FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

UNCEDED xʷməθkʷəy̓əm (MUSQUEAM), Sḵwx̱wú7mesh (SQUAMISH) AND səlilwətaɬ (TSLEIL-WAUTUTH) TERRITORIES/VANCOUVER – Six B.C.-based organizations concur with concerns raised by the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs about substantial deficiencies in Ksi Lisims’ application to the B.C. Environmental Assessment Office for a liquefied natural gas project.

The David Suzuki Foundation, Sierra Club BC, Stand.earth, the Wilderness Committee, Northwest Institute and Skeena Watershed Conservation Coalition are calling on the EAO to address the myriad flaws in the application and compel the proponent to undertake a comprehensive analysis that considers its climate, electrification strategy, wild salmon health and Indigenous rights implications. In alignment with the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs’ plea, we advocate for a pause in the environmental assessment process for the project until essential studies are completed, and credible evidence supporting the proponents’ assertions is provided. Issues raised should be addressed by the company before the Gitanyow Wilp Sustainability Assessment Process and the environmental assessment process can proceed.

The Ksi Lisims application builds its net-zero claims around project electrification with no guarantee that it will be viable and without considering that the costs associated with prioritizing electrification of the fossil fuel sector could hinder necessary electrification beyond the sector throughout B.C.

The project also relies excessively on offsets for emissions mitigation, an unproven approach that detracts from the application’s credibility. The best way to avoid emissions isn’t through offset schemes, but by not building new fossil fuel projects. This is consistent with the commitments made at COP28 and with the overwhelming scientific consensus regarding the critical importance of phasing out fossil fuel development.

The proponent does not credibly evaluate the emissions from burning the fuels in countries they’re exported to. This narrow approach is no longer defensible in the context of the intensifying climate crisis. If Ksi Lisims were to proceed, emissions in receiving countries would amount to 32.2 MT CO2e annually (equivalent to about half of B.C.’s annual emissions) for the life of the project.

As pointed out by climate-policy experts, governments concerned about domestic emissions can no longer turn a blind eye to the grave planetary and human rights consequences associated with exporting fossil fuels and their emissions.

Contrary to industry claims, there is no guarantee that B.C. LNG exports would displace coal rather than simply locking out investment in renewable energy.

Finally, as the International Energy Agency and other energy market analysts point out, repeatedly, the project is not justified since the LNG market is entering a period of oversupply, with the growing risk of stranded assets for any new projects.

-30-