By Peter Ewart

 Over the last several years, many extravagant claims have been made about the potential for LNG production in BC. For example, the Clark government has claimed that the industry will create 100,000 jobs, generate $1 trillion in revenue over the next few decades, and contribute to amassing a $100 billion sovereign wealth fund.

 Opponents of the provincial government have criticized these figures as being pumped up, while the provincial government has argued that critics are only nay-sayers and anti-resource development. And so the arguments have gone back and forth.

 But, all of that controversy aside, another question has arisen that both the supporters and opponents of LNG production in BC should be very concerned about. And that is: Just how big are the raw gas reserves in British Columbia and, based on those figures, how many LNG facilities could realistically be supported? 

Regarding that question, David Hughes, a geoscientist and researcher, makes a startling claim in a recently released report from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (1). According to Hughes, the provincial government has grossly inflated the total estimated raw gas supply in the province. How does he prove this? By citing figures from the provincial government’s own crown corporation, the BC Oil and Gas Commission. 

In 2013, the BC Oil and Gas Commission estimated a potentially “marketable resource” of 442 trillion cubic feet of raw gas (2). However, Clark government officials are claiming that the supply is actually an astounding 2,933 trillion cubic feet, six times what the Commission estimates. 

Hughes says that the government’s figures are “false and irresponsible” and are “more than triple the remaining marketable ‘resources’ of the entire Western Canada Sedimentary Basin, both conventional and unconventional, according to the NEB [National Energy Board].” 

By way of comparison, recently released figures by American researchers, put the technically recoverable gas resource for the entire continental U.S. at 2,515 trillion cubic feet, which is actually less than the amount the BC government claims could come out of the relatively small Northeast corner of BC (3). 

Clearly, something is haywire with the BC government statistics. Hughes thinks that the government is mixing up recoverable or marketable gas with what is called in situ or gas-in-place (which is gas in the ground but not necessarily recoverable). Recoverable gas often amounts to as little as 10% of gas-in-place. If Hughes is right, such mixing up of concepts would constitute a gross error or possibly something much worse. 

Even if the BC government’s estimates were right and it reached its hoped-for export target, Hughes believes, “the scale-up in drilling and associated infrastructure required [i.e. drilling between 37,800 and 43,700 new wells by 2040] would be massive, and would fundamentally alter the landscape of northern BC.” In effect, this would almost triple the number of gas wells drilled since 1954 and, most, if not all, would be achieved through fracking. Each fracked well could require as much as much as 25 million gallons of water. 

So how has the BC government responded to Hughes’ claim about the spooky figures and the discrepancy between provincial government estimates of gas reserves and those of its own BC Oil and Gas Commission? 

So far, lots of bluster but no hard facts or research. In recent news reports, instead of addressing why such a huge discrepancy exists, Natural Gas Minister Rich Coleman avoids the question by simply repeating the mantra that “B.C. has a vast supply of natural gas to meet domestic and international demands for more than 150 years” (4). 

He further argues, “I’m not going to buy any of [Hughes ‘ report] because I know what our facts are, I know what research is, and I know from sitting down with the companies that have been drilling what the pressure of the wells are, what they’re going to have production-wise going forward in the next 10-25 years.” 

Now that is all well and good. But If Minister Coleman does, indeed, “know what research is”, he should, instead of bluster and evasion, provide it to British Columbians. He should explain why there is such a variance between his figures and that of the government’s own BC Oil and Gas Commission. And he should explain why the government appears to be mixing up the figures for recoverable gas with gas-in-place. 

Let the facts and research speak for itself. 

Peter Ewart is a columnist and writer based in Prince George, British Columbia. He can be reached at: peter.ewart@shaw.ca

1. Hughes, David. “A clear look at BC LNG: Energy security, environmental implications and economic potential.” Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives – BC Office. May 2015. https://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publications/BC%20Office/2015/05/CCPA-BC-Clear-Look-LNG-final_0.pdf
2. BC Government. Trade and Invest British Columbia. Retrieved May 27, 2015. http://www.britishcolumbia.ca/invest/industry-sectors/natural-gas.aspx#.VWYfqEbj_Ik
3. “Potential Gas Committee reports increase in magnitude of U.S. natural gas resource base.” Potential Gas Committee. Golden, Colorado. April 8, 2015. http://potentialgas.org/download/pgc-press-release-april-2015.pdf
4. BC Oil and Gas Commission. “Hydrocarbon and by-product reserves in British Columbia.” 2013. http://www.bcogc.ca/node/12346/download
5. Jang, Brent. “LNG industry in B.C. threat to environment and energy security: study.” Globe and Mail. May 26, 2015.
6. McElroy, Justin. “New report claims B.C. has much less natural gas than government claims.” Global News. May 26, 2015.