Shale gas: a gas continues in Quebec


After failing to get its projects accepted in Quebec, the shale gas industry turns to the courts to have its right to drill with fracking recognized. The Alberta company Questerre, which is leading this action in court, also claims that this technique is safe and hopes to even boost the development of the sector in the province.

The spokesman of the Quebec Oil and Gas Association (QGQA), Éric Tétrault, is formal: the former government of Philippe Couillard did not have the right to close the door to fracturing in the St. Lawrence Lowlands. Lawrence. "It's an arbitrary decision that was made at the last minute, obviously in view of the election campaign. So it's a political decision and, for us, it's unacceptable, "he said in an interview at Le Devoir .

The APGQ "supports" the lawsuit that Questerre Energy has launched against the Quebec government to force the annulment of the regulations of the Hydrocarbons Act, which formally prohibit "fracking in shale", including in lakes and rivers. "Questerre considers that the ban on fracking of shale is in no way justified by the scientific data available to the government", and therefore, that "it is arbitrary, discriminatory and unreasonable," reads the documents filed in Superior Court on November 6.


The company recalls that the hydrocarbons Act adopted by the Couillard government authorizes the use of fracking. Moreover, the first version of the regulations, published in September 2017, did not close the door to shale gas projects in the St. Lawrence Lowlands. It was not until last June that the government chose to ban fracking in this region of Quebec, insisting on the lack of "social acceptability".

According to documents filed in court, this action amounts to a "disguised expropriation" of all companies that hold permits in the St. Lawrence Lowlands. "For seven years, and after several environmental studies, the intention has always been to put in place rules to regulate the production of hydrocarbons in Quebec. But we come to the end of the process, last June, with draft regulations that block the production of hydrocarbons, "summarizes Éric Tétrault.

13,000 km²

The query presented by Questerre also specifies that the lowlands "constitute the only sector with a commercial gas potential in Quebec". The APGQ spokesman added that "Quebec has potentially the second or third gas among the purest in the world. We sit on a world-class resource. This explains the interest of the companies, who always hope that it will one day be possible to go towards the production ".

According to the most recent list of the Department of Energy and Natural Resources, a dozen companies currently hold a total of about 13,000 km² of exploration permits in the south of the province. In addition to Questerre, there are Repsol Oil Gas Canada (a subsidiary of a Spanish company), Suncor, Gastem and Altai Resources. Most of the permits are held by companies outside Quebec, since the acquisition of Junex by Alberta's Cuda Energy.

Questerre is therefore taking legal action "on behalf of a group of oil and gas companies in Quebec," says Michael Binnion, who is both president of the QOGA and president of Questerre.

According to the lawyer Jean Baril, specialist in environmental legislation, the victory of Questerre in court is however not acquired. It recalls that the government is entitled to adopt a regulation that comes to "restrict activities" that are permitted by law. However, this is the case with fracturing, "which has been prohibited precisely in shale, but which is permitted elsewhere in Quebec".

Gas recovery

The Questerre motion also does not mention any claim for compensation, if the ban on fracking should remain in effect. In court documents, the company stresses, however, that it suffers "serious and irreparable harm", but also "a commercial loss that worsens and damage to its reputation". It is also evaluating its investments and those of its partners to "more than $ 160 million" since 2003.

The Calgary company is therefore calling for the revival of the shale gas sector in Quebec, while recognizing that the issue of fracking "has generated a reflection across Quebec". As she points out, the "safety" of her "clean gas" project has been demonstrated "by reliable and objective scientific data".

https://www.ledevoir.com/societe/environnement/541157/gaz-de-schiste-une-gaziere-poursuit-quebec
tuja
12.11.2018 kl 15:24 3753

QEC blir gull værdt innen kort tidshorisont. Binna er skråsikker på "victory". :)
6710
12.11.2018 kl 16:07 3611

Længe siden jeg har læst noget så fornuftigt som dette, godt beskrevet Ledevoir :-)

Lad fornuften vinde. Dette ville være en sejr for alle, særlig når man læser dette omkring tørgas:
"The APGQ spokesman added that "Quebec has potentially the second or third gas among the purest in the world. We sit on a world-class ressource" "clean gas" project has been demonstrated "by reliable and objective scientific data".

