My Sea to Sky announced it will hold a peaceful roadside protest along Highway 99 on Friday, May 16, to oppose the proposed LNG plant.
The protestors will gather at Shannon Falls at 8:30 a.m. for a peaceful protest as Premier Christy Clark comes to Squamish for the Sea to Sky Gondola grand opening, the group said.
The co-founder of the group, Tracey Saxby, said she is excited for the grand opening of the Sea to Sky Gondola which showcases that natural beauty of the town.
“We need to support this investment in tourism infrastructure to attract more potential investments like these,” she said.
Saxby said Friday’s demonstration brings together a growing number of concerned voices who have been straining to be heard.
“We also have concerns about how this proposed project would impact the new economy that is emerging in Squamish which includes the film industry, the rec tech industry, knowledge-based industry, and green small business champions.”
She said Woodfibre LNG does not make sense for Squamish or anywhere else for that matter.
“Certainly not from a climate change standpoint, and the upstream impact of fracking in northern BC is something all Canadians should be worried about,” she said.
Rick says
Get a job
Adam says
Very constructive Rick. Do you actually have anything intelligent to add to this discussion or is hurling insults the most you have to offer?
Gary says
I agree Rick. So disgusted with the anti-LNG gang. Squamish is barely getting out of the shadows of recession and still has a terrible reputation for being close to business. I hope due process is followed and we get some industry here. This town has a really serious NIMBY problem.
Brad Hodge says
“We also have concerns about how this proposed project would impact the new economy that is emerging in Squamish which includes the film industry, the rec tech industry, knowledge-based industry, and green small business champions.”
It would impact it exactly the same way it impacts these types of businesses in Vancouver — ie. not at all. You cannot power an entire economy on KBI and tourism alone, and I would dispute the idea that either industry is free of negative environmental impacts — it’s just that a lot of those impacts happen out of sight, out of mind.
A community needs as diverse a business base as possible so that when one sector gets hit with a downturn, the others keep you going. You also need to provide jobs for those who lack the skills/credentials for that kind of work. If we provide those jobs, then we don’t have to spend time obsessing about ‘living wages’ for Starbucks workers. If I were feeling better, I would totally get out there and counter protest.
Mona Benge says
just how many jobs do you expect from the LNG plant? The executive at the meeting I attended said it would be less than a hundred. Taxes for Squamish will be minimal because everything is on the water except for some administrative building. So the cost benefit ratio will not be in favour of Squamish when you consider the hazard the will exist for the whole of Howe Sound and the shipping route through the Georgia/Haro Straits region. There are better industries to encourage.
Adam says
Brad,
It’s far easier to land a job in tech-rec, knowledge or the film industry than it will be in LNG. Do you need work? I’d be pleased to show you how to get set up working for your self in tech in as little as 4-6 months. LNG is not going to solve the employment ‘problem’ in Squamish.
The reality is this. The economy is changing and now, more than ever before, you need to create your own opportunity in this world. What everyone thinks is a ‘problem’ unique to Squamish is the same issue being played out in countless cities around the world. Hoping that an outside employer is going to solve all of your problems just isn’t realistic anymore. We’re all on our own and while scary to some, it represents the best opportunity we’ve ever had to build true freedom. LNG isn’t the answer to your worries. A town with a unique vision built around clean air and water is bound to attract far more wealth and investment long-term so let’s go get it.
Donny says
Maybe I missed it , but can any of you tell me how much the LNG plant is going to contribute to our tax base? Or have they been offered a free ride?
In addition , what kind of pollutants , if any , will be carried by the winds blowing down the Sound right into the front windows of those apartments “yet” to be built at SODC ?
Wendy says
WFLNG probably won’t contrubute much to Squamish tax base because the liquefaction plant is planned to be on a floating barge. Municipal taxes (not determined yet) are charged on improvements on land, not those floating on federally administered ocean.
Re other taxes, neither BC nor Canada would see much tax revenue because WFLNG is owned in Singapore and can keep profits offshore. BC might receive a small amount of tax on WFLNG profits, but only if the mobile barge facility stays in BC past 7 years, which is iffy given fluctuations in international LNG supply and demand. BC proposes to tax LNG facilities 1.5% on net profits and then rebate this back in full after 7 years. After that, WFLNG would pay “up to” 7% on net profits after capital costs are written off. That’s if there are ever any net profits shown in BC.
All profits will go offshore to Singapore.
So we have: profits go overseas, little tax gained at any level, subsidized natural gas rates for Woodfibre-LNG ie now 25% lower for WFLNG (and Vancouver Island) and 25% higher for Vancovuer as of Ap 1st, increased electric rates for residential customers as of Ap 1st (and significantly higher once Site C dam or other sources are built to power Woodfibre-LNG)….ie LOTS of subsidy of Woodfdibre LNG. We will get almost no money for our LNG. All for 90 jobs. Doesn’t sound sensible to me.
