Why Canadian Liquefied Natural Gas Is Not the Answer for the European Union’s Short-Term Energy Needs

The document examines the feasibility of using Canadian LNG to replace Russian gas in the EU, concluding that the 3-to-5-year timeline for building new Canadian facilities is incompatible with the EU's immediate needs and its medium-term goal of phasing out gas by 2025-2027.

• Canada currently lacks any operating LNG export infrastructure, as most gas is used domestically or exported to the United States via pipelines. The first completed export facility, LNG Canada in Kitimat, British Columbia, is scheduled to come online in 2025 and is intended for Asian markets.
• The European Union is accelerating its transition away from fossil fuels to reduce dependence on Russian gas, with targets to reduce gas demand by 32%–37% by 2030. Some analyses suggest the EU could phase out Russian gas imports as early as 2025 through energy efficiency, heat pumps, and renewable energy.
• There is a fundamental temporal mismatch between Canadian supply capabilities and European demand. New Canadian LNG projects would take at least 3 years to complete, by which time the EU's immediate energy crisis will likely be resolved and its overall gas demand will be declining.
• Three potential LNG projects in Atlantic Canada—LNG NL, Goldboro LNG, and the Saint John LNG Terminal—face significant hurdles. LNG NL targets 2028 for exports, Goldboro LNG is not expected to be operational until 2027, and the Repsol project in Saint John is estimated to take 3 to 5 years to complete.
• Investment in new Canadian LNG infrastructure specifically for the European market carries a high risk of creating stranded assets due to the EU's climate commitments and the global trend toward an accelerated transition away from gas.

APA

Christensen, L. T., & Dusyk, N. (2022). Why Canadian Liquefied Natural Gas Is Not the Answer for the European Union’s Short-Term Energy Needs. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2022-08/bottom-line-canadian-lng-not-eu-energy-crisis-solution.pdf

Chicago

Christensen, Lasse Toft, and Nichole Dusyk. Why Canadian Liquefied Natural Gas Is Not the Answer for the European Union’s Short-Term Energy Needs. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2022. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2022-08/bottom-line-canadian-lng-not-eu-energy-crisis-solution.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Christensen |first1=Lasse Toft |last2=Dusyk |first2=Nichole |title=Why Canadian Liquefied Natural Gas Is Not the Answer for the European Union’s Short-Term Energy Needs |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=August 2022 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2022-08/bottom-line-canadian-lng-not-eu-energy-crisis-solution.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{christensen2022why, author = {Christensen, Lasse Toft and Dusyk, Nichole}, title = {{Why Canadian Liquefied Natural Gas Is Not the Answer for the European Union’s Short-Term Energy Needs}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2022}, month = aug, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2022-08/bottom-line-canadian-lng-not-eu-energy-crisis-solution.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }