Wantage Road area targeted by Council as a Major Project staging area

Making use of the land where the old Prince Rupert Landfill site was once located is one option that City Council is putting in motion, with an eye towards utilizing the area along Wantage road for use in relation to any proposed major developments in the area for the years to come.

Council reviewed the proposal from staff, calling on the City Manager to expand a bit on what the City has in mind as far as development of the area that runs between Wantage Road, towards the city side across the boundary of the golf course.

Proposed Wantage Road zone for development
related to major industrial projects proposed for the City

Mr.  Robert Long explained that the proposal is something that he called outside the normal thinking, providing for temporary zoning with major industrial developments in mind.

The temporary change in designation, would allow for the development of projects such as work camps and lay down areas that are attributable to the possibility of some major development, such as that for the proposed LNG projects for the area.

He suggested that the project would make the city more pro-active for those potential developments. Seeking to have the City accommodate those businesses that may be taking part in the major projects of the area.

He also outlined how it would show that community is open and available to house those that are involved with the major projects.  He observed on the desired prospect of having the city reuse areas such as the old Wantage area dump location for this kind of project.

Mr. Long explained that once the major projects had been completed a term of perhaps fifteen years, the areas would be returned to the city and be able to be used for other purposes.

Councillor Ashley also spoke in favour of the proposed development area and agreed to the concept of re purposing of the land and accessing the ability to get it back in better shape, highlighting that as a positive aspect of the plan.

More background on the proposal was provided for Council as part of their Agenda package, you can review that from pages 38 to 48 (see here), included in that package were a pair of diagrams which outline the scope of the area and the potential use that could be made of it.

Overview of proposed land use area

Overview of potential use of
Wantage Road lands 

As for a notification zone regarding the public hearing, after discussion between the Mayor and Councillors Cunningham and Thorkelson, the areas of the city along 9th Avenue West and the Haysvale Trailer park, as well as above on Summit and Omenica would added to the extended notification area.

The Mayor reminded Council that once the notice is published, anyone in the community can attend the hearing.

Council will consider the Wantage Road proposal at the November 24th Council session. Notices will be published in the community to alert residents to the proposal and their opportunity to comment on it.

You can review discussion related to the Wantage Road proposal can be found through the City's Video Archive, starting at the 31 minute point and wrapping up by the 41 minute mark.

A full review of the November 3rd Council session can be found on our Timeline feature.

For more items related to City Council discussions see our Council archive page.

Cross posted from the North Coast Review

Legacy Corporation process to be explained through the City's website

The creation of the Legacy Corporation earlier this year by the City of Prince Rupert, remains a bit of  a mysterious thing and a bit of a discussion topic for many residents of late.

The Corporation was created by the City to administer its dealings for any proposed LNG developments on the Tuck Inlet side of the recently expanded civic borders.

The Corporation and its operations made for even more intriguing news, with the discovery late last month that the Corporation had hired local oceanographer Dr. Barb Faggetter to conduct a study on the impact of development in the area that is part of the Lot 444 work.

With the workings of the Legacy Corporation becoming a bit of a conversation starter for the community, Council it seems has taken notice that they may want to do a bit better of a job of explaining just what it is that the Corporation does.

The topic made for a few discussion points at Monday's Council session, first as part of the overview of the City's plans for public engagement on Lot 444 for November and December.

Public sessions where the public will be invited to ask questions and learn more about the work proposed for that area.

The sessions will provide an opportunity for the city's residents to ask any questions of the Civic officials in attendance that they may have about the Legacy Corporation

Those information sessions are planned for November 25th, with Public Hearings also planned for December 3rd and 4th, all of those public meetings will be held at a venue still to be determined.

As part of that review, Councillor Anna Ashley asked that the City find a way to provide a video home for those sessions, for further review by the public if they wish.

Towards providing more information on the nature of the Legacy Corporation, Councillor Ashley then recommended that the City provide some background on the creation of the corporation and its terms of reference, posting that information to the City's website.

A very good suggestion, though perhaps one that should have been acted upon back when the Legacy Corporation was first introduced to the public by City Council back in June.

