To the candidates for the leadership of the Conservative Party (PCC) who want to relaunch the controversial Énergie Saguenay gas project of GNL-Québec, the Legault government answers no.
Both Jean Charest and Pierre Poilièvre want to authorize this liquefied natural gas terminal site in Saguenay and its pipeline, even if it was refused by both Quebec and the federal government.
They argue that the context has since changed: Europe wants to stop depending on imports of Russian natural gas and would now be interested in Canadian supplies, following the invasion of Ukraine by Vladimir Putin’s troops.
At a press conference on Thursday, Quebec Environment Minister Benoit Charette wanted to put an end to any ambiguity and closed the door once and for all on the project.
“We made the decision (to say no) last year and we have no intention of reconsidering it,” he said in English on the sidelines of an announcement on a greenhouse gas reduction plan. Greenhouse.
“It is no longer a project (envisaged) in Quebec and we are rather firm on it. »
Even a survey commissioned by the Montreal Economic Institute which suggested that public opinion would be more favorable to the project now was brushed aside by the minister.
He considers it “biased”, since it evokes the very immediate context of the war in Ukraine; but even if the project were back on track, it would take a good ten years for the terminal to see the light of day.
A motion had already been adopted by the National Assembly recently to again say no to the project, but such a position does not bind the executive, that is to say the government.
The Énergie Saguenay project consisted of a natural gas liquefaction plant in Saguenay with a long gas pipeline to supply it.
The objective was to export by sea, each year, 11 million tonnes of natural gas from Western Canada to Europe and Asia, for a period ranging from 25 to 50 years. A gas pipeline 780 kilometers long was to be built by the company Gazoduq, in order to transport gas from Ontario to the Saguenay.
In 2021, the Legault government, rather favorable at first, refused to grant its authorizations following a devastating report from the Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement (BAPE).
The sum of the risks of the project greatly exceeded its advantages, concluded the BAPE.
The promoter maintains that the carbon balance will be positive because its energy will serve as a substitute for more polluting energies abroad. However, the BAPE affirms rather that the GHG emissions associated with the supply of natural gas upstream do not confirm this positive balance.
The BAPE felt that the debate was highly polarized and that its hearings were unable to come to a conclusion on the social acceptability of the project.
In another report released in February, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada said the project was likely to harm the environment.
The Agency concludes that the plant would increase greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, that the increase in maritime traffic on the Saguenay would harm the beluga population, while there would also be negative effects on heritage culture of the Innu First Nations.
The Trudeau government therefore also decided that these negative impacts on the environment were not justifiable in the circumstances and refused to grant its authorization.