It will be “virtually impossible” for B.C. to meet its climate target for 2050 if two liquefied natural gas projects – including Woodfibre LNG in Squamish – are built, according to a new report from a Canadian think tank.
“New investments in natural gas and LNG are too carbon-intensive to be consistent with limiting global temperature rise to 2 C, and therefore should not be seen as a climate solution,” said the Pembina Institute in a recent report.
In 2015, delegates from 19 countries signed onto the Paris Agreement, which outlines the global temperature rise should be kept below two degrees celsius. Some negative consequences of a two-degree increase include an almost 18 per cent decrease in Mediterranean freshwater, as well as decreases in the amount of wheat and corn harvested in the tropics, according to NASA.
Pembina’s report arrives at a time when discussion about climate change has taken a renewed focus.
B.C. has just been through a particularly dry summer, which has led to a record-breaking wildfire season. In the Squamish area, smoke blown in from B.C.’s Interior blotted out the sun for weeks. Some researchers appear to suggest the increased severity and frequency of fires may be at least in part due to global warming.
For example, a recent study published in Environmental Research Letters said that “climate change over the next century may have significant impacts on [the spread of] fire... in almost all parts of Canada’s forested landmass.” In some cases, the number of days during which fire spreads may double or triple in eastern Canada, while increasing by more than 50 per cent in the west, the study said.
In the midst of all this, the Pembina Institute is saying that if LNG Canada and Woodfibre LNG go ahead as planned, the two projects – and all activities associated with them, such as resource extraction – would create the equivalent of 10.2 megatonnes of carbon dioxide per year by 2050. Most of this pollution would come from LNG Canada, as it a significantly larger project.
LNG Canada’s project in Kitimat has been reported to cost up to $40 billion and is estimated by Pembina to emit 9.6 megatonnes of carbon pollution per year by 2050. On the other hand, Woodfibre is expected to cost up to $1.8 billion and Pembina says it would emit 0.6 megatonnes in the same period.
Since B.C.’s legislated goal is to bring its carbon pollution down to 12.6 megatonnes by 2050, this will leave barely any room for the emissions coming from the rest of the provincial economy. This is the reason the Pembina Institute report states it’s a near certainty B.C. will miss its climate targets. If those two LNG projects go forward using the best practices and technology, the report continues, emissions would be halved. However, the combined carbon output would still make it “very difficult” for B.C. to meet its targets without drastically eliminating emissions from the rest of the economy.
The latest figures, which were tallied in 2014, say the province emits the equivalent of about 63 megatonnes worth of carbon each year, and it’s expected to increase until 2030. This suggests B.C. is also on track to miss its 2020 goal of limiting carbon output to 43.5 megatonnes per year.
In reply to the concerns outlined by the study, a representative from the LNG industry told The Chief that people should look beyond the scope of just B.C. when accounting for climate change.
Susannah Pierce, external affairs director of LNG Canada, said that liquefied natural gas can reduce climate change globally because LNG burns cleaner than coal and could, therefore, be a more environmentally-friendly alternative.
“LNG Canada believes LNG has a vital role to play in meeting the global climate change challenge,” said Pierce in an emailed statement. “With half the CO2 than coal, natural gas delivered to China from LNG Canada to back out coal fired power can reduce CO2 emissions between 60 and 90 million tonnes per annum.”
David Keane, president and CEO of the BC LNG Alliance, said that the province imposes stringent guidelines in the production of liquefied natural gas.
“British Columbia’s best practices, strong environmental regulations, emissions intensity benchmark and carbon tax will see the cleanest liquefied natural gas in the world come from B.C.,” he said by email.
Finally, Byng Giraud, country manager of Woodfibre LNG, said that his project was recognized by the Pembina Institute as the cleanest LNG terminal proposed in B.C.
“Woodfibre LNG’s approach is consistent with the very [Climate Leadership Team] recommendations Pembina endorsed,” he said in an emailed statement.
But while Pembina does acknowledge that Woodfibre is using advanced technology to limit emissions from the terminal, it says there are still many opportunities for the company to clamp down on pollution.
“We support that choice of technology,” said Maximilian Kniewasser, who co-authored the report from the Pembina Institute. “There are still lots of opportunities to reduce upstream emissions.”
Upstream emissions result from pollution associated with the terminal but not coming directly from it. Some examples include drilling natural gas wells, gas processing and transporting materials. He estimated that about 80 per cent of the emissions from the Woodfibre project fit this description.
With respect to the idea that LNG can help reduce climate change, Kniewasser said that Pembina acknowledges natural gas has a role to play, but it shouldn’t be considered a final step because it’s still a fossil fuel.
“LNG should not be seen as a climate solution,” said Kniewasser. “It’s really climate policy that’s going to drive us to adhere to our global commitments to limiting climate change impacts.”
He also added that while liquefied natural gas could displace coal in some cases, there is concern it could also end up competing with energy that has lower carbon output, such as hydro or nuclear.
Kniewasser also appeared to disagree with the idea that reducing Chinese coal emissions could justify allowing B.C. to continue polluting over its limits.
“We shouldn’t claim credit for the emissions reductions from displacing coal in export markets in order to justify missing our own climate targets,” he said in a follow-up email. “This will result in double counting. Each jurisdiction has made climate commitments and it is important that all of us meet the targets that we have set.”
The province did not respond to requests for comment before press time.
