Report - Agence canadienne d'évaluation environnementale

Assessing the risks related to the project
♦ Finding — The Panel noted that Natural Resources Canada deemed the seismic
analysis produced for the project to be satisfactory.
Other opinions regarding security
Some hearing participants 1 were of the opinion that the proponent had minimized his
project’s risks and consequences for the population. In order to correctly assess the
proponent’s conclusions, some participants referred to other studies which had
analyzed the potential hazards of building LNG terminals, including the one proposed
for this project.
In his report, James A. Fay, from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was of
the opinion that the standards of the Canadian Standards Association (CSA-Z276-01)
are not restrictive enough, and that danger areas related to the thermal radiation
produced after LNG spills could extend to a distance of 4 km from the source. In his
opinion, the danger areas dealing with flammable vapours could be extended further,
i.e. over a distance of approximately 6 km from the spill site. He also thought that, in
the event of spills from an LNG tanker in transit, the danger areas linked to the
thermal radiation and flammable vapours would cover both of the river’s shores, up to
a distance where the river’s width would exceed 12 km (DB16.1). However, the Panel
noted that Fay did not use the same parameters as the proponent (thermal radiation
threshold and flammability limit) to reach these conclusions. Furthermore, no
probability was associated with the accident scenarios to which he referred.
The opinion of Jerry Havens, from the Chemical Engineering Department of the
University of Arkansas, was also reported. He was of the opinion that a major LNG
spill could occur after an intentional act. He explained that a natural gas vapour cloud
could travel up to approximately 4.8 km. He also believed that in the event of a pool
fire fuelled by an LNG spill, the entire LNG tanker could be in flames. In his opinion,
the thermal radiation generated by a pool fire could be felt up to approximately 1.6 km
(DC17). For this case also, the Panel noted that it was not able to compare these
results with those of the proponent, because of missing data on the parameters used
and the probabilities associated with the accident scenarios considered.
James E S Venart, from the Mechanical Engineering Department of the University of
New Brunswick, also studied safety issues associated with the potential construction
of the LNG terminal project at Lévis. He was of the opinion that the proponent’s risk
1. Among others: Coalition Rabat-joie, DM377; Ms. Louise Maranda, DM596; Mr. Sylvain Castonguay, DM578.
164 Rabaska Project – Implementation of an LNG Terminal and Related Infrastructure