'We’re not looking at green fields,” Vautour said in an interview. “We’re not looking to tear down forests or displace habitats or wetlands or watercourses.
“There’s enough brownfield, former industrial sites in New Brunswick that we can continue to develop and help rehabilitate those sites and restart economic engines in communities.”'
The first round of Technical Review Committee (TRC) comments and Beacon/VoltaGrid responses for EIA 1663 are now public.
The TRC is made up of government and agency reviewers who assess technical issues during the provincial EIA process. The TRC for EIA 1663 includes 5 federal reviewers/agencies, 22 GNB departmental reviewers/addresses, and 4 additional NB/local/regional reviewers, including the NB Energy and Utilities Board, Fundy Region, WorkSafeNB, and the City of Saint John.
For the Spruce Lake AI Data Centre Project, Round 1 TRC comments were provided to the proponent on May 14, 2026. Addendum comments were provided on May 26, 2026. Proponent responses were provided on June 15, 2026.
The Round 1 TRC document identifies Stantec Consulting Ltd. as the proponent/consultant and records formal “Proponent Responses.” In practical terms, these appear to be Stantec’s responses submitted on behalf of Beacon Data Centers and VoltaGrid.
Link to all EIA docs (Scroll down to Project Number 1663): https://www.gnb.ca/en/topic/environment-resources/environmental-assessment/registrations-determinations/1657-most-recent.html
Direct link to PDF for TRC comments:
The document has 227 TRC comments including serious questions about wetlands, groundwater, private wells, downstream salt marshes, fish-bearing streams, American eel habitat, stormwater, industrial water, cooling-system chemicals, drought, air emissions, human health risk, 24/7 noise, heat, carbon sinks, greenhouse gases, and cumulative impacts.
✍️The public can continue to send comments and concerns on the project to:
brandon.love@gnb.ca, jennifer.mcphail@stantec.com, nathan.ough@voltagrid.com, joseph@beacondatacenters.com, Gilles.LePage@gnb.ca, Susan.Holt@gnb.ca
Some of the main red flags from the round 1 TRC review:
1. The project may be reviewed and approved in pieces
RTI records show that the proponent identified two phases and requested approval of phase 1, the data centre and gas plant, “as soon as possible.” If information for phase 2, the corridors, is not ready, the province was considering approving phase 1 first and requiring separate ministerial review for phase 2 later.
2. Transmission-line and pipeline field studies were still incomplete
The DIA assessment states that field studies for the proposed transmission lines and pipelines had not been completed, and that DIA would revisit the assessment once those studies were complete.
The updated assessment says field studies were still underway for 27 watercourses/waterbodies in the transmission-line PDA and 15 watercourses in the first pipeline PDA. The addendum did not state the number of watercourses affected by the second pipeline.
3. The transmission corridor overlaps the Musquash Estuary Protected Natural Area
The updated DIA assessment says the transmission-line PDA is approximately 9.5 km long and 92 m wide, crosses private and Crown properties, and overlaps with the Musquash Estuary Protected Natural Area. It also states that 46 ha of Crown land will be impacted by the transmission line.
4. ECCC recommended primarily avoiding any further wetland loss
Environment and Climate Change Canada raised concerns about cumulative wetland loss from nearby projects, including the Spruce Lake Industrial Park Expansion, Burchill Wind Farm, Saint John 138 kV Corridor Project, and Coleson Cove, and recommended primarily avoiding any further loss of wetlands.
5. The proponent did not provide a serious avoidance plan
The proponent’s response was simply that wetland compensation would be addressed later through the Watercourse and Wetland Alteration permitting process.
6. Up to 27 ha of wetlands may be directly impacted
ECCC stated that the current plan appears to result in significant direct impacts to delineated wetlands, up to 27 ha within the PDA. ECCC also noted that the wetlands are high-functioning in several respects.
7. Downstream Provincially Significant Wetlands were not properly assessed
ECCC said the current assessment does not account for potential indirect impacts to downstream Provincially Significant Wetlands, including impacts to hydrology, water quality, habitat, wildlife, and species at risk. ECCC also said downstream coastal locations should be assessed because all coastal marshes are PSWs.
