Why don't we build our own energy corridor. If Canadian companies wish to utilize the corridor they can pay fees to do so. The same as if we have our own energy companies that wish to use the same corridor.

As for safety in the passage of LNG tankers into Passamaquoddy Bay, they shouldn't have anymore problem reaching Calias or Robbinston than the ships that reach Bay Side Marine Terminal in New Brunswick. The US Coast Guard has already said that it is safe enough. That is good enough for me.

In the third world, there is a long history of multinational companies exploiting the countries and their resources. A country blessed with a particular resource remains poor. The people live in shanty towns, save for a small band of rulers who allow the exploiting companies to extract the resources while the people get nothing. These rulers, who sell out their people grow wildly rich. In these countries, such rulers are often sunglass-wearing thugs. In Maine we elect them.

Since the Baldaci administration is in bed with First Wind and wind energy, Canadian power even though it is cheaper would blow a huge hole in the wind energy scam.

The LNG gas terminal is tied into transmission lines . Does this make sense to the average citizen? NO

Canadian govt. states that having the LNG terminal in the Passamaquody Bay is an environmental hazard. It will also harm tourism. (Maine doesn't care about tourism or environment) . The Coast Guard states it is unsafe. Yet the Bangor Daily News prints this article leaving those important facts out.

It is time for clear, honest reporting. That and only that will bring newspaper sales back up. This is yellow journalism.

STOP THE YELLOW JOURNALISM ON THE WIND ENERGY SCAM.

Jaygee...funny

The world LNG industry's own best safe practices for terminal siting indicate Passamaquoddy Bay is eminently inappropriate for such facilities -- as pointed out in "Site Selection and Design for LNG Ports and Jetties" and "LNG Operations in Port Areas," by the Society of International Gas Tanker and Terminal Operators (SIGTTO) -- the organization that represents virtually the entire world LNG industry. In comparison, Canaport LNG's terminal complies with those industry siting standards. The industry is protecting its own reputation and survival by advocating those best practices.

The Coast Guard's Waterway Suitability Report and Letter of Recommendation require the developers to acquire Canada's approval -- something Canada has repeatedly and firmly indicated since 2005 it will not give. The Coast Guard recognizes Canada's authority over its own waters -- a concept lost on the LNG developers.

It is abundantly clear that if Maine wants LNG terminals, the projects must site in industry-compliant locations. By doing so, there would be no objections from Canada, as Canada and New Brunswick have repeatedly stated. So why won't they do it?

The developers would lose face by moving. Plus, they are fulfilling obligations made years ago to their investors, while collecting big paychecks until the permitting processes come to their ultimate conclusions.

Perhaps the developers will not move because they know their projects will not succeed no matter where they are located. There is an oversupply of LNG import infrastructure and a glut of domestic natural gas (around 100-years' worth). Even the Wall Street Journal calls new LNG import projects a mistake.

Maine needs to either move the LNG projects or accept also losing the energy corridor jobs and revenue. Otherwise, Maine will lose out on both.

There is one damned good place for an LNG based project that would have a huge impact. FP & L own the old CMP Wyman station on Cousin's Island in Yarmouth. This generating station was built there because an oil tanker can tie up in deep water 50 feet off the shore in a sheltered harbor. So sheltered that it anchored the North Atlantic Fleet of the US Navy during WWII.

Alas, that plant has not been upgraded and is used as reserve and for peak power loads. When it fires, it is the single greatest source of air pollution in the state of Maine. The infrastructure is there. The transmission lines are already there. The site, less than 100 acres is already developed. It would take about $500 million to destroy the existing plant and build a state of the art LNG conversion and gas fired generating plant. Ten years ago, the Calpine station in Westbrook, 540MW of baseline power (24/7/365, not just a sputtering when the wind blows!) was built for $300 million.

The cleaner burning natural gas would produce less pollution than the heavy oil fired Wyman does now running intermittently. The world is awash with natural gas; it is what has driven costs down. We have to build no new transmission lines or this ridiculous pie in the sky notion of an energy corridor. This is all driven by the mania over wind turbines. Guess what? If all the wind farms were built to meet the state's goal of 2700 MW of installed capacity by 2020, we would still only end up with 675 MW of actual output due to a maximum 25% capacity factor building in wind-poor areas. Yet we would destroy over 300 miles of ridgelines, permanently clearcut over 50,000 acres and wrap Maine up with so many new powerlines it would look like Gulliver lashed down by the Yahoos. A better solution could happen on an already developed 100 acre parcel with deepwater anchorage.

The problem is Baldacci has cronies in the wind industry and doesn't have the balls to lead the state to a single, major impact resolution to an energy "problem" we don't really have.