“The Top Trial Lawyers in the Country”
DVD Price $39.95 plus S &
H
LNG TERRORIST TARGET
Post 911
¤LNG¤
Liquefied Natural Gas
Is A Major Terrorist Target
April 2008
House passes Coast Guard bill despite Bush veto threat
January 2008
ALERT: MARITIME SECURITY (GAO REPORT) - LNG Tankers Vulnerable & Security Resources Lacking Government Accountability Office Report LNG Tankers face three main types of threats - suicide attacks, 'standoff' attacks, and armed assaults resulting in severe threat to public safety, environmental, and energy supply chain. The Congressional report further admonishes that the US Coast Guard - the lead federal agency for maritime security - has insufficient resources to meet its own self-imposed security standards.
Coast Guard stretched thin, and it's about to get worse CBS News, Houston KHOU.com “I think it’s assuming too much the Coast Guard itself is going to come out and say ‘Sorry folks, we can’t protect you,’” said Tim Riley, an attorney who has spent the last five years investigating the dangers of liquefied natural gas. “The Coast Guard has had difficulty meeting its own self-imposed requirements for security,” the GAO report said. “We have started focusing on protecting air travel,” Riley added. “But yet our harbors are very, very risky right now. We should shore it all up before major tragedies start happening in the country.” VIDEO
LNG Tankers Vulnerable The Associated Press-
LNG tankers vulnerable to attack The Australian - Sydney, Australia
Q&A: Liquefied Natural Gas: A Potential Terrorist Target?
New York Times
April 21, 2005
Text from US Congressional Record House Floor Arguments over Energy Bill H.R.6 Energy Policy Act of 2005 SEC. 320. LIQUEFACTION OR GASIFICATION NATURAL GAS TERMINALS at page H2344:
Mr. KENNEDY (D., RI)
“I will tell my colleagues, in Rhode Island we would welcome the chance to have our gas piped in from some other country because the fact of the matter is, our State knows, as every other State that has an LNG facility knows, that if we were to ever have that explode, it would decimate a 50-mile radius.
Mr. Markey (D., MA,)
“If you just want the Federal Government to decide in the middle of your district where this most attractive of all terrorist targets will be located, then you vote ``no,'' but understand the consequences on the floor today.”
NOTE: Mr. Markey is also a Senior Member of House Homeland Security Committee
May 10, 2005
Report warns of 'catastrophic' risk at gas terminal Reuters - USA BOSTON (Reuters) - A terrorist attack on a proposed liquefied natural gas terminal in urban New England could cause "catastrophic damage," former U.S. counterterrorism official Richard Clarke said in a report released on Monday...
READ THE ENTIRE REPORT: http://www.riag.state.ri.us/LNG_Good%20Harbor2.pdf
November 28, 2001
Ashcroft : US got threat against natural gas sector
WASHINGTON - U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft said… Bush administration received information on a possible terror attack on the American natural gas sector...
"Ashcroft did not say if the threat was made against a specific natural gas pipeline, storage site or liquefied natural gas (LNG) plant."
“Substantial Hazard”
"We're especially always concerned as it relates to things that might have substantial hazard, and some of our energy (facilities) have substantial hazard," Ashcroft said.
“Terrorist Target”
“Maryland Democratic Senator Barbara Mikulski has demanded that FERC rescind its operating certificate for the (LNG) Cove Point plant, warning the facility is a terrorist target.”
"We have received uncorroborated information that Osama bin Laden may have approved plans to attack natural gas supplies in the United States," said the FBI warning.
"We have no additional details on how such an attack would be carried out or which facilities would be targeted," the FBI added.
“Prior to the September 11th terrorist attacks, the major security issue considered in LNG infrastructure approval was accidental leakage from LNG storage and processing facilities. Residents of densely populated regions where LNG plants were planned expressed fears that gas could escape, congeal and possibly ignite. For nearly 50 years now, all discussions of risk and probability in LNG transport have focused on how to account for human errors. No real threat analysis was performed to find out possible vulnerabilities in transportation and storage procedures that could be utilized by terrorists.”
“The present situation requires taking into account the likelihood of terrorist attacks on LNG infrastructure. The idea that terrorists could attack an LNG tanker or site with aircraft on a suicide mission must be recognized as possible. LNG terminals and tankers present especially attractive targets. While fires in petrochemical or petroleum plants tend to burn out quickly, LNG fires do not stop until all gas is consumed.”
Author: Dr. Cyril Widdershoven is the editor of Global Energy Security Analysis (GESA) and Associate Fellow at the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security.
08/20/03
Mobile Register, News: Forum on bringing LNG terminal to Mobile draws 300 people
"In an interview, Don Juckett, an LNG expert with the Department of Energy, suggested that such an accident was "very, very unlikely" and that terrorism would be the most likely cause of such a disaster."
