Environmentalists push back against Higgs's natural gas pitch

Article content

Environmentalists on both coasts are banding together to push for an end to LNG and shale gas development, just as Premier Blaine Higgs tries to convince Canadians that New Brunswick’s underground deposits could be used as a transition fuel to get rid of far worse polluting coal.

Last week, 28 environmental groups in Atlantic Canada sent an open letter to Higgs and the other premiers in the region, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and two key federal cabinet ministers asking them to follow U.S. President Joe Biden’s lead and pause the approval of new liquefied natural gas exports, commonly called LNG.

They worry that any fossil fuel production will accelerate the earth’s warming, threatening humankind.

It was sent the same day that dozens more environmental groups on the West Coast sent an open letter to British Columbia Premier David Elby and three federal cabinet ministers to express concern over climate change and the extraction of more fossil fuel.

The Atlantic letter points to a study that shows Europe dropped greenhouse gas emissions from electricity generation by 19 per cent last year, largely aided by a substantial build-out of wind and solar power and the use of far more heat pumps.

“This LNG push doesn’t make sense because it’s all for export,” Moe Qureshi, the climate solutions manager at the Conservation Council of New Brunswick, told Brunswick News. “But Europe is using less LNG than before. In New England, they are pushing for renewables. Everywhere around us is pushing for it in the face of climate change. And I don’t want to see New Brunswick fall behind on that. Because if everyone starts making that shift, and New Brunswick doesn’t, then it’s going to cost even more later on to catch up.”

He said it would make more money sense to build more wind and solar capacity and start selling green energy to American states willing to pay a premium than worry about cheap gas for Europe.

Last month, Higgs appeared before a parliamentary committee in Ottawa to argue shale gas development in New Brunswick was a better climate plan than the federal carbon tax.

The Progressive Conservative premier argued natural gas could replace coal-fired plants in Europe that produce far more greenhouse gases.

In response to the latest letters, Higgs told Brunswick News developing the shale beds in the province could play a critical role in the energy mix both at home and abroad for decades to come.

Natural gas has roughly half the greenhouse gas emissions of coal and extraction can be conducted with minimal risk.

Blaine Higgs

“As countries move away from coal and as energy demand dramatically increases, our province has the opportunity to make significant economic gains from a potential robust natural gas sector,” the premier said an email. “Natural gas has roughly half the greenhouse gas emissions of coal and extraction can be conducted with minimal risk as it is in other jurisdictions, through our legislation, regulation, and rules for industry.”

Canada and New Brunswick specifically, he said, could have a major impact on global emissions reductions around the world by taking a broader approach that prioritizes resource development, economic growth, opportunities for First Nations communities and significant pollution curbs.

“Let me remind you that Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland last fall called natural gas ‘an important transition fuel’ that could keep the world from burning coal amid the current energy crunch,” Higgs said, a reference to a Liberal politician he normally doesn’t see eye to eye with. “She further stated that ‘We will always be looking at economically viable LNG projects’.”

The Atlantic letter, however, disputes that coal is always dirtier than natural gas. It pointed to a study from Cornell University that was recently submitted for peer-review that challenges the notion that LNG is a cleaner alternative. Instead, it states that LNG transported by ships may produce nearly three times more greenhouse gas pollution than if the importing countries burned their own coal.

You’ll be invested millions in more infrastructure for fossil fuel rather than developing clean electricity. It’s like you're locking yourself into a destructive energy source even further.

Moe Qureshi

Qureshi said he thinks Canada needs to break what he calls a fossil fuel lock-in.

“Every aspect of our economy is dominated by fossil fuels,” he said. “But consider this. You cannot put LNG in a coal generator. So what that means is to replace coal, you have to build a new facility to deal with the LNG. That’s what worries me. You’ll be invested millions in more infrastructure for fossil fuel rather than developing clean electricity. It’s like you’re locking yourself into a destructive energy source even further.”