By Evan Drygas
Published: April 1, 2015
As someone who grew up in Squamish I spent a great deal of my free time hiking, biking, and skiing in the profound wilderness that surrounds us. My connection with our environment runs deep. Four generations of my family have depended on the forest for their livelihood and I grew up understanding that we relied on the environment for both work and play. I learned that industry and tourism could co-exist as long as they both were sustainable.
I hope that we can move past the misinformation and rhetoric that has been propagated by some opponents. False scare stories about non-existent exclusion zones, the notion that Howe Sound is too narrow, subsidized BC Hydro rates and “kill-zones” do nothing to further the productive conversation Squamish needs to have about this project. The world needs our LNG. It’s time to show the world we can make it better than anyone else.
Woodfibre LNG will provide the permanent, good paying, family-supporting jobs that our community needs. The company will provide about 100 jobs that will result in over $8 million in wages to be spent in Squamish. This is in addition to the $2 million plus that the company will pay in property taxes, and tens of millions more that will go into provincial and federal coffers to pay for things like health care and education.
I support Woodfibre LNG because our environment is so important. Soon, the company will remove 3,000 herring roe killing creosote pilings from the foreshore of the site. They will restore Mill Creek and remove contaminated materials from the site ― reversing much of the impact of 100 years of industrial use.
This is a genuine opportunity for Squamish to have a positive impact on the global environment. Woodfibre LNG would provide natural gas to emerging economies that are currently heavily dependent on coal. Fossil fuels still account for 85 percent of the world’s energy, and cleaner fossil fuels are a sure fire way to reduce GHG emissions and the micro-particulate that kills millions.
Much of the natural gas for Woodfibre LNG will come from Hydraulic Fracturing – the same process used for over 50 years in BC, the same process that is currently used to supply our homes and businesses, and to supply exports to the United States. BC regulatory agencies have a great deal of experience with this technology, and are world leaders in doing it safely. BC was the first jurisdiction in the world to require companies to post chemicals they use online for all to see, and the shale in BC is in remote regions, thousands of feet below the levels used for groundwater.
Woodfibre LNG will also be paying higher tariffs for the natural gas and the electricity they will use to compress it. The costs will not be passed onto consumers.
We’re fortunate enough to welcome tens of thousands of visitors every year. Places like Hammerfest in Norway, Barcelona and Boston all have a thriving tourism industry alongside LNG plants. Industry and tourism has co-existed in Squamish for a long time. Why would Woodfibre LNG change anything? We also need to recognize that most of our visitors come in the summer and some businesses struggle after the summer boom. We need a diversified economy that has a strong, year-long base in addition to tourism.
When the pulp mill was built a hundred years ago there was no environmental review process, and little to any environmental monitoring. Times have changed, our EAO environmental review process is stringent, and even the strongest supporter would fully expect Woodfibre LNG to be held to a high standard and meet or exceed all environmental regulation.
We have an opportunity here to increase the number of high-paying local jobs and our industrial tax base. The real question should be how we do it, not if.
Jean says
Missing on your article and interpretations you use, are links documented by reputable scientists and accredited professionals that published facts, it,s sounding more like a summaries of the pro LNG Spin Dr,s working for the Fossil fuel industry. Are you a PHD on LNG.
It was no fun to read all that old non sense making article.
Bottom of it, please change your thinking and exchange old Fossil fuel business Moto, to what Germany of many are doing, employing 2 million People in research and manufacturing of clean energy, not repackaging the old fossil fuel ( model T type energy) and re branding it into a more modern sounding desirable gunk.
PS ..was a good 1st April joke!!!!
Bonny says
On August 6th Mr. Drygas said that West Vancouver council should mind its own business when voting against the LNG proposal. A funny thing to say when the tankers could spill all over West Van’s beach.
As an employee of Whistler Municipality, maybe Mr Drygas should mind HIS own business.
Larry McLennan says
soooo-your argument is that anyone who works outside of Squamish- yet may live here – should not have a say in the community. I suppose you will be the first one demanding that Eoin Finn get the hell out of town.
Bruce says
Evan Drygas bullshit article was obviously written by Christy Clark. What a joke.
Thomas says
What’s a joke is that you’re accusing Christy Clark of writing something even though she clearly didn’t. Having one similar opinion to someone else doesn’t transform you into that person. It’s even funnier that you need to resort to foul language in your post.
Trevor says
Jean – These facts have been backed up any number of times. By regulators (BC Oil and Gas Commission), industry and science. This is an opinion piece; not a scientific paper.
Bonny – Your comment reinforces Evan’s argument. He noted that he lives in Squamish. If he does indeed work for the Resort Municipality then he’s in the unfortunately position of being one of the many people forced to find a good paying job outside of town. I grew up in a town like that in ON. The folks that commuted to the good jobs had money, but on the whole the community was poorer for not attracting a balanced economy.
Dave says
Not one scrap of evidence to substantiate the headline. How does the world *need* our LNG especially when other countries can do it cleaner and cheaper?
Larry McLennan says
Name them
Cinci says
Brilliant April Fools joke 🙂
Mike says
It’s nice to finally read someone’s thoughts on this project as opposed to quotations from this source or that one. For every peer reviewed paper saying one thing is bad, you can find just as many saying the opposite. I for one am in total agreeance with this persons opinion, and since it is an opinion then nobody is able to say your wrong. Since my writing is limited to technical subjects, I thank you for putting this into words Mr. Drygas.
Thomas says
Opposition can be a good thing. This plan will more or less go through, so we need to make sure we’re getting the best deal for our town.
Don says
Nice to see the other side instead of the environmental theories usually published to drum up controversy.
Ralph Fulber says
Evan you need to do some homework particularly around “Hydraulic Fracturing – the same process used for over 50 years in BC, the same process that is currently used to supply our homes and businesses, and to supply exports to the United States”. This is the bullshit industry would like you to swallow but it is untrue. The horizontal drilling, the proprietary chemicals, the methane leaks, water contamination and abandoned wells are all a few of the things you will discover make your statement without factual basis. As to fossil fuels providing 85% of the world’s energy, that needs to be eliminated not just reduced and pass the buck. The jobs provided by dirty energy are already significantly less than those from new energy sources and these are perpetual. Once you build the infrastructure the source never runs out.