03/26/2021
Honorable Premier Ministre, M. Francois Legault;
I say that it’s about time our government “approve or reject the GNL Québec project [1]. The fate of this project is in your hands, and so is the fate of all Canadians as this project would have repercussions not only in Quebec, but all across Canada.
I am writing to you today to ask you to reject GNL Québec. This liquified gas project is a threat for the global climate, the health of thousands of Canadians, and Canada’s biodiversity.
GNL Québec threatens the global climate
The project would generate over 50 million tonnes of GHG per year, for at least 25 years. That’s the equivalent of the pollution generated by 10 million cars, every single year [2], when we are in the midst of a climate crisis.
Moreover, your government announced that the gas exported by GNL Québec would replace coal consumption overseas. But so far, the company has not been able to show contracts which prove that statement. And even if GNL Québec could guarantee that its LNG would indeed replace coal, studies show that when unreported fugitive methane emissions are taken into account, the gas may induce little or no climate benefit compared to coal [3].
If Canada wants to commit to its announcement to reach carbon neutrality by 2050 [4], and if we listen to the science that tells us to stay under a global temperature increase of 1.5 C, then GNL Québec must never see the light of day.
Increasing fracking in Alberta is bad news for all Canadians
The gas used to fuel the GNL Québec liquefaction complex would come from Alberta [5], among which at least 80% would be extracted by hydraulic fracturing [6]. Also referred to as “fracking”, this extractive technique poses serious threats to air and water quality, the global climate, and human health. That is why in January 2020, the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) called for a moratorium on fracking in Canada [7].
GNL Québec poses a threat to endangered beluga whales
If your government approves GNL Québec, this will permit giant LNG tankers to make 400 trips per year, through the Saint-Lawrence river and the Saguenay Fjord, starting in 2027. The increase of human activities and noise in one of the essential habitats of the St.Lawrence belugas poses a serious threat to this endangered whale population, which has been declining since the early 2000s and is now facing an unprecedented increase of mortality in females of reproductive age and newborns [8].
Independent scientists funded by your own government recently asked for a moratorium on the increase in marine traffic in the Saguenay Fjord, because of the risks on this iconic species [9]. How can we possibly ignore this call for action?
The fact that the Quebec government is considering moving forward with this ticking bomb, when the climate crisis is getting worse by the minute, is in total contradiction with Canada and Quebec’s GHG reduction objectives and the protection of the environment.
For all these reasons, and more, I am asking you to reject GNL Québec right now.*
Best regards,
Daniel La Tour
104-9801 Ceres,
Dollard-des-Ormeaux, Quebec
Canada
H9B 0A8
Mobile/Text 514-659-5804
[email protected]
* Sources:
[1] https://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/story/41055/what-gnl-quebec-is-and-why-you-must-say-no-to-it/
[2] Mémoire du Collectif scientifique sur la question du gaz de schiste et les enjeux énergétiques au Québec et Rapport-Mémoire de Greenpeace sur GNL-Québec
[3] Notably : Howarth, R. W. (2014). A bridge to nowhere: methane emissions and the greenhouse gas footprint of natural gas. Energy Science & Engineering, 2(2), 47–60. http://doi.org/10.1002/ese3.35; and also : Johnson, M. R., Tyner, D. R., Conley, S., Schwietzke, S., & Zavala-Araiza, D. (2017). Comparisons of Airborne Measurements and Inventory Estimates of Methane Emissions in the Alberta Upstream Oil and Gas Sector. Environmental Science & Technology, 51(21), 13008–13017. http://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b03525
[4] https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/news/2020/11/government-of-canada-charts-course-for-clean-growth-by-introducing-bill-to-legislate-net-zero-emissions-by-2050.html
[5] Information provided by the promoters themselves during the environmental assessment (BAPE), full quote available at page 28 of this document : http://voute.bape.gouv.qc.ca/dl/?id=00000167928
[6] “(...) Since 2013, an estimated 80% of all oil wells placed on production use the same technique (fracking)” : https://www.alberta.ca/unconventional-resource-potential-development.aspx
[7]https://cape.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/CAPE-Fracking-Report-EN.pdf
[8] https://uqo.ca/nouvelles/39478
[9] https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/scientists-seek-moratorium-on-saguenay-river-projects-to-protect-beluga-whales-1.5089361?cache=pdchghmfvlrea
I am writing to you today to ask you to reject GNL Québec. This liquified gas project is a threat for the global climate, the health of thousands of Canadians, and Canada’s biodiversity.
