The third link “does not pass the climate test”, according to a study

The Quebec-Lévis third link project, for which François Legault still refuses to reveal the studies carried out, “is incompatible with the objectives of the fight against the climate crisis”, according to a new report published on Wednesday.

Henri Ouellette-Vezina
The Press

This is what the Integrated Center for Research in Environment, Health and Society (PIRESS) – a group of professors specializing in environmental issues – concludes in its study carried out jointly with the organization Équiterre.

“In the absence of data provided by [le gouvernement], this qualitative analysis of the third link was carried out using major consensus principles in terms of ecological transition. For the scientific community, the government’s studies and analyzes must be made public as quickly as possible,” insists the professor from the University of Sherbrooke and director of PIRESS, Annie Chaloux.

His group therefore based its analysis on four criteria: the mitigation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the environmental footprint, adaptation and resilience to climate hazards, socioeconomic benefits and sound governance.

The experts attribute a score of 33% to the first criterion, that of GHGs, because the third link “would make it difficult to place Quebec on the path to carbon neutrality, not only because of the emissions related to construction, but also because the vehicles circulating there would not be exclusively zero emissions for several decades”.

On climate resilience, the score is even worse: 17%. The reason: the project “would result in the intensification of urban sprawl, particularly in Lévis,” reads the report. “In other words, we would see an increased loss of natural habitats and agricultural land, threatening the resilience of Quebec in the context of the climate crisis,” write its authors.

Focus on “socio-economic benefits”

According to them, even the socio-economic benefits of the third link leave something to be desired, with a score of 39%, because there is no reason to believe that the project “would generate significant economic benefits, given its estimated cost of 6.5 billion dollars”, especially since tunnels generally see their cost “increase by 35% on average”.

In terms of sound governance, we finally attribute 22% to the project, given “the absence of opportunity and feasibility studies, and analyzes of traffic needs and projections”, which illustrates “a lack of rigor and transparency in the management of this file”.

Thus, the average score assigned to the project is thus 24 out of 75, or 32%. “The analysis is clear: the third link does not pass the test of ecological transition. It should not go forward if we want to act as a good manager and with consistency in the fight against the climate crisis, ”pleaded Wednesday the director of government relations for Équiterre, Marc-André Viau.

Last week, François Legault had again refused to reveal the studies on the project of a third highway link between Quebec and Lévis, repeating at each opportunity that they must first be updated. “We have no comments. Our position is clear. Mr. Legault has already reiterated on many occasions the need for a third link, “said his press secretary, Ewan Sauves, briefly on Wednesday.

With Hugo Pilon-Larose, La Presse