The significant presence of different sectors reflects the importance of citizen participation in decisions with a high environmental impact and allowed multiple voices to express their concerns and present their objections and arguments about the social, environmental, and climate risks associated with the project. Participation took place even under limiting circumstances, as the hearing was restricted to people residing in the province of Río Negro who were able to travel to San Antonio Este, violating the principles of the Escazú Agreement.
The diversity and strength of the interventions showed that this project poses serious risks to society, local economies, and the integrity of their ecosystems, and that it does not have the social license to move forward in the community.
Critical omissions in the Environmental Impact Study
- According to the review, the project’s Environmental Impact Study (EIS) has serious shortcomings:
- It does not estimate greenhouse gas emissions or their climate impact.
- It omits the expansion of the compressor plant, an essential part of the project.
- It does not have detailed environmental maps that situate the project in relation to sensitive ecosystems.
- It includes insufficient biological studies, which do not take into account the seasonal variation of fish and megafauna.
- It does not assess the conservation status of sensitive species, such as sharks and endangered fish.
- It does not present a closure and abandonment plan, exposing the area to risks of future contamination from abandoned infrastructure.
- The demand for labor and goods may deepen gender inequality if female hiring and training against gender violence are not incorporated.
- The presence and movement of workers in the project area and nearby locations (Las Grutas, San Antonio Oeste, and San Antonio Este) may increase the risk of gender-based rights violations.
La presencia y circulación de trabajadores en la zona del proyecto y localidades cercanas (Las Grutas, San Antonio Oeste y San Antonio Este) puede incrementar riesgos de vulneración de derechos por razones de género.
The EIS itself also recognizes significant risks, such as:
- LNG spills with potentially serious environmental consequences.
- Unresolved local economic and employment expectations.
Regarding the most impactful damage (temporary and permanent)
- Irreversible damage to the seabed (benthic communities): The mooring area has the highest recorded biodiversity (42 species). Its destruction would be permanent.
- Thermal discharge outside international standards: Temperature increases of +3 °C would extend up to 400 m from the discharge, exceeding the recommended limit (100 m).
- Contradiction with Argentina’s international commitments: The project would increase methane emissions, contrary to the Global Methane Pledge signed by the country (30% reduction by 2030).
Voices at the hearing:
Representing the Forum for the Conservation of the Patagonian Sea and Areas of Influence, Cristian Fernández, legal coordinator of the Environment and Natural Resources Foundation (FARN), stated at the hearing:
“The Environmental Impact Study claims to contain an analysis of cumulative impacts. But this information is incorrect: the study only considers the cumulative impacts of the MKII LNG ship with the Hilli Episeyo ship, omitting a serious analysis of the cumulative impacts with the expansion of the gas compressor plant in San Antonio Oeste, with the methane ships that will transport the LNG, and with the Vaca Muerta Oil Sur project. These impacts, measured correctly, will cause damage to the environment, marine biodiversity, and climate and ecosystem damage of enormous magnitude.”
Other prominent voices:
At the University of Río Negro, a group of researchers from different disciplines conducted a thorough study of the EIS. In their presentation, they highlighted:
“Everything we do has an impact. Nothing we do fails to impact others. You cannot walk without stepping on and impacting something.” Minimizing the anthropogenic impacts of these works demonstrates a lack of in-depth knowledge of the risks and consequences at their different stages of implementation or, worse still, a lack of empathy and awareness mitigated by economic interests. Professor Roberto Kozulj, representative of the University of Río Negro.
In turn, the team of environmental lawyers emphasized:
“It is necessary to further study the environmental impact, which the EIS does not address or did not carry out with the necessary rigor, and it is also necessary to know what happens with the consumption of this gas, where it goes, and to whom.” “It is surprising that, in the era of mass digitization, this hearing is restricted only to those who can travel to Rio Negro, violating the principles of the Escazú Agreement and restricting participation.” Gonzalo Vergéz, Environmental Lawyers
The interventions raised relevant questions about the environmental and social viability of the LNG ship in the San Matías Gulf and reflected a broad consensus in the community: this project lacks social license.
Supported by scientific evidence and backed by international jurisprudence, we oppose the advancement of this and any project that goes against the health and well-being of our ecosystems and the people and communities that inhabit Argentine territory.
