it would be a boost, but a very temporary one. (Keep in mind, my business would benefit too). But all that would be followed by a serious economic hangover.
WHEREAS, the permanent employment at the Jordan Cove terminal and the Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline will include 99 direct jobs, 51 indirect jobs paid by Jordan Cove (Sheriff’s deputies, firefighters, tugboat crews and emergency planners), 404 other indirect jobs and 182 induced jobs for a total of 736 total family-wage jobs in Southwest Oregon;
First of all, this acknowledges that the “99 direct jobs” include jobs managing the pipeline. Most of those would not be based in Coos Bay because it’s a 234-mile pipeline. That does not leave a lot of “direct jobs” in Coos Bay for such an expensive installation. And, of course, there is no reckoning of the Coos Bay jobs that will be lost due to the LNG plant’s presence. For example, anybody who thinks that the frequent imposition of a “safety zone” in the bay won’t have an effect on fishing or recreation should think again. Without notice, fishermen won’t be able to travel in or out of the bay, and tourists who come to town will see their engagement canceled, also without notice. That is bound to make us lose jobs, not gain them. The other factor that will make us lose jobs is FEAR. It’s as much of a pollutant as the odorous emanations of a pulp mill, but worse. With that plant there, even fewer people will decide to settle in Coos Bay, and settle in Florence or Bandon or Brookings instead, as they have been doing. I know that the plant will be built to high specifications, but with a 40% chance of having a major earthquake and tsunami here, we could have a situation worse than the one in Japan. Over there they only had a meltdown. Here the entire area could burn up.
WHEREAS, the Jordan Cove terminal and the Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline will generate much needed tax revenue to Coos, Douglas, Jackson and Klamath counties – $32 million a year in ad valorem taxes or payments in lieu of taxes for the first three years, and $42 million to $52 million a year thereafter;
Not quite. The plant and the power station will be exempt from property taxes for the first 3 to 5 years due to being located in the Enterprise Zone. After that they will begin paying taxes, but that revenue will go to the Port which controls the Urban Renewal District these facilities are located in. And the Port may make all kinds of promises about what they will do with that money, they won’t be held to them. And they have a huge history of urinating that UR money away.
WHEREAS, the Jordan Cove terminal and the Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline will enhance the Port of Coos Bay and Southern Oregon’s infrastructure, helping the economically depressed region attract new businesses and create new jobs;
Nonsense. The 1-foot pipeline was sold to the taxpayers with the promise of 2,900 new jobs it would attract. Where are the jobs?
WHEREAS, natural gas can be exported from the Pacific Northwest without having a measurable impact on domestic natural gas prices, due in part to a surplus supply of natural gas in the Western part of North America and a surplus of natural gas pipeline infrastructure in the region;
Actually, gas and oil experts are starting to claim that the productive capacity of the fracked wells has been way overstated by stock manipulators. Instead of a 100-year supply they’re talking about only 10 or 15. And if we have “a surplus of natural gas pipeline infrastructure in the region,” why do we need to build another pipeline?
WHEREAS, electric utilities in Alaska are seeking a West Coast LNG terminal from which to purchase natural gas due to insufficient natural gas infrastructure in certain parts of that State;
Now that’s weird. For many years there’s been an LNG export plant, the only one in all of the US, in Kenai, Alaska.
With haughty condescension and faulty comprehension, Bob M tries to set me straight, while falling flat on his own face. In my criticism of the Democrats’ “Resolution” I disputed six of its WHEREAS clauses. Completely ignoring five of them he rants about just one, after a cheap putdown (you’re just a restaurant guy! What do you know!) But all he proves is that he can’t understand what he reads: “let me dismiss your claim,” he writes, “that natural gas reserves will run out in 10-15 years and that the 100 year claim is somehow conjured up stock market manipulators.”
But Bob M has erected a straw man. I did NOT “claim” that we’d run out of natural gas in 10-15 years. Instead I wrote that: “. . . gas and oil experts are starting to claim that the productive capacity of the fracked wells has been way overstated by stock manipulators. Instead of a 100-year supply they’re talking about only 10 or 15.” Bob M challenges me to provide references, so here they are. One lengthy article by an oil and gas expert: “The fracked-up USA shale-gas bubble,” http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/03/13/the-fracked-up-usa-shale-gas-bubble/
And in the New York Times: “Insiders sound an Alarm About Natural Gas Rush.” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/us/26gas.html?_r=5&scp=1&sq=Insiders%20Sound%20an%20Alarm&st=cse&
The NYT article provides a link to a bunch of leaked industry emails in which: “ . . . energy executives, industry lawyers, state geologists and market analysts voice skepticism about lofty forecasts and question whether companies are intentionally, and even illegally, overstating the productivity of their wells and the size of their reserves.” The implication is that the real goal of those touting fracked gas is to quickly sell their drilling rights and their stock, and get out before the collapse. There is nothing new under the sun.
No, I do not claim to be an oil and gas expert; that’s why I cite them. But I have studied and written about economic matters for twenty years, and the Coos Bay area has allowed itself to be victimized by many, many “bubbles” before. I referred to those popular manias in a recent interview. It’s in the nature of economic bubbles to take time to be identified for what they are; remember the 2008 housing bubble and past stock market bubbles. But when, finally, public opinion shifts, the dam breaks, and it’s not pretty. A lot of money is flushed away, money that was spent on no more than high hopes.
