Skip to content

LNG is a less dirty fossil fuel

Editor: Re: Premier at groundbreaking for Tilbury LNG plant expansion, Oct. 22 As noted in your article, the premier puts forth a big smile, brave face and grandiose claims as she celebrates the expansion of a liquid natural gas plant in Tilbury.

Editor:

Re: Premier at groundbreaking for Tilbury LNG plant expansion, Oct. 22

As noted in your article, the premier puts forth a big smile, brave face and grandiose claims as she celebrates the expansion of a liquid natural gas plant in Tilbury.

She does not share the trepidation that she undoubtedly feels at the possibility of an economic disaster. In spite of her sweet enticement packages, foreign corporate developers are threatening to pull out of B.C. Most of the cheap natural gas in B.C. has already been harvested. World LNG prices are reported to have dropped from $18.50 per mmBtu in 2012 to current levels around $11.00 mmBtu. The cost of the more expensive "fracked gas" is very close to not being worth the cost of getting it out of the ground. While an economic disaster is clearly a possibility, an environmental disaster is a certainty. These disasters are happening now wherever fracking is used to get fossil fuels out of the ground: contamination of drinking water, drought due to a lowering of the water table, pollution of waterways and the permanent deposits of undisclosed toxic substances underground. LNG is highly volatile.

Does Delta council have a comprehensive report of the safety risks associated with LNG tankers going up and down the Fraser River?

LNG is called a cleaner source of fossil fuel, but it is still a fossil fuel. It should be called a less dirty fuel.

Shirley Ireland