Still, the flow of information on the Legacy Corporation seems to be in motion for the City. Hopefully, the information that is provided to the City's website will outline the scope of the Legacy Corporation's mandate,  any role that members of Council, City Staff and any others that are involved in its operation have, as well as to provide for a listing of those that are now employed by the Corporation and what their tasks are on its behalf.

However, no timeline as to how fast that information will be posted on line was outlined by staff on Monday night.

The Legacy Corporation topic weaved in and out of the Lott 444 discussions on Monday, you can review those conversation points from the City's Video Archive from the 31 to 41 minute mark.

As well, Councillor Ashley's request for the information to be made public on the website can be reviewed a the 41 minute mark of the Video Archive.

More items related to the Legacy Corporation can be found on our Tuck Island LNG development archive.

A full review of the November 3rd Council session can be found on our Timeline feature.

For more items regarding City Council see our Council archive page here.

Cross posted from the North Coast Review

Four Northern Interior First Nations declare opposition towards Pacific NorthWest's Lelu Island project

While the parent company Petronas prepares to meet with BC government officials on November 11th to hold further discussions on their proposed terminal site at Port Edward, a new issue has arisen related to the selection of the Lelu Island site for the proposed Pacific NorthWest LNG terminal.

On Wednesday, a group of four Northern Interior First Nations located upriver on the Skeena voiced their concerns regarding the massive industrial project proposed for the Port Edward area.

Members of the Gitxsan, Lake Babine,Wet'suwet'en and Gitanyow First Nations all gathered in Vancouver to outline their opposition to the project, highlighting the impact that they believe the proposed development will have on salmon stocks that transit through their territories.

Citing what they describe as concrete scientific evidence to back their claims of concern towards the alteration or destruction of crucial habitat in the Lelu island estuary, the Four First nations called the plan for the Terminal on Lelu Island as ludicrous.

Outlining how no amount of mitigation related to the Lelu Island plan will be of satisfaction to them, suggesting that Pacific NorthWest LNG look for another site location in Prince Rupert for their terminal.

The Four First Nations had sought out bilateral consultations on the project during the current CEAA process, but say that they were refused, owing they suggest to the distance of their territory from the development site.

In a media release from Wednesday's conference in Vancouver, further background on their opposition was outlined, including the call for Petronas, as well as the Federal and Provincial Governments to withdraw from the Lelu Island site immediately.

Some of the media reviews from Tuesday's press conference can be found below:

Globe and Mail-- First Nations fight Petronas-led LNG project over salmon habitat
CBC--Skeena River First Nations oppose Petronas LNG plant near Prince Rupert
CFTK-- Upriver First Nations Oppose Petronas LNG Project
CFNR-- First Nations express Opposition to Pacific Northwest LNG Project (audio)

For more items of interest related to the Pacific Northwest LNG project see our archive page here, for background on items of general interest on the LNG industry on the North Coast see that archive option here.

Cross posted from the North Coast Review

Robin Austin takes charge of the Northwest discussion on LNG in Legislature

The last two weeks have provided for much discussion at the British Columbia  Legislature on the twin themes of LNG development and Green House Gas issues, with some of the rhetoric and rebuttal getting rather heated at times in the debating chamber.

As we outlined yesterday, the North Coast's MLA Jennifer Rice offered up a few thoughts on the theme, through a seven minute or so contribution to the discussion last week, however, when it comes to the full Northwest perspective, Skeena's Robin Austin is clearly carrying the load for the region and his party.

Austin who was named as the Northern Economic Critic for the NDP in July, has been a featured speaker through the last two weeks, with a fairly in-depth contribution to the topic delivered last week.

October 27 -- Afternoon Session 17:55 to 18:10 mark

Since the return of the Legislature last month, Austin and the NDP have continued to press the governing Liberals and LNG Minister Rich Coleman in particular on a number of LNG issues.

On Monday, some of the line of NDP questioning led to a frustrated Minister Rich Coleman to express a few pent up thoughts and emotions on the approach of the opposition when it comes to LNG:

I just think it's great that as soon as you hit a nerve, they all start to chip and chirp and go on because they know I just figured out what they did. They oppose LNG. They also opposed the cleanest LNG in the world ...