HOMELAND SECURITY ORANGE ALERT
12/23/2003
Boston Globe Officials stop gas tanker as Boston reacts to alert - State residents are told to keep holiday plans
"Massachusetts and Boston officials yesterday halted a tanker filled with flammable liquefied natural gas that was scheduled to sail into Boston Harbor today, as Governor Mitt Romney and Mayor Thomas M. Menino sought to assure residents the area was preparing for possible terrorist threats while urging them to enjoy the holiday season."
¤Liquefied Natural Gas¤
Tankers
and Platforms are
Vulnerable
Sitting Ducks
Suicide
Aircraft Attack
(Photo credit: Boston Globe by David L. Ryan/ Globe Staff)
May 3, 2003
"Crash an explosives-laden Small Aircraft"
CBS News | US Stops 9/11-Style Attack In Pakistan. “WASHINGTON - U.S. authorities say they have uncovered an al-Qaida plot to crash an explosives-laden small aircraft into the American consulate in Karachi, Pakistan. That prompted the Homeland Security Department to warn about possible attacks in the United States... The warning… urging vigilance to guard against similar attacks in America... the advisory says al-Qaida could try to use such planes because they are easily available and require less pilot skill than large jets… Security procedures also are less rigorous for small aircraft… ”
This Small Aircraft Alert has Significant Relevance for the
Malibu, Oxnard, Ventura and Santa Barbara Communities
Because Two Offshore LNG Proposals There Will be Very Vulnerable
Oxnard Airport's departing runway [represented by the location and angle of the airplane in the graphic above] heads towards Platform Grace which is the location for one of the proposed offshore LNG facilities, and is within just 12 miles of Grace; and the runway is approximately 26 miles from the other proposed offshore LNG facility to be situated approximately 14 miles off Malibu.
Flights are permitted to depart 24/7 and approximately 95% do not file any flight plans. The unprotected LNG tankers and facilities would be sitting ducks for a small aircraft suicide attack from Oxnard Airport - a matter of minutes away - certainly not enough time to scramble defense fighters from Pt. Mugu.
Camarillo Airport is approximately just 6 more miles inland.
Santa Paula Airport is approximately just 15 more miles inland.
Santa Barbara Airport and Santa Monica Airport are also nearby.
LAX Flights will travel over both proposed facilities as well. [The Alaskan Airline tragedy
crash site was offshore centered between the two proposed LNG locations]
TERRORISM ALERT
MSNBC.com
NBC’s Andrea Mitchell reports
November 21, 2003
“U.S. warns Americans of terror risk”
Homeland Security, State, FBI issue advisories on threats in U.S., abroad
Full Story: http://msnbc.com/news/996623.asp?0sl=-22
ASSOCIATED PRESS ABSTRACTS:
WASHINGTON, Nov. 21 — The government warned Friday of an increased risk of terrorist attacks on Americans at home and overseas and stressed concerns al-Qaida could try to hijack cargo jets and crash them into targets.
Of particular concern is ‘al-Qaida’s continued interest in aviation, including using cargo jets’ to attack infrastructure such as bridges or dams ‘as well as targeting liquid natural gas, chemical and other hazardous materials facilities,’ the department said in a statement.”
March 24, 2004
Mobile Register
Book Details LNG Terror Risk
FULL STORY: http://www.al.com/news/mobileregister/index.ssf?/base/news/1080123508102400.xml
Former counterterrorism chief says threat of massive LNG incident in Boston Harbor was considered in wake of Sept. 11 attacks
By BEN RAINES
ABSTRACTS:
Prior to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, senior Bush Administration officials knew "that al Qaeda operatives had been infiltrating Boston by coming in on liquid natural gas tankers from Algeria," according to a new book by former White House counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke.
The book further states "we had also learned that had one of the giant tankers blown up in the harbor, it would have wiped out downtown Boston."
The Mobile Register has also discovered that LNG tanker simulator programs available for sale on the Internet are designed to instruct crews in every facet of the operation of LNG tankers.
Terrorists who used these programs would be tutored in all aspects of running the vessels, including controlling the valves and gauges that regulate temperature and other critical factors that govern the integrity of LNG storage containers on the ships.
Federal and industry officials who have made presentations in support of building LNG terminals near residential areas on Mobile Bay have said that it is unlikely such a facility would become a terrorist target.
But that view is challenged in Clarke's new book. Clarke served as terrorism chief under Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, until resigning in March 2003. He served in other national security posts under both President Reagan and the first President Bush.
Both his assertions appear to directly contradict statements top Bush Administration officials made to members of Congress and public safety officials in Boston regarding security issues at the Distrigas LNG terminal located near Boston.
