Shell to sea rossport

mayo | environment | opinion/analysis Tuesday December 26, 2006 18:41 by confused local - Erris citizen

can somebody explain?

Give me the reason

Ok I have been tempted to do this for some time.
Can someone explain to me exactly what shell to sea and others posting on Indymedia are concerned about ?
We often hear of concerns over the pipeline, and that is a legitimate concern but now shell says it will reroute the pipe.
The likelihood of that pipe failing was probably negligible, but I appreciate that the fear the residents felt was real.
So the pipeline is been addressed!
The discharge into broadhaven another real cause for concern, under no circumstances should our marine or terrestrial environment be sacrificed for profit.
I hear the fishermen of erris has commissioned an aquatic ecotoxicoligst to asses the impact on the bay.
I would suggest shell to sea hire a expert on the impact of the refinery, then they could fight to have the refinery located at sea with hard facts.
Has there ever been an assessment made by an independent consultant,( with credentials and a reputation to protect) on the actual impact on human health and the local environment from this refinery?
What I am asking is what "proven" facts are quoted as the reason to have this refinery located at sea?
This is not human cloning, or Gm foods, this is refining of natural gas It has been done for decades, If the risks are real then evidence should be very easy to produce (precedence).