The funny thing about that is they claim to be caring about the environment, and then they vote against something that actually puts British Columbia in the window as the cleanest producers of LNG in the world. Interesting, isn't it? 

I'm sure they'll vote against the tax, because they won't want British Columbians to get their fair return on the dollars that come through LNG in B.C. They'd rather just keep it in the ground. -- Natural Gas Minister Rich Coleman on LNG and Green House Gas emissions in the Legislature on Monday afternoon

The full account of the Minister's commentary can be found in the Legislative Record from the 15:55 mark to the 16:25 mark

Mr. Austin addressed the Minister's comments during the course of his discussion points during the yesterday's afternoon/evening session.

I just want to speak for a moment in regards to the Minister of Natural Gas Development harping on and berating this side of the House for voting against last week's Bill 2 in regards to greenhouse gas emissions. 

He said that we're delaying the LNG industry by voting against that bill. We voted against that bill because that side of the House promised to bring in the cleanest energy in the world and then exempted 70 percent of all of the emissions from the LNG industry. 

That hardly says very much about what they want to do. Also, he says that we're delaying it. I heard the Minister of Natural Gas himself last year say that they would have this bill in this House by the end of the fall session last year, 2013 — end of November. 

That never happened. There was no fall session. Why? Because this government that says they're in a big hurry to bring forward LNG never did the work to bring it about. -- Skeena MLA Robin Austin on LNG issues in the Legislature on Monday

As for more local concerns, Mr. Austin has been making frequent mention of how he believes the LNG issue is having an effect on the region, on Monday the Skeena MLA offered up a review of events in Prince Rupert as part of his examination of the current situation regarding the proposed LNG industry.

Let's talk about 100,000 jobs for a moment. In my colleague's riding, to the west of me, there was a large pulp mill. It went down, I think, in about the year 2003. When that pulp mill went down there were 620 direct jobs — never mind spinoff jobs — that were lost. 

Currently there are two large potential LNG plants in Prince Rupert. Just remember now that we lost 620 direct jobs in the northwest, in Prince Rupert. Now one of them, unfortunately, we've just heard, is being put on hiatus. It may have a decision in a couple of years, but it looks like, listening to what they're saying in the media, the BG Group might put their project on hold for a number of years. 

My point is this, in relation to this exaggerated claim that we would have 100,000 jobs. Once an LNG plant is built, and once the pipeline is built, they actually are not hugely labour-intensive. They are, of course, hugely capital-intensive. That just describes some of the sort of weasel words that have been used in order to get elected, but, in fact, the reality is not what it is. --Robin Austin speaking to Legislature Monday on LNG development  in Prince Rupert

Mr. Austin then addressed some of the social issues in his riding of Skeena, with a focus related to the current pace of industrial expansion and what may come from LNG development:

The housing situation in our communities has gone from a high vacancy rate…. In Kitimat, it was 42 percent, the highest vacancy rate in all of British Columbia. You could rent a two-bedroom apartment for $400 about two and a half years ago — $400 for a two-bedroom apartment. Now there is zero vacancy, and that same apartment is probably renting for anywhere between $1,500 and — yes, this is no exaggeration — $2,500, in a small town like Kitimat.

So what does that do to people living there who are not part of these new industries that have high wages? People who are on fixed incomes, seniors, people who are only part-time employees? It puts a huge problem on them, and that's the kind of challenge that we're talking about.

Austin also touched on issues related to the high unemployment rates of some areas of the Northwest and the need to make sure that local training opportunities are available through Northwest Community College to ensure that local residents receive benefits from LNG development.

I think it's very, very critical for all of us who live in the northwest to see that, if we get to a final investment decision, when the government actually sits down and writes a project agreement with any proponent, people in the northwest take advantage of Northwest Community College, take advantage of other training opportunities and ensure that these people — many people who have never worked.... Many people left high school and have never worked in northwest B.C., particularly in First Nations communities but not only in First Nations communities. 