8. Groundwater and private-well risks remain unresolved
The TRC asked how removing roughly 27 ha of wetland would affect groundwater recharge and private wells. The proponent acknowledged that wetland removal or alteration could locally alter shallow groundwater recharge/discharge patterns and surface-water storage, but said this should be confirmed later through baseline private-well monitoring and final stormwater/wetland mitigation design.
9. Internal GNB records confirm older shallow wells may be vulnerable
A GNB hydrogeologist noted that OWLS does not capture all older wells and that owners with wells drawing from the surficial aquifer should be concerned about wetland infilling within the Lorneville community watershed. He recommended identifying pre- and post-1994 wells within 500 m and requiring baseline monitoring and mitigation if wells are affected.
10. The so-called “closed-loop” cooling system still contains chemicals
The proponent response confirmed that the cooling-loop water would contain glycol and chemical additives, including corrosion inhibitors and biocides. Maintenance drain-downs or flushes would need to be collected and disposed of by a licensed contractor.
11. Industrial water service is not currently in place
The TRC noted that the City does not currently service this area with industrial water and that significant investment would be needed to upgrade and extend the industrial water system if continuous industrial water is required. The proponent’s response was still pending.
12. Drought and Spruce Lake water questions received a weak answer
The TRC asked whether drought conditions had been considered for the 3,500 m³ initial cooling-water fill, and whether that withdrawal could affect Spruce Lake during low-water conditions. The response was only that the proponent would consult and coordinate with the City of Saint John.
13. Marsh Brook, Mill Creek, and American eel were flagged
The TRC raised concerns about wastewater and surface-water runoff into Marsh Brook and Mill Creek, which are fish-bearing watercourses with potential American eel habitat. DNR has historical records of American eel in both.
14. Stormwater design is still being pushed to detailed design
The TRC asked whether the stormwater system would manage the 100-year, 24-hour rainfall event, prevent downstream flooding, erosion, or sedimentation, account for climate-change factors, and include measurable enforceable criteria. The proponent repeatedly said a stormwater management plan would be developed later during detailed design.
15. Industrial runoff and containment details are still unresolved
The TRC asked whether runoff from equipment yards, loading areas, fuel storage, and generator compounds would be treated to enhanced industrial water-quality standards, and whether transformers, generators, and storage areas would have secondary containment. These issues were again pushed to detailed design.
16. Fish habitat impacts from watercourse crossings could not yet be determined
DFO said it did not have enough information to determine whether watercourse crossings could cause harmful alteration, disruption, or destruction of fish habitat. DFO said specific crossing details were needed and noted that cumulative impacts from all in-water works are considered.
17. Major technical studies were still deferred after Round 1
After Stantec submitted the Round 1 responses, DELG asked about missing deliverables expected in July, including the Human Health Risk Assessment, Scope 3 emissions estimates, GHG emissions intensity analysis, net-zero plan, and data centre heat/temperature assessment. DELG noted that if these were submitted after the 30-day TRC review began, they would be new information and the review period would need to restart.
18. Stantec wanted the review to proceed while deferred studies came later
Stantec said it intended to submit the deferred studies together with responses to the second round of TRC comments, while also wanting the TRC review period for the submitted responses to proceed as soon as possible.
19. The TRC asked about permanent 24/7 noise
The TRC asked whether the duration of sound from the site would be consistent or permanent, and noted that even if the decibel level is not high enough to cause issues, the presence of permanent sound may cause issues.
20. No follow-up noise monitoring was proposed up front
The proponent said follow-up noise monitoring was not proposed. Instead, a complaint-management system would be established, and monitoring could occur later as part of complaint procedures.
21. Government acknowledges there is no specific provincial old-growth protection law
A government response states that New Brunswick has no specific provincial legislation governing old-growth forest protection and instead relies on EIA principles of avoidance, minimization, and compensation.
