Hundreds of National, State and Local Groups Urge Govs. Christie and Cuomo to Veto Port Ambrose LNG Plan

A letter sent today by advocacy group Food & Water Watch to Governors Chris Christie and Andrew Cuomo, signed by 217 national, state and local organizations, called on the governors to veto an offshore liquid natural gas (LNG) port being proposed for construction in the waters just off New York and New Jersey. As the letter states, the proposed Port Ambrose LNG facility would pose a significant explosion and pollution threat to nearby costal communities, would increase dependence on fossil fuels and fracking throughout the region, and would impede the prospect of offshore wind energy development in the same location. Both Christie and Cuomo have the ability to veto the proposal outright.

Additionally, as the public comment period on Port Ambrose came to a close today, Food & Water Watch submitted more than 27,000 comments to the U.S. Coast Guard and the federal Maritime Administration opposing the plan. The letter opposing Port Ambrose was signed by organizations from 24 different states, including prominent national organizations such as Sierra Club and 350.org.

"Governor Christie vetoed a similar offshore LNG proposal in 2011 and we hope he'll once again do the smart thing for the safety and prosperity of the Jersey Shore," said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch. "Governor Cuomo recently became a national leader on the environment and public safety when he banned fracking in New York. For him to allow Port Ambrose now would be a real contradiction, and an about-face on fracking and fossil fuels. We urge both governors to reject this unneeded, unwanted offshore hazard."

Notably, the letter highlights the connection Port Ambrose would likely have to the harmful, polluting practice of fracking in the United States. The letter states in part:

There is no convincing demonstration for the need of this project for [natural gas] imports... Although the Port Ambrose project is being proposed as in import facility, market forces dictate that it could be used to export LNG to foreign markets where has fetches a much higher price than in the United States... If converted to an export facility, the project's threats would be compounded by the extent it would drive demand for drilling and fracking for natural gas. Fracking is a dangerous method of extracting oil and gas that threatens drinking water supplies, as well as the stability of our climate...