Star misrepresents LNG debate

The Ventura County Star has fallen into a trap that is way to easy--if something fits your editorial bias, accept it as fact and act upon it. They make this mistake twice in a recent article on President Bush's Liquefied Natural Gas policy:

The president's remarks, part of a broader speech about the need for a national energy strategy, brought swift criticism from environmental groups and others fighting the development of two LNG facilities off the coast of Oxnard.

Giving the federal government the final say on the location of LNG terminals would cut states out of the process and leave residents powerless to keep the facilities out of their communities, opponents argue.

"In the end, it may be that all of these potential energy sources are sited and permitted without any significant involvement from the people most affected," said Alan Sanders, conservation chairman of the Los Padres chapter of the Sierra Club. "And I think that is troubling, certainly to Californians."

Oxnard Shores attorney Tim Riley, who produced a documentary about the dangers of LNG, agreed.

"By appointing all of the FERC commissioners, President Bush has jockeyed himself into position to fast-track an LNG agenda," Riley said. "All he needs now is to convince the U.S. Senate to go along with his demolition derby of states' rights."

First of all, as regular readers will know, the FERC language Bush is referring to applies only to onshore LNG facilities in California, such as the one being proposed by Sound Energy Solutions/Mitsubishi in Long Beach. The two projects proposed in Oxnard will remain under their current jurisdictions. For example the Cabrillo Port will remain under the US Coast Guard and State Lands Commission.

Rather than do research, the paper then goes to their go-to-guy to attack LNG, Tim Riley. Getting him to say something negative about liquefied natural gas is like getting Michael Moore to protest President Bush--damn the facts, I need a quote! And Riley, the lawyer who's movie has been debunked by two internationally renowned scientists, is cited as a credible source simply because he produced a video. For such an important issue for the community and the State, you'd think the Star would seek to up its journalistic standards a notch and not give this Riley guy and ounce of ink until he can back up his bluster.