6710
Redigert 12.11.2018 kl 16:07 Du må logge inn for å svare
Pick Up
12.11.2018 kl 19:04 3348

I likhet med forrige artikkel om Binnions planer om søksmål blir også Strangers innlimte artikkel møtt med sterke motreaksjoner fra quebecere. Siste leserinnlegg er spesielt interessant (undertegnet Marc Durand, doct-ing in applied geology).



Nadia Alexan - Member 12th November 2018 01:06

The environment and the people before the profits!

I would like to understand exactly who is governing us? Our elected officials or multinationals? Citizens have demonstrated their opposition to shale gas exploration in the St. Lawrence. What are our government waiting for to regulate those companies that believe themselves to be above the law and the will of the people? The government should take its responsibility seriously.

Denis Paquette - Member 12 November 2018 04:16 AM

what misery we must continually assume

what a misery that the present federalism, we have the right to live as we expect it, we will have to defend ourselves for a long time of the covetousness of the other provinces and the federal

Yvon Pesant - Member 12 November 2018 05h35

Conflicting interests

The fact that the APGQ, chaired by Mr. Binnion, supports the approach undertaken by the firm Questerre, chaired by Mr. Binnion, on behalf of other companies wishing to exploit this resource that is shale gas appears to me already questionable in itself if not subject to caution.

One can also wonder who of the people, the civil service or the government, previously or not, knew the technology of hydraulic fracturing practiced in some American states before putting down very low prices on the rights of Exploration and exploitation of the Utica shale that we knew contained gas not really recoverable otherwise.

What to think and what to say or tax arrangements and other conditions very advantageous set up by the Liberal government of Jean Charest to give pride of place to these companies newly born here, for some, or come from afar for others to whom we felt like a jackpot in addition to the smell of "cow farts" of methane gas.

For my part, for having studied the file well enough and for having gone to Pennsylvania to examine it more closely, it will be nice to tell me about all the soft tones or not that the exploitation of shale gas with hydraulic fracturing of its rocky matrix in the St. Lawrence Lowlands would still be safe, which I do not believe, it would always remain that it would come into direct conflict with all the other interests of the Quebec population, be they of an agricultural nature , forest, landscape, environmental, social or economic.

Eric Duhamel - Joined November 12, 2018

It looks like

These arguments that explain the reasons for this lawsuit were manufactured only to be able to intend it. I hope the government will go through with this and create a legal precedent.

"Questerre considers that the ban on fracking of shale is in no way justified by the scientific data available to the government"

And the EVIDENCE VIDEO they do what? Look for "fracking" on YouTube ...

Using justice for commercial purposes in this way should not be without consequence.


Marc Durand - Member 12 November 2018 08:35

Exploration license does not mean allowed to fracture

The licenses held by Questerre et al. Are licenses for gas and / or oil exploration. These are permits that allow you to search and possibly find conventional deposits.

For unconventional deposits, as was the case when dealing with shale gas or oil, these are unconventional deposits that could hypothetically be exploited only by using hydraulic fracturing. The government has long dithered over the possibility of granting fracturing permits; he finally closed the door to this technique in the Lowlands. It is perfectly legitimate and legal for a government to regulate an industrial activity, especially since this is an industry that would inject dangerous products into a space that belongs to the state: the underground environment. Permits are only "rental leases" of a right to explore; there is nothing in the permits granted that guaranteed a right to use one technique or the other. Any fracturing operation must always be submitted separately to a request for a specific license.

The basement of Quebec does not belong to Questerre et al. Permits only give them the right to explore; nothing in permits specifies the type of deposit. The regulation limits these potential discoveries to only conventional deposits. Let them use their licenses for that and leave out the pursuits that will lead to a bitter failure.

