Several climate and health advocacy groups are renewing concerns about LNG Canada’s Kitimat export facility following the release of new imaging showing emissions from the site.
Representatives from the David Suzuki Foundation, the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, My Sea to Sky and Lax’yip Firekeepers spoke about the findings Wednesday.
The groups said they, along with Kitimat residents and nearby communities, have raised concerns for months about elevated flaring at the facility.
They said imaging collected at the site in May showed plumes of pollution being vented into the air.
The images were collected over four days in early May and analyzed by Tim Doty, a Texas-based air monitoring specialist commissioned by My Sea to Sky. Doty now works as a technical adviser for Oilfield Witness.
“I can clearly say that LNG Canada is a huge polluter whose site emissions appeared to be equivalent to or exceed that of anything that I have witnessed to date in the U.S.,” said Doty.
Doty used Optical Gas Imaging technology, which can detect some emissions not visible to the naked eye. He said the technology is commonly used by regulators and oil and gas facilities in Canada and the U.S.
LNG Canada is the country’s first large-scale LNG export facility and began shipping cargo to Asian markets in June 2025.
The facility has been diverting flow to a spare flare after cracks developed in one of its key systems earlier this year. Repairs were scheduled to begin June 15.
An April report to the B.C. Energy Regulator showed average flaring on the spare flare was more than 18 times above permitted levels. LNG Canada said the higher volume was needed to prevent backburn and reduce the risk of an explosion.
The facility’s other flares also exceeded permitted levels in April.
LNG Canada said in an emailed statement on Wednesday that higher levels of flaring are expected as systems are safely stabilize.
“We are working within B.C.’s regulatory framework, including pursuing a temporary Waste Discharge Authorization (WDA) permit amendment that will be supported by updated modelling and a human health risk assessment,” it said.
LNG Canada said the images captured by Doty are infrared and temperature-based images.
“They do not provide the quantitative emissions data needed to determine concentration, emission rate, chemical composition, or potential ambient levels at community locations,” it said. “Optical gas imaging can be a useful screening tool for identifying the presence and general movement of certain hydrocarbon plumes, but imagery alone cannot determine whether a plume contains benzene, how much of any substance is present, or whether it results in harmful exposure in the community.”
Chris Cooper, president and CEO of LNG Canada, said during a May news conference that air monitors in nearby communities had not detected harmful pollutants above permitted levels.
“We are monitoring very carefully the emissions levels in the community. They’re independently verified by third parties, and they’re closely scrutinized by government and by the regulators,” said Cooper.
“The lived experience of the community is just as important as the compliance, so we work on both. We take that very seriously,” he added.
Tim Takaro, with the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, said there are gaps in LNG Canada’s monitoring.
“The problem with these monitors are that they are stationary and that they miss a lot of exposure,” said Takaro. “The other problem with these monitors is that they don’t measure benzene, for example, that we’re very concerned about and we know is being emitted by the facility.”
Takaro said there is no identified safe level of benzene exposure. Benzene is classified as a carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.
LNG Canada said volatile organic compounds, including benzene, are monitored as part of total hydrocarbons measurements, and said the levels are very low.
CAPE and five B.C. communities have called on Ottawa and British Columbia to mandate a health-impact study of LNG Canada.
B.C.’s Ministry of the Environment and Climate Solutions did not respond to a request for comment by publication.