He indicates in the book that shutting down Boston Harbor was one of the administration's first priorities after the terrorist-commandeered planes hit the Twin Towers.
Copyright 2004 al.com. All Rights Reserved
Imagine ...
Aircraft Suicide into 20 Billion Gallons of Natural Gas
TERRORISTS NEED ONLY PROVIDE THE TRIGGER ...
THE ENORMOUS VOLUME OF
Liquefied Natural Gas
RELEASED / UNLEASHED
WOULD DISPERSE AND PROVIDE DEVASTATING POWER
FOR MASS DESTRUCTION
The Science
& Environmental
Policy
Project
http://www.sepp.org/weekwas/2002/Jan5.htm
2. HARBOR SECURITY
“Next to a nuclear bomb, the most destructive kind of calamity imaginable is the explosion in a big-city harbor of a tanker carrying Liquefied Natural Gas. Remember the Baytown, Texas disaster? An LNG explosion would be much worse and take many more lives. The science of such an event has been studied by experts years ago when LNG shipments from Algeria to US ports first started. The most outstanding analysis was by James Fay, MIT professor of mechanical engineering. It should be revisited in light of the current terrorist threat.
Protection against such an attack by a terrorist (or even by an odd maniac) is the responsibility of the US Coast Guard. Europeans also need to be on guard against such a threat. It could even occur in Algeria and other terminals where LNG tankers are loaded. Think of a nuclear bomb (without the radioactive fallout, to be sure). And no need to steal nuclear material….”
Remember...
“The energy content of a
Single standard LNG tanker
(one hundred twenty-five thousand cubic meters)
is equivalent to seven-tenths of a megaton of TNT, or
about 55 Hiroshima bombs."
Part 2 Disasters Waiting to Happen / Chapter 8: Liquefied Natural Gas
[ First Prepared as a US Pentagon Study ]
By Lovins & Lovins
OTHER TERRORIST SCENARIOS
THAT COULD UNLEASH
THE HORRIFYING VOLUME OF NATURAL GAS
Explosive-Laden Motor Boat, ala USS Cole
Scuba Diver Sabotage
Seizure of Tankers - Seizure Of Platforms
Onboard Sabotage Manipulation of Valves
Rocket Launcher - Grenade Launcher Helicopter - Bomb..., etc.
MSNBC Archives
WASHINGTON, July 22, 2003
"U.S. Maritime Targets Tempting
Attacks on cruise ships, passenger vessels and other maritime targets ‘represent an attractive option for terrorists’ and can be carried out ‘using commercially available equipment,’ says the FBI in a warning issued late last year and underscored in subsequent memos. ”
“…FBI has continued to warn of potential terrorist interest in maritime targets in subsequent memos based on information gathered from captured al-Qaida operatives…” “The FBI memo issued in December warning of al-Qaida interest in maritime targets also warned that ‘explosive-laden boats represent the primary threat to U.S. maritime interests.’ The memo referenced the October 2000 bombing of the USS Cole while refueling in Yemen as a prime example along with last year’s attack on the French oil vessel Limburg off the Yemeni coast, noting that terrorists are capable of converting ‘an innocuous small craft into an effective weapon.’”
“The FBI also warned of al-Qaida operatives having been trained as ‘combat divers’ through scuba courses. Such training would allow the terrorists to ‘place explosives with command or delayed-action fuses to detonate while the ship was underway.’ FBI agents, acting on information gleaned from captured al-Qaida operatives, visited hundreds of dive shops across the nation late last year looking for clues that might lead to hard evidence that al-Qaida was planning such an attack. The FBI won’t comment on such investigations."
May 8, 2004
Terrorism threat roils debate on LNG
safety
LNG terminals are "a terrorist attack waiting to happen," said Anne Korin, director of policy and strategic planning at the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, a nonprofit think tank in Washington, D.C., that focuses on energy security issues.
"In the days when the primary concern was accidents and things like that, LNG terminals and tankers were thought of as pretty secure," Korin said. "But once you start looking at the terrorist risk, they become very, very, very dangerous facilities."
Korin said the type of attack conducted against the double-hulled
French oil tanker Limburg, in which a boat loaded with explosives
rammed into the ship and penetrated both hulls, could
be a disaster when directed at an LNG tanker.
The Double-Hulled
French Oil Tanker Limburg
Was Vulnerable to Terrorism
A Small Motor Boat with Explosives
Blew Open the Double-Hulls
LNG TANKER
DOUBLE-HULLS
ARE VULNERABLE
“The FBI memo issued in December warning of al-Qaida interest in maritime targets also warned that ‘explosive-laden boats represent the primary threat to U.S. maritime interests.’
