Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Early Morning Open Forum

Judiciary Chairman Mike Lawlor will be liveblogging tonight on My Left Nutmeg. SpazeBoy has his press conference from yesterday in four parts.

CT Bob has an interview with Rosa DeLauro.

Opponents of Broadwater speak out - and it looks like the New York Department of State has misgivings.

An interesting challenge to the constitutionality of the Death Penalty is brewing in Hartford.

Rabid Raccoons? Yes, rabid raccoons.

State Dems look to change bonding rules to end Governor's monopoly.

An economics Professor takes George Will's latest Courant column to task.

What else is going on?

6 comments:

wtfdnucsubsailor said...

Regarding the Broadwater hearing - In many ways, it is a shame that the statements of the politicians took over half the hearing so that many citizens who came to speak, had left by the time their name was called to speak. I have to hand it to the folks who favor Broadwater - They came early so they would be first in line to speak after the politicians, who were lined up against the proposal. There are still many questions about the feasability of this project and whether it is the best solution for a supply of natural gas in New York and New England. The EIS needs more work to answer those questions.

GMR said...

If Broadwater isn't the solution, what is? Would you prefer for there to be a LNG terminal in Bridgeport on land? Or in Branford, or somewhere on Long Island? I've never heard anyone who is opposed to Broadwater say where they would rather have an LNG terminal.

Electricity in the United States is generated through a variety of methods. There's nuclear, oil, natural gas, hydropower, coal and a few windmills.

If we decide that LNG won't work for environmental reasons (and let's face it: even through natural gas burns cleanly, you got to have a way to get the stuff to the power plant), will coal be better? I don't think Connecticut has enough rapidly flowing rivers to make Hydropower an option. Nuclear is unrealistic to add capacity. So oil fired plants?

Gabe said...

GMR - You have a great point. My personal feeling is that the middle of the sound is the absolute worst possible place to put a LNG terminal, but there really aren't any good options.

That said, looking at Broadwater individually isn't very helpful - we have to change our entire energy outlook - consumption as well as where the energy comes from...

GMR said...

The economics professor cites the Card and Krueger study on NJ minimum wage. That study is reportedly Highly flawed

wtfdnucsubsailor said...

I think the flaw is that FERC is looking at LNG Terminal proposals on a first come first served basis and it is a race to the finish line for all proposals. Instead, FERC should be looking at New England and New York as a Region and determine which solutions are best for the region (I believe that the experts say two additional terminals will be sufficient for the thirty year predicted life span of Natural GAs as a major energy source. It could be that the best solution for the region is an increase in the capacity of some of the pipelines to take advantage of the already approved sites in Canada. I don't know the answer to that question, but if the need for energy is not looked at as a regional solution, we will have random, sprawl like development of resources. Whereever the LNG terminal(s) is/are sited, there will be an expense for emergency procedures and personnel to carry out those procedures. The terminal operator should be required to carry that expense. It is not an easy solution to solve this problem.

Anonymous said...

Certain Stratford Town Council members should act with emotional restraint. Please be professional. Your reputation and the reputation of the Town is at stake. Stop the drama and put the Town first. If
the shoe fits the wear it.