Benefits, risks of new jet fuel terminal discussed
Opponents cite danger to drinking water, proponent says it’s boost to the economy
A new jet fuel terminal in Montreal East will make it harder for Canada to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and could put Montreal’s drinking water at risk, opponents of the plan told Quebec’s Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement at a public hearing on Tuesday.
But supporters told the BAPE the $150-million project will have a positive effect on Montreal’s economy and the company behind the plan maintains that it’s the best way to meet existing fuel demands at three of Canada’s busiest airports.
Currently, more than half the jet fuel used at the international airports in Montreal, Toronto and Ottawa is imported, according to the Montreal International Fuel Facilities Corporation, the consortium of more than 30 airlines that is behind the project.
That fuel arrives by ship in Quebec City. From there, it is transported by truck to Montreal and Ottawa. Shipments to Toronto are transported by train, truck and ship.
This situation has put the reliability of the three airports’ fuel supply at risk, according to the MIFFC.
“There’s a general tightness in the market, given the amount of fuel that has to be imported,” said Robert Iasenza, the president of FSM Group, a Montreal-based company that administers MIFFC and is managing the fuel terminal project.
The MIFFC’s plan is to build a terminal at the Port of Montreal — allowing fuel ships to bypass Quebec City.
That terminal would be connected to a second site nearby, where rail cars and tanker trucks would be loaded to supply Toronto and Ottawa.
The plan also calls for a sevenkilometre pipeline to be built to connect the fuel terminal to the existing Trans-Northern Pipeline, which links Trudeau airport to fuel refineries in Montreal East.
Between 1.4 and 1.8 billion litres of fuel would travel though these facilities a year, if the project goes ahead.
“What we’re doing is bringing the fuel closer to the airports and then using the same modes of transportation that would be used anyway, we’re just shortening the distance, decreasing greenhouse gas emissions, increasing security of supply to the airport,” Iasenza said.
But those existing modes of transport — particularly the Trans-Northern Pipeline — are a concern, several presenters told the BAPE.
Parts of the buried pipeline, which is more than 60 years old, have been exposed in recent years, raising fears about its conditions.
The National Energy Board, the federal pipeline regulator, has issued several safety orders related to the pipeline and in 2016 required Trans-Northern to reduce the operating pressure of the pipeline as a safety measure.
In the fall, the company informed the regulator about previously unreported over-pressure incidents on the pipeline.
Luc Lefebvre, who is in charge of major emergencies and environmental emergencies at the Direction régionale de santé publique for Montreal, said measures need to be taken to ensure a leak can’t contaminate Montreal’s drinking water.
After the Lac-Mégantic disaster, one nearby town closed its water intake for 74 days over concerns of oil contamination.
“In the context of Montreal, such a situation is unthinkable, we can’t close a water intake,” Lefebvre said. “A closure would put public health in peril.”
Iasenza said he’s confident in the federal pipeline regulation system.
“We’re not changing the use of that pipeline, that pipeline is being used today to supply Montreal Trudeau, other than to meet the growth of future demand, we are not going to change the use of that pipeline, with or without the project, that pipeline will continue to be used to feed Trudeau (airport),” he said.
But Raymond Malo, the deputy director general of the VaudreuilSoulanges regional county municipality, said a recent report by the auditor general of Canada has demonstrated there are major flaws with the pipeline regulation system.
Increasing the use of the pipeline will increase the associated risks, said Luc Falardeau, a concerned citizen who addressed the BAPE.
Increasing the supply of fuel to the airport is incompatible with Quebec and Canada’s goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, said Geneviève Puskas, a representative from environmental group Équiterre.
While the project’s promoter has said it will reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared to the current supply system, because it will reduce the distance fuel is transported by truck, spending millions of dollars to build new storage facilities for fuel would encourage more fuel to be used, Puskas said.
“It’s like if you want to lose weight but then buy a gift certificate for McDonald’s for a year,” she said.
The project is supported by the both the Chamber of Commerce of Metropolitan Montreal and the Chambre de commerce de l’Est de Montréal, the business groups say that it will benefit the city’s economy.
“I don’t think we want the airport to reduce its activities,” said Michel Leblanc, president and CEO of the CCMM, “we want the airport to continue growing.” But environmentalists disagree. “Quebec’s economy does not need this project,” Martine Chatelain, of the Comité Vigilance hydrocarbure Montréal, told the BAPE. While Quebec’s economy needs private investments, she said, it’s more important to invest in renewable energy and alternative forms of transportation, not in an industry that will take the province further from its goals to reduce emissions.
“That will happen with or without this project, passenger growth is happening and passenger growth is requiring more fuel, the airports are growing, so one way or another, the fuel is going to have to get there, what we’re suggesting is to improve the way in which it gets there,” Iasenza said.
The BAPE’s report is intended to help the provincial government decide whether to approve the project.
If it gets the green light, construction would begin in the fall.
I don’t think we want the airport to reduce its activities. We want the airport to continue growing.