Perhaps mindful of the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) effect which recently derailed ConocoPhillips’s Harpswell proposal, the UK giant had a team of environmentalist survey the area for three months to see if the plant would prove to be an environmental hazard.
The plant will be sited on 40 acres of land in a 175-acre plot located along the waterfront. The unused acreage will be undeveloped and serve as a buffer zone between the facility and nearby residents.
According to Julia Tims, an environmentalist with Environmental Resources Management (the company contracted by BP to study the site), “BP worked with engineers extensively to come up with a site plan that falls within areas that do not provide quality habitat for wildlife.”
The final say rests with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), which is currently undertaking studies of its own to determine if the project is a go or a goner.
According to FERC spokesperson, Tamara Young-Allen, “[FERC] has final approval over BP’s proposed project [and] is currently conducting a study to evaluate hazards associated with LNG spills on water in order to develop a model for calculating vapour and thermal hazards of such spills.”
“FERC will also conduct an environmental impact statement, assessing the land and soliciting public comment to help determine if the facility should be accepted or rejected,” added Young-Allen.
