A gas project at the heart of a conflict between two Indigenous nations in B.C.

In western British Columbia, an Indigenous nation is racing to launch a liquefied natural gas project. Problem: their neighbors, from another nation, are opposed to it.

It’s only April, but the drought is already being felt in northern British Columbia. And despite cool temperatures and continued snowmelt, the level of the Skeena River is particularly low.

Areas where she reveals her bed are not uncommon around Gitanyow, a Gitxan community in British Columbia. This river is known to be the second largest in the province for sockeye salmon production.

This already fragile environment is in danger if the Nisga’a Nation’s liquefied natural gas project comes to fruition, the Gitanyow community believes.

This project called Ksi Lisims LNG provides, among other things, for the construction of a maritime terminal and a gas pipeline. It brings together three promoters: the Nisga’a Nation, Western LNGan American energy company, and Rockies LNGa group of Canadian natural gas producers.

The terminal would be located near Ginglox, 180 km from Gitanyow, on the northwest coast of British Columbia.

The project is not new and dates back more than 10 years, so according to the Director of Sustainability for the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs, Tara Marsden, the data – particularly regarding environmental impacts – have evolved considerably since then.

Gitanyow is not the only community to oppose it. Lax Kw’alaams, located on the Pacific coast, is also against the project.

The cost of risks for what benefits?

Before even thinking about the consequences, communities wonder if the project is really relevant.

This last is expected to replace coal burning in Asia. But [ils n’ont pas] further proven that there will be a net reduction in greenhouse gas emissionselaborates Ms. Marsden, who also mentions numerous trees cut down to make way for the pipeline and the fracturing process.

We requested an interview with the President of the Nisga’a Nation, but we never received a response. Ksi Lisims LNG also did not want to grant us an interview and preferred to answer our questions by email.

Rebecca Scott, director of communications for Ksi Lisims LNG, therefore writes that the gas will come from the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin (which covers 1.4 million km² and contains one of the world’s largest reserves of oil and natural gas) and that, therefore, there will be no hydraulic fracturing on the Ksi Lisims LNG site or along the gas pipeline.

This argument does nothing to reassure Tara Marsden. On the contrary, it fits perfectly with a position that she underlined throughout the interview with Espaces nationaux: such a project does not only have effects on its immediate environment, and its impacts must therefore be considered. all over the planet.

We cannot act in isolation, without consulting others and without thinking about the consequences for the entire population.

Well versed on the subject, she discusses the energy that will have to be deployed to transform the gas into a liquid form, then cool it. We must therefore create more electricity, while we are in the middle of a drought.she continues.

Ms. Scott assures that the solution chosen to remedy this problem will not be the construction of new dams, but the increase in the electrical capacity of an existing network.

Long-term impact

To make his point, Gitanyow requested a full report which was carried out by Swift Creek Consultinga company based in Squamish.

In his conclusion, he states that there is no solid basis for expecting the project to have a beneficial effect on the climate on a global scale.

He argues that evidence of the project’s climate performance are weak.

The report also says that LNG does not support the claim that switching from coal to gas has significant benefits”,”text”:”scientists say the full life cycle of LNG does not support the claim that switching from coal to gas has significant benefits significant advantages”}}”>scientists claim that the complete life cycle of LNG does not allow us to assert that the transition from coal to gas presents significant advantages before recalling that the main component of natural gas is methane, a much more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

Not considering GHG of 40% by 2030. If Ksi Lisims LNG is given the green light, everything the province is doing to reduce carbon pollution will come to naught –in global climate terms– through this project alone”,”text”:”British Columbia is committed to reducing GHG emissions by 40% by 2030. If Ksi Lisims LNG receives the green light, everything the province accomplishes to reducing carbon pollution will be reduced to nothing – in global climate terms – by this project alone”}}”>British Columbia commits to reducing carbon emissions GHG by 40% by 2030. If Ksi Lisims LNG is given the green light, everything the province is doing to reduce carbon pollution will be wiped out – in global climate terms – by this project alonesays Gitanyow’s report.

Arguments that Rebecca Scott refutes. By email, she writes that this project LNG producing the lowest greenhouse gas emissions in the world”,”text”:”will be the LNG facility producing the lowest greenhouse gas emissions in the world”}}”>will be the installation of LNG producing the least greenhouse gas emissions in the world and that the team has committed not to produce any broadcasts. The project site mentions tree replanting and carbon burial.

Asked about this last suggestion – the effectiveness and feasibility of which are regularly questioned by experts – Ms. Scott responds: I believe this is only referred to as an example of a reduction option.

In general, Ms. Scott ensures that environmental demand undergoes rigorous review by government agencies and participating Indigenous nations.

In a presentation document, the promoters do not deny the impacts of the project: direct loss of habitat for wildlife, negative residual effects associated with fish and their habitat, loss of species, etc. For each of the effects, they suggest a list mitigation measures.

Inform people

New sources of revenue, royalties, training, study and employment opportunities are being put forward to support the gas pipeline. In a report which details the project, it is even indicated that it is the cornerstone of the economic prosperity plan of the nation.

Tara Marsden believes that there is real awareness and information work to be done among the Nisga’a.

In particular, she believes that false information is circulating about the advantages of liquefied gas. There is a very strong marketing campaign, claiming that liquefied natural gas is green, that it is good for the climateshe says, skeptically.

Do you know what you are really committing to? That may seem like a lot of money. It might be a good deal, but if it was, why is the company trying to sell you the pipeline?she cites as an example of questions to ask the Nisga’a.

The Nisga’a Nation has in fact acquired the project from the Alberta company TC Energy. During this announcement, the president of the Nisga’a government, Eva Clayton, said: This is a historic day for the Nisga’a Nation. We mark the beginning of a new era for Indigenous participation in the Canadian economy.

With several data, Tara Marsden thinks she can convince her neighbors.

I try to share information in a way that isn’t about blaming people. Because the industry is very powerful. She is very persuasive. And it has unlimited resources. We must approach this issue with compassion and respect, but also with evidenceshe says.

It is also difficult to be so open about this issue which highlights the dissensions that can exist between Indigenous people.

Why should we all agree, among Aboriginal people?said Ms. Marsden before adding: People are afraid of getting involved in a conflict between two nations. They don’t want to appear disrespectful to the Nisga’a.

Previous projects maintain a form of distrust towards developers. Tara Marsden discusses, for example, the case of the gas pipeline Coastal GasLink.

Not all the promises made regarding the environment have been kept. They also went over budget by two and a half to three times. When projects exceed their budget, it [l’entreprise] begins to reduce costs on items that are generally related to the environment or any mitigation measuresshe says.