And the orcas, grey whales, porpoises, and herring (also sound sensitive) will probably go away again due to noisy turbines (cooling the natural gas to become LNG). The noise will carry through the float into the water. Water transmits noise 5 times faster and much further than in the air. Orcas won’t be able to hear each other.
G_h says
Several good points being made here. It is time the hysterical anti-LNG crowd found some other fashionable concern to obsess over and quit damaging Squamish’s economic prospects.
Paul Watt says
Squamish is blowing up right now, in case you didn’t notice. It’s happening in spite of our incompetent council, and it’s happening because Squamish is becoming known as a place that has moved away from the resource dependant environmental disasters of it’s past. Film, sport industries, education, tourism, technology… These are what will drive us forward. You should know and understand that as much as anyone.
Adam says
Well said Paul. Squamish is H-O-T right now and only going to get better. We’re very much becoming a destination and we’re attracting great business to the community. Our firm (offices in Vancouver) recently moved our financial record keeping to a provider here in Squamish and was eyeing a permanent move of our office to Squamish. All on hold now pending the LNG decision. Why? Our plan to move here was based on providing perspective employees with a pristine environment to live and recreate in. If LNG arrives, this dies and that would be extremely sad.
Ihor Zalubniak says
“Pristine” is a bit of a dramatization. Unless of course you ignore the power lines, and thousands of vehicles racing thru on the way to ski and party central. And the industrial/big box complex along the highway is a natural phenomenon as well. Your comments about potentially canceling your company’s move to Squamish seems a truffle disingenuous.
Adam says
Sorry you disagree with my choice of words. Having grown up here and having travelled extensively, I feel quite confident that ‘pristine’ is the right choice of words. Squamish is amazing and has only improved since industry exited. We’ve got work to do but there’s light on the horizon and if you don’t see that you’re not looking very hard.
Those power lines carry electricity generated by clean Hydro (not perfect but pretty damn progressive of BC to take on Hydro back in the day). The cars you reference are an issue but getting more and more efficient every day and the electric car business is booming. Big box retail is a reality in most places but is something we could get rid of if we wanted. Just shop elsewhere.
As for moving my business. Why the hell would I spend money to move my company from Vancouver if Squamish didn’t offer something unique? LNG and industry isn’t a selling point for prospective employee but climbing, biking, hiking, clean air and water are. So yes, we’ll stay in Vancouver if that’s not on the table. We bill ourselves as the ‘Outdoor Recreation Capital of Canada’ not the ‘Home of Heavy Industry’ – don’t see the two as compatible.
Ihor Zalubniak says
To the protesters who plan to be in attendance at the opening of the Sea to Sky Gondola in Squamish today, STAY HOME! This event has nothing to do with your concerns about LNG – you are hitching a FREE RIDE on a celebration of achievement and creativity. If you really CARE about LNG go protest at the Legislature. Spend your money and time to mount your protest. Out of respect for the owners and those who really support this addition to our community you should NEVER return to ride the gondola or walk the trails created by it.
You should be ashamed of yourselves hijacking this proud day for Squamish.
Adam says
Ihor,
I understand your sentiment but I’m pretty sure that the Sea-to-Sky Gondola doesn’t want to see LNG arrive here in town. They just invested 10’s of millions to show people how beautiful Squamish is. Putting an LNG plant right in the middle of the sound won’t do much for their bottom line. Hell, we hang our hat on being the outdoor recreation capital of the world. ‘Come to Squamish, ride your bike and inhale byproduct emissions, nitrous oxide and carbon monoxide’ doesn’t have the same ring to it.
Ihor Zalubniak says
Adam – you really have no evidence that an LNG plant on Howe Sound will affect the bottom line of the Gondola. Pure conjecture and speculation.
What about the possible scenario that the plant is well designed and contained and becomes an example of environmentally sound / visually aesthetic / with global benefit and becomes a standard of what what can be achieved? Or is that not possible in your world?
Adam says
Ihor,
Given that Management listed being able to see nature in it’s pristine state as a big selling point over Grouse and Whistler Mountains, I’m pretty confident that it’s not going to ad to the bottom line. It’s their big sell.