Back in the late seventies, the Port of Coos Bay wasted millions on a useless dock and a couple of fish plants because they were convinced the boom in fishing of those days would last forever. It collapsed; it was a bubble. When they offered Canasia Coal $150 million in tax-exempt bonds in 1980 to build a coal export facility, they were also responding to a bubble. That bubble was caused by a lot of vapid talk about coal replacing oil, due to a rise in oil prices, and it was the same bubble that caused the Port to build a never-used barge slip for oil equipment fabricators on the North Spit, in 1985. In 1990, the Port wasted millions on water studies for a pulp mill that had no chance of being built. Another bubble; the domestic pulp industry had peaked and was already in decline; today is a mere shadow of its former self.
Seriously, I’d love to be convinced that the fracked gas boom is NOT a bubble; we’d be much better off that way. But experience counts for something, and I wouldn’t rule it out.
Finally, Bob’s faith in the infallibility of government agencies and reports strikes me as naïve. The government is run by people who know no more than the average citizen, and they tend to be less careful than the average citizen because they’re not spending their own money. And where does the government get those figures about our gas supplies? Right, from the gas companies and the drillers who are thinking of unloading their “reserves” and their shares. Like his fellow travelers at B.S. Oregon and similar organizations, Bob nurtures and oversized faith in government. And that’s how Coos County got into its current fix in the first place.
Thanks Bob M. You must support the position of Adolf Hitler who said “What good fortune for governments that people do not think.” Wim is a thinker. I’ll read EIA as soon as I complete my government web site Benghazi reading
I would like to offer just a word of caution to bob m. While I am not saying that information provided by the US Department of Energy/ Energy Information Administration is “not to be trusted” in its entirety, I will state that it deserves to be treated with a significant degree of skepticism. You see, the top 536 positions within the Department of Energy are filled by political appointees, which includes the top 13 positions in the Energy Information Administration.
The unfortunate reality in Washington DC is that a revolving door exists whereby persons working in an industry being regulated by a government agency freely move, via political appointment, into the regulatory agency itself and then back again. There is no requirement that political appointees be objective and un-biased nor technically qualified for the position they are assigned to – political compatibility is the main consideration.
Ever wonder why confidence in federal agencies is at an all-time low? Can one of the main reasons be that the top 8049 positions within the federal bureaucracy are filled by political appointees? Just Google “The Plum Book – 2012 Edition” and you will be able to see all positions listed by agency and job title.
Wim: For someone who owns and runs the Blue Heron Bistro in Coos Bay, you sure seem to know a lot about LNG?? Could it be that you use natural gas to cook? Is that what makes you such an expert? If you are going to put out patently false statements such as the many you make in your ranting then all you will achieve is nothing more than to look foolish and make yourself an easy target for rebuttal.
For example, let me dismiss your claim that natural gas reserves will run out in 10-15 years and that the 100 year claim is somehow conjured up stock market manipulators. If you, or any open minded readers of this blog go to http://www.eia.gov/analysis/projection-data.cfm#annualproj and select report A13 in pdf format, you will clearly see natural gas supplies increasing thru 2040 at an annualized rate of 0.6%. Numerous other reports at http://www.eia.gov speak of increasing production of both gas and oil for the foreseeable future. The only uncertainty you will find in these reports is that the area remaining to be explored for shale gas and oil is so big that estimates of the unproven reserves are difficult to make but the undeniable truth is that the total supply of proven reserves plus even a reasonable estimate of unproven reserves is huge and a game changer for the US energy industry. None of this factual information suggests we will fall off a cliff in 10-15 years now does it?
I guess you could claim that the US governments Energy Information Administration’s data is somehow bogus or not to be trusted. Maybe you could even go down the conspiracy theory path? If you have a better scientific and referenced source of information then put it out there. Otherwise stick to what you know and hope customers continue to frequent your business.
With the way the industry is working up legislators to promote natural gas powered 18 wheelers I’m surprised the Port isn’t trying to turn our natural port into the next Detroit too. An interesting side note is that the economically feasible natural gas supply in the US will run out a lot faster than our Oregon virgin forests did.
So, was that the purpose of the secret meeting. Get all the troops on board. Drink the koolaid and assimilate. Interesting -sounds like a sure thing with this clown and McKelvey involved with the DCC.
So tell us, Westerman, what is the purpose of the resolution; for whose benefit is it? Is the real reason to take this to FERC under the guise that the majority of Coos Bay supports this idiocy?
I too am curious why the job numbers keep growing. Do your job numbers include the impact to the fisherman? to the airport? to those who rely on the tourist/recreation crowd? For once, I’d like to see some data based on fact.
Yo! Bird Flipper. I’m a supporter of business that wants to be here. Business that wants to be here is unwelcome elsewhere.
WHAT A CROCK OF CRAP that you have tried to place before the uneducated of the area. Your resolution appears to have been written by a first year law student drop out. I note that:
your preamble make no reference to Jordan Cove
the 1938 Act does not mandate anything of an organization formed in 1977
where’s the support for your $7.5 billion number investment?
why not mandate use of the current pipeline with 50 million cubic feet of daily capability?
curious that the number of jobs grows as Jody McCaffree makes progress
the direct jobs number has doubled in past years but the terminal has not grown. Why?
says who on the tax collection matter?
how will a LNG factory, pipelines and piping ENHANCE the community?
hasn’t there been a LNG export terminal in Alaska for many years?
And, so much more.
Sue