Link to full post: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1DZ5qxi2TE/
The first round of Technical Review Committee (TRC) comments and Beacon/VoltaGrid responses for EIA 1663 are now public.
The TRC is made up of government and agency reviewers who assess technical issues during the provincial EIA process. The TRC for EIA 1663 includes 5 federal reviewers/agencies, 22 GNB departmental reviewers/addresses, and 4 additional NB/local/regional reviewers, including the NB Energy and Utilities Board, Fundy Region, WorkSafeNB, and the City of Saint John.
For the Spruce Lake AI Data Centre Project, Round 1 TRC comments were provided to the proponent on May 14, 2026. Addendum comments were provided on May 26, 2026. Proponent responses were provided on June 15, 2026.
The Round 1 TRC document identifies Stantec Consulting Ltd. as the proponent/consultant and records formal “Proponent Responses.” In practical terms, these appear to be Stantec’s responses submitted on behalf of Beacon Data Centers and VoltaGrid.
Link to all EIA docs (Scroll down to Project Number 1663): https://www.gnb.ca/en/topic/environment-resources/environmental-assessment/registrations-determinations/1657-most-recent.html
Direct link to PDF for TRC comments:
The document has 227 TRC comments including serious questions about wetlands, groundwater, private wells, downstream salt marshes, fish-bearing streams, American eel habitat, stormwater, industrial water, cooling-system chemicals, drought, air emissions, human health risk, 24/7 noise, heat, carbon sinks, greenhouse gases, and cumulative impacts.
✍️The public can continue to send comments and concerns on the project to:
brandon.love@gnb.ca, jennifer.mcphail@stantec.com, nathan.ough@voltagrid.com, joseph@beacondatacenters.com, Gilles.LePage@gnb.ca, Susan.Holt@gnb.ca
Some of the main red flags from the round 1 TRC review:
1. The project may be reviewed and approved in pieces
RTI records show that the proponent identified two phases and requested approval of phase 1, the data centre and gas plant, “as soon as possible.” If information for phase 2, the corridors, is not ready, the province was considering approving phase 1 first and requiring separate ministerial review for phase 2 later.
2. Transmission-line and pipeline field studies were still incomplete
The DIA assessment states that field studies for the proposed transmission lines and pipelines had not been completed, and that DIA would revisit the assessment once those studies were complete.
The updated assessment says field studies were still underway for 27 watercourses/waterbodies in the transmission-line PDA and 15 watercourses in the first pipeline PDA. The addendum did not state the number of watercourses affected by the second pipeline.
3. The transmission corridor overlaps the Musquash Estuary Protected Natural Area
The updated DIA assessment says the transmission-line PDA is approximately 9.5 km long and 92 m wide, crosses private and Crown properties, and overlaps with the Musquash Estuary Protected Natural Area. It also states that 46 ha of Crown land will be impacted by the transmission line.
4. ECCC recommended primarily avoiding any further wetland loss
Environment and Climate Change Canada raised concerns about cumulative wetland loss from nearby projects, including the Spruce Lake Industrial Park Expansion, Burchill Wind Farm, Saint John 138 kV Corridor Project, and Coleson Cove, and recommended primarily avoiding any further loss of wetlands.
5. The proponent did not provide a serious avoidance plan
The proponent’s response was simply that wetland compensation would be addressed later through the Watercourse and Wetland Alteration permitting process.
6. Up to 27 ha of wetlands may be directly impacted
ECCC stated that the current plan appears to result in significant direct impacts to delineated wetlands, up to 27 ha within the PDA. ECCC also noted that the wetlands are high-functioning in several respects.
7. Downstream Provincially Significant Wetlands were not properly assessed
ECCC said the current assessment does not account for potential indirect impacts to downstream Provincially Significant Wetlands, including impacts to hydrology, water quality, habitat, wildlife, and species at risk. ECCC also said downstream coastal locations should be assessed because all coastal marshes are PSWs.
8. Groundwater and private-well risks remain unresolved
The TRC asked how removing roughly 27 ha of wetland would affect groundwater recharge and private wells. The proponent acknowledged that wetland removal or alteration could locally alter shallow groundwater recharge/discharge patterns and surface-water storage, but said this should be confirmed later through baseline private-well monitoring and final stormwater/wetland mitigation design.
