LNG: Here’s the lies, and here are the truths

LNG Lie: LNG is a clean source of energy. 

Fact: The fossil gas that is used to create Canadian LNG comes from fracking wells, an extreme form of fossil fuel extraction which poisons water, is linked to local health problems, and causes earthquakes.  

LNG Lie: Exporting LNG to Asia will reduce the use of coal in importing nations and thereby reduce global emissions.

Fact: Scientific studies have shown that the climate impact of LNG is actually worse than coal. That’s because fossil gas is methane which is 86 times as potent a greenhouse gas as carbon dioxide and it leaks into the atmosphere all the way from the well head to market. 

LNG Lie: LNG Tankers are safe, sustainable, and a good way to transport fossil fuels.

Fact: LNG has a history of fires and explosions at terminal sites, and planning to fill up tankers that leak pollution straight into the atmosphere on their journey across the largest Ocean in the world is not only a poor plan for pollution prevention, it can also put communities at risk.

LNG Lie: LNG creates long term jobs and economic opportunities for communities on B.C.’s north coast. 

Fact: Like other fossil fuel export infrastructure, LNG terminals create very few long term jobs and are often owned by global oil giants – like Shell, the largest investor in the LNG Canada terminal – who will export any profits along with the resource.    

LNG Lie: LNG is a significant source of tax revenue for Canadian governments. 

Fact: In Canada, LNG terminals and fracking companies receive significant government fossil fuel subsidies, including: a $5.35 billion package of incentives for the LNG Canada terminal from the Province of B.C., a $500 million loan from the federal government for the Cedar LNG terminal, and a cap on royalties paid by fracking companies until they have recouped the cost of drilling new wells in B.C.  

LNG Lie: Fast-tracking the approval of new LNG terminals and pipelines will help to fight Trump’s tariffs. 

Fact: Building LNG terminals and pipelines takes many years. For example, LNG Canada – the terminal that is closest to starting operation – has already been under construction for six years. That means that an LNG project approved today is not going to go into operation before Donald Trump leaves office.        

LNG Lie: Canadian LNG is somehow cleaner and more ‘ethical’ than other sources of fossil fuels.

Fact: Research has shown over and over again that the LNG supply chain is incredibly leaky. LNG from Canada is a fossil fuel just like it is from every other place.

LNG Lie: LNG terminals will only be built in B.C. if they fit into the provincial government’s climate plan and all new terminals must be Net Zero by 2030.

Fact: The B.C government’s climate commitments only cover emissions from the terminals themselves and don’t include the vast majority of pollution that comes from extracting the fracked gas or from burning the gas after it’s exported. Furthermore, the Net Zero by 2030 requirement won’t apply to all LNG terminals. For example, it will not be applied to LNG Canada – the largest single source of climate pollution in B.C. when completed.     
  

LNG Lie: LNG is a cleaner option for shipping traffic and it helps to move us away from dirty conventional marine fuels.

Fact:  While it might sound like a cleaner option, pollution from unburned methane that slips from LNG engines actually undermines any potential benefits of switching off dirty fuels. We need to move to zero-emission vessels and energy-saving technologies, but LNG ships make that transition slow and difficult, not to mention the fact that a spill could cause an explosion.

LNG Lie: Many Indigenous communities stand to benefit from LNG production.

Fact: LNG is often touted as an example for economic reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples even though the International Energy Agency 2024 World Energy Outlook has said no new LNG projects are needed to meet global demand. This long-term economic uncertainty makes LNG export projects a very risky investment. If these projects do become stranded assets, participating First Nations will have to live with the abandoned industrial sites on their territories and the debt that comes with them, while their business partners will be able to write off the project and leave town.