The vast majority of Quebecers are refusing to finance the Quebec LNG pipeline project and the natural gas liquefaction plant by increasing electricity prices in Quebec, according to a Léger survey published on Wednesday.
“If the LNG Quebec / Gazoduq project were to be implemented, would you be prepared to accept the increased electricity bill that might result from this?” A company asked a thousand people, on behalf of the Quebec Environmental Groups Alliance [voir encadré méthodologie].
Only 5% of respondents answered in the affirmative, versus 87% who said they are against it.
“Not surprisingly, the vast majority said no [parce qu’il] “There is no benefit to the consumer,” Journalism Leger Vice President for Public Affairs and Communications, Sylvain Gautier.
He stresses that people tend to be less favorable to projects of this nature when they see the direct consequences that this will have on them.
Last December, before the impact of the Quebec LNG project on electricity prices was revealed, Another Léger poll also showed an approval rating of 34% against 46% of unfavorable reviews.
From the moment we touch the wallets of consumers, it is natural for there to be a collective reaction, right or wrong.
Sylvain Gautier, Leger
The construction of a natural gas liquefaction plant on Saguenay Beach and the gas pipeline that crosses Abitibi, Lac-Saint-Jean and Saguenay to supply it will increase the electricity bill of households and companies. 25 years of project activity, confirmed at the beginning of the month of the Contractors Union.
The consumer rights organization calculated that the energy consumption required by the project would force Hydro-Quebec to enter into new supply contracts, at rates higher than those at which it would resell the electricity to LNG Quebec.
Therefore, all of the SOE’s customers will be the ones who will pay the bill by increasing their rates, starting in 2030.
“10 billion of public money” will be diverted to finance the project, said Adrian Gibert-Barthez, a spokesperson for the Straits coalition, while Prime Minister Francois Legault said “clearly” that there will be no public funding.
How did the minister do [de l’Énergie et des Ressources naturelles Jonatan] Could Julian justify it when we’re in the throes of a pandemic and that Quebec families’ finances are already in disrepair?
Alice Ann Simard, CEO of Quebec Nature
What’s more, and for the same reasons, the project will generate a deficit of $ 1.5 billion for the first years of activity, from 2027 to 2030, which could reduce the profits the company pays the government by the same amount. He also counted the consumer union.
A decision expected this summer
Environment and Climate Change Minister Benoit Sharett said the natural gas liquefaction plant project does not meet Quebec’s requirements, after reading the Bureau of Public Hearings on the Environment (BAPE) report, released last month. (Read our article on this topic again)
The 500-page document concluded that the project will increase global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, stimulate the Canadian fossil fuel industry, threaten beluga and will not produce significant long-term economic benefits for the region.
Minister Sharett’s decision on whether or not to authorize the Énergie Saguenay project will not be made until the company submits the expected environmental impact assessment this summer.
The gas pipeline from Northern Ontario, the crossing of Abetepe, Haute-Morrisie, and Lac Saint-Jean that will provide the final Énergie Saguenay plant must undergo a separate environmental assessment, which will be jointly implemented by BAPE and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.
The survey from Léger was conducted by Nature Québec, Greenpeace, Équiterre, David Suzuki Foundation, Coalition Fjord, Rouyn-Noranda Pipeline Combat Alliance and Regroupement vigilance hydrocaralités Québec (RVHQ) This is an online survey conducted from 16 To April 18, 2021 among 1,003 people residing in Quebec. Results were weighted by gender, age, mother tongue, region, level of education, and presence of children in the family. A sample taken from a panel cannot calculate the margin of error, but for comparison, the maximum margin of error for a sample of 1003 respondents is ± 3.1%, 19 times out of 20.
“Music guru. Incurable web practitioner. Thinker. Lifelong zombie junkie. Tv buff. Typical organizer. Evil beer scholar.”