9. Internal GNB records confirm older shallow wells may be vulnerable
A GNB hydrogeologist noted that OWLS does not capture all older wells and that owners with wells drawing from the surficial aquifer should be concerned about wetland infilling within the Lorneville community watershed. He recommended identifying pre- and post-1994 wells within 500 m and requiring baseline monitoring and mitigation if wells are affected.
10. The so-called “closed-loop” cooling system still contains chemicals
The proponent response confirmed that the cooling-loop water would contain glycol and chemical additives, including corrosion inhibitors and biocides. Maintenance drain-downs or flushes would need to be collected and disposed of by a licensed contractor.
11. Industrial water service is not currently in place
The TRC noted that the City does not currently service this area with industrial water and that significant investment would be needed to upgrade and extend the industrial water system if continuous industrial water is required. The proponent’s response was still pending.
12. Drought and Spruce Lake water questions received a weak answer
The TRC asked whether drought conditions had been considered for the 3,500 m³ initial cooling-water fill, and whether that withdrawal could affect Spruce Lake during low-water conditions. The response was only that the proponent would consult and coordinate with the City of Saint John.
13. Marsh Brook, Mill Creek, and American eel were flagged
The TRC raised concerns about wastewater and surface-water runoff into Marsh Brook and Mill Creek, which are fish-bearing watercourses with potential American eel habitat. DNR has historical records of American eel in both.
14. Stormwater design is still being pushed to detailed design
The TRC asked whether the stormwater system would manage the 100-year, 24-hour rainfall event, prevent downstream flooding, erosion, or sedimentation, account for climate-change factors, and include measurable enforceable criteria. The proponent repeatedly said a stormwater management plan would be developed later during detailed design.
15. Industrial runoff and containment details are still unresolved
The TRC asked whether runoff from equipment yards, loading areas, fuel storage, and generator compounds would be treated to enhanced industrial water-quality standards, and whether transformers, generators, and storage areas would have secondary containment. These issues were again pushed to detailed design.
16. Fish habitat impacts from watercourse crossings could not yet be determined
DFO said it did not have enough information to determine whether watercourse crossings could cause harmful alteration, disruption, or destruction of fish habitat. DFO said specific crossing details were needed and noted that cumulative impacts from all in-water works are considered.
17. Major technical studies were still deferred after Round 1
After Stantec submitted the Round 1 responses, DELG asked about missing deliverables expected in July, including the Human Health Risk Assessment, Scope 3 emissions estimates, GHG emissions intensity analysis, net-zero plan, and data centre heat/temperature assessment. DELG noted that if these were submitted after the 30-day TRC review began, they would be new information and the review period would need to restart.
18. Stantec wanted the review to proceed while deferred studies came later
Stantec said it intended to submit the deferred studies together with responses to the second round of TRC comments, while also wanting the TRC review period for the submitted responses to proceed as soon as possible.
19. The TRC asked about permanent 24/7 noise
The TRC asked whether the duration of sound from the site would be consistent or permanent, and noted that even if the decibel level is not high enough to cause issues, the presence of permanent sound may cause issues.
20. No follow-up noise monitoring was proposed up front
The proponent said follow-up noise monitoring was not proposed. Instead, a complaint-management system would be established, and monitoring could occur later as part of complaint procedures.
21. Government acknowledges there is no specific provincial old-growth protection law
A government response states that New Brunswick has no specific provincial legislation governing old-growth forest protection and instead relies on EIA principles of avoidance, minimization, and compensation.
Link to full post: Link to full post: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1DZ5qxi2TE/
The rush to build massive AI data centres is moving faster than the laws and policies needed to protect electricity customers, communities and the environment.
Other governments and municipalities are recognizing this and taking action.
ONTARIO: The Progressive Conservative government now says access to the electricity grid is “not your right.” Ontario is developing criteria to prioritize data centres that demonstrate economic, strategic, security and local-community benefits before they are permitted to connect to the grid.
