Dear BC MLA,
It has come to my attention the failures we have had in BC when it comes to LNG and we shouldn’t have it progress any further.
This can provide areas with an unsafe water supply that you cannot live on but are forced to adapt and find a way to live with it anyway.
“LNG is often regarded as extremely dangerous and toxic with container ships called floating bombs. But is this perception accurate? The historical reality is that LNG has the best safety record of all common fuel types and is completely non-toxic. Of course natural gas vapors are flammable and present safety hazards that must be managed, but these hazards are substantially less than for gasoline, diesel and other liquid fuels.”
““LNG is safe, on land and in transit as a result of detailed industry standards, strict regulations, and a commitment to risk management,” reads one government website. As the U.S. Congressional Research Service tidily noted in 2004, there have always been public concerns about the siting of LNG terminals because “LNG is a hazardous liquid transported and stored in enormous quantities, often near populated areas.””
“In fact, a recent and nasty explosion at an LNG facility in Washington State, combined with alarming British research on what scientists call “vapour cloud explosions” or the release of flammable gases into the atmosphere, has raised new doubts about the adequacy of safety regulations for siting LNG export terminals in North America.”
From what I see this is an unsafe approach and I would advise against it.