Lawyers, Not TreeHuggers

We've talked about LNG vs Coal and Conservation. Interstate, underwater territorial conflicts, however, were not one of the tradeoffs we had in mind when we summed up all under the title, Real Treehuggers Support Adding LNG Terminals.

"The U.S. Supreme Court should reject New Jersey's attempts to carve away a chunk of Delaware [bottom center of picture] to benefit energy giant BP's plans for a liquefied natural gas import pier on the Delaware River, attorneys for Delaware argued in an interstate boundary dispute document made public Monday."

"In a final written brief before the high court hears oral arguments, Delaware's lawyers argued that New Jersey claimed an exclusive right to land under the Delaware River only after BP "convinced them to reverse New Jersey's decades-long policy of cooperation" on boundary-straddling projects along the Delaware River."

"...The company wants to build a large terminal to receive two to three huge LNG import ships on land in Logan Township, across from Claymont, that straddles the Delaware-New Jersey border. Delaware, however, ruled in early 2005 that the pier would violate its Coastal Zone Act ban on new bulk-delivery terminals or heavy industries in or alongside the waterway."

"BP's proposed terminal would send out enough natural gas to meet the daily energy needs of about 5 million homes. Each arriving ship could carry more than three times that amount in the form of super-chilled, liquid fuel."

Offshore wind farms by Delaware are nice; but they won't do much good while coal remains the single cost effective solution. This is what happens from watching too much local news: fear of fire rules.

Via::Delaware Online, Image credit::Delaware Online, via

Lawyers, Not TreeHuggers
"The U.S. Supreme