Opponents of 138-foot-tall propane tank in Searsport to hold meetings

Posted Nov. 01, 2011, at 8:19 p.m.
Last modified Nov. 01, 2011, at 10:09 p.m.
Print this   E-mail this    Facebook this   Tweet this     

View Searsport, Maine in a larger map

SEARSPORT, Maine — The Maine Department of Environmental Protection gave its approval this fall for the construction of a $40 million liquid propane terminal to be located in the Mack Point industrial zone.

But that approval has not changed the minds of area environmentalists, business owners and others who say they are deeply concerned about the potential problems that might grow alongside the 138-foot-tall propane tank. Two information sessions titled “Thanks But No Tank” will be held this week in Belfast and Searsport by those opposed to the project.

“Whether or not you’re for it or against it, it makes sense to ask questions,” Astrig Tanguay, co-owner of Searsport Shores Camping Resort, said Tuesday afternoon. “We should find out what’s in it for us. I don’t see anything in it that’s for the people in our region.”

The terminal would be constructed by Denver-based DCP Midstream Partners, a private company that is jointly owned by Spectra Energy and ConocoPhillips. Company representatives first came to Searsport last December to hold informational sessions about the project, which still needs approval from state and federal agencies.

Tanguay said that last week she invited officials from DCP Midstream to attend the “Thanks But No Tank” information sessions.

However, Roz Elliott, a spokeswoman for the company, said Tuesday night that because of the short notice no one from the company will be able to attend.

“We of course are always pleased to respond to questions,” she wrote in an email.

According to the permit issued by DEP, a maximum of six propane tankers a year would offload the fuel at the existing cargo pier. The liquid propane would be pumped through a new, mile-long mostly above-ground pipeline to the bulk storage tank at the DCP Terminal. The company would offload the propane to trucks and rail cars at the terminal for distribution throughout Maine and potentially to other locations in northern New England.

Elliott said Tuesday that it is too early to discuss a timeline for project construction since the company still is working through the application process.

The Searsport Planning Board, which would give final approval to the terminal’s construction, has not yet received an application, according to Chairman Bruce Probert. He said he has been busy reading the 21-page permit from the DEP, which he received Monday night.

He said that he will look skeptically at the application, if and when it is received, and also wondered why such staunch opposition did not mobilize for other major industrial projects in Searsport, including the Irving Energy tanks that were built at Mack Point.

“We want to give these people a fair shot,” he said of DCP Midstream. “In Maine, we don’t like a lot of restrictions. We like private property rights … it comes down to a thing about home rule, too. It depends on the project. People in Searsport shouldn’t be telling people in Belfast how to build their boathouse. This isn’t a wide-open thing for the state. This is a Searsport thing.”

He said that if the company meets the town’s 17 performance standards in terms of site planning, the project must be approved.

But Tanguay, who will be moderating the question-and-answer segment of the public meetings, said that building a tank nearly three times taller than the gasoline storage tanks already in town could have wide-ranging negative effects on the town and the region.

She is concerned about the increase in heavy-truck traffic on Route 1, the potential explosive dangers of having nearly 23 million gallons of propane in one place, and the negative effect it will have on Penobscot Bay views.

One permit received by DCP Midstream has given them permission to bring in to the facility as many as 144 trucks a day.

“What do we get out of it except danger?” Tanguay asked.

But Elliott vehemently disagreed.

“I can’t tell you how seriously we take safety,” she said Tuesday in a phone interview from Denver. “Safety is our top value. Our employees are so highly trained to the highest of standards.”

The terminal project would feature an emergency shutdown system and backup power generators. In case of a power outage or mechanical problem, the terminal could “flare” or release the gas to the air so it could dissipate, she said, although this is less necessary in the wintertime when temperatures are colder and refrigeration not as affected. The company has permission to flare the terminal for a maximum of 500 hours a year.

Also, company officials would team up with local emergency responders to help train and support them, she said.

“I’m just very proud of what we do in that area [safety],” she said. “If you think about this potential propane import terminal in Searsport, it’s not just an operation to us. It’s the home of our future employees. We would live and work there.”

She also tried to soothe concerns about the increased numbers of trucks on the roads by saying that 144 per day is the maximum allowable and it would be much more typical to see 50 trucks a day, with more in the winter.

Tanguay and other tank opponents believe that this kind of talk is just whitewashing a project that is inherently problematic for Searsport and the midcoast region. She said that while tourism is an important part of the midcoast economy, the area also is a destination for retirees and others.

“My chief concern is it’s going to throw the entire balance out of whack,” she said of the proposed terminal. “They’re going to change our identity up here.”

The “Thanks But No Tank” public meetings are scheduled for 6-8 p.m. Wednesday, Nov. 2, at the Searsport Town Hall and 6-8 p.m. Thursday, Nov. 3, at the Belfast Free Library. There will be a presentation followed by questions and discussion.

Similar articles:

Marketplace News

Marketplace

Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News encourages comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service.

In brief:

  1. Keep it civil and stay on topic
  2. No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
  3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.

The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. Here are some guidelines (see more):

  • Anonymous

    How many trucks come out of GAC chemical plant and the Sprague terminal each day?  Far more than 50 is my guess and carrying material that is far more hazardous than the propane trucks.  I’d much rather fight a propane fire than a fire in the ethanol tanks stored at Sprague.  So, is this really more dangerous?  
    Or is this more a NIMBY situation based on fear rather than fact?  I say, the job creation, though not huge, would be good.  And, would the supply/demand differential be changed since propane would not have to be trucked in from outside of Maine?  I surmise, although possibly incorrectly, that propane costs may decrease thus attracting further job creation should energy costs be reduced.If the tank were to hold molasses, I would guess that someone would complain of the danger of attracting disease carrying rodents or the threat of drowning by a slow tidal wave should the tank rupture?

  • Anonymous

    Apparently, Mr. Probert and the Searsport Planning Board do not recognize responsibility for the effiects of their decision on the surrounding towns and region.  His “Belfast Boathouse” example is hardly comparable to the potential impact of a 15-story storage tank and up to 144 trucks per day though the surrounding communities.  I understand the need to develop jobs locally but that needs to be done in such a way that there is a net increase, that is more jobs created than lost.  It is not at all clear that will happen in this case.   

  • Anonymous

    Kind of like Belfast messing around for years debating and effectively turning away big box stores that, though taboo to some, would benefit the people in the greater region?

    Again, let’s count trucks and find out what else is coming out of the existing port.  Then ask, why are propane trucks different or more hazardous?

  • Anonymous

    There is a difference in scale, energy content and potential hazard comparing the proposed storage tank to the existing storage tanks.  It is a bit off topic but since you brought it up, the big box issue also can be debated w/r/t  jobs lost vs. jobs created, again not a clear net gain there.

  • Anonymous

    As a resident of Searsport, I have many concerns with regard to the impact on the existing businesses  and property values of home owners in the area.  I don’t think that the implications have been studied.  I did note that in a similar situation there were no residences within 2 miles of the tank whereas in Searsport there are many, including my own.

ADVERTISEMENT | Grow your business

Marketplace Coupons

ADVERTISEMENT | Grow your business