The Rhode Island Marine Trades Association and others interested in activities on Narragansett Bay got a one-sided view of the Weaver’s Cove Energy proposal to an offshore berth in Mount Hope Bay for liquefied natural gas (LNG) Monday night and it wasn’t positive.

“It’s all about profits,” Joseph Gleason told an audience of more than 50 at the East Greenwich Yacht Club, “they’re looking to get exclusive rights to their distribution.”

Gleason is a board member of Save the Bay, the environmental group that is opposed to the proposal for LNG tankers to make deliveries to the offshore terminal. From that point the liquefied natural gas would be transported in its frozen state through a 4.5-mile pipeline to the company’s terminal in Fall River.

Weaver’s Cove has projected there would be as many as 70 roundtrip tanker passages a year.

For security and size of vessel reasons, the trips would be conducted during the day and at high tide.

Gleason wasn’t the only one to voice concerns over the project that Save the Bay Baykeeper John Torgan said would prompt a virtual shutdown of Bay boating operations with the passage of an LNG tanker. Torgan was the featured speaker and in a 40-minute presentation stepped through the history of efforts to site an LNG terminal in Fall River. In the last eight years, proposals have advanced from a dock that would have required extensive dredging of the Taunton River to accommodate the 950-foot vessels to use of “mini” tankers and now to the offshore berth for the larger tankers.

Torgan said the current plan would require the dredging of three million cubic yards of material for the channel and turning basin for the ships, destroying 73 acres of winter flounder spawning habitat. He said an environmental impact statement is ongoing and that he expects the draft to be released in June at which time the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) will conduct public hearings in Rhode Island and Massachusetts. No matter which way federal regulators and Massachusetts rule on the project, Torgan says it will end up in the courts. He said Save the Bay will appeal approval of the project and he believes Weaver’s Cove would do the same if its application were denied.

Torgan made it clear it’s the proposed citing of a terminal in the confined waters of Mount Hope Bay that Save the Bay opposes.

“If it’s truly an off-shore terminal,” he said referencing Rhode Island Sound, “we’ll take a look at it.” Also, he pointed out that an off-shore LNG terminal in Chesapeake Bay does not affect activities because it is sufficiently far enough from the shore that the exclusionary zones required for the tankers don’t disrupt shipping traffic, pleasure boating and regattas.

But that didn’t change the thinking of many in the room who, looking at the impact on Rhode Island waters, saw little more than hassle at the least and lost opportunities including jobs and revenues for the state at the most.

Questions were raised over whether the state would lose cruise ship visits – a major boost for the Newport economy – and if approved would the terminal thwart efforts to bring America’s Cup races to Newport. During a tanker’s transit, Torgan said, Newport Harbor would be “shutdown” for about an hour. The Pell and Mount Hope Bay bridges would also be closed for periods during passages. The exclusionary zones for the tankers, as currently set by the Coast Guard, would extend for two miles ahead, one mile astern and 1,000 yards abeam of the tankers.

While those arguments favoring the project including a 20 percent increase in the supply of gas thereby creating the potential for lower regional energy costs and the creation of jobs were not presented, there were apparent efforts to discredit them.

Marine Trades Association member Michael Keyworth of Brewer’s Marina claimed the terminal would create 32 full time jobs. Gleason said, “It’s not for the common good. It’s for Hess only.”

Weaver’s Cove officials say up to 1,000 skilled trade workers will be employed during the three-year construction of the facility with $125 million in direct wages. They project 50 jobs with support for 350 more jobs generating $105 million in direct and indirect economic benefits.

Save the Bay is arguing the case on the basis that it is not needed; it would disrupt the economy and harm the Bay and that it would give a private company rights to a public resource.

With three LNG terminals in the northeast region, Torgan said Weaver’s Cove has not demonstrated a public need for the facility. Further, he said, with the discovery of reserves of natural gas in shale deposits in Pennsylvania and upstate New York, there should be more than an adequate supply for an extended period.

Torgan said the project would require in excess of 20 permits from a variety of agencies and “we’re going to dog every one of them.” He didn’t see much opportunity for state legislative action although he mentioned a bill introduced by Rep. Douglas Gablinske that would require ships 150 feet and longer carrying a hazardous cargo to clear Rhode Island bridges by a minimum of 25 feet.

“I’m not worried about the one in a million scenario,” Torgan said referencing concerns that the tankers could be the targets of terrorists or there could be an accident, “but what is going to happen.”

Torgan said public advocacy plays an important role in the fight and that Save the Bay has garnered the signatures of 4,000 people opposed to the project, of which 80 percent are not Save the Bay members. The next phase of the fight he estimated at costing $50,000.

There were suggestions from Marine Trades officials that people open their wallets.

“We’re going to win this thing,” Togan vowed.