Marc Durand, doct-ing i geologi

Redigert 12.11.2018 kl 19:45 Du må logge inn for å svare
6710
12.11.2018 kl 19:34 3258

PU - Jeg håber du vil respekter rettens afgørelse i februar!
Tænkte om den siddende regering vil reagere inden.
Men jeg vil tro for alle(også miljø org.) vil det være godt at afvente de spilleregler som her udstikkes.
For QEC handler det om tørgas, om accept i disse områder, deling af profit i disse områder, samt
overholde, endda overgå, miljøregler, igennem QECs koncept "clean gas".

Det er vigtigt for QEC. Det er nøglen.

6710
Redigert 12.11.2018 kl 19:34 Du må logge inn for å svare
Pick Up
12.11.2018 kl 19:36 3242

6710
Det håper jeg at du også vil. Fikk du med deg leserinnlegget til Marc Durand, doct-ing in applied geology? En kar med doktorgrad innen geologi bør ha gode forutsetninger for å uttale seg.
Redigert 12.11.2018 kl 19:42 Du må logge inn for å svare
norman
12.11.2018 kl 19:43 3212

Mange ønsker også at gass skal utvinnes for økt velstand, samtidig med at man globalt får ned utslippene.

We are fooled

JONATHAN TRUDEAU
Friday, November 9, 2018 05:00
Update Friday, November 9, 2018 05:00

I do not put oil in my grain in the morning. I love our planet and I do not dream of charcutering it by making fun of what I will leave behind. But I'm furious when I see how much we have both feet in the same boot when it comes to talking about the exploitation of our natural resources.

Disappointment

During the last election campaign, I had hoped that a political party would commit to RESPONSIBLE exploitation of our natural resources. This, in order to free Quebec from the damning equalization and to create wealth other than by increasing our taxes.

My hopes were quickly disappointed.

But that's not all. My colleague Geneviève Lajoie told us yesterday that the Questerre gas will be asking the government to invalidate a regulation prohibiting hydraulic fracturing throughout its territory. Clearly, the government is handcuffing companies that hold exploration licenses (the famous " claims ").

But there is a catch. By selling these licenses, the government implicitly allowed exploration to find out what is in our basement. The logical consequence, of course, is exploitation. If not, how to persuade a company to make holes for the pleasure of making holes?

Penalties

This means that the government may well have to pay hundreds of millions in penalties and refunds. Only for Questerre, we are talking about investments of $ 160 million for which we could demand a refund from the government. Add to that the Anticostian flip-flop that will have cost us nearly $ 100 million in punishments and other losses.

The point is this: not only are we refusing to get rich by exploiting our resources, but we are spending hundreds of millions of dollars pounding on paint as a result of our broken words.

We are fooled.

https://www.journaldequebec.com/2018/11/09/nous-sommes-vires-fous
6710
12.11.2018 kl 19:44 3203

PU - Bestemt jeg vil det. Det er oplagt man skal søge om udvinding, når man har social accept.
Har man det i områder og får tilladelse, skal selv de som er negative, respekter flertallet.

6710
Redigert 12.11.2018 kl 19:45 Du må logge inn for å svare
Pick Up
12.11.2018 kl 19:52 3172

Jeg kan ikke se noe av sosial aksept i disse leserinnleggene og heller ikke i motreaksjone på den forrige artikkelen . Nå er de riktig nok ikke signifikante...
Innerst inne ønsker jeg at fracking forbudet skal bli erklært ugyldig fordi det vil bety letttjente penger på gata, men fornuften min sier meg noe annet. Den er bare blitt forsterket av quebecernes motreaksjoner i media.
Redigert 12.11.2018 kl 22:32 Du må logge inn for å svare
6710
12.11.2018 kl 19:56 3144

PU - For mig er dette vigtigere og argument for at jeg har inv. i QEC.
"The APGQ spokesman added that "Quebec has potentially the second or third gas among the purest in the world. We sit on a world-class ressource" "clean gas" project has been demonstrated "by reliable and objective scientific data".