It's imperative that we use these project agreements to put in place the kind of training that's required to give people the skills so that we don't end up seeing what we've seen in the last two or three years, which is planeloads of people coming from outside the area while we still have quite high unemployment rates in our own home communities. That is an incredibly important thing. This should be seen not just as an opportunity to bring tax revenue and jobs. But by training people, we are building the future capacity to replace all of those tradespeople who are retiring.

You can review the full range of the discussion from the Legislature Record and view his thirty minute examination of the LNG files from the Legislature Video Archive here (Chamber Video from Monday afternoon).  Mr. Austin's contribution starts at the 1700-1730 mark.

For more items on events from the British Columbia Legislature see our archive page here.

Cross posted from the North Coast Review

MLA Rice outlines a number of concerns on Liberal Government's Bill 2 provisions on LNG

Last week, MLA Jennifer Rice outlined her opposition to the Liberal Government's LNG Bill, known as Bill 2.

Offering her observations and commentary to the Wednesday Afternoon session of the Legislature all part of the Second reading process of the proposed legislation.

The North Coast MLA highlighted her concerns over Green House Gas emissions and offered up some observations on the Government's recent tax regime announcement, which features a scaled back expectation on returns for the Provincial treasury.

The bulk of last week in the Legislature was taken up with conversations on the issues of LNG and focused a great deal on the potential levels of Green House Gas that could come from development of the resource in the province.

For the Northwest, MLA Robin Austin was carrying the bulk of the conversation, with Ms. Rice providing her contribution during Wednesday's afternoon session.

Her focus when it came to the environment was to seek protection of air, land and water resources and to ensure that the province lived up to its Climate Change commitments.

Those aspects can be reviewed from these excerpts from the Legislative records from Wednesday:

Global climate change is that — a global issue. It's the issue of this generation. It should be imminent, uppermost, on our minds. I'd like to say that I support LNG for British Columbians. I support LNG for British Columbians, provided that it comes with good-paying jobs for British Columbians. I support it if we get a fair return for our resources.

I support it if First Nations are respected and they benefit from the resource. Lastly, and obviously, I support it if the protection of our air, land and water, including living up to our climate change commitments, are upheld. Bill 2 clearly does not meet this test. 

The North Coast MLA also expanded her review of the situation to developments in Prince Rupert, making comments related to the anticipation in the community regarding the LNG industry proposals here, as well as to express her concerns over the need for consultation with First Nations of the Northwest.

Ms. Rice also reviewed for the Legislature her thoughts on the balance between the enthusiasm for the prosperity promised by the Premier and the need to gain a fair return for the province's resources.

 I support good-paying LNG jobs for the local people in my community of Prince Rupert. They eagerly await the promised benefits from our enthusiastic Premier. The Premier touted a trillion-dollar industry for northern British Columbia, and my constituents eagerly await this prosperity. It is paramount that LNG proponents enter into express guarantees that put jobs and training opportunities for British Columbians first.

 As I said, we need to be guaranteed a fair return for our resources. However, we now see those benefits being cut in half. In the North Coast nearly half of the population that I represent is aboriginal. It's paramount that First Nations are being respected, made partners in LNG, and their rights to a share of the benefits must be recognized. There must be protection of our air, our land and our water, including living up to our climate change commitments. As I said, Bill 2 clearly does not meet this test, and I will outline why.

Towards an explanation as to how Bill 2 is failing to meet the test, Ms. Rice called on the recent events related to the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline controversy and her concerns over the flexible nature nature of the benchmarks that the LNG industry is being afforded through the Liberal legislation.

I parallel this to the way the National Energy Board terms of reference for the Enbridge northern gateway pipeline project were examined. That process did not look at the Alberta tar sands. It only looked at what the pipeline impacts would be. Yet tar sands development would need to be created, and industry would need to be stimulated in order to produce enough bitumen to put in that pipeline. 

All they wanted to examine was the impacts of the pipeline. Again, that's not realistic. According to the Pembina Institute, upstream emissions account for approximately 70 percent of GHG emissions in the LNG life cycle, and they're not covered by this legislation. 

