Trump-fake-news-yellow-bg-950x108px.jpg

Pacific NorthWest LNG

From SourceWatch
Jump to: navigation, search

This article is part of the FrackSwarm portal on SourceWatch, a project of CoalSwarm and the Center for Media and Democracy. To search by topic or location, click here.

This article is part of the FrackSwarm coverage of fracking.
Sub-articles:
Related articles:

Pacific NorthWest LNG is a proposed natural gas liquefaction and export facility on Lelu Island, British Columbia Canada within the District of Port Edward on land administered by the Prince Rupert Port Authority.

According to the company website, Pacific NorthWest LNG would liquefy and export natural gas produced by Progress Energy Canada Ltd. in northeast B.C. Both Pacific NorthWest LNG and Progress Energy are majority-owned by PETRONAS. Sinopec, JAPEX, Indian Oil Corporation and PetroleumBRUNEI are minority shareholders in the Pacific NorthWest LNG project.[1] Progress Energy, the company supplying gas to Pacific NorthWest LNG, estimates the development of Pacific NorthWest LNG is a $9 billion to $11 billion investment to build the pipeline.[2] Business Vancouver reports the entire project will cost $36 million.[3]

Loading map...

Background

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) began its review of the proposed Pacific NorthWest LNG in April, 2013. The review of the LNG facility has been halted five times due to different issues, including a need for further scientific information.[4]

The LNG faced another delay on March 19, 2016. The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency' was granted an extra three months to finish an impact study.[5]

Opposition

In November 2015 members of the Lax Kw'alaams First Nation camped at the site of the proposed LNG facility to prevent further research.

"We want to make sure nothing gets contaminated or in the way natural habitat, whether it's salmon or shellfish or eelgrass," said Clifford White, chief councillor of the Gitxaala First Nation.[6]

The Skeena Watershed Conservation Coalition and other groups have raised concerns about the risk to salmon habitat on Flora Bank, an area located next to Lelu Island, which could be impacted by the LNG port.[4]

Opponents claim approving Pacific Northwest will make it impossible for B.C. and Canada to meet new emissions reduction standards. Running the plant would release 5.28 million tons of carbon dioxide a year.[7]

More than 130 scientists questioned the science behind the CEAA environmental assessment of the proposed Pacific Northwest LNG. These fish and wildlife biologists from Canada, the U.S., and Norway made their concerns in a joint letter. Of primary concern is the salmon. "You couldn't find a worse location to develop in terms of risks to fish. The CEAA report does not acknowledge that this LNG proposal is located on critical habitat of Canada's second largest wild salmon watershed", said a representative of the Skeena Fisheries Commission."The CEAA draft report for the Pacific Northwest LNG project is a symbol of what is wrong with environmental decision-making in Canada," the letter states[8]

Industry Groups

Project Details

  • Operator: Progress Energy Canada Ltd.
  • Annual Capacity (cubic feet):
  • Status: Proposed

Articles and resources

References

  1. "Pacific NorthWest LNG" accessed March 2, 2016.
  2. "Pacific NorthWest LNG" Progress Energy, accessed March 7, 2016.
  3. Jonny Wakefield,"Will Justin Trudeau’s emissions plans trip up Petronas LNG project?" Business Vancouver, March 18, 2016.
  4. 4.0 4.1 "Pacific NorthWest LNG plan review resumes after long delay" Brent Jang, Globe and Mail, December 20, 2015.
  5. David Ljunggren, Julie Gordon, and Emily Chow,"Huge Petronas Canada LNG project runs into further delays" Reuters, March 19, 2016.
  6. "Lelu Island LNG project divides First Nations as protest continues" Daybreak North, CBC News, November 12, 2015.
  7. Jonny Wakefield,"Will Justin Trudeau’s emissions plans trip up Petronas LNG project?" Business Vancouver, March 18, 2016.
  8. "Lelu Island LNG environmental assessment questioned by 130 scientists" CBC News, March 09, 2016.

Related SourceWatch articles

For state-by-state information on fracking click on the map below:

Alabama and fracking Alaska and fracking Arizona and fracking Arkansas and fracking California and fracking Colorado and fracking Connecticut and fracking Delaware and fracking Florida and fracking Georgia and fracking Hawaii and fracking Idaho and fracking Illinois and fracking Indiana and fracking Iowa and fracking Kansas and fracking Kentucky and fracking Louisiana and fracking Maine and fracking Maryland and fracking Massachusetts and fracking Michigan and fracking Minnesota and fracking Mississippi and fracking Missouri and fracking Montana and fracking Nebraska and fracking Nevada and fracking New Hampshire and fracking New Jersey and fracking New Mexico and fracking New York and fracking North Carolina and fracking North Dakota and fracking Ohio and fracking Oklahoma and fracking Oregon and fracking Pennsylvania and fracking Rhode Island and fracking South Carolina and fracking South Dakota and fracking Tennessee and fracking Texas and fracking Utah and fracking Vermont and fracking Virginia and fracking Washington State and fracking West Virginia and fracking Wisconsin and fracking Wyoming and fracking Delaware and fracking Maryland and fracking New Hampshire and fracking New Jersey and fracking Massachusetts and fracking Connecticut and fracking West Virginia and fracking Vermont and fracking Rhode Island and frackingMap of USA with state names.png
About this image
This article is a stub. You can help by expanding it.