Report - Agence canadienne d'évaluation environnementale

Opinions of participants
l’environnement du Québec, DT29, p. 61). The Association saw these possibilities to
protect the environment of Lévis as “alternatives that are much less costly in terms of
funds and the environment, and which would place Québec at the junction point of two
distribution networks (DM459, p. 46).
Integrating the project into the landscape
The project’s integration into the landscape was an aspect which was raised by
several participants at the hearings, especially through questions dealing with the
LNG terminal’s implementation area, the compliance with the development plan and
municipal regulations, the future development of the area as well as the impacts on
the landscape, heritage sites and area uses.
Choosing the site
The implementation area of the Rabaska LNG terminal is one of the project’s most
controversial aspects. This aspect was raised by a great many participants during the
hearings. The site chosen offers, for some, optimal conditions regarding security,
environmental protection and technical feasibility, while for others it has major
constraints regarding the security of neighbouring populations, landscape integration
and poor area cohesion. In this respect, and summarizing the controversy
surrounding this choice, the Conseil des monuments et sites du Québec stated that
“the main question at issue is if the project is suitable for the site, not if the site is
suitable for the project” (DM394, p. 3). Many participants believed that the site chosen
and the project’s nature are incompatible with the host environment. One participant
added:
[…] this project is totally incompatible with its environment. The site chosen is a
mistake because it is too close to residences (risks and disruptions), because it
disrupts the harmony of a rural area located alongside the river, facing the île
d’Orléans, and because the position of the local population must be respected,
and they are fiercely opposed to it.
(Ms. Carole Boucher, DM694, p. 17; Ms. Isabelle Carrier, DM624, p. 17)
Several participants thought that the building of an LNG terminal must take place far
away from inhabited areas and that, as such, the site chosen is inadmissible as it
doesn’t meet this crucial population security condition. The municipality of Beaumont
was of the opinion that “while residential realities can cohabitate very well with
agricultural considerations, this is not the same for an extensive industrial project that
poses risks which may be major” (DM619, p. 25). To this end, the GIRAM stated:
26 Rabaska Project – Implementation of an LNG Terminal and Related Infrastructure