Natural Gas Terminals

An Australian company announced Thursday it had suspended its plan to build a controversial offshore liquid natural gas terminal 27 miles from Los Angeles International Airport, citing the downturn in the world economy. A spokeswoman for Woodside Natural Gas said the company planned to bring the project back when conditions changed. "Woodside's in this for the long haul," said Laura Doll, the company's vice president for public and governmental affairs.

The company backing a $750-million natural gas terminal in Long Beach Harbor filed a lawsuit Thursday seeking to revive its project after officials in that city terminated it last month. Sound Energy Solutions, a partnership of ConocoPhillips and Mitsubishi Corp., filed a writ of mandate in Los Angeles County Superior Court that seeks an order to compel the Long Beach Harbor Board of Commissioners to direct its staff to complete an environmental impact report on the project.

A small energy company is the latest to propose a liquefied natural gas terminal in Southern California, detailing a plan Wednesday for two floating platforms about 10 miles southwest of Huntington Beach. As envisioned by Esperanza Energy, a subsidiary of Tidelands Oil and Gas Corp. of San Antonio, the terminals would be located in 1,100 feet of water, among a set of existing oil platforms.

A comprehensive study released Friday on a natural gas processing plant that would be built in the ocean about 20 miles from Malibu concludes that the project poses substantial environmental and safety concerns for the California coast. BHP Billiton, one of the largest energy companies in the world, wants its $800-million terminal to become the portal through which California receives natural gas from Australia.

The chairman of an Assembly committee that heavily influences California's energy policy announced Saturday that he now opposes construction of an $800-million natural gas processing plant in the ocean about 20 miles off Malibu. Assemblyman Lloyd Levine (D-Van Nuys) said he would fight a terminal proposed by BHP Billiton, one of the largest energy companies in the world, because "it's an environmental problem for the coast."

Citing safety and pollution concerns, most of the 250 people who turned out Wednesday night for a public hearing in Oxnard urged denial of a proposed $800-million liquefied natural gas terminal that would be moored off the Ventura County coast. "It's a dirty and dangerous floating LNG factory," said Assemblyman Pedro Nava (D-Santa Barbara), whose district includes Oxnard, just before the hearing. "It should not go forward."

In another blow to a huge natural gas terminal proposed off Southern California, a state commission rejected the project Thursday after concluding that it posed an unacceptable risk to the coast between Malibu and Ventura. The California Coastal Commission unanimously decided that the project failed to meet rigorous coastal protection standards.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Friday vetoed a proposal to build a terminal for importing liquefied natural gas 20 miles off the coast of Malibu, but he kept the door open for future LNG projects if they are environmentally sensitive. "California needs to diversify fuel sources for California consumers with cleaner alternatives such as LNG," the governor said.

A catastrophic release of liquefied natural gas from a terminal proposed off the Ventura County coast could spread a powerful and spectacular fireball over several miles, but pose no threat on land because the facility would be at least 14 miles offshore, a new study shows. The gas-processing plant, one of four proposed for Southern California, would convert fuel shipped from across the Pacific Ocean for use in Los Angeles-area factories and power plants.

The developer of a proposed $700-million liquefied natural gas terminal at the Port of Long Beach is pushing to extend its contract to retain exclusive rights to build the processing plant at the harbor. An agreement granting Sound Energy Solutions, a partnership of Mitsubishi and ConocoPhillips, the rights to build the terminal on a 25-acre harbor site is set to expire Thursday.