MISSISSAUGA: City council unanimously approved a one-year moratorium on new AI data centres while the municipality studies their impacts and develops appropriate regulations.
NEW YORK: The state has imposed a moratorium on new hyperscale data centres by pausing new state environmental permits for up to one year. During that pause, New York will develop consistent standards addressing electricity costs, grid infrastructure, water, air quality, environmental impacts and community benefits.
MANITOBA: Premier Wab Kinew has said that Manitoba must prioritize its limited electricity capacity. His government stated that saying “no” to AI hyperscale data centres allows Manitoba to say yes to projects that provide greater strategic and public benefits.
ROCKY VIEW COUNTY, ALBERTA: Council has temporarily paused new data-centre rezoning applications until its Emerging Sector Strategy and regulatory framework are completed. It also changed data-centre campuses from a permitted use to a discretionary use, giving council the authority to refuse applications.
These governments are recognizing a very basic principle in RULES FIRST, APPROVALS SECOND.
Meanwhile, New Brunswick has refused to pause data centre development. The government says there will eventually be limits on the number of data centres and promises they will not place additional pressure on the grid or ratepayers, but it has not publicly shown New Brunswickers what those limits or protections will be.
Those discussions are apparently happening “behind the scenes” while the enormous Lorneville proposal, which provincial agencies has been actively planning and pushing for since September of 2024, continues through the approval process. Saint John has already rezoned the land.
Why should Lorneville be the experiment? Why are New Brunswick and Saint John proceeding before establishing enforceable rules governing:
-electricity allocation and ratepayer protection;
-public subsidies and infrastructure costs;
-greenhouse-gas emissions and fossil-fuel generation;
-wetlands, water, air pollution and noise;
-permanent local jobs and community benefits;
-foreign ownership and genuine data sovereignty; and
-community support for projects imposed near existing neighbourhoods?
Once forests and wetlands are destroyed, public money is committed, and hundreds of megawatts of electricity are allocated, it will be too late to write the rules.
NB Power’s own documents, acquired through Right to Information, show that the utility is planning major, customized transmission infrastructure to serve Beacon Data Centers’ proposed 200-MW grid load.
The project would require two new 345-kV transmission lines totalling approximately 14 kilometres, two new high-voltage terminals and extensive additional electrical equipment.
NB Power’s internal financial model calculates: the total cost of the new infrastructure; Beacon’s required capital contribution; the financial security required from Beacon; the portion of the investment remaining on NB Power’s books; and whether projected annual revenue from Beacon would cover NB Power’s annual costs.
The model amortizes the entire project using a 63-year accounting life based on the depreciation rate for steel poles.
This means that NB Power is spreading recovery of its investment over more than six decades when calculating the project’s annual costs.
The most important figures have all been redacted and withheld from the public, including the total construction cost, Beacon’s required contribution, the amount NB Power and ratepayers would finance, and the value and duration of Beacon’s financial security.
In addition, these documents state that “NB Power has not even assessed whether it has enough generation to supply the project’s real-time demand”, amplifying risk to ratepayers.
What happens if Beacon downsizes, fails or leaves long before those assets are paid off? Until New Brunswick has binding rules ensuring that data-centre developers bear every infrastructure and stranded-asset cost, approvals and grid commitments should be paused.
Documents acquired from NB Power through RTIPPA can be viewed here: https://drive.google.com/.../16e10pfc49MnmddS26a4.../view...
Ask the provincial government to pause final approvals, grid commitments and financial assistance for mega-scale data centres until a comprehensive and transparent regulatory framework is in place, and require the proposed Lorneville project to meet those rules before any decision is made.
SEND A LETTER TO PREMIER AND MLAs TODAY: Template and MLA Emails Below
Template Letter to MLAs:
Subject: Rules before AI data-centre approvals
Dear [MLA’s name],
With massive data centres being considered in Lorneville, Miramichi and Belledune, I am asking you to support an immediate moratorium on further approvals, grid commitments and public assistance until New Brunswick establishes a comprehensive regulatory framework.
