I have just read that the City is looking to open up land across from Seal Cove for a potential LNG export terminal.
they talked about it at city council, hard to hear them on tv but think it is to Exxon
Yes, that would be on Lot 444, which is City owned. The Province recently announced that it would amend the City’s boundaries to include Lot 444, so that the watershed could be better protected, as per the council’s request.
Here’s a backgrounder from less than two weeks ago on Lot 444 as a watershed protection issue:
< northcoastreview.blogspot.ca/201 … e-for.html >.
And here’s a Black Press story, dated yesterday, on how Lot 444 will be made available for LNG development < thenorthernview.com/news/260716281.html >.
It’s interesting how quickly the City has changed its’ stories.
There’s an opinion piece from Black Press entitled ‘Was it ignorance or deception?’, raising interesting questions about how the City council requested that Lot 444 be included within the City boundaries to better protect the watershed and less than two weeks after Provincial approval began touting Lot 444 as a site for an LNG plant. < thenorthernview.com/opinion/261728141.html >
The op ed picks up on a theme developed a couple of days ago in a North Coast Review article pointing out the inconsistency between using watershed protection as the main justification for an Alternative Approval Process and then talking about industrializing the same land. There are useful links to background information. < northcoastreview.blogspot.ca/201 … newly.html >
Lot 444 is not only close to the watershed, part of it is within the watershed. How would a plant be accessed? Would adjacent development open up the watershed for unplanned recreational use? Would the access route be in close proximity to residential areas or would it take off from Highway 16 and by-pass Rupert altogether? Has a risk analysis been considered?
One would hope that the council could come up with some better ideas about where to locate an LNG plant, such as in areas that have already been developed for industrial use, for instance Ridley Island or Watson Island (although the latter has probably been struck off the list for now due to the WatCo law suit, which is based on allegations of bad faith by the City).
Would there be any reason to think that all the discussion about a LNG Facility going in at 444
is only going on so that the powers that be can use the Pulp Mill sight at Watson Island
as a default site for the Facility. With everyone being possibly upset about having something
like this in our harbor. I think the City still owns Watson Island so it would only seem
logical to put the facility out near the other plant at Lelu Island.