GNL Québec threatens the global climate
The project would generate over 50 million tonnes of GHG per year, for at least 25 years. That’s the equivalent of the pollution generated by 10 million cars, every single year [2], when we are in the midst of a climate crisis.
Moreover, your government announced that the gas exported by GNL Québec would replace coal consumption overseas. But so far, the company has not been able to show contracts which prove that statement. And even if GNL Québec could guarantee that its LNG would indeed replace coal, studies show that when unreported fugitive methane emissions are taken into account, the gas may induce little or no climate benefit compared to coal [3].
If Canada wants to commit to its announcement to reach carbon neutrality by 2050 [4], and if we listen to the science that tells us to stay under a global temperature increase of 1.5 C, then GNL Québec must never see the light of day.
Increasing fracking in Alberta is bad news for all Canadians
The gas used to fuel the GNL Québec liquefaction complex would come from Alberta [5], among which at least 80% would be extracted by hydraulic fracturing [6]. Also referred to as “fracking”, this extractive technique poses serious threats to air and water quality, the global climate, and human health. That is why in January 2020, the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) called for a moratorium on fracking in Canada [7].
GNL Québec poses a threat to endangered beluga whales
If your government approves GNL Québec, this will permit giant LNG tankers to make 400 trips per year, through the Saint-Lawrence river and the Saguenay Fjord, starting in 2027. The increase of human activities and noise in one of the essential habitats of the St.Lawrence belugas poses a serious threat to this endangered whale population, which has been declining since the early 2000s and is now facing an unprecedented increase of mortality in females of reproductive age and newborns [8].
Independent scientists funded by your own government recently asked for a moratorium on the increase in marine traffic in the Saguenay Fjord, because of the risks on this iconic species [9]. How can we possibly ignore this call for action?
The fact that the Quebec government is considering moving forward with this ticking bomb, when the climate crisis is getting worse by the minute, is in total contradiction with Canada and Quebec’s GHG reduction objectives and the protection of the environment.
For all these reasons, and more, I am asking you to reject GNL Québec right now.
Best regards,
[your name will go here]
[your email address will go here] [your location will go here]
[1] https://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/story/41055/what-gnl-quebec-is-and-why-you-must-say-no-to-it/
[2] Mémoire du Collectif scientifique sur la question du gaz de schiste et les enjeux énergétiques au Québec et Rapport-Mémoire de Greenpeace sur GNL-Québec
[3] Notably : Howarth, R. W. (2014). A bridge to nowhere: methane emissions and the greenhouse gas footprint of natural gas. Energy Science & Engineering, 2(2), 47–60. http://doi.org/10.1002/ese3.35; and also : Johnson, M. R., Tyner, D. R., Conley, S., Schwietzke, S., & Zavala-Araiza, D. (2017). Comparisons of Airborne Measurements and Inventory Estimates of Methane Emissions in the Alberta Upstream Oil and Gas Sector. Environmental Science & Technology, 51(21), 13008–13017. http://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b03525
[4] https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/news/2020/11/government-of-canada-charts-course-for-clean-growth-by-introducing-bill-to-legislate-net-zero-emissions-by-2050.html
[5] Information provided by the promoters themselves during the environmental assessment (BAPE), full quote available at page 28 of this document : http://voute.bape.gouv.qc.ca/dl/?id=00000167928
[6] “(...) Since 2013, an estimated 80% of all oil wells placed on production use the same technique (fracking)” : https://www.alberta.ca/unconventional-resource-potential-development.aspx
[7]https://cape.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/CAPE-Fracking-Report-EN.pdf
[8] https://uqo.ca/nouvelles/39478
[9] https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/scientists-seek-moratorium-on-saguenay-river-projects-to-protect-beluga-whales-1.5089361?cache=pdchghmfvlrea
Fracked gas from Alberta, pipeline going through Ontario. Oppose this project NOW.