New Brunswick has not publicly demonstrated adequate data-centre-specific rules for continuous and permanent noise near homes, greenhouse-gas and air emissions, cooling-system blowdown and wastewater disposal, water consumption, decommissioning, or cumulative grid and environmental impacts. The Lorneville assessment itself relies on standards from other provinces because appropriate New Brunswick standards are lacking.
NB Power records also show that serving Beacon’s required 200-MW load for the Lorneville AI Data Centre would require major new transmission infrastructure amortized over 63 years, while the total cost, Beacon’s contribution and the security protecting ratepayers remain hidden.
Please insist on rules first, approvals second, and require the Lorneville proposal to meet those rules before any final decision.
Sincerely,
[Name]
[Community]
MLA Emails:
christie.ward@gnb.ca; crystale.harty@gnb.ca; Susan.Holt@gnb.ca; Richard.Ames@legnb.ca; Guy.Arseneault@legnb.ca; Kris.Austin@legnb.ca; Kathy.Bockus@legnb.ca; LyneChantal.Boudreau@legnb.ca; Benoit.Bourque@legnb.ca; Chuck.Chiasson@legnb.ca; Keith.Chiasson@legnb.ca; Michelle.Conroy@legnb.ca; David.Coon@legnb.ca; Ryan.Cullins@legnb.ca; Jean-Claude.DAmours@legnb.ca; John.Dornan@legnb.ca; AlexandreCedric.Doucet@legnb.ca; Pat.Finnigan@legnb.ca; Robert.Gauvin@legnb.ca; John.Herron@legnb.ca; David.Hickey@legnb.ca; Bill.Hogan@legnb.ca; Susan.Holt@legnb.ca; Claire.Johnson@legnb.ca; Margaret.Johnson@legnb.ca; Sam.Johnston@legnb.ca; Aaron.Kennedy@legnb.ca; Francine.Landry@legnb.ca; Jacques.LeBlanc@legnb.ca; Marco.LeBlanc@legnb.ca; Ian.Lee@legnb.ca; Rene.Legacy@legnb.ca; Gilles.LePage@legnb.ca; Eric.Mallet@legnb.ca; Robert.McKee@legnb.ca; Cindy.Miles@legnb.ca; Megan.Mitton@legnb.ca; Don.Monahan@legnb.ca; Bill.Oliver@legnb.ca; Luke.Randall@legnb.ca; Luc.Robichaud@legnb.ca; Kevin.Russell@legnb.ca; Glen.Savoie@legnb.ca; Tammy.Scott-Wallace@legnb.ca; Tania.Sodhi@legnb.ca; Isabelle.Theriault@legnb.ca; Alyson.Townsend@legnb.ca; Natacha.Vautour@legnb.ca; Rob.Weir@legnb.ca; Kate.Wilcott@legnb.ca; Mary.Wilson@legnb.ca; Sherry.Wilson@legnb.ca
The rush to build massive AI data centres is moving faster than the laws and policies needed to protect electricity customers, communities and the environment.
Other governments and municipalities are recognizing this and taking action.
ONTARIO: The Progressive Conservative government now says access to the electricity grid is “not your right.” Ontario is developing criteria to prioritize data centres that demonstrate economic, strategic, security and local-community benefits before they are permitted to connect to the grid.
MISSISSAUGA: City council unanimously approved a one-year moratorium on new AI data centres while the municipality studies their impacts and develops appropriate regulations.
NEW YORK: The state has imposed a moratorium on new hyperscale data centres by pausing new state environmental permits for up to one year. During that pause, New York will develop consistent standards addressing electricity costs, grid infrastructure, water, air quality, environmental impacts and community benefits.
MANITOBA: Premier Wab Kinew has said that Manitoba must prioritize its limited electricity capacity. His government stated that saying “no” to AI hyperscale data centres allows Manitoba to say yes to projects that provide greater strategic and public benefits.
