Offshore gas plants get 2d look

TOMS RIVER, N.J. - With energy prices sky high, proposals to store or transfer liquefied natural gas off the New Jersey coast are getting a serious look. But environmental and fishing groups say the idea is wrong for a state dependent on tourism.

Three projects have been proposed for the ocean off Monmouth County, out of sight of the shore:

The Atlantic Sea Island Group wants to build a 63-acre artificial island nearly 20 miles off Sandy Hook for a liquefied natural gas port called Safe Harbor Energy.

A group called Liberty Natural Gas wants to build a pipeline tethered to buoys 15 miles off Asbury Park. Ships would connect to the pipeline and empty their gas, which would be carried under the ocean floor to the mainland.

ExxonMobil has proposed a floating gas terminal called BlueOcean Energy about 20 miles off Manasquan.

Also, BP had proposed a liquefied natural gas receiving pier on the Delaware River in Logan Township, Gloucester County, though a court recently ruled that Delaware could block the plan.

At a public hearing on the proposals yesterday before state Senate and Assembly committees, officials of two companies touted their projects as essential to increasing the supply of natural gas in the region.

Mark Schanzer, BlueOcean's president, said his company's proposed facility could deliver about 1.2 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day, enough to heat 5 million homes.

"The region needs access to reliable supplies of natural gas," he said.

He said BlueOcean would generate billions of dollars in economic activity and $150 million in tax revenue and would create 300 jobs.

Roger Whelan, president of Liberty Natural Gas, said his facility could provide enough gas at peak capacity to heat 11 million homes per day.

"We will provide a clean, safe, effective solution to New Jersey's energy needs," he said. "This is proven, safe technology."

Environmental and fishing groups disagreed, saying New Jersey should concentrate on renewable energy sources and on using energy more efficiently instead of importing natural gas, which the terminals would do.

"Liquefied natural gas is foreign, and it's expensive," said Cindy Zipf, executive director of Clean Ocean Action. "It's also not clean."

Zipf said underwater pipelines would kill sea creatures and harm fishing grounds - a point echoed by James Lovegren of the Fishermen's Dock Cooperative in Point Pleasant Beach.

"Our dock does $6 million to $10 million a year in seafood landings," he said. "Each of these terminals would be located in prime fishing grounds. That's where the fish are, and that's where we fish. It would put us out of business."

He and other opponents of the proposals said existing natural gas terminals on the East Coast were operating far below capacity, and he questioned the economic sense of building more.