Report - Agence canadienne d'évaluation environnementale

Opinions of participants
gazoduc, existing LNG terminals already have a hard time obtaining sufficient LNG
supply: “Rabaska would only be one more mouth to feed in a starving world” (DM589,
p. 4). Moreover, the Groupe de jeunes citoyens lévisiens believed that “world gas
reserves will eventually run out, even if they are still sizeable. This is inevitable as we
are literally wasting almost all of our forms of energy simply because we can have
access to them” (DM612, p. 9).
Some believed that this project would result in increased mining of oil sands in
Alberta, as this mining activity requires a great deal of natural gas 1 . Several
participants also had doubts regarding the project’s true goal, i.e. ensuring Québec’s
energy security. They believed that a major portion of the imported natural gas would
be sent to the U.S, be it directly or indirectly 2 . Some participants were worried that the
U.S. would benefit from this new natural gas source, while the population of Québec
would suffer safety and pollution drawbacks (Mr. Philippe de le Rue, DM423, p. 4;
Ms. Marie Dubé and family, DM399, p. 2; Ms. Lise Thibault, DM436, p. 20).
According to the municipal council of Sainte-Pétronille, “there must be a clear
demonstration that this project is essential to ensure the long-term energy future of
Québec”. Some participants also stated:
In 2007, we are facing major societal choices and environmental challenges.
Quebeckers must choose energy solutions that best represent their ambitions and
vision for the future. The expression of its will must be clearly defined and
expressed by its elected officials, who have the mandate to represent the
population and not the interests of foreign investments.
(Mr. Jean-Christian Roy and Ms. Guylaine Piché, DM617, p. 2)
Many participants believed that the natural gas industry should not be favoured. The
advantage that hydroelectricity gives Québec as a main source of energy was
underscored, because it is renewable and doesn’t pollute much (Mr. Christian Lévesque,
DM440, p. 2; Groupe de jeunes citoyens lévisiens, DM612, p. 18; Mr. Yvan Bastrash,
DM520). According to some participants: “we were supposed to become independent in
terms of energy requirements when electricity was nationalized in the 1960s. And this has
been the case. Our energy needs are currently being met in great part by our electrical
network” (Ms. Gisèle Perron and Mr. Claude Castonguay, DM54, p. 1).
1. Association pour la protection de l’environnement de Lévis, DM459, p. 41; Ms. Suzanne Rochon, DM536, p. 3;
Ms. Andrée Roberge, DM366, p. 1; Les AmiEs de la terre de Québec, DM625, p. 66; Association québécoise de
lutte contre la pollution atmosphérique, DM592.1, p. 38.
2. Ms. Martine Samson, DM164, p. 1; Mr. Jacques Clermont, DM224, p. 4; Ms. Louise Crevier-Letendre, DM317, p. 2 and
3; Ms. Sandrine Louchart, DM349, p. 6; Mr. Michel Riou, DM370, p. 1; Ms. Michèle Lépine and Mr. André Dubois,
DM573, p. 6; Groupe de jeunes citoyens lévisiens, DM612, p. 11; Ms. Chantal Bernier, DM575, p. 2; Centre de
recherche et d’information en consommation, DM9, p. 1; Ms. Suzanne A. Samson, DM186, p. 1; Mr. Jean Dupont,
DM301, p. 1; Ms. Sylvie Vincent and Mr. Daniel Bégin, DM314, p. 1; Mr. Claude Lachance, DM426, p. 2.
Rabaska Project – Implementation of an LNG Terminal and Related Infrastructure 17