The legislation also provides LNG proponents with the flexibility to meet that benchmark. If proponents cannot reduce their GHG emissions to the 0.16 carbon dioxide equivalent per tonne of LNG produced, they can either (1) invest in B.C.-based offset at market prices or (2) contribute to a technology fund at a rate of $25 per tonne. Therefore, this legislation does not actually require LNG operators to reduce their GHG emissions.
.
She wrapped up her presentation to the Legislature, with a review of some comments from the Organization Clean Energy Canada, highlighting their concern over the Government's legislation.

You can review, the North Coast MLA's full overview from the Wednesday, Draft minutes, listed at the 1605-16012 mark.

The video archive of the Wednesday session can be found here, use the Chamber Video listing for Wednesday afternoon to view the proceedings, Ms. Rice's contribution arrives at the 16:05 point of the Clock.

Or from this version of her comments posted to YouTube




For more items related to her work at the British Columbia Legislature see our archive page here.

Cross posted from the North Coast Review

Pacific NorthWest LNG to use monitoring equipment to learn more on marine and weather on the North Coast

While the larger issues of LNG development on the North Coast will play out in discussions between the Provincial Government and the parent company Petronas  in mid November (see our item of yesterday).

On the local front, Pacific NorthWest LNG continues on with its preliminary work on the project.

The most recent addition to their technical look at the Lelu Island site comes with word of the installation of an enhancement to their monitoring equipment positioned in Prince Rupert Harbour.

On Tuesday Pacific NorthWest LNG outlined the scope of the monitoring program which is designed to collect a wide range of weather data, such things as wind speed and direction, air temperature and air pressure and such.

Captain Davie Kyle, Pacific NorthWest's Head of Marine Services reviewed the project through this media release, providing some background as to what use the company will have for the data collected.

“This data is helping Pacific NorthWest LNG learn more about the complex marine and weather environment on the north coast. We are making use of the information to assist in the design of our marine terminal and to determine operating procedures for LNG carriers that would be calling on the facility. It only makes sense to share this information with the wider marine community”

Pacific NorthWest is sharing its data with all mariners in the region, as well as the Prince Rupert Port Authority as part of an ongoing project to help enhance marine safety.

You can review more of our items related to the Pacific NorthWest LNG project from our archive page here.

Cross posted from the North Coast Review

When "prudent" becomes "pause": BG announces pause for Prince Rupert project

The rumblings of a shift in time lines for LNG development of Tuesday became the thing of possible delays of up to ten years by Wednesday, as the BG Group delivered a bit of a setback for the region's LNG aspirations.

As we outlined in our item of yesterday,  the BG Group released its third quarter report on Tuesday, with some significant financial declines to report and with it a cautionary outlook for it's Canadian plans.

By Wednesday morning, a wide collection of Financial news services were reporting that the British based energy giant was look to put it's Prince Rupert LNG project on pause, while they assess how the conditions in the LNG market evolve towards 2020.

A transcript of a conference call regarding BG's third quarter results and prospects world wide outlined the current view on Prince Rupert, with Interim Chairman of BG Andrew Gould advising that the company isn't abandoning Prince Rupert, but at this point pausing on Prince Rupert.

On Price Rupert, as I’m sure you’ve seen that estimated volumes of LNG from the US have been calculated closer to 90 million tonnes per annum as opposed to the 60 million that was previously forecast. So as a result of this, coupled with weakness in gas pricing generally, there is a risk that the market be very well supplied post 2020. 

And all we’re doing at this point in time is pausing on Prince Rupert, we’re not abandoning Prince Rupert, we’re pausing on Prince Rupert to see how the market evolves particularly in function of total supply that will come out of the US. We will continue to work on the project but not at the same rhythm as perhaps we were working in 2014. -- Interim BG Chairman Andrew Gould on the company overview of Prince Rupert LNG and their plans to pause development.

You can review the full transcript of that conference call here, it provides a fair bit of insight as to the nature of the business decisions that BG make and what factors they take into account as they review their world wide LNG ambitions.


The Prince Rupert LNG project is one of eight LNG terminal developments proposed for the immediate Prince Rupert area, you can review our items on all of those here.

As well, you can access our past items related to the BG project for Prince Rupert here.

