Canada’s Foreign Affairs and International Trade Department has released its report on the possible impact of proposed LNG facilities on the Maine side of Passamaquoddy Bay.
Both sides of the controversy are essentially claiming that the page report supports their positions. Produced by SENES Consultants Limited in Ottawa for the Government of Canada, the 326-page report is entitled, “A Study of the Anticipated Impacts on Canada from the Development of Liquefied Natural Gas Terminals on Passamaquoddy Bay.”
When Ottawa declared its opposition to LNG tanker traffic in the area earlier this year, it cited this report but did not release its findings.
Key points in the lengthy report include the statement that transit to the facility sites “does not pose any difficulties, except for the section from Head Harbour Passage to Western Passage,” which involves a course change of about 100 degrees and must be made in the vicinity of the Old Sow, “known as the strongest whirlpool in the world with currents ranging from three to five knots.”
(It is, at least, known as the largest whirlpool in the Western Hemisphere.)
The report adds that tanker traffic “involves a considerable level of risk,” again citing the Old Sow turn, “where the risk factor is approximately double the average risk for the whole transit.”
However, “Such risks are manageable with a host of mitigation measures,” the report’s authors state, but such steps involve additional costs as well as “considerable operational limitations.”
Overall, marine transport and distribution of LNG in the Passamaquoddy Bay region “presents the potential for emergencies whose impacts on the environment could range from minor to significant,” the report states. While individual projects or components may produce relatively insignificant impacts, “when combined with the effects of other project components, these small effects can become cumulatively important.”
Proposed facility sites include Split Rock on the Passamaquoddy Pleasant Point Reservation, being developed by Quoddy Bay LNG, as well as a terminal in Robbinston and a facility in Calais, being developed by Downeast LNG.
“The SENES report supports our government’s position because it actually identifies many of the same risks that we have deemed unacceptable,” said Greg Thompson, Member of Parliament for New Brunswick Southwest. “The proposed Maine locations are not smart locations. They are not safe locations.”
On the other side of the border, and the issue, officials of Quoddy Bay LNG and Downeast LNG said that they welcomed the SENES report and maintained that it bolsters their proposals.
“We’re happy to see that the Canadian government has finally filed the report that was referenced back in February as their reason for trying to stop LNG traffic through Head Harbour Passage,” said Brian Smith, Quoddy Bay project manager. “As we expected based on our years of study, the report in no way indicates that the transit cannot be made safely, securely, or without significant harm to the environment, and in fact concludes that risk mitigation strategies can be used to reduce risks to both the population and the environment.”
Smith added, “Overall, while the report is very high level and largely applicable to all LNG terminals, we agree with its central conclusion and recommendation. Risk mitigation strategies can be and should be employed at Quoddy Bay LNG just as at the Canaport LNG facility to ensure the protection of the surrounding population and environment.”
Downeast LNG president Dean Girdis said, “We welcome the additional information that this report provides, and if those who oppose our project hope to use this report as justification for their position, it falls way, way short of the mark.”
He added that the report concludes, “By and large, it is possible to transit safely, but it is absolutely necessary to plan the passage in accordance with the tidal cycle…we have indeed done just that. We have carefully planned for shipping routes, tides and currents, and we have engaged in highly sophisticated transit simulations with both Canadian and U.S. officials as observers.”
But Jessie Davies, Canadian co-chair of Save Passamaquoddy Bay, counters, “The bottom line is, `No means no.’ The Canadian federal government has considered the findings of the SENES Report and decided that the risks, to people and to the environment, of LNG tankers in Head Harbour passage are unacceptable.”
Davies concluded, “These are Canadian waters, Canada has the right to deny passage to vessels which pose too great a risk. Clearly, the proposed LNG terminals in Passamaquoddy Bay are inappropriate. Site selection is critical to the safety of LNG facilities; these do not meet LNG industry standards.”