Skip to main content

Woodfibre where the proposed LNG site would be near Squamish may 27, 2015.

John Lehmann/The Globe and Mail

Council members of the Squamish Nation have delayed their vote on whether a liquefied natural gas project meets their environmental and cultural conditions.

Chief Ian Campbell said the vote by the 16-person elected group will now take place in the fall, after further talks with Woodfibre LNG over 25 conditions outlined last month by the aboriginal council on behalf of its 4,000 members.

The main concern is Woodfibre LNG's planned seawater cooling discharge system – specifically the impact that warm chlorinated water would have on small fish in Howe Sound.

Story continues below advertisement

"With the revitalization of Howe Sound and the visible presence of whales, that has really heightened the anxiety – not only of the Squamish Nation but also local residents," Mr. Campbell said in an interview Tuesday.

Of the 19 LNG projects on the drawing board in British Columbia, none of the proponents has made a final investment decision yet. Woodfibre LNG, privately owned by Singapore-based RGE Pte. Ltd. and controlled by Indonesian businessman Sukanto Tanoto, is seeking approval from the B.C. Environmental Assessment Office before deciding whether to forge ahead.

The B.C. Environmental Assessment Office is leading the regulatory review through a co-ordinated process with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. The process, which began in mid-January, was recently put on hold at the request of Woodfibre LNG in order to consult further with the Squamish Nation on the proposed LNG terminal and FortisBC Energy's related pipeline project.

The aboriginal group has launched an independent review, saying it will determine whether to grant its own environmental certificate to Woodfibre LNG over and above the provincial regulatory process.

"The provincial environmental assessment doesn't typically look closely at cultural or spiritual values or aboriginal rights and title to our lands and territory," Mr. Campbell said. "Our assessment is not a showstopper for Woodfibre LNG."

Byng Giraud, Woodfibre LNG's vice-president of corporate affairs, said he remains optimistic about the project site – a former pulp mill seven kilometres southwest of Squamish. "We respect the Squamish Nation's process. We entered into this process voluntarily, and they are not yet in a position to render a decision based on the conditions that they have imposed," Mr. Giraud said.

Squamish has roots as a pulp town dating back to 1912, but the local mill closed in 2006. Activists say community leaders' efforts to increase Howe Sound's profile as a place for tourism and recreation are threatened by the $1.6-billion project's plans to export LNG by tankers to Asia.

Story continues below advertisement

The export terminal's capacity is pegged at 2.1 million tonnes a year. The original goal was to be operational by March, 2017, but the launch date has been postponed until 2018.

In a recent report, the Squamish Nation said it was worried about the company's proposal to release warm water from the planned terminal into Howe Sound. Heat is created when cooling natural gas into a liquid state, and the seawater would absorb the heat. Woodfibre LNG emphasizes that its system is designed to remove most of the chlorine from the discharged water.

"We do not find that the proponent's conclusions of negligible impacts on herring and plankton (tiny fish, plants, marine insects, larval fish or shellfish) are sufficiently proven," the report said. "We found that the development of this project adds to other industrial impacts on Howe Sound at a time when the waters are coming back to life."

Other conditions sought by the aboriginal group include relocating a compressor station, routing a pipeline so it avoids a wildlife management area and ensuring proper insurance coverage in the case of an industrial spill or explosion.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.
Cannabis pro newsletter