ROCKY VIEW COUNTY, ALBERTA: Council has temporarily paused new data-centre rezoning applications until its Emerging Sector Strategy and regulatory framework are completed. It also changed data-centre campuses from a permitted use to a discretionary use, giving council the authority to refuse applications.
These governments are recognizing a very basic principle in RULES FIRST, APPROVALS SECOND.
Meanwhile, New Brunswick has refused to pause data centre development. The government says there will eventually be limits on the number of data centres and promises they will not place additional pressure on the grid or ratepayers, but it has not publicly shown New Brunswickers what those limits or protections will be.
Those discussions are apparently happening “behind the scenes” while the enormous Lorneville proposal, which provincial agencies has been actively planning and pushing for since September of 2024, continues through the approval process. Saint John has already rezoned the land.
Why should Lorneville be the experiment? Why are New Brunswick and Saint John proceeding before establishing enforceable rules governing:
-electricity allocation and ratepayer protection;
-public subsidies and infrastructure costs;
-greenhouse-gas emissions and fossil-fuel generation;
-wetlands, water, air pollution and noise;
-permanent local jobs and community benefits;
-foreign ownership and genuine data sovereignty; and
-community support for projects imposed near existing neighbourhoods?
Once forests and wetlands are destroyed, public money is committed, and hundreds of megawatts of electricity are allocated, it will be too late to write the rules.
NB Power’s own documents, acquired through Right to Information, show that the utility is planning major, customized transmission infrastructure to serve Beacon Data Centers’ proposed 200-MW grid load.
The project would require two new 345-kV transmission lines totalling approximately 14 kilometres, two new high-voltage terminals and extensive additional electrical equipment.
NB Power’s internal financial model calculates: the total cost of the new infrastructure; Beacon’s required capital contribution; the financial security required from Beacon; the portion of the investment remaining on NB Power’s books; and whether projected annual revenue from Beacon would cover NB Power’s annual costs.
The model amortizes the entire project using a 63-year accounting life based on the depreciation rate for steel poles.
This means that NB Power is spreading recovery of its investment over more than six decades when calculating the project’s annual costs.
The most important figures have all been redacted and withheld from the public, including the total construction cost, Beacon’s required contribution, the amount NB Power and ratepayers would finance, and the value and duration of Beacon’s financial security.
In addition, these documents state that “NB Power has not even assessed whether it has enough generation to supply the project’s real-time demand”, amplifying risk to ratepayers.
What happens if Beacon downsizes, fails or leaves long before those assets are paid off? Until New Brunswick has binding rules ensuring that data-centre developers bear every infrastructure and stranded-asset cost, approvals and grid commitments should be paused.
Documents acquired from NB Power through RTIPPA can be viewed here: https://drive.google.com/.../16e10pfc49MnmddS26a4.../view...
Ask the provincial government to pause final approvals, grid commitments and financial assistance for mega-scale data centres until a comprehensive and transparent regulatory framework is in place, and require the proposed Lorneville project to meet those rules before any decision is made.
SEND A LETTER TO PREMIER AND MLAs TODAY: Template and MLA Emails Below
Template Letter to MLAs:
Subject: Rules before AI data-centre approvals
Dear [MLA’s name],
With massive data centres being considered in Lorneville, Miramichi and Belledune, I am asking you to support an immediate moratorium on further approvals, grid commitments and public assistance until New Brunswick establishes a comprehensive regulatory framework.
New Brunswick has not publicly demonstrated adequate data-centre-specific rules for continuous and permanent noise near homes, greenhouse-gas and air emissions, cooling-system blowdown and wastewater disposal, water consumption, decommissioning, or cumulative grid and environmental impacts. The Lorneville assessment itself relies on standards from other provinces because appropriate New Brunswick standards are lacking.
NB Power records also show that serving Beacon’s required 200-MW load for the Lorneville AI Data Centre would require major new transmission infrastructure amortized over 63 years, while the total cost, Beacon’s contribution and the security protecting ratepayers remain hidden.
Please insist on rules first, approvals second, and require the Lorneville proposal to meet those rules before any final decision.
