Why Not Outer Brewster?

One of today's Boston Globe Editorials urges lawmakers to reject a plan to build a liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal on Outer Brewster Island, siting the lack of regional planning which would ensure that such a facility would actually be necessary as well as environmental and aesthetic concerns. Outer Brewster is one of the uninhabited Boston Harbor Islands, one that formerly housed some army facilities in the World Wars, but little else since. The public is not even currently allowed on the island due to the hazards from those disused structures, as well as an abandoned water desalination plant. The argument that maybe we won't need the extra capacity seems silly to me, particularly since we may be able to divert LNG shipments from Everett -- a much more potentially dangerous journey -- to the island facility if we end up with a surplus. Of course worrying about energy surpluses at this point seems kind of far-fetched, but you never know what will happen in the future. While it's true that the island is part of a protected park, and selling off parkland sets a bad precedent, when you take into account some of the other places, like Fall River, where an LNG terminal has been proposed, the out-of-the-way island looks pretty good.

If it's a choice between Fall River and Outer Brewster Island, I'm going to pick Outer Brewster every time. One would put an LNG terminal in the middle of a densely populated city and require tankers to go through a heavily trafficked bay. The other would be two miles away from the nearest home -- unless you count some potentially displaced migratory birds and harbor seals. I do realize, of course, that's a false choice. There are some Canadian facilities on the drawing board, as well as one off the coast of Gloucester. Still, Outer Brewster deserves serious consideration as a site for an LNG terminal that would meet the region's energy needs without compromising the security of residents.