Get Busy on your LNG comments! We need *another* NY Miracle! (here's mine for Day One)

LNG Super Tanks:
Should NY Remove the present BAN
on Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) facilities?

It is CRITICALLY IMPORTANT

is that we Create Another NY Miracle

and defeat these proposed LNG regulations.

http://www.thirtydaysoffrackingregs.com/

The 30 Days site is so great
because there is no pressure.

Even if you miss the start  or miss a day,
No Pressure!
You can begin anywhere,

skip a day or a few if you have to.

You can begin with "Today's Date" and go from there, or you can start with Day One (Oct 6) and do 2 per day until you catch up.

Just do whatever you can!

Each Day,

Sandra gives you one rule to look at.

Then she gives you a few ideas about
what to comment on.

You can follow her lead, or just make up your own
comment from scratch! It's fun because the goals
are very open-ended.

But you have to read, comprehend, think,
and then do something creative.

Chip Northrup has created this very useful resource for you to use also:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/New_York_LNG_regulations

Please try to do one per day and we can create
ANOTHER NY Miracle!
http://www.thirtydaysoffrackingregs.com/

One suggestion:

Due to computer SNAFUs,
it is always a good idea to
SAVE A COPY OF YOUR COMMENTS!

Post your comments to your local email listserv,
or publish on your blog.This may inspire others
to comment also.

Some people have had issues with the 30 days site.

There is not a good confirmation that your comment
is accepted.

So compose your comment in a text editor
(eg Word or Notepad or Open Office)
and paste it into the 30 days form.

And save a local copy.

Here is a sample comment for DAY ONE.

Don't copy this directly. Feel free to use it 

(with the other hints by Sandra and Chip) as a guide.

May this inspire you to GET BUSY! :)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Oct 6: Today's Reg: Proposed 6 NYCRR Part 570 Preamble
The use of the word "Safe" in the preamble ("safe siting")
is linguistically and scientifically dubious. 

"Safe" means "without risk of harm".
DEC is asserting with this statement,
that by creating LNG rules, 
all risk can be either eliminated or reduced.

Each alternative is absurd on its face
and contradicts the facts.

Storing and Transporting LNG is an inherently risky process,
And the direct harms of this infrastructure,
when they happen, are often catastrophic.

There are also indirect harms, such as these rules will tend
to create a demand for more natural gas,
and more fracking, such as fracking NY where there is a present moratorium,
and which most citizens are against.

In fact, DEC, by permitting an inherently unsafe activity,
is actually CREATING RISK where none existed before*! 
(*=Due to the present ban on LNG facilities)

DEC should present a fair presentation of the facts
and not try to sugar-coat a potentially poison pill
and trick the people into believing
that this is a risk-free process, or even
that these inherently grave risks of catastrophe
can be eliminated through mitigation.

They cannot.