Safety Before LNG
Exposing the truth about the Hess 'Shannon LNG' project
Negative Effects on the Shannon Estuary
Nevada LNG Explosion

Press Releases

Letter to the Farmer's Journal printed on March 28th 2009

Shannon LNG   A dirty money-making project

Dear Sir,

LNG - an exercise in bad planning - is only about money..
LNG projects are dirty and dangerous and feared by the well-informed local communities all over the world that they come into contact with. However, Kerry County Council, Shannon Development and a couple of local associations have bucked this international trend by welcoming them with open arms. One wonders why?

Kerry County Council has not pointed out the millions of euros it will make every year from rates at the terminal. Add to this the millions from the now-suspended 220 million gallon SemEuro petroleum storage facility, which we suspect is only awaiting rezoning of better land East of the LNG site, as proposed in the new draft county development plan, which has deeper water. It will make Kerry County Council one of the richest councils in the country.
Shannon Development has not pointed out it secretly received almost half a million euros from Shannon LNG three months before the land was even rezoned as part of the option to purchase agreement. This agreement was conditional on obtaining planning permission within two years.

As for Tarbert Development Association, it can see no wrong in the Shannon Development /Shannon LNG deal. Then again, Shannon Development has sponsored the new e-town project in Tarbert to the tune of €3m for what is basically eight houses with broadband - a pretty outdated concept for an average of €375,000 construction price per house in these recessionary times. The same association kept telling us that the LNG project would bring lots of local jobs. That rings hollow when even the building of the eight houses for the e-town was not given to the locals that need the jobs, but to a Castleisland firm.

The local associations also forget to mention the €200,000 yearly donation to the 'local' community from the LNG company, which they hope to administer.

No concern is expressed for forward planning, the environment or the dangers of LNG.
The trans-shipment harbour (which would give a huge number of sustainable jobs) cannot now go ahead because of the sterilisation of the Estuary by the LNG terminal. An LNG risk assessment on water would prove this if they ever decide to carry one out. This is outside the remit of the HSA which only looks at risks on land. All this mismanagement is for 50 long-term LNG jobs. We believe this project is anti-jobs and all about the greed of the few and money changing hands.