Further, science (key word) would indicate that sustained reliance on fossil fuels will kill us all. Even the most hardened climate change deniers are having trouble sustaining their rhetoric and becoming more and more isolated. While funny, this more or less highlights the general feel of anybody paying attention to global events as it relates to our continued exploitation of fossil fuels. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjuGCJJUGsg
If you can point to research indicating that fracking and the burning of LNG can be done in a manner that has no negative environmental impact Id’ very be curious to see the data. Specifically, I’d be curious to see how fracking can be completed without compromising our water and continuing to raise the earth’s temperatures. Looking forward to seeing the data.
Ihor Zalubniak says
Again Adam you missed the original point. I’m not supporting LNG – I’m disappointed in the tactics employed on openning day of the Gondola. If My Sea to Sky has sufficient public respect and support it should be able to stage it’s own event and have the media coverage and interest it hopes to achieve. I expect that the Organization will protest at the Squamish Music festival, although I was disappointed not to see a bigger effort made to protest during the influx of traffic for the last event in Whistler. A lack of interest or too much effort required.
Ps. What is so pristine about the quarry that you can see on Watts Point?
Ken says
Wow , you people are so ignorant to the environment and the harm caused by having a facility like this in Squamish. Fracking uses enormous amounts of fresh water only to pollute the clean water we have. We don’t need “more jobs” we need a stable environment that will benefit the future of our planet.
Ihor Zalubniak says
Ken. Did you actually read and understand my comment. It doesn’t support LNG or any other activity that is detrimental to the environment. My comments identified the way in which the protest was staged, basically hijacking the opening of the gondola. Poor showing of understanding community relations.
Paul Watt says
Ihor, most people protesting absolutely support the Gondola and have passes there. This is exactly the type of development we support, and if you had cared to examine the demonstration, you’d see that Gondola support was the foundation of the protest. In fact, every employee from the Gondola I saw expressed support for the anti-LNG movement. It’s in the best interest of everyone in Squamish, especially the Gondola that this project never get off the ground. The economic benefits are insignificant, while the cost to our environment are huge.
Adam says
Great point by Ken. We’re focussed on the terminus of this project. What Squamish as a community should also be weighing is the impact of fracking on the communities throughout BC that will be providing gas. Many of these communities rely on ground water and we’re setting them up for disaster.
While other states and provinces are moving quickly to ban fracking, Christy Clark and Jordan Sturdy are giving it their all to ram these projects down the throats of British Columbians.
Lynn Wilbur says
Human caused Global warming and Climate change are the major issues of our time. Producing more and more fossil fuel for energy consumption makes the problem worse not better. When our politicians reject their responsibilities to the future generations, it becomes the citizens right, responsibility, and duty to protest and stand up for a sustainable future.
Wendy says
Re noise from Woodfibre-LNG, to cool the natural gas there will be a whole line of turbines, which are basically jet engines. They will run 24 hours a day.
Ihor Zalubniak says
Thank you Wendy – hadn’t heard that info about tubines before.
Craig D. McConnell says
Wendy,
Given your focus on “a whole line of gas turbines” how about doing a bit of research on combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) technology. There are few manufacturers that meet the specification and include ABB of Switzerland, Siemens of Germany, and possibly General Electric of USA. Examine the operating specifications of the CCGT, particularly the available noise suppression housing system, and note that the installed site will be 7 kilometers from downtown Squamish.
The CCGT bears little resemblance to a plane jet engine. I have stood beside a industrial gas turbine at the previous pulp mill in Campbell River without the need for sound related personal protective equipment. Acoustically the CCGT is designed with sound attenuation considered for plant operating staff and beyond the installed site fenceline.
How about your guestimate on the number of CCGT for Woodfibre LNG?
Craig D. McConnell
Geoscience Analysis Technology
Enviro-Guard Technology
Ihor Zalubniak says
Craig – I appreciate your comments regarding the tubines – do they produce accoustic vibration, with potential effects on marine mammals, that would be transmitted to the water given that they are proposed to be situated on a “barge” at the water’s edge.
Don Patrick says
Got to have a job before you can become a tourist… sure a lot of misinformation in the market place these days… and for those worried about Global warming, it is going to happen and if all the carbon and other bad stuff was stopped tomorrow, the end may be a couple weeks longer. Volcano eruption and in a couple days the volumes of bad stuff equals all the human race can create in a year or more. Try the Scientific American and disregard the thousands that are living off the scare tactics. Remember, professors and educators along with self named individuals only know what they have been taught or want to know….they are not the end all most cases cannot see out of the box.
Adam says
Don. The movement denying climate change is dead. It’s 3 other guys and yourself that are still trying to deny the human race has anything to do with the state of our planet: http://www.whitehouse.gov/climate-change
Ihor Zalubniak says
In this midst of all this banter and commenting and slagging, it appears that there are several separate issues emerging and can possible be evaluated as mutually exclusive. Or not. Are there others not listed below? And are the comments supporting or denying these issues supported by science? How do we separate emotionally based responses from science.
