Councilor Steven C. Waluk is hoping the City Council will be once again come out against a proposal that would bring LNG through Narragansett Bay.
NEWPORT, R.I. – As opposition to a proposal by Weaver’s Cove Energy to construct a liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal in the middle of Mount Hope Bay mounts, one local official wants Newport to once again weigh in on the controversial issue.
In a resolution to be considered at the City Council’s Dec. 9 meeting, Councilor Steven C. Waluk writes “this proposal could have significant negative economic and environmental impacts on the east bay region, including periodic bans on boating along the East Passage, temporary closures of the Pell and Mount Hope Bridges and extensive dredging causing destruction of fish habitats in Mount Hope Bay.”
If approved, it wouldn’t be the first time the city has voiced its opposition to an LNG development. Similar resolutions were also passed during the debate over plans to locate on-shore offloading facilities in Providence and Fall River.
However, ever since the Mount Hope Bay facility picked up a critical endorsement from the U.S. Coast Guard, public resistance to the project is being urged as increasingly important, according to opponents.
Waluk, who served as mayor from 2006-2008, has been a vocal opponent of bringing LNG tankers into Narragansett Bay since being elected to the council in 2001.
In an email to Newport Now, he described Narragansett Bay as “our most precious natural and economic resource.”
He went on to say that the transit of LNG tankers through the East Passage will have “a serious negative impact on many facets of the maritime industry and recreational boating. Anything that poses a threat to these significant parts of Newport’s fabric must be opposed.”
His sentiments coincide with the launch of an aggressive anti-LNG campaign by Save the Bay, which like Waluk, point to the potentially devastating environmental consequences for the bay should the project be approved.
“Save the Bay is to be applauded for leading the fight against the hazard of LNG tankers in Narragansett Bay,” Waluk said. “My hope is that Newport continues our strong opposition and passes my resolution. Hopefully we will be the first of many communities and organizations that go on record against this latest proposal.”
Loading ...
Newport, RI
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
Mr. Waluk;
So, with a state and city where unemployment is at historical levels, tell the taxpayers that you can make up the deficit with t-shirt shops and Panera Bread versus high paying wages which provides energy assets to homeowners and businesses at low risk levels…it’s a new world and new economy…get your head out of the 18th century…
Of course, when the ships are to pass under the bridge, visitors won’t even be able to get to the Panera and t-shirt shops. In fact, they won’t even be able to get to Newport until after a lengthy wait. Twenty years ago, a tanker (the Greek-flagged World Prodigy) grounded in Narragansett Bay and spilled, according to the New York Times report, 1 million gallons of No. 2 fuel oil over 50 square mile of Narragansett Bay. Do we want to face that risk once more? I say no.
To the economy major above,
Please help me understand what is best for Newport County’s economic interest. I’m pretty sure Newport’s economic engine would be based on the tourist dollar. I understand that there is no way to forecast what the detriment of LNG would be on tourism but even someone from the new world would acknowledge that any LNG presence would not be beneficial to Newport’s tourism. So Mr. Waluk is voicing an opinion based on what is best for Newport. Isn’t that supposed to be his perspective? Is your agenda to support a miniature economic bump at the expense of Newport or are you a character assassin?