Isabel Siu-Zmuidzinas

Say no to Tilbury LNG expansion!

Five years after the deadly heat dome that claimed more than 600 lives in B.C., the provincial government is considering draft conditions that could greenlight FortisBC's Tilbury LNG expansion.

Why this matters

This project would lock us into decades more fracked gas, threaten salmon and the endangered southern resident killer whale, and force ratepayers to shoulder more than $1 billion in costs — all while relying on dubious carbon offsets and future promises to justify more fossil fuel expansion.

What you can do

Send a clear and simple message to the B.C. EAO and the provincial government: reject Tilbury LNG. We need affordable, climate-safe solutions and investments, not more methane gas infrastructure that puts communities and ecosystems at risk.

Points to consider

(Copy and paste to add to your letter)

  • Five years after the heat dome claimed over 600 lives in B.C., approving this facility would result in around 1 billion tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions a year. We cannot afford to continue to expand fossil fuels in 2026.
  • The cities of Vancouver, New Westminster, Richmond, Port Moody and Burnaby all passed motions opposing the facility, as LNG tankers would pose a serious safety risk to residents near the facility in the event of a spill of cryogenic and flammable gas.
  • This project won’t make life better or more affordable. Ratepayers are already being forced to shoulder $1 billion for the cost of an extra storage tank on the site, all while the profits flow to FortisBC.
  • This project would require an increase in fracking wells in Northeast B.C., worsening local air quality. It poses dangerous health and safety risks for communities across the province.
  • In the approval letter for the Tilbury Marine Jetty issued in 2024, former Environment Minister George Heyman and Transportation and Infrastructure Minister, Rob Fleming, acknowledged that some First Nations’ expressed outstanding concern around the cumulative effects and cultural impacts of that project, which is closely connected to the proposed expansion. 
  • Expanding the facility will increase tanker traffic — around 100 trips per year — threatening salmon and pushing the southern resident killer whale closer to extinction.
  • The draft conditions rely on unproven carbon offsets to offset emissions or electrification of facilities. None of these strategies change the fact that LNG  is mostly just methane, an extremely potent greenhouse gas.
Points to consider

(Copy and paste to add to your letter)

  • Five years after the heat dome claimed over 600 lives in B.C., approving this facility would result in around 1 billion tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions a year. We cannot afford to continue to expand fossil fuels in 2026.
  • The cities of Vancouver, New Westminster, Richmond, Port Moody and Burnaby all passed motions opposing the facility, as LNG tankers would pose a serious safety risk to residents near the facility in the event of a spill of cryogenic and flammable gas.
  • This project won’t make life better or more affordable. Ratepayers are already being forced to shoulder $1 billion for the cost of an extra storage tank on the site, all while the profits flow to FortisBC.
  • This project would require an increase in fracking wells in Northeast B.C., worsening local air quality. It poses dangerous health and safety risks for communities across the province.
  • In the approval letter for the Tilbury Marine Jetty issued in 2024, former Environment Minister George Heyman and Transportation and Infrastructure Minister, Rob Fleming, acknowledged that some First Nations’ expressed outstanding concern around the cumulative effects and cultural impacts of that project, which is closely connected to the proposed expansion. 
  • Expanding the facility will increase tanker traffic — around 100 trips per year — threatening salmon and pushing the southern resident killer whale closer to extinction.
  • The draft conditions rely on unproven carbon offsets to offset emissions or electrification of facilities. None of these strategies change the fact that LNG  is mostly just methane, an extremely potent greenhouse gas.