The
memo referenced the October 2000 bombing of the USS Cole while refueling in
Yemen as a prime example along with last year’s attack on the French oil
vessel Limburg off the Yemeni coast, noting that terrorists
are capable of converting ‘an innocuous small craft into an effective weapon.’”
MSNBC
Remember The USS COLE
Armed and Protected Military Warships are Vulnerable
Imagine the Vulnerability
Of Moored Non-Military Tankers
Loaded With 20 BILLION Gallons of Natural Gas
Just Imagine...
If Suicidal Terrorists Seized an LNG Tanker
Bringing it Dangerously Close to Shore
We Would All Be Extremely Vulnerable
The Tremendous Danger and Volatility of the Circumstances
Would Make the Use of Ammunitions Very Perilous
In the Overtaking or Removing Them
Impervious to Attack from Rescue Forces
The Suicidal Terrorists Could
Manipulate Onboard Valves Unleashing
The Billions of Gallons of Natural Gas
For Dispersion and Mass Destruction
"The Mobile Register has also discovered that LNG tanker simulator programs available for sale on the Internet are designed to instruct crews in every facet of the operation of LNG tankers.
Terrorists who used these programs would be tutored in all aspects of running the vessels, including controlling the valves and gauges that regulate temperature and other critical factors that govern the integrity of LNG storage containers on the ships."
March 24, 2004 Mobile Register
http://www.al.com/news/mobileregister/index.ssf?/base/news/1080123508102400.xml
abcNEWS.com
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/World/sept11_piracy030910.html
September 10, 2003
"An ABCNEWS investigation has uncovered the increasing fears in shipping and security circles that armed terrorists may, as pirates already do, seize ships carrying liquid natural gas, chemicals or oil. But, rather than rob a ship, they could transform it into what a sea captain in Malaysia, Raja Kumar, calls 'a floating bomb.'"
Import Terminals: Siting, Safety and Regulation
Specialist in Science and Technology Resources, Science, and Industry Division
At page CRS-6
" Terrorism Hazards. LNG tankers and land-based facilities could be vulnerable to terrorism.
Tankers might be physically attacked in a variety of ways to destroy their cargo - or commandeered for use as weapons against coastal targets. LNG terminal facilities might also be physically attacked with explosives or through other means. Some LNG facilities may also be indirectly disrupted by “cyber-attacks” or attacks on regional electricity grids and communications networks which could in turn affect dependent LNG control and safety systems." http://www.wildcalifornia.org/cgi-files/0/pdfs/1078177225_LNG_Ignites_Controversy_CRS_Report_to_Congress_LNG_Jan_04.pdf
LNG Tanks Afford Limited Protection Even Against
Non-military Small Arms Projectiles
Brittle Power Energy Strategy for National Security
By Lovins & Lovins
Part 2 Disasters Waiting to Happen
Chapter 8: Liquefied Natural Gas
“Onboard sabotage would be relatively straightforward. Manipulation of onboard valves could in some circumstances rupture the LNG tanks from overpressure. Alternatively, all LNG tanker designs allow internal access below the tanks, and if a tank were deliberately ruptured, ducts open at both ends and running the full length of the cargo area would help to distribute liquid. Any such substantial spillage of LNG onto the steel hull would probably shatter it.”
“The General Accounting Office warned that ‘Only an expert would recognize some types of explosive material as explosives. One LNG ship crew member, trained in the use of explosives, could cause simultaneous tank and hull damage...[which] might initiate an extremely hazardous series of events.’”
“Abrupt, massive releases are indeed possible, as in Cleveland in 1944, because ‘if the inner tank alone fails for any reason, it is almost certain that the outer tank will rupture from the pressure and thermal shock.’ It also appears that relatively small cracks or holes in a large, fully loaded LNG tank could cause it to fail catastrophically by instant propagation of the crack."
"This proneness to brittle fracture implies that relatively small disruptions by sabotage, earthquake, objects flung at the tank by high winds, etc. could well cause immediate, massive failure of an above grade LNG tank. Certainly enough weaponry is available to pierce such a tank with ease. The General Accounting Office confirms that the equipment stolen from National Guard armories includes 'small arms, automatic weapons, recoilless rifles, anti-tank weapons, mortars, rocket launchers, and demolition charges. A large number of commercially available publications provide detailed instructions on the home manufacture of explosives, incendiaries, bombs, shaped charges, and various other destructive devices. All the required material can be bought at hardware stores, drug stores, and agricultural supply outlets.... It is not unusual for international terrorist groups to be armed with the latest military versions of fully automatic firearms, anti-aircraft or anti-tank rockets, and sophisticated explosive devices.'”
“The General Accounting Office also found, however, that such sophistication would not be necessary to cause a major LNG release. Live firing tests ‘confirmed that the double-wall structure of [LNG]...tanks affords limited protection even against non-military small arms projectiles, and that devices used by terrorists could cause a catastrophic failure of the inner wall.’”
