"They're saying the average family will save $300 with Broadwater, and that's false," said Richard Amper, executive director of the Pine Barrens Society, a group that's a member of the Anti-Broadwater Coalition. "We've talked to people in the energy business and economists, and they have said that is false."

A recent launch of television, print and radio ads by Broadwater Energy claim a floating natural gas terminal proposed for Long Island Sound by the joint venture of Shell Oil and TransCanada Corporation would save island households $300 per year in energy costs. This claim is being disputed by area environmentalists, who sent Mr. Cuomo a letter Wednesday asking him to investigate the advertisements.

"There's a point at which political spin turns into downright lies and Broadwater is at that point," said Adrienne Esposito, executive director of Citizens Campaign for the Environment, a Farmingdale-based environmental advocacy organization that has led the opposition to Broadwater since it was first proposed in 2005. "... This campaign is a last desperate attempt to gain some level of public support to make this decision more politically palatable for the governor. This misinformation campaign by Shell isn't directed at the public but to gain the governor's support."

Launched after the state and Broadwater agreed on a two-month postponement for a state ruling on whether the facility's proposed site in the middle of the Sound is environmentally appropriate, the ad campaign cost Broadwater around $100,000, Mr. Amper said.

In a written statement, Broadwater senior vice president John Hritcko said the environmentalists' claims are "false [and they] disregard the facts and the laws of supply-and-demand economics."

"They ignore independent studies conducted by the Long Island Power Authority and provide no independent analysis or date to validate their claims," Mr. Hritcko continued.

Additionally, the press conference held by Mr. Amper and other Broadwater opponents on Thursday to announce their call for the investigation, "is another example of grandstanding tactics that are designed to serve the opinions of a vocal minority at the expense of middle-income families on Long Island," he said.

The statement from Mr. Hritcko said that because Broadwater would bring a large new supply of natural gas to the region, it would bring down the price of energy to New Yorkers.

"Broadwater used economic models and widely accepted databases to develop this household savings analysis, which is based on expected energy cost savings submitted in our applications," Mr. Hritcko said.

Economist Martin Cantor said the $300 annual savings is "suspect" because it's impossible to forecast what liquefied natural gas will cost in the future and said energy costs will inevitably continue to rise -- with or without Broadwater.

"Energy costs will go up, they have to," said Mr. Cantor, director of the Long Island Economic and Social Policy Institute at Dowling College. "Anytime you're dealing with a commodity of diminishing reserves, they go up. They have not released calculations of how they arrived at the $300; the $300 is suspect."

"On Long Island, only 30 percent of people use natural gas, so what happens to the electric ratepayers?" he continued. "The only way they can assure Long Islanders will get a $300 savings per year is if they make it a rebate, if they cut a check."

Still, Broadwater insists their numbers are well-founded and ACORN executive director Bertha Lewis said the $300 in savings would prove to be a financial boost for Long Islanders. ACORN is the nation's largest community organization of low- and moderate-income families "working together for social justice and stronger communities," according to their Web site.

"Rising energy costs are hurting working families on Long Island and throughout the region," Ms. Lewis said in a written statement. "Groups like the Pine Barrens Society represent people who, by and large, have never had to worry about paying an energy bill in their life. They don't speak for most Long Islanders and they just don't get it. We need real solutions to our energy crisis that will lower the cost of energy and reduce pollution from coal-fired power plants in our neighborhoods."

Broadwater critics have said ACORN is supporting Broadwater's efforts because in June 2007, Shell Oil announced a 10-year, $10-million initiative with ACORN to fund the weatherizing of more than 2,000 houses in low-income parts of Nassau and Suffolk counties.

Gov. Eliot Spitzer is expected to make a decision by April 11 as to whether or not the Broadwater project can go forward -- a decision that has several local politicians concerned.

"Broadwater has created a campaign of lies and deceit which it is still trying to sell to the people of Long Island," said Assemblyman Fred Thiele Jr. (R-Sag Harbor). "Their claims of no environmental impacts and energy savings are the desperate attempts of a greedy corporation to exploit the resources and residents of Long Island for the almighty dollar. We know the claims are false. They cannot stand unchallenged as the final decision on Broadwater nears. The attorney general should expose and prosecute Broadwater's false advertising once and for all."

Assemblyman Marc Alessi (D-Shoreham) also called for the attorney general to investigate Broadwater's ads.

Mr. Amper said they are also asking the Nassau and Suffolk Departments of Consumer Affairs to participate in the investigation of Broadwater's ad campaign. However, Suffolk's director of Consumer Affairs Charles Gardner said while he had not heard of the request, it's likely he would "pass something like that onto the attorney general."

Add your comments below:

Your name:

Your email:

Subject:


Comments:



Enter text seen above: