Breadcrumb Trail Links
Opinion: Recent study finds that the methane in natural gas — a super-potent greenhouse gas — leaks at every stage of fracking, transporting, and processing LNG
Cooling towers used to dissipate heat generated when natural gas is converted into liquefied natural gas are seen under construction at the LNG Canada export terminal in Kitimat. Photo by DARRYL DYCK /THE CANADIAN PRESS
Article content
“Climate change is the single biggest health threat facing humanity.” — World Health Organization
Advertisement 2
Article content
Article content
Recommended Videos
Article content
Physicians have a duty to speak out when public health is at risk. That is why concerned doctors in B.C. have repeatedly cited the climate and health impacts of the liquefied natural gas (LNG) industry — and called for a halt to new projects until those impacts are studied.
As our new provincial government sets its priorities, it is now even more urgent that it implement this moratorium. New research from one of the world’s top methane experts recently shattered the environmental argument for LNG.
Industry has argued that replacing coal plants with LNG will fight climate change because burning natural gas produces less carbon dioxide than coal. But a 2024 peer-reviewed study by Cornell University’s Robert Howarth now estimates that LNG from fracking is actually worse for climate than coal.
Canucks Report
Article content
Advertisement 3
Article content
The study estimates that the overall greenhouse gas footprint of such LNG is 33 per cent greater than coal when its full lifecycle is examined. The problem is that methane in natural gas is a super-potent greenhouse gas — and leaks at every stage of fracking, transporting, and processing LNG.
U .S. President Joe Biden responded to the data by halting LNG project permits in order to reconsider its impacts on climate. U.S. officials launched investigations into the possibility that a wave of new LNG facilities could create a “climate bomb” and worsen climate change.
In contrast to the Biden Administration’s actions, the B.C. government remains committed to LNG expansion — in spite of prior calls from the UN and the International Energy Agency to stop licensing new gas developments for the sake of climate.
Advertisement 4
Article content
Since the science now indicates that LNG may be worse for climate than coal, B.C.’s commitment to LNG expansion raises grave public health concerns. Many doctors worry that the health of British Columbians is already being seriously impacted by climate change. They point to health impacts such as:
Heat-related illness: The 2021 heat dome alone led to the deaths of over 600 British Columbians;
Wildfire smoke: Smoke that now routinely envelops B.C. communities forces people with asthma and heart disease into emergency rooms and has serious long-term impacts. A UCLA study links wildfire smoke to 55,000 California deaths over eleven years;
Infectious diseases: Climate change contributes to the spread of diseases that thrive in a warmer climate, such as West Nile virus, Lyme Disease, encephalitis, rabies, dengue fever, Rocky Mountain spotted fever, valley fever and bathing fever;
Advertisement 5
Article content
Damage to water and air quality: Climate change degrades drinking water quality, exacerbating toxic blue green algae blooms, beaver fever, food poisoning, and cryptosporidiosis. It increases air pollution and allergens, worsening health outcomes from child development to cancer;
Extreme weather events: Severe storms, flooding and drought trigger injuries, and increase food insecurity;
Mental health impacts: Anxiety and grief about the warming planet has profound mental health impacts, especially on young people.
It is unsurprising that doctors would oppose expansion of any industry that threatens to make climate change worse. Taking action on climate is a public health necessity.
Furthermore, climate change is not the only public health risk created by LNG. Many doctors are concerned about local health impacts of fracking, gas transport and processing.
Advertisement 6
Article content
For example: There is evidence of links between fracking and leukemia, congenital heart defects, reproductive abnormalities, increased premature births, and asthma; and air emissions from gas production contain carcinogenic and toxic substances, such as benzene, toluene, ethylene, and xylene, and dioxins.
In light of emerging evidence, it is vital to carefully study all public health risks created by LNG. First, the B.C. government needs to investigate whether LNG expansion will increase global climate risks — as the Cornell study indicates. Second, B.C. needs to re-examine health risks faced by residents in and around fracking, pipeline and LNG facilities.
The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment has called for a moratorium on new fracking and LNG development until such risk assessments are done. LNG expansion must not proceed — until we know whether or not expansion will threaten world climate and British Columbians’ health.
Good public health policy demands nothing less.
Calvin Sandborn, K.C., is a former professor of environmental law; Dr. Melissa Lem is a Vancouver family physician and president of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment.
Article content
Share this article in your social network