6710
Pick Up
12.11.2018 kl 21:06 3021

6710
Norge markedsfører clean oil fra Nordsjøen. Er du ikke imponert?
njn-
13.11.2018 kl 13:51 2676

Pick Up!
1. Hvis du hadde kjøpt en tomt av kommunen som det var lov å bygge-på, men så ombestemte de seg, så det IKKE ble lov å bygge, uten erstatning.
Ville du protestert?
2. Du henviser til de som protesterer. Er de mange?
Når de som protesterer er få, (u-an sett hva det det gjelder) vet vi at, skal de få gehør, må de rope høyt.
Valget viste at de er ikke mange.

Roper du ULV mange nok ganger, tror saueflokken det er sant.

njn-
Pick Up
13.11.2018 kl 13:59 2646

njn
Nok en gang blander du korta. Det er ikke jeg som har doktorgrad i geologi. Jeg har kun limt inn uttalelsen fra en som har doktorgrad i geologi. Han hevder at en letelisens ikke gir tillatelse til fracking. Det er vel samme ståa som i Jorden siden Qec venter på å forhandle med kongen før de kan gå videre?

Marc Durand - Member 12 November 2018 08:35
Exploration license does not mean allowed to fracture

The licenses held by Questerre et al. Are licenses for gas and / or oil exploration. These are permits that allow you to search and possibly find conventional deposits.

For unconventional deposits, as was the case when dealing with shale gas or oil, these are unconventional deposits that could hypothetically be exploited only by using hydraulic fracturing. The government has long dithered over the possibility of granting fracturing permits; he finally closed the door to this technique in the Lowlands. It is perfectly legitimate and legal for a government to regulate an industrial activity, especially since this is an industry that would inject dangerous products into a space that belongs to the state: the underground environment. Permits are only "rental leases" of a right to explore; there is nothing in the permits granted that guaranteed a right to use one technique or the other. Any fracturing operation must always be submitted separately to a request for a specific license.

The basement of Quebec does not belong to Questerre et al. Permits only give them the right to explore; nothing in permits specifies the type of deposit. The regulation limits these potential discoveries to only conventional deposits. Let them use their licenses for that and leave out the pursuits that will lead to a bitter failure.

Marc Durand, doct-ing i geologi
Redigert 13.11.2018 kl 14:13 Du må logge inn for å svare
Vikingen
13.11.2018 kl 14:03 2621

Nej det er helt tydelig ikke dig der har en doktorgrad - så havde du sikkert andre ting at give dig til ?
Pick Up
13.11.2018 kl 14:06 2608

Vikingen

Du som er dansk må da ha bedre humor enn dette.
Pick Up
13.11.2018 kl 14:09 2590

Her forleden kjøpte jeg vedsekker som var merket Clean Flame. Det neste blir at arsenikk blir merket Clean Poison.
Redigert 13.11.2018 kl 14:10 Du må logge inn for å svare
Vikingen
13.11.2018 kl 14:09 2586

Jeg påpeger bare det åbenlyse og giver dig 100% ret ?
Pick Up
13.11.2018 kl 14:23 2547

Har det aldri slått deg at du kan boikotte meg? Så vil du spare mye tid på å la være å lese mine innlegg, og jeg slipper å svare på dine personfokuserte tilbakespill.
Redigert 13.11.2018 kl 14:25 Du må logge inn for å svare
Vikingen
13.11.2018 kl 14:39 2501

Så vil jeg gå glip af en masse god underholdning - tag det ikke så tungt - det er i hvert fald ikke ment sådan.
13.11.2018 kl 14:43 2481

Du Ola Du Ola
Plomma
13.11.2018 kl 15:34 2417

Du Ola du Ola.. ser du sola?
Men ser du månen da Pær?
Var det ikke slik det lød da? ;o))))
Flipper
13.11.2018 kl 17:46 2232

President Donald Trump’s administration is looking at a multi-faceted infrastructure plan, according to top White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow on Tuesday.

“We are looking at infrastructure in many different ways,” Kudlow said on CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street.”

“I’d like to do energy infrastructure. I’d like to do pipeline,” Kudlow said. “I’d like to anything that will help LNG, terminals, shipping. We’d like to revise the U.S. shipping industry which has been dormant for many years. We’d like to export oil, natural gas to Europe and to Asia.”

