Gothenburg LNG Terminal

From Global Energy Monitor
This article is part of the Global Fossil Infrastructure Tracker, a project of Global Energy Monitor.
Sub-articles:

Gothenburg LNG Terminal was a proposed LNG terminal in Sweden. Decisions taken by the Swedish government in 2019 indicate that the project is cancelled.

Location

The LNG terminal is located in the Port of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Loading map...

Project details

  • Owner: Vopak; Swedegas
  • Parent company: Vopak; First State (via FB Gas Transport AB)
  • Location: Port of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
  • Coordinates: 57.701770, 11.947963 (approximate)
  • Capacity: 0.5 bcm/y[1], 0.4 mtpa
  • Status: Cancelled
  • Type: Import
  • Start year:

Background

The Dutch company Vopak and the Swedish gas infrastructure company Swedegas are investing in an LNG terminal in Gothenburg. The terminal would have supplied LNG to both shipping and industry.[2]

The establishment of an LNG facility in Gothenburg was initiated by the infrastructure company Swedegas, which owns the Swedish gas transmission network. Swedegas is working in collaboration with the Port of Gothenburg. Swedegas is owned by the European Diversified Infrastructure Fund (EDIF II), which is managed by First State Investments.[3] In 2017 Swedegas received a grant of €2,629,500 from the European Union's Connecting Europe Facility to carry out a preparatory study for the project.[4]

In 2019, a judge ruled that the terminal shouldn't be connected to Sweden's gas grid.[5]

In October 2019, the Swedish government denied the proposed Gothenburg terminal its final permit on climate grounds.[6] Sweden also withdrew the project from the European Union's Projects of Common Interest (PCI) list, citing concerns over climate change.[7] These two decisions by the government indicate that the project has been cancelled. PCIs are a category of projects that the European Union has decided is a key priority, making them eligible to receive public funds.[8]

In May 2022, Swedish media reported that Swedegas was intending to revive its plans to build the terminal as a consequence of Russia's invasion of Ukraine which the company viewed as an opportunity to secure permission for the investment.[9] In reaction to this development, a statement from local grassroots group Fossilgasfällan ("The fossil gas trap") said, "To Swedegas we want to say: Sweden has said no to your fossil gas terminal. You will face opposition if you submit a new formal application for a terminal. To our allies around Sweden we want to say: We have spoken to both authorities and the company ourselves, and Swedegas has not submitted a formal application to build. However, it is clear from the CEO's statement on Sweden's radio on May 9 that they are fishing for pacifiers from politicians. We invite everyone to get ready to organize and mobilize again if necessary, and to take their own initiatives."[10]

Opposition

Opposition groups have called the necessity of the project into question by citing Sweden's low and decreasing demand for natural gas. According to Food and Water Europe, "The €100 million terminal, with a 0.5 to 1bcm/y imports capacity and 25.000m³ storage capacity, could meet a large majority of the domestic demand (around two-thirds to over 100%). The need to build now such a costly project in a country where gas represents less 1.5% of the total primary energy supply seems deeply questionable. Local mobilization against the project grows stronger. Climate emergency and ambitious Paris Agreement objectives should push EU countries to start phasing-out the fossil fuel industry. In a country like Sweden where gas represents a tiny portion of the energy needs, such transition should be easier than in countries more heavily invested and reliant on fossil fuels. This LNG terminal project only stands to worryingly undermine the necessary rapid energy transition. Moreover, the steeply decreasing demand for gas in the country challenges the commercial viability of such project which could become quickly stranded."[11]

Hundreds of people gathered in September 2019 to block Gothenburg harbour and trucks carrying oil and gas in protest against plans to develop an LNG import terminal.

The Swedish government's decision in October 2019 to deny the proposed Gothenburg terminal its final permit on climate grounds was preceded by a mass civil disobedience action in September where hundreds of people from the region gathered in protest for a day to block Gothenburg harbour and trucks carrying oil and gas. Local organising against the terminal proposal was spearheaded for over two years by local grassroots group Fossilgasfällan, whose leader Olivia Linander said of the project permit rejection: "When we started campaigning against the terminal in early 2017, the gas lobby’s claims that this massive piece of new fossil fuel infrastructure was a solution of sorts went unchallenged ... We have shifted the conversation entirely."[12]

Articles and resources

References

  1. LNG Investment Database Gas Infrastructure Europe, October 2019
  2. EU MILLIONS FOR LNG TERMINAL AT THE PORT OF GOTHENBURG Port of Gothenburg, May 2019
  3. LNG Gothenburg LNG Gothenburg, accessed July 2019
  4. Go4Synergy in LNG European Commission, accessed Jan. 12, 2021
  5. Vanessa Dezem, Stephen Stapczynski and Naureen Malik, Natural gas is losing its luster as a “bridge fuel” to renewable energy World Gas, September 9, 2020
  6. Sweden rejects major gas terminal on climate grounds, European Climate Foundation, Oct. 10, 2019
  7. Kevin O'Sullivan Bruton will not support grant application by Shannon LNG until review complete The Irish Times, October 23, 2019
  8. Project of Common Interest Wikipedia, accessed December 2, 2019
  9. Christian Egefer, Nya planer för fossilgasterminal i Göteborg, ETC, May 9, 2022
  10. Fossilgasfällan statement, Fossilgasfällan Facebook page, May 15, 2022
  11. Sweden Food and Water Europe, accessed December 6, 2019
  12. Sweden rejects major gas terminal on climate grounds, European Climate Foundation, Oct. 10, 2019

Related GEM.wiki articles

External resources

External articles