"A further hazard of LNG is that its extreme cold causes most metals to become brittle and contract violently. If LNG spills onto ordinary metals (that is, those not specially alloyed for such low temperatures), such as the deck plating of a ship, it often causes instant brittle fractures. Thus failure of the special cryogenic-alloy membranes which contain the LNG in tanks or tankers could bring it into contact with ordinary steel—the hull of a ship or the outer tank of a marine vessel—and cause it to unzip like a banana, a risk most analyses ignore."
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
Mobile Register
Fire threat in LNG ships
Top U.S. security officials now admit that insulation in vessels is highly flammable
http://www.al.com/news/mobileregister/index.ssf?/base/news/109757270533150.xml
By BEN RAINES Staff Reporter
Top officials with the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Coast Guard now acknowledge that ships designed to carry liquefied natural gas are, in fact, constructed using tons of highly flammable polystyrene insulation.
The same officials had previously denied that the material was even present on the ships, maintaining in a letter to a member of Congress last May that polystyrene insulation "is not used on LNG carriers precisely because it's susceptible to melting and deformation in a fire."
Officials now describe that statement as "incorrect," and granted that many important questions remain about what might happen to an LNG vessel if terrorists attacked it. Some scenarios envision a fire a mile across, producing severe burns up to two miles away.
As early as February, some scientists brought concerns to Homeland Security officials about the widespread use of flammable insulation on ships carrying one of the nation's most dangerously flammable cargoes.
Shortly after, government documents began surfacing suggesting that there was no danger, simply because, according to the documents, the flammable insulation was not present on LNG ships.
In the past several months, the statement has turned up in congressional hearings, letters to Congress and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission documents that granted approval for new LNG terminals. Two such terminals have been proposed for the Mobile area, with a third proposed for federal waters 11 miles off of Dauphin Island.
The mistaken assertion originally appeared in a letter from Homeland Security to Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., whose suburban Boston district is home to the nation's only urban LNG port, long singled out by Homeland Security officials as a likely terror target.
In that letter, Pamela Turner, an assistant secretary for the federal security agency, rebutted concerns from the scientific community about the hazards posed by the insulation with the statement that it was "not used."
When natural gas is chilled to minus 260 degrees, it turns into a liquid, takes up 600 times less space, and can be economically shipped around the world aboard supertankers, just like oil. From a shipping perspective, the main difference between the fuels is that LNG vessels require tremendous amounts of insulation in order to keep the cargo below minus 260 degrees and in its condensed liquid state.
Beginning in February, a prominent LNG scientist warned Secretary Tom Ridge and other officials via personal letters that if terrorists attacked an LNG tanker, the heat from the ensuing fire would likely destroy the polystyrene cargo insulation.
The Mobile Register obtained a copy of one of those letters, written by University of Arkansas chemical engineering professor Jerry Havens, whose work has long been a central component of federal LNG regulations. The letter made clear that the problematic insulation was commonly used on LNG tankers.
Havens -- a former officer in the U.S. Army's chemical weapons division who is expert in biological warfare, nuclear weapons and the behavior of chemical fires -- warned "if the cargo containment insulation were to fail in a fire, I believe that the entire LNG containment could be compromised."
Writing in scientific journals and testifying before Congress, Havens has suggested the government was underestimating the public safety risks posed by an attack on an LNG vessel in a populated port area. His central criticism is that officials have never considered what would happen if all 30 million gallons on board an LNG vessel were ignited.
At this point, federal officials are making regulations based on a worst-case scenario accident that would involve less than a fifth of the natural gas aboard a tanker.
In the letter to Ridge, Havens referenced a confidential study, paid for by the LNG terminal operator in Boston Har bor and produced by Lloyd's Register of Shipping, that suggests an attack on an LNG tanker with a relatively small explosive charge could lead to an escalating series of fires and explosions that would ultimately consume the ship. Scientists both within the federal government and in academia have estimated such a fire would be a mile across and cause severe burns to people within two miles of the blaze.
Some in the scientific community have expressed alarm that the senior government officials in charge of protecting the nation's ports did not appear to understand critical facts regarding construction of LNG ships, even as the Department of Energy and FERC have sought to locate new LNG terminals in populated port areas.
Turner's statement went uncorrected by government agencies from May until Sept. 13, when a follow-up letter described the earlier statement as "incorrect." The follow-up letter states that the Coast Guard informed Markey's office on Aug. 30 that the earlier information was wrong.
In the interim, beginning in June, the Mobile Register published portions of numerous industry documents that show polystyrene is the primary insulation on LNG ships, and referenced a paper by the Society of International Gas Tanker and Terminal Operators that states the material was so flammable that dozens of shipyard workers have been killed in accidental fires during tanker construction and repair.