As for the news of the Prince Rupert decision, reviews of the news of the pause of the LNG plans for British Columbia is making for a growing archive of articles.

Most of which suggest that a delay into the next decade may be in the LNG cards for the BG Project. You can review those articles below, we'll update the list as further items become available.

Globe and Mail-- BG Group delays decision on Prince Rupert LNG project
Globe and Mail-- BG Group to delay LNG terminal on B. C. coast
Vancouver Sun-- BG delay latest cloud over hoped-for LNG industry
Wall Street Journal-- BG Group to delay LNG Terminal on Canada's Pacific Coast
Financial Post-- BG Group to delay LNG terminal on Canada's Pacific coast: report
CBC-- BG Group to delay planned B. C. LNG Terminal
Vancouver Sun-- BG Group pressing pause button on Prince Rupert LNG, citing market conditions
News 1130-- LNG export terminal proposed for northwestern BC delayed

CFTK-- BG Group Delays LNG Project in Prince Rupert Until Next Decade
Business in Vancouver-- BG Group to delay Prince Rupert LNG export terminal
Forbes-- Worries aplenty for BG Group and BP
Victoria Times Colonist-- BG Group hits pause button on Prince Rupert LNG

Cross posted from the North Coast Review

Sheila Gordon-Payne to focus on LNG opportunities as part of her campaign

Photo from Sheila Gordon-Payne website

While the news cycle of late hasn't been delivering any great movements forward on the LNG file, one Council candidate is looking to make it a high profile topic as we move into the final few weeks of the Municipal Election campaign.

Yesterday, Sheila Gordon-Payne's campaign provided some of that new focus through her website, with LNG becoming a key part of her message for November 15th.

Listed as one of her Primary Platform reviews:

Sheila’s objective as Mayor of Prince Rupert is to take advantage of the opportunity that LNG and other new industries present, to rebuild our economy, and improve the quality of life in our community. 

 The establishment of the Fairview Container Terminal and Pinnacle Pellet added hundreds of permanent jobs. These terminals and the businesses that support them signify growth; however, this growth has not kept pace with the loss of jobs in our fishing and forestry sectors. It has not replaced the lost revenue to the city from the closed fish plants and pulp mill. 

Our retail and service sector have not returned to the levels of fifteen years ago. Taxes for small business and residents have risen with no improvement in services or quality of life. We can no longer afford to be complacent. We need be seen as interested in rebuilding the industrial sector of our economy. 

We must make the LNG opportunity work for us starting now. For the city, even one LNG facility will provide hundreds of permanent well-paying jobs for our families, bring new tax dollars for improved services, attract people to the community, and create opportunities for small business growth.

You can review further background on the candidates position from the platform page of her website.

Her statement towards the proposed LNG opportunities for the region, came on the same day as the BG Group outlined how it was looking towards a prudent approach for its Prince Rupert LNG project.

Today, a number of Financial news services have reported that the Prince Rupert LNG project may be delayed by at least a decade.

For Ms. Gordon-Payne and the other challengers to Mayor Jack Mussallem, that cautionary note and the recent developments for the Pacific NorthWest LNG project offer up a real time lesson in the pace and shifting sand which makes up the LNG development path.

It also poses a pretty important question for those seeking a seat, whether in the Mayoralty or on Council as to what kind of Plan B they might have in mind in the LNG aspirations continue to shift on the North Coast.

While there is not much that a local council can do about larger international issues related to the prospects of the proposed plants, how the local issues are introduced and examined in the campaign could give us a glimpse into what the candidates may think when it comes to the ongoing dialogue required between the City and industry proponents.

You can review more items related to the 2014 Prince Rupert Civic Election from our archive page.

Cross posted from the North Coast Review

BG Group to approach Prince Rupert LNG project on a prudent basis

Depending on how one parses the word prudent, an announcement from today by the BG Group could offer up a variety of outcomes for the Prince Rupert LNG project, proposed for Ridley Island,

As part of their third quarter financial statement for the end of October, BG outlined the state of its world wide reach on Tuesday, highlighting the future for their Canadian plans with this short observation.

