Woodfibre LNG opponents have made a legal appeal to environment minister Leona Aglukkaq asking the federal government to do its own examination of the Woodfibre LNG proposal rather than letting B.C. run the environmental assessment of the project.
“The idea of shipping LNG through our heavily populated area requires serious consideration of the hazards,” says Dr. Eoin Finn, spokesperson for the citizens group My Sea to Sky.
“The Woodfibre location doesn’t even meet the siting criteria set by the LNG industry itself. Nor does it meet the U.S. LNG siting criteria.”
The Woodfibre LNG project requires assessment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, but in 2014 minister Aglukkaq allowed the B.C. environmental assessment process to “substitute” for the federal process.
Lawyer Bill Andrews, representing My Sea to Sky, said the provincial process is not meeting the federal legal requirement to examine the potentially catastrophic effects of an LNG spill due to an accident or malfunction regarding LNG shipping.
In addition,” he said, “the provincial process excludes members of the public from the ‘Working Group’ that conducts the assessment, contrary to the CEAA requirement that the public be allowed to participate in the assessment.”
The U.S. Coast Guard’s LNG siting process looks at human populations within hazard zones of 500 m, 1,600 m and 3,500 m around the terminal and shipping route. These hazard zones for the Woodfibre LNG proposal include the Sea to Sky Highway, BC Ferries traffic out of Horseshoe Bay, and considerable portions of West Vancouver, Lions Bay, Bowen Island, Furry Creek, Bowyer Island, Anvil Island, as well as Porteau Cove Provincial Park, Murrin Provincial Park, and Britannia Beach, the opponents said.
The U.S. siting standards require consideration of the possibility that an LNG spill over water creates a vapour plume that could travel a mile and a half or more before igniting, creating an LNG fireball, a flash back to the source, and then a pool fire at the LNG spill site. In contrast, Woodfibre LNG Inc.’s application claims there would be “negligible to minor” consequences in a worst case scenario of LNG being released from all the cargo tanks on an LNG carrier (maximum capacity of 180,000 m3), the opponents said.
Edna Thomson says
Thank you Dr. Finn, and My Sea To Sky for providing this welcome information regarding your appeal to the Federal Government for a more thorough assessment according to the comprehensive Canadian Environmental Assessment Act of 2012. And thanks to all other opponents working as individuals and/or in groups to alert all British Columbians of this threat to the irreplaceable ecological treasure we have in Howe Sound.
This preposterous proposal to introduce such a detrimentally exploitive industry into the magnificent waterways, ecologically rich, and beyond beautiful vistas of Howe Sound is nothing short of insane
Many thanks again for this inspired opportunity for all to continue speaking up!
tjay says
Yeah whatever…..
Donna Moore says
Dr. Finn should be applauded for requesting federal intervention to prevent this ecological site from being damaged. I spent a few years as a child in Sechelt when it was an obscure lovely littl town. There was enough money for a school bus one way. After school a few of us children walked the mile long beachfront together on our way home. It was pristine and amazing and I would hope that it will remain that way for all future generations. We have seen the devastation of fracking all over the coastal areas including the beautiful Mexican Baja. Let us not repeat the same mistakes once more. The people of Santa Rosarita on the Baja used to be great squid fishermen. They would go out at dusk in their pangas and float around for hours with their lamps. This is all gone now and the people have lost their traditional livelihood. The pursuit of money does not compensate for the loss of nature no matter how masterfully it is presented to the public.
tjay says
Keep your nose to yourself in B.C.
Eric Andersen says
REGARDING: “The Woodfibre location doesn’t even meet the siting criteria set by the LNG industry itself. Nor does it meet the U.S. LNG siting criteria.” This is just more mischief from the anti-WLNG campaign. A successful, generally well appreciated publication like The Squamish Reporter does not need to indulge in spreading such tiresome misinformation.
tjay says
Probably a lot of lots in Squamish don’t meet so-called criteria, set by Squamish government itself. By your standards , they also should be turfed out !
As far as your opinion of what ‘The Reporter’ needs to indulge in or not, who in fact placed you in the position of God to dictate this ?! Dictators throughout history have NEVER done well. May I suggest you put your opinions where your mouth is and start YOUR OWN newspaper ?. No?….. Yeah, I thought so.