The inaccurate statements regarding the presence of the foam insulation on LNG ships have been repeated in FERC documents, and were used by FERC to justify, in part, the construction of new LNG terminals in populated areas.
In its approval for a new terminal in Freeport, Texas, FERC wrote that bringing the LNG tankers into Freeport represented an "acceptable risk," partly because "polystyrene insulation is not used on LNG carriers."
Last week, a FERC spokeswoman said that several other pending permits for new LNG terminals contain the same statement by the agency. There was no word on whether those permits will be reviewed or whether the erroneous information will be repeated in future permit approvals.
FERC officials declined further comment for this story.
Capt. Dave Scott, with the Coast Guard in Washington, said that his agency was responsible for the error, and said it was made while conducting research into LNG issues. He said that since then, the Coast Guard has conducted further research and determined that, while the flammable insulation is used on LNG ships, the vessels are in compliance with all U.S. and international shipping regulations. In addition, he said his agency was satisfied with safety features designed into LNG ships, and warned that "there is no such thing as a terrorist-proof ship."
"We erred in saying it was not used. Of course it is used... Our position at the Coast Guard is that intentional damage to an LNG vessel is an unacceptable event. We are doing everything possible to make sure that doesn't happen," Scott said. "We recognize the dangers posed by gas ships. That's why we take the precautions we do."
He cautioned that protecting numerous LNG terminals in the nation's ports will require significant Coast Guard resources, more than if the terminals were built offshore, away from port facilities and the public. At least four offshore terminals are planned for the Gulf of Mexico, with permit applications well under way.
"If you can reduce the public safety impacts of something, all things being equal, then an offshore terminal would be preferable in many respects," Scott said. "That's not to say an inshore terminal could not be responsibly managed. But an inshore terminal may demand a higher level of Coast Guard resources to protect than an offshore terminal."
Scott said that the Coast Guard will act responsibly if a long-awaited LNG safety study under way by the Sandia National Laboratory indicates that LNG ships need safety improvements to lessen the risk of catastrophic fire or require increased security measures to protect the public.
Homeland Security officials indicated in their latest letter to Massachusetts congressman Markey that they are unsure what would happen to an LNG ship in the event of a terrorist attack.
The agency letter suggests that the same LNG safety study Scott mentioned "is expected to examine how the cargo tank insulation would perform under an extreme fire load, and the degree to which insulation decomposition could affect the survivability of undamaged cargo tanks."
That letter -- written by Homeland Security's Turner, who signed the earlier letter as well -- states "there is no economically feasible engineering or design solution that could mitigate the consequences of a large scale LNG release on the vessel's hull."
Turner made that comment in reference to scientists' concerns that the steel hull of an LNG ship might crack and fall apart after a terror attack due to the simultaneous temperature extremes posed by both an intense natural gas fire and the super-chilled LNG. In her earlier letter, she dismissed concerns about possible hull damage, writing that "special crack-arresting steel in strategic locations throughout the vessel's hull" had solved that problem.
The Mobile Register left a message for Turner, seeking comment, but she did not respond.
Copyright 2004 al.com. All Rights Reserved.
MSNBC NEWS Reuters DUBAI, United Arab Emirates,
Aug. 3, 2003
Attorney General John Ashcroft, speaking on “Fox News Sunday,” said “The potential for us to be hit again is a very real potential.” “I believe al-Qaida wants to strike us. I believe they want to strike us whenever and wherever they can.
Ridge also conceded that “it will be several years until we get the kind of robust system that we need” to protect Americans at home. “We are not where we need to be ..."
March 14, 2005
Pirates Seize Gas Tanker in Malacca Straits
Voice of America - Jakarta
By Nancy-Amelia Collins Jakarta
Collins report [Listen to] 
Malaysian patrol boat in Malacca Straits Pirates briefly seized a chemical tanker in the Malacca Strait, releasing the boat and crew but holding the captain and chief engineer for ransom. The latest act of piracy in one of the world's busiest shipping lanes underscores security concerns for that region.
Around 35 pirates armed with machine guns and rocket launchers seized the Indonesian-owned chemical tanker on Saturday before disembarking with the ship's captain and chief engineer.
The attack took place as the ship was sailing from Kalimantan on Borneo Island for the Indonesian port of Belawan in the Malacca Strait, one the world's busiest sea ways.
Almost all of China and Japan's oil imports and more than a quarter of global trade pass through the Strait, an area plagued by pirates.
Noel Choong of the International Maritime Bureau, a non-profit shipping association in Malaysia, says the ship was carrying an unknown but highly flammable liquid.
Mr. Choong says the incident was simply a criminal act, not terrorism. He says that on Monday the owners of the vessel are negotiating with the pirates for the release of the captain and engineer.
