ANALYSIS-Offshore U.S. LNG systems may calm safety concerns

By Joe Silha

NEW YORK, Oct 23 (Reuters) - With only three liquefied gas terminals on the populous U.S. East Coast and none on the West Coast, which also depends heavily on gas to generate power, experts said facilities sited far offshore may be the key to calming environmental and safety concerns that have hindered development.

Two offshore projects approved this year off the coast of Massachusetts may open the door to supplying major markets with less environmental impact and fewer safety and security risks.

"The local hurdles to build an onshore facility in Massachusetts were almost insurmountable. Building offshore was a way to get the job done," said Bill Cooper, director of the Center For LNG, a Washington, D.C.-based trade group.

Cleaner-burning natural gas has been the fuel of choice for new power generation for the last decade, but price spikes during periods of peak demand, particularly in the Northeast, have raised concerns about the adequacy of supply.

Putting LNG facilities in key coastal markets where supply is needed cuts transport costs and eases pipeline bottlenecks, but community and environmental objections have stalled or killed at least a half dozen onshore proposals in recent years.

In order for natural gas to be imported into the U.S., it must be super-cooled into liquid form and shipped by tanker. Upon reaching U.S. shores, the liquid is warmed and regasified, then put into a pipeline.

Opponents of building regasification terminals fear that an industrial mishap or a terrorist attack could trigger an explosion powerful enough to level a town.

Located about 13 miles off the Massachusetts coast and scheduled to begin operations in December, Excelerate Energy's Northeast Gateway is a submerged buoy system with very little surface infrastructure.