Canada BG Group continues to investigate the best way to advance the Prince Rupert LNG project. However, given current uncertainty about the size and number of North American projects, BG Group is taking a prudent approach to development in Canada by moderating future expenditure.

The words of caution, come after reports in the financial press of a significant decline in profits for the British company.

As stated in their media release (full version can be found here) , there is a fair bit of uncertainty on the number of North American projects and in recent weeks, much has been made about the nature of the financial returns, as markets decline and the energy giants seek more concessions and tax relief from the different levels of government.

The British Columbia in particular has been feeling some of those pressures, as highlighted by the Provincial Liberal's recent tax regime announcement which set the taxation level significantly lower than previously anticipated.

And still, even with those concessions, one of the leading prospects for LNG development on the North Coast is now taking a prudent approach to development in Canada. A term that might suggest that BG will be slowing down it's plans and taking stock of the prospects moving forward.

No word of the plan for the future has been outlined on the local Prince Rupert LNG website as of yet.

The first alert for British Columbians on the announcement came through the twitter feed of the Globe and Mail's Brent Jang, who reviewed the news out London.

Today's announcement from the BG Group provides a glimpse for locals as to how developments in far off locations can change very quickly and have an immediate impact on industrial plans for the North Coast.

For more items related to the BG Group project see our archive page here.

Update:  Various Financial News Services across Canada have started to reveal more of what may lay ahead for the Prince Rupert LNG project, some of their items can be found below:

Globe and Mail-- BG Group to delay LNG terminal on B. C. coast
Wall Street Journal-- BG Group to delay LNG Terminal on Canada's Pacific Coast
Financial Post-- BG Group to delay LNG terminal on Canada's Pacific coast: report
CBC-- BG Group to delay planned B. C. LNG Terminal
News 1130-- LNG export terminal proposed for northwestern BC delayed

For the latest items related to the Prince Rupert LNG project see our updated item of October 29 here.

Cross posted from the North Coast Review

MLA seeks more than promises on theme of LNG in Legislature

As part of last weeks response to the Speech from the Throne, North Coast MLA Jennifer Rice challenged a few of the Provincial Liberal's themes on LNG, in particular when it comes to the recently announced Tax Regime.

On that topic Ms. Rice offered up that the government announcement provide for a failure for the government's bargaining position. With the windfall that was promised now a thing of the past. Suggesting that the Tax Regime was written by industry for industry.

Today we find out that British Columbians are getting half of what she promised. I find it hard to take the Premier at her word when it comes to LNG. She knew what to say when she promised a fair share from LNG, then turned around and did the opposite. Shamefully, the LNG tax regime was written by industry for industry.

The Premier eliminated B.C.'s bargaining position with her outlandish promises. Now we see the result of that failure. The Premier and the B.C. Liberals are selling out B.C. They knew what to say at election time, but their grand promises of a "Debt-free B.C.," eliminating the PST and creating those thousands of jobs have fallen away. Now they're talking about LNG to just pay for the basics, like health care. What happened to the windfall we were promised? The throne speech is now switching gears.

An LNG industry in B.C. needs to protect our land, our air and our water. That means honouring our climate change commitments to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The legislation covering environmental regulations won't achieve that. It fails to address upstream emissions from natural gas production and gives liquefication facilities enough loopholes to ensure they won't meet our emission targets.

Ms. Rice also stressed the desire of the NDP to seek guarantees of jobs, and training opportunities for British Columbians, as well as a fair return for the provinces resources.  She also called on the province to make sure that LNG explicitly benefits First Nations and protects air, land, water and climate change commitments.

She also reviewed for the Legislature of the concerns for some residents of the North Coast when it comes to development of LNG terminal options near the Flora Bank

I'd also like to mention that the First Nations in my community around Prince Rupert are really concerned about LNG and the Skeena River, and they're concerned about the estuary. They're not necessarily concerned about the gas evaporating. 

They're concerned about the industrialization of the Skeena estuary, and they're concerned particularly about Flora Bank, which is the largest remaining intact eelgrass bed in British Columbia. Now, eelgrass is not something you smoke. It's actually very important fish habitat. It's important fish habitat for British Columbia's second-largest salmon run. 