“They want LNG, they want it badly, and we’re going to everything we can to accommodate them,” Kudlow said.

There are early signs that European leaders would be willing to support the building of new LNG import terminals, which could lead to an increase of American LNG exported to the continent.

This story is developing. Please check back for updates.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/13/kudlow-says-white-house-looking-at-infrastructure-plan-including-energy-pipelines-lng-terminals.html
tuja
13.11.2018 kl 17:51 2208

Canada/Quebec next. De må bare følge etter USA, ellers må de importere olje/gass i evigheter i staden for
å skape jobber/inntekter til egne formål.

Ja Pick Up- Vi har i butikkene noe som heter økologisk honning :-) Den er ganske dyr fordi birøkterne må ha halsbånd på alle biene slik at de i samler honning på et område hvor det ikke er brukt fx kunstgjødsel (som er Natrium, fosfor og kalium).
Arsen ble forøvrig brukt til eksempelvis å strø på sengklær for å fjerne lusproblemer (i hine hårde dager) og tilsatsmiddel for å sørge for langsommere råte i treverk.
Men enda før det, var det enklere å bruke tjære (eller kreosot som bare er et destillat) men den inneholder jo de kreftfremkallende Polycykliske Aromatiske Hydrokarbonene :-) ( hvilket alt trevirke inneholder).
Så til dansken som mener at hvis man får tillatelse til å undersøke tomta, så kan man saksøke kommunen dersom man etterhvert ikke får lov til å bygge. VissVass!
njn-
14.11.2018 kl 10:42 1553

Det har jeg heller ikke skrevet, men det er du som poster de negative artiklene.

njn-

Hvorfor ikke bare holde den under 1/2 pris en stund til?
Pick Up
14.11.2018 kl 11:16 1453

Njn
Du hevder derimot at hvis man får tillatelse til å undersøke tomta, så kan man saksøke kommunen dersom man etterhvert ikke får lov til å bygge. Dette er vissvass som også pellepolitibil skriver. Ref. også leserinnlegget til Marc Durand med doktorgrad i anvendt geologi. Du har tydeligvis ikke fått det med deg.

Marc Durand - Member 12 November 2018 08:35

Exploration license does not mean allowed to fracture

The licenses held by Questerre et al. Are licenses for gas and / or oil exploration. These are permits that allow you to search and possibly find conventional deposits.

For unconventional deposits, as was the case when dealing with shale gas or oil, these are unconventional deposits that could hypothetically be exploited only by using hydraulic fracturing. The government has long dithered over the possibility of granting fracturing permits; he finally closed the door to this technique in the Lowlands. It is perfectly legitimate and legal for a government to regulate an industrial activity, especially since this is an industry that would inject dangerous products into a space that belongs to the state: the underground environment. Permits are only "rental leases" of a right to explore; there is nothing in the permits granted that guaranteed a right to use one technique or the other. Any fracturing operation must always be submitted separately to a request for a specific license.

The basement of Quebec does not belong to Questerre et al. Permits only give them the right to explore; nothing in permits specifies the type of deposit. The regulation limits these potential discoveries to only conventional deposits. Let them use their licenses for that and leave out the pursuits that will lead to a bitter failure.

Marc Durand, doct-ing i geologi
Redigert 14.11.2018 kl 11:54 Du må logge inn for å svare
njn-
14.11.2018 kl 12:25 1343

Jeg snakker ikke om å undersøke.
Mitt eksempel var vis du KJØPER en tomt. (QEC har kjøpt rettigheter)
Vil du da bare godta selgers forandringer som nekter deg å bruke tomten?

njn-
Pick Up
14.11.2018 kl 12:55 1268

njn
Marc Durand, doct-ing i geologi (doktorgrad i anvendt geolologi) hevder at QEC har letelisens som ikke gir tillatelse til fracking. Nå har jeg bedt deg ørten ganger om å lese hans leserinnlegg.

"Exploration license does not mean allowed to fracture"
Redigert 14.11.2018 kl 13:10 Du må logge inn for å svare