Lloyd's List is part of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call UK support at +44 (0)20 3377 3996 / APAC support at +65 6508 2430

Printed By


Knock-back for BHP plans for floating Malibu LNG terminal

AUSTRALIAN mining giant BHP Billiton suffered a blow to its plan to anchor a floating liquefied natural gas terminal near the famous Malibu beach when a California commission rejected an environmental study on the $800m project. The Lands Commission voted 2-1 on Monday night against the 3,000-page report after members raised such issues as global warming and cost-effectiveness during an all-day hearing attended by worried residents, including actor Pierce Brosnan. A BHP spokeswoman in Melbourne said the company would review the commission's decision and assess its position. "Then we will look at what we will do next," the spokeswoman said. BHP Billiton's Cabrillo Port project involves building a terminal larger than an aircraft carrier about 14 miles off the California coast. The plant would unload liquefied natural gas and regasify it before pumping it ashore. Some residents were worried it could be a terrorist target. The company says the plant would produce more than 10 percent of California's daily natural gas consumption and would be environmentally friendly. A spokesman did not respond to an email seeking comment on the vote. Five governmental bodies, as well as California Govenor Arnold Schwarzenegger and US president George Bush, need to approve the project. Mr Schwarzenegger, who has gone to great lengths to establish his green credentials, said in a statement that an LNG facility would make California less vulnerable to fluctuations in gas supply and price. He said he would use a federally allotted 45-day review period to ensure the project meets safety standards.





Ask The Analyst

Please Note: You can also Click below Link for Ask the Analyst
Ask The Analyst

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts