On the eve of the German Chancellor’s visit to the country, scientists, legal experts and environmentalists are warning the public that plans to export natural gas to Germany would undermine Canada’s climate commitments and are not a solution to the energy crisis in Europe.
Chancellor Olaf Scholz is due to arrive in Canada on Sunday and will meet with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, including to discuss energy security.
Several groups fear that this meeting will lead to agreements that would allow the construction of new facilities to export liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Europe in order to respond to the energy crisis linked to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
A few weeks ago, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mélanie Joly, had mentioned, as had done in May the Minister of Natural Resources, Jonathan Wilkinson, the possibility of Canada exporting hydrogen and natural gas to help Europe get rid of its dependence on Russian oil.
According to Caroline Brouillette, National Policy Director of the Climate Action Network Canada, “the Canadian oil and gas industry is trying to instrumentalize Germany’s energy insecurity, in particular to promote the export of liquefied natural gas, in particular through the construction of new infrastructure.
She is of the opinion that “certain members of the federal government have been speaking out for this industry in recent months” and that the discussions surrounding the construction of new natural gas facilities in eastern Canada to help the Germany run counter to both countries’ greenhouse gas reduction pledges.
“As the threat of difficult winters to come in the coming years hangs over Germany (due to the energy crisis), let us keep in mind the summer that has just happened in Europe, marked by heat waves and droughts,” she argued.
“We no longer have the luxury of responding to a single crisis at a time,” said Ms. Brouillette, referring to the energy crisis and the climate crisis.
Currently, no natural gas export terminal is in operation in Canada, but several projects are on the table in eastern Canada.
At a press conference organized by the Climate Action Network earlier this week, various stakeholders denounced what they consider to be the three main potential LNG production projects in eastern Canada.
A pipeline that would cross Quebec
The Alberta company Pieridae Energy plans to build a natural gas liquefaction plant in Goldboro, Nova Scotia, to transport natural gas from Alberta there for export to Europe.
Pieridae Energy would use an existing pipeline, which passes through Quebec in particular, but according to Ecojustice lawyer James Gunvaldsen Klaassen, “it is already used to the maximum of its capacity”. It would therefore be necessary to build a new pipeline that would pass through Quebec, according to him.
“If this project were to proceed, it would be Nova Scotia’s largest GHG emitter, approximately 3.7 megatonnes per year, which would completely destroy Nova Scotia’s ability to meet its GHG reduction targets. and reverse any gains it has made,” attorney James Gunvaldsen Klaassen said.
The project could also include a floating liquefaction plant.
The Repsol project in New Brunswick
Located in New Brunswick, the Saint John LNG project of the multinational Repsol would be “the most advanced” of the projects, according to Ecojustice, because there is “already a facility in place”. The proposal received the support of the premier of the province.
Blaine Higgs had indicated in June that the Saint-Jean plant, which currently imports gas from the United States to liquefy it, could easily be converted to liquefy hydrogen for the purpose of exporting it, which could help reduce Europe’s dependence on fossil fuels from Russia.
Premier says he’s had preliminary talks with First Nations and investors with an interest in the province’s shale gas resources, which could supply the plant, despite a moratorium that prevents the development of new projects shale gas development in New Brunswick.
“We see a lot, a lot, a lot of opposition to shale gas in New Brunswick”, so “it causes a lot of concern about the fight against climate change, but also for the marine environment of the region”, indicated Matt Abbott, Conservation Council of New Brunswick.
Newfoundland and Labrador LNG
The third important project, identified by the participants at the press conference organized by the Réseau-Action Climat, is that of the company LNG Newfoundland, which notably envisages a floating liquefaction plant off the coast of Newfoundland.
The gas would be transported through an approximately 600 kilometer undersea pipeline to land at the facilities and would then be liquefied and then shipped overseas.
“Methane leaks in a gas pipeline are always problematic, but even more so in a pipeline of this length,” said James Gunvaldsen Klaassen, who also fears several negative repercussions for marine fauna and flora if the LNG Newfoundland proposal saw the light of day.
Several years before exporting gas
All of these projects are problematic, according to Hugo Séguin, a teacher at the School of Applied Politics at the University of Sherbrooke and senior adviser at Copticom.
“The first question that must be asked is when will these projects be available, are we talking about a horizon of 5, 7 or 10 years? While the crisis in Europe is a crisis in the medium and short term”, argued the one who was the moderator of the press conference organized by Réseau-Action Climat.
“In a context of energy transition in Europe where the share of natural gas is decreasing”, these projects “must integrate the issues related to greenhouse gases” and also “survive the authorization process in Canada”, so “we is far from the lip service,” added Hugo Séguin.
These words are in line with the conclusions of a report published a few days ago by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD).
“Due to climate commitments and energy security concerns, Europe is accelerating its plans to reduce gas consumption by increasing energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy sources. While there may be a demand for some fossil fuels, markets like Norway make more sense to meet immediate needs” than Canada, the study concludes.
The researchers also point out that “Canada cannot increase supply before 2025, when Europe’s energy needs will be largely met by then”, and demand for Canadian gas could be very weak in the future. when the facilities would be completed.
Green hydrogen interests Germany
Berlin is also interested in the green hydrogen that Canada could produce.
A government official who requested anonymity recently confirmed to The Canadian Press that a hydrogen accord will be signed in Stephenville, Newfoundland and Labrador, during Chancellor Scholz’s official visit to Canada.
Stephenville will be home to a zero-emissions power plant where wind power will be used to produce hydrogen and ammonia for export.
But Canada does not yet have the infrastructure to produce large quantities of green hydrogen, according to Amit Kumar, holder of the industrial research chair at the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).
“The key is that you need to build a lot of associated infrastructure before you can export hydrogen to other countries on a large scale,” Kumar said.
As in the case of LNG projects, the eventual Canadian green hydrogen could not respond in the short term to the energy crisis in Europe, according to several specialists.
“The construction of the first wind farm should start next year. This means that hydrogen production is still a long way off,” said Paul Martin, a chemical engineer, who added that “it will take years and years”.
During his three-day visit, which begins on Sunday, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz will travel to Montreal, Toronto and Stephenville in Newfoundland and Labrador.