"At the moment we can safely say that it's a piratical attack, it's not for political gain, but it's for monetary [gain]," said Noel Choong. "But of course a lot of people are also afraid that terrorists may actually learn from the pirates."
Mr. Choong says it is impossible to say who is behind the attack, although the ship's owners blame Indonesia's Aceh separatist group, the Free Aceh Movement, or GAM.
But Mr. Choong says pirates often attack ships in the Strait and blame GAM.
The attack underscores international concerns that terrorists may team up with pirates and launch an attack in the Malacca Strait or block the waterway to disrupt world trade. One particular concern is that terrorists would seize a tanker carrying oil or gas, and then crash it into a port city.
The narrow 960-kilometer Malacca Strait is bordered by Malaysia, Indonesia, and Singapore. Last year, the three nations began coordinated security patrols in the waterway.
Security experts say the type of ship seized Saturday is the perfect size to use as a weapon.
Increased security has made land targets more difficult for terrorists, so some groups are looking for maritime targets. On Friday Malaysia said it would boost security in the Malacca Strait with a 24-hour radar system.
Seizing Platforms
OFF SHORE RIGS ARE EASILY SEIZED & HAPPENS OFTEN
AUGUST 27, 2001 10:00 EDT - Nigeria Youths Take Hostages
“LONDON (AP) — Militant youths in Nigeria have taken 16 oil workers — including five Americans — hostage after seizing their drilling rig off the African country's coast…”
April 25, 2002 - Afrol News
“Chevron Nigeria Ltd. again has been involved in a seizure of one of its offshore oil-drilling rigs.”
THE LIST OF OFFSHORE OIL RIG SEIZURES/HOSTAGE TAKING IS LONG
Imminent rescue predicted for oil-rig workers Globe and Mail
Nigerian navy sails to oil platforms in hostage ordeal Azcentral
Transocean denies Nigeria navy boarded its rigs Yahoo Energy
Oil worker held in Nigeria Canada Dot Com
Nigerian Navy Boards Besieged Nigeria Rigs -Union Financial Times
Nigerian navy storms strike-hit rigs Reuters
Nigeria/Oil Workers/: Whereabouts Of Workers Unknown Yahoo Energy
UPDATE - Nigerian navy removes oil rig strikers--union Yahoo Energy
Nigerian navy boards besieged rigs - May. 1, 2003 CNN
Nigerian Navy May 'Rescue' Hostages Las Vegas Sun
Nigerian Navy May 'Rescue' Hostages The State
Nigerian Navy May 'Rescue' Hostages ABC News
Nigerian Navy Boards Besieged Nigeria Rigs -Union Reuters
Navy storms besieged Nigeria rigs Reuters
Nigerian navy boards besieged Nigeria rigs -union Yahoo Energy
Navy storms besieged Nigeria rigs Swissinfo English
Nigerian navy breaks up oil rig hostage standoff CBC
Nigeria hostage rescue 'imminent' Ananova
Nigeria navy sails to rig hostages - May. 1, 2003 CNN
Nigerian Oil Rigs Stand-off Continues Scotsman
Hostage talks sour in Nigeria The Boston Globe
Nigerian navy sails to oil rigs where hostages are held The Miami Herald
Hostage talks broken off in Nigeria Seattle Times
Nigeria sends warships to free oil rig hostages The Guardian
Nigerian navy prepares to attack oil rig Scotsman
Oil price rebounds amid worries over Nigeria The News International
Nigerian navy steps in to oil hostage crisis Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Workers trapped on Nigeria oil rigs NZ Herald
Nigerian navy ships head for Transocean rigs Houston Chronicle
Union says talks deadlocked in Nigerian hostage-taking; navy ships on the way Canada Dot Com
Nigeria Deploys Navy in Hostage Standoff The State
Nigeria Deploys Navy in Hostage Standoff ABC News
Nigeria sends warships to free oil rig hostages Hoovers
Nigerian Naval Ships Head to Offshore Oil Rigs Where Foreign Hostages Are Held Voa News
Nigeria Deploys Navy in Hostage Standoff Hoovers
Nigerian navy sails to oil platforms as hostage negotiations end in Hoovers
Negotiations Reach Stalemate in Nigeria Rig Zone
Nigeria navy to retake oil rigs City Press SA
Nigeria Deploys Navy in Hostage Standoff Yahoo Daily News
Nigeria deploys Navy in hostage standoff The State
Nigeria Deploys Navy in Hostage Standoff Las Vegas Sun
Santa Barbara News Press
7/16/02
“gubernatorial candidate Bill Simon …nearby offshore oil rigs are vulnerable to attack…”
“For more than a decade, the FBI and Marine Corps have staged training exercises on rigs in the Channel Islands to prepare for the possibility of a terrorist attack, officials said.”