We support the development of LNG if it comes with express commitments for the well-paying jobs and skill development opportunities British Columbians need. The government is trying to meet this standard as they continue to fail on skills training and rely on temporary foreign workers and ignore other sectors of the economy.

As she closed her ten minute review, which wrapped up the Tuesday afternoon session of the Legislature, Ms. Rice read a from the Victoria Times Colonist article of October 18th which highlighted some of the issues and concerns that Prince Rupert is facing as the LNG prospects continue to form up.

You can review the full transcript of her comments to the Legislature here, her presentation starts at the  1815 mark.  You can view it from the Legislature Video files by clicking on House Video for Tuesday Afternoon, Ms. Rice speaks at the

For more items of note regarding the work of MLA Rice at the Legislature see our archive pages, the Archive for the week of October 20-13 can be found here.

While the larger overview of events at the Legislature related to the North Coast and Haida Gwaii can be found here.

Cross posted from the North Coast Review

Aurora LNG receives export authorization from National Energy Board

Another of the North Coast's hopeful LNG shippers has been given approval to export Liquefied Natural Gas from the North Coast.

As Aurora LNG, received authorization for exports from the National Energy Board on Friday.

A letter dated October 24th outlines the terms and conditions for the Export Licence for Aurora, which would permit the Chinese owned company ship exports from a proposed Liquefaction Terminal to be located in the vicinity of Prince Rupert.

The export licence issued on Friday will expire 10 years from the date of its approval, which was October 8th.

Aurora LNG has two potential sites in mind for it's North Coast terminal development, one a proposed development at Grassy Point near Lax Kw'alaams.

While the other option was only recently revealed, and would see the company construct Terminal Facilities on the south end of Digby Island.

As we outlined on September 24th, that latter proposal has provided for a bit of controversy for the company, with residents of nearby Dodge Cove expressing their dissatisfaction at possibly sharing Digby Island with a major industrial project.

Both the Grassy Point and Digby Island proposals are currently in early stages of their Environmental Assessment process, however at some point only one of the two will be listed as the final option to be considered.

You can review more about the two options here.

While a larger overview Aurora LNG's plans for the region can be found on our Archive page.

Cross posted from the North Coast Review

Executive shakeup at Pacific NorthWest LNG

The nameplate will be chaining on the main office of Pacific NorthWest LNG, as word filtered out on Friday of the departure of President Greg Kist from the LNG proponent, which is currently focused on development plans for a terminal at Lelu Island.

Mr. Kist's departure came in a short announcement from Pacific NorthWest LNG which outlined that he had tendered his resignation and left the company to return to his home and family in Alberta.

In the same announcement, Pacific NorthWest outlined that Mr. Michael Culbert a member of the Board of Directors of Pacific NorthWest LNG and the President and CEO of Progress Energy will be taking over in the role of acting President for Pacific NorthWest. ,

Dato' Wee Yiaw Hin, the Chair of Pacific NorthWest LNG's Board of Directors offered his praise for Mr. Kists work and contributions to the company.

“Under Greg’s leadership, the company was formed and continues to work towards a final investment decision this year. He leaves Pacific NorthWest LNG as a strong company with an excellent management team and a committed, dedicated group of employees. We wish him much success in Alberta and want to ensure continuity of leadership during this period of transition.”

The change at Pacific NorthWest LNG comes at a pivotal time for the company's plans for development of their Lelu Island terminal project.

In recent weeks, Pacific NorthWest has outlined a change in design to their project, reflective of concerns from those that have taken part in the Environmental Review process for the proposed development.

It was a move by the company that signalled its intention to continue to work on issues that are raised in the community regarding their terminal project.

The days heading towards the end of the month will also prove to be interesting for observers of the progress of the Pacific NorthWest proposal.

Earlier this month, Petronas the Malaysian owned parent company of Pacific NorthWest served notice of sorts, outlining their plans to re-address their investment plans by the end of the month.

With the energy giant looking for clarification from both the federal and provincial government in regard to tax regimes and other issues related to the larger LNG development picture.

You can review much of that background from our archive page here.

Cross posted from the North Coast Review