Proposed LNG exports spark controversy in British Columbia

British Columbia has a reputation as a modern North American energy utopia. The province has abundant hydroelectricity, ambitious greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets and a functioning, uncontroversial carbon tax. Attempts to ship oil and coal through British Columbia have been stonewalled by indignant locals.

But aboriginal communities in British Columbia’s northeast corner wish more attention would be paid to fossil fuel development inside the province, which has been largely ignored as the rest of the province debates the potential global carbon footprint of the government’s push to become Asia’s primary source of liquefied natural gas.

They are complaining about the gallons of water being sucked out of the local water table to fuel hydraulic fracturing. They’re also worried that the clearcutting of forest to create roads and make room for drill pads is removing valuable cover for moose and caribou, leaving them dangerously exposed to predators.

And most of the wood that’s cut down ends up being burned. Given the remoteness of the location, it’s not economically viable for many companies to truck the timber to a processing mill; there’s no mill north of Fort St. John. The B.C. Oil and Gas Commission’s Fibre Utilization Plan allows companies to burn, bury or use the timber at their discretion…

Click here to read the full article.

• ← How an earthquake gave Christchurch, New Zealand, a major push toward sustainability
• Moving shale oil across melting tundra: huge and potentially risky business →