1. Taxation – is some better than none?
2. The visual impact of the site – wwho arbitrates esthetics?
3. The local air quality impact of the project.
4. The water quality impact of the project.
5. The environmental impact of gas extraction in non-local locations.
6. The possible benefit to global CO2 production thru the replacement of coal generation.
7. Is there a NIMBY component to the protest?
8. The environmental impact on marine mammals.
9. Which human activity doesn’t have a carbon footprint?
10. Which human activities do we condone because there are benefits to OUR individual lifestyles? Tourism? Recreation? Trips to centalized medical services?
11. How does “global activism” apply to this scenario in terms of benefits globally vs local costs?
12. And finally – do we have social reponsibilities beyond our own community and our own lives?
A personal comment: Does our perception of what we are entitled to outweigh projects which may improve the lives of people far away. Next time you open your fridge and ponder what you might want to snack on – consider those in the world without electical service to run a refridgerator and the impact that has on their DAILY lives in terms of food collection and preservation. Yes, there are other sources of power such as solar and wind. Yes, they should be developed . Yes, we should tell those people who’s lives are substantially less benefitted than ours, “just wait a bit – we’re trying to figure this out. We’ll let you know when there is a better solution. In the meantime just keep doing what you’re doing and try to survive.”
Before you sit down at your computer/tablet/phone to respond to this – take a serious look at how good your life is and what the global cost has been for your lifestyle to exist. And then, MAKE A COMMITMENT TO REDUCE YOUR IMPACT (and not just by re-cycling pop cans and cardboard) ON THE EARTH THRU YOUR CONSUMPTION and ACTIVITIES. HAVE A LOOK AT THAT GORETEX JACKET, THE BICYCLE, THE AUTOMOBILE, ANY FOOD YOU EAT THAT DIDN’T COME OUT OF YOUR BACK YARD. THE POWER CONSUMPTION OF GOOGLE AND FACEBOOK AND THE INTERNET. (Are you aware that a major internet provider just bought another hydro electric provider to provide for its need to COOL the processors and storage facilities it runs?)
And, that’s it for now.
larry mclennan says
Its interesting to note the span of subjects addressed with the LNG question. These include the LNG plant itself, the effect on tourism, tax base , global warming/ climate change ,employment numbers, turbines frightening whales and herring. Much of the anti-LNG seems to be frightening rhetoric concocted from questionable truisms. The pro-LNG appears to be more identifiable job creation and municipal tax benefits. Is it possible for the anit-groups to provide more provable data to support their concerns/statements? Conversely, could the pro-LNG group do the same? It would be interesting to see which group/side performs the best.
Jean says
I like that Larry,
Good suggestion. But most of all why not make use of what we have or should be able to get, at reasonable cost, for those that at present are not getting it locally and only after all that, consider LNG. It seams Fortis restricting access to CNG/ household gas and W-LNG not interested to sell LNG if successful to the local market as stated. When does the DOS support those, that have no acess to house hold gas, at much lower cost then electricity, where the government is having the monopoly on it. So let not Fortis use the 100 Year supply of the truly Natural Gas reserve already admitted to and divert it to the North to frack for more Gas and then when it is sold for a few years, until the rest of the World is geared up to take over, with there tremendous capacities elsewhere, much bigger then what we can get out of the Horn basin, the lesser polluting “Earth Gas” ( Methane) region … please note that this not natrural gas any more., but rather UN-natural Gas with undefined and secret chemicals in it, plus all the rest that goes with fracking … now back to Fortis, of course a monetary windfall for a few years, that all with acces to household gas will have to compete for and will be asked to pay the same, as the export market will bring ( again for a very short time only and with no grantee of a lasting profit, on the end), rather a liability in view of all the possibilities emerging and the future creating of alternative power/heat that might change to the better for the consumers, if not a mega greedy corporation gets a hold of it, to carry on the profit taking.
larry mclennan says
Jean- I gather that english is not the language you are most comfortable using so I’ll cut you some slack there. Your fears and statements however indicate to me that you are reading many anti-fracking documents which are commonly filled with mis-statements and, in some cases, knowing falsehoods. There is an interesting column in the Vancouver Province (this past Tues or Wed- May20/21) you might read to give yourself an alternate perspective. Also, you might want to watch the Sun News channel (Ezra Levant especially- channel 177 on my Shaw) as they have exposed many of the falsehoods and scandals related to the anti-fracking factions. You can also go onto the Sun News website to look up previous broadcasts relating to the fracking debate. Find out how open-minded you are-it might change your attitude.Tell your friends and see what their response is.