If at first you don't succeed...

In its report on developments with the proposed Cabrillo Port LNG project, the LA Times notes that coastal residents are now citing onshore air quality concerns as a reason to oppose the project.

Initially, detractors sought to derail the project by raising questions about the safety of an LNG terminal, but most now concede that, because the project would be so far offshore, it poses no safety risk. The LA Times concedes as much, calling Cabrillo Port "safer" than onshore projects.

Cabrillo Port officials responded to questions about onshore air quality impacts, noting that they are using state of the art technology and that the project will have a net postive effect on onshore air quality:

But Renee Klimczak, president of BHP Billiton LNG International, said the project would not only provide California with a reliable source of low-polluting energy, it would aid in the fight for clean air. She said the company plans to use the best-available technology so the operation does not degrade air quality on the mainland.

"There should be no onshore impact," Klimczak said. "We have committed to reduce near-shore emissions to near zero and that's going to result in a net air quality benefit."

Offshore Terminal's Onshore Effect Debated [Los Angeles Times]