In the March 24 viewpoint by Quoddy LNG’s lawyer Gordon Grimes titled “Treaty trumps LNG politics,” he presents the company’s arguments for

why the Canadians mustn’t block their project. He writes, “Before

Canada can block LNG tankers it will have to overcome this

presumptive right and demonstrate that LNG ships somehow present a risk to the ‘peace, good order or security’ of Canada.”

Most people involved in issues related to LNG are familiar with the findings of the government-commissioned Sandia report titled, “Guidance on Risk Analysis and Safety Implications of a Large Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Spill Over Water.” Canada need not look any further than that report and a chart of Passamaquoddy Bay to appreciate the risks this project poses to its citizens on Campobello and Deer islands.

Grimes then suggests similarities between his client’s project

and the two LNG terminals Canada has approved and are under

construction near Saint John New Brunswick and Point Tupper, Nova Scotia. Again, the facts do not support his contentions. Neither of those projects requires the passage of large ships through the narrow, often treacherous waters of Head Harbor Passage and Western

Passage. Neither location has Passamaquoddy Bay’s raging currents.

Neither will require the passage of these ships within yards of a city. Finally, neither Canadian project will trap the 2,000 people who live and work in Eastport on a peninsula that would be blocked by a mishap at Quoddy LNG’s poorly chosen site.

Grimes would better serve his clients by advising them to seek

their fortune elsewhere and not at the expense of eastern Maine.

Cliff Goudey

Newburyport, Mass.