There are numerous LNG infrastructure projects at different phases of environmental review and construction in British Columbia, Canada — all of which put people and the climate at risk. 

One project—the Tilbury Phase 2 Expansion—is currently under review by the BC Environmental Assessment Office (EAO), and is in the Application Review phase. If Tilbury sounds familiar, it’s probably because the Tilbury Marine Jetty, an infrastructure project for LNG tanker fueling at the same site, was approved by the EAO just one year ago. With the Jetty proposal specifically linked to marine shipping and the bunkering of LNG as a marine fuel, Say No to LNG was also actively engaged in debunking the myths around methane-based fuels as decarbonization solutions. 

Say No to LNG participated in the recent Tilbury Phase 2 Expansion public engagement period, which was open for public feedback from January 14 to March 3, 2025. In reviewing the project application, we found many instances of incorrect, incomplete, and missing information.

According to the proponent (FortisBC), the expansion application proposes construction of new LNG storage, liquefaction facilities, natural gas receiving facilities, and supporting infrastructure. FortisBC states the purpose of the project is to improve energy resilience in the region and increase LNG production to meet needs for LNG as a “low-carbon-intensity” fuel to support local and global energy transition goals. 

In contrast to FortisBC’s claims, LNG is not a low-carbon fuel source due to associated methane emissions throughout its lifecycle across land and sea; LNG appears to be their long-term goal, not merely a transition fuel as they say (e.g., export licenses have been issued for 40 years). 

The scale of the Tilbury Phase 2 Expansion is also important to highlight. The original Tilbury site had an LNG production/liquefaction capacity of about 92 tonnes LNG per day. At 7,700 tonnes LNG per day, the Phase 2 Expansion alone is more than 80 times the capacity of the original facility. When combined with past site expansions (including Phase 1A and Phase 1B), Phase 2 brings total liquefaction capacity to over 10,000 tonnes of LNG per day—over 100 times the capacity of the original site. 

Over the course of a year, this expansion project could result in dozens more LNG carriers transiting the Fraser River Delta region, and according to a recent report on Canadian LNG emissions, has significant implications for exhaust emissions from LNG-carrying vessels.

Despite this potential for a substantial increase in LNG shipping activity linked to the Phase 2 Expansion, the project application omits adverse impacts from shipping. 

As outlined in the Say No to LNG submission (read here), LNG shipping has the potential for adverse impacts across a majority of feedback categories listed for the public engagement period, including air quality, acoustic conditions, wildlife and wildlife habitats (coastal and marine), economic outcomes, human health and well-being, and the climate. 

Potential biodiversity impacts are particularly striking. According to maps of regional vessel traffic routes and protected areas, carriers used to export LNG produced at the Tilbury facility to international destinations pass within roughly one nautical mile of seven critical protected ocean wildlife areas:

• South Arm Marshes Wildlife Management Area (WMA), 
• Alaksen National Wildlife Area,
• George C. Reifel Migratory Bird Sanctuary, 
• Sturgeon Bank WMA, Roberts Bank WMA,
• Race Rocks Ecological Reserve, and 
• Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary.

These LNG carriers will also pass within 10 nautical miles of an additional 25+ sensitive ocean and coastal areas along the Strait of Georgia, Strait of Juan de Fuca, and Haro Strait in Canada and the United States. 

With impacts ranging from pollution (noise, toxins, nutrients, bacteria, pathogens, pharmaceuticals, plastics) to vessel strikes, and with nearby sensitive areas acting as safe havens for a number of coastal and marine species protected under the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, Species At Risk Act, and BC Listed Species, adverse impacts from LNG shipping associated with the expansion must be considered in the Environmental Assessment.

Read the full written submission, including anticipated LNG shipping impacts across all Environmental Assessment components. To take action against the Tilbury expansion, sign Stand.earth’s open petition.