Why Worry ?
Boston Globe
7/27/2003
“Is It Safe?How do law enforcement agencies protect a 900-foot liquefied-natural-gas tanker from potential attack?
With everything
they've got.”
By H.D.S. Greenway
“Rear
Admiral Vivian Crea, commanding the First Coast Guard District,
headquartered in Boston, calls the delivery ‘a hazard that we are
taking steps to mitigate.’"
“Beginning
48 hours, or in some cases 24 hours, prior to an LNG ship's
arrival, the Coast Guard starts notifying a long list of agencies. It
includes the State Police and/or the police and fire departments of
Boston, Chelsea, Everett, Quincy, Revere, Weymouth, and Winthrop.
Massport, which has responsibility for the airport and the Tobin
Bridge, is on the list. The Maritime Incident Resources and Training
Partnership, which includes emergency medical services, is part of
the effort, as are the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency, the
Massachusetts Environmental Police, and the Federal Aviation
Administration, because the ship will pass so close to the airport.
Naval Operations is also alerted, and so is the USS Constitution,
which the LNG ship will pass close by.”
“The
harbor ferries and tourist boats are contacted, as are the harbor
master, the harbor pilots, and the tugboats. Distrigas, which will
unload the ship, is brought into the loop, as are the Metropolitan
District Commission and the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
Also involved are the US Customs Service, the Transportation Security
Administration, and the FBI.”
“As the LNG carrier passes near the Logan Airport runways, as if by magic, planes stop passing overhead.”
“…
with rings of escort vessels and a helicopter overhead looking for any signs of
trouble in this new age of terror. First, there come the small, fast
boats belonging to the city, state, and environmental police. The
swiftest is called an Interceptor, capable of speeds of more than 60
miles per hour. Then there are two 41-foot Coast Guard patrol boats,
with mounted M60 machine guns manned port and starboard. Closer in
are six tugs, the newest with fire-boat capabilities, and the Massachusetts Port
Authority's fire boat taking up the rear. Finally, as a shepherdess herds her
flock, comes the big, 110-foot Coast Guard cutter Jefferson Island, in charge of
the transit, a conspicuous
cannon mounted on her foredeck. The Jefferson Island is of the same class of
cutters that the Coast Guard dispatched to the Persian Gulf in the days leading
up to the war in Iraq.”
Ask Yourself...
If
Liquefied Natural Gas
IS AS SAFE
AS THE ENERGY INDUSTRY
WANTS US TO BELIEVE
THEN WHY
ALL THE EXTREME SECURITY ?
May 12, 2004Boston Herald
LNG will skip shipment:
Company commended for action for high-alert Dem convention
Full Story: http://business.bostonherald.com/businessNews/view.bg?articleid=27510
By Jon Chesto
ABSTRACTS:
Distrigas will not ship liquefied natural gas through Boston Harbor during the Democratic National Convention in July because public safety crews will be too busy to escort LNG tankers, the company said yesterday.
U.S. Reps. Michael Capuano (D-Somerville), Stephen Lynch (D-South Boston) and Edward Markey (D-Malden) praised the decision to suspend LNG shipments that week. The trio met with Coast Guard officials last week to discuss LNG security.
SECURITY EXCLUSION ZONE
ALERT TO ALL
YACHT
CLUBS
RECREATIONAL
CRUISERS AND SAILORS
WHALE
WATCHERS AND CHANNEL ISLAND TOURISTS
REGIONAL
FISHERMEN
AND
ENTIRE RESORT INDUSTRY
Keep Clear Two Miles Ahead and One Mile Astern
Of a Moving LNG Carrier
Boston Globe 7/27/2003
Is It Safe?
“Among the safeguards are the Coast Guard's rules to keep clear two miles ahead and one mile astern of a moving LNG carrier, with no vessels moving at all alongside it in the narrow confines of the inner harbor…”
“All ships must keep their distance or be ‘severely prosecuted.’"
“… any sudden move might be misinterpreted. Nobody wants to risk a suicide boat darting out from the shore, as happened to the USS Cole in Aden, Yemen, in October 2000.”
Bay Weekly.com
August 6, 2003
http://www.bayweekly.com/year03/issuexi31/dockxi31.html
Liquefied Natural Gas Returns to Chesapeake Bay
22 million gallons dock at Cove Point
“Security zone violations are taken very seriously,” says Cmdr. Gordon Loebl, chief prevention officer for the Port of Baltimore. “I can’t say what will happen in each and every case. However, any person who violates a security zone … is subject to their vessel being seized and a maximum of 10 years imprisonment and a $10,000 fine.”
HIGH ANXIETY ?
Ask Yourself...
</