Report - Agence canadienne d'évaluation environnementale

Project energy context
supply. Presence of the LNG terminal would put Quebec at the head of the network,
thus providing increased flexibility in supply and demand management”.
♦ Finding — The Panel takes note of the fact that Quebec’s energy strategy calls for a
role for natural gas in the energy and economic development in Quebec. The Panel
also takes note of the importance that the strategy gives to natural gas supply
source diversification for the Quebec market in general and the particular role that
LNG terminals could play in that diversification. The Panel also notes the continuity
that has marked the strategic visions of successive Quebec governments in this
area for nearly thirty years.
♦ Opinion 1 — The Panel is of the opinion that the establishment of LNG facilities in
Quebec would represent a diversification of its natural gas supply and would have
the effect of reinforcing its energy security.
Alternatives
Alternatives to the project concern the functionally different ways to meet the project
need and achieve the project purpose 1 . The project aims to provide Quebec and
Ontario with a source of supply other than the WCSB, thus increasing the security and
competitiveness of these provinces (PR3.2, p. 2.37 to 2.39).
In order to meet these objectives, the proponent envisioned several options, including
hook-up by pipeline to the reserves on Sable Island, Nova Scotia. This option was
nonetheless dropped because the amount of natural gas found in that basin proved to
be less than expected (PR3.2, p. 2.53 and 2.54). The following solutions were then
explored.
One of the options envisioned by the project consisted in importing natural gas from
the Canaport project at St. John, New Brunswick. In order to send this volume of
natural gas to Quebec and to Ontario, two routes were considered to reach the TQM
pipeline facilities at Lachenaie, one 920 km long and the other 870 km long. The
proponent nonetheless deemed these two options economically unviable due to
higher transportation costs, and to the higher prices of natural gas in the northeast
United States market compared to prices in Quebec and Ontario. This latter point
would imply that suppliers would agree to sell their natural gas at a price below that
which they could obtain on another market, a prospect which the proponent considers
unrealistic (PR3.2, p. 2.53 to 2.58).
1. [On-line (30 mars 2007): www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/013/0002/addressing_f.htm].
76 Rabaska Project – Implementation of an LNG Terminal and Related Infrastructure