View non-flash version
www.marinelink.com LNG & Public Perception Teo said he knows the public has concerns about LNG. “I’ve seen the days where there were a lot of plans to build terminals and the public said ‘not in my backyard.’ But this is a totally different issue all together. We’re dealing with a smaller scale. The pub- lic was concerned about gas clouds if there was a release of LNG.” But in the case of LNG-fueled ves- sels, Teo said, if there was a release, the cloud would dissipate easily. “It is not easy to ignite LNG. In North America, LNG is often mistaken for Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG), which has a lower flash point.” “In Norway they had the same problem. They were concerned about public perception. They started with the Glutra, and after a while they found that it was actually very safe and also much cleaner.” Today, Teo said, Norwegian’s prefer to ride on the ferries which are propelled by LNG because it helps them reduce their own carbon footprint. “So now there is wide public acceptance in Europe. I hope the same goes for the U.S. market.” Teo also said that over the past 50 or more years, LNG transportation and storage has had a safe record without any human casualties. Hatley sees LNG as increasing the environmental advantage that U.S. marine transportation already offers as far as emissions levels. “If our society truly has enduring values for lower emissions, sustainabili- ty and minimal carbon footprint, these society prefer- ences will assure the long term future of marine cargo.” Hatley sees marine transportation growing slightly more than our GDP in the future “because, where appropriate within the logistics supply chain, marine will take a little bit more from rail and truck because it will still be the most efficient. And particu- larly in the future, if we see goods in our stores with labels saying ‘this many grams of CO2 were expended to carry this product to you,’ that transparency will illustrate the importance of marine transportation.” MN