Sincerely,
[Name]
[Community]
MLA Emails:
christie.ward@gnb.ca; crystale.harty@gnb.ca; Susan.Holt@gnb.ca; Richard.Ames@legnb.ca; Guy.Arseneault@legnb.ca; Kris.Austin@legnb.ca; Kathy.Bockus@legnb.ca; LyneChantal.Boudreau@legnb.ca; Benoit.Bourque@legnb.ca; Chuck.Chiasson@legnb.ca; Keith.Chiasson@legnb.ca; Michelle.Conroy@legnb.ca; David.Coon@legnb.ca; Ryan.Cullins@legnb.ca; Jean-Claude.DAmours@legnb.ca; John.Dornan@legnb.ca; AlexandreCedric.Doucet@legnb.ca; Pat.Finnigan@legnb.ca; Robert.Gauvin@legnb.ca; John.Herron@legnb.ca; David.Hickey@legnb.ca; Bill.Hogan@legnb.ca; Susan.Holt@legnb.ca; Claire.Johnson@legnb.ca; Margaret.Johnson@legnb.ca; Sam.Johnston@legnb.ca; Aaron.Kennedy@legnb.ca; Francine.Landry@legnb.ca; Jacques.LeBlanc@legnb.ca; Marco.LeBlanc@legnb.ca; Ian.Lee@legnb.ca; Rene.Legacy@legnb.ca; Gilles.LePage@legnb.ca; Eric.Mallet@legnb.ca; Robert.McKee@legnb.ca; Cindy.Miles@legnb.ca; Megan.Mitton@legnb.ca; Don.Monahan@legnb.ca; Bill.Oliver@legnb.ca; Luke.Randall@legnb.ca; Luc.Robichaud@legnb.ca; Kevin.Russell@legnb.ca; Glen.Savoie@legnb.ca; Tammy.Scott-Wallace@legnb.ca; Tania.Sodhi@legnb.ca; Isabelle.Theriault@legnb.ca; Alyson.Townsend@legnb.ca; Natacha.Vautour@legnb.ca; Rob.Weir@legnb.ca; Kate.Wilcott@legnb.ca; Mary.Wilson@legnb.ca; Sherry.Wilson@legnb.ca
"Ough also alleged that VoltaGrid’s “proprietary algorithms” have suggested that a “significant portion of the online commentary appears to originate from individuals, or automated accounts, with IP addresses located outside North America.”"
Repost: Chris Watson @ SaveLorneville
On Thursday, June 11th, MLA Megan Mitton tabled a motion calling for an immediate moratorium on AI data centres in New Brunswick until legislation is in place to ensure these projects do not increase electricity prices, harm communities, or harm the environment. This motion received multi-party support from Greens and PCs.
The New Brunswick Liberals did not defeat this motion on its merits. They avoided the vote, ran out the clock, and effectively dismissed serious concerns of New Brunswick residents and ratepayers.
This post includes the following videos:
(1) Megan Mitton, Green Party MLA for Tantramar, speaks in favour of her motion.
(2) Ian Lee, PC MLA for Fundy-The Isles-Saint John-Lorneville, speaks in favour of Megan’s motion.
(3) Luke Randall, Liberal Minister responsible for Opportunities New Brunswick (ONB), speaks in opposition to Megan’s motion.
(4) Megan requests a vote on her motion. Liberals refuse.
MLA Megan Mitton laid out exactly why this moratorium is needed: massive new power demands, weak regulation, environmental destruction, greenhouse gas emissions, ratepayer risk, and communities like Lorneville being asked to carry the burden while decisions are advanced behind closed doors.
New Brunswick does not have the proper regulatory framework to deal with hyperscale AI data centres or to protect communities from the full consequences of these developments.
Ian Lee, the Progressive Conservative MLA for Lorneville, also spoke in support of the motion using a notably handwritten speech. He spoke up for his constituents in Lorneville and made it clear that residents’ concerns are real, serious, and still unanswered.
This was not a partisan issue. Megan Mitton brought the motion. Ian Lee supported it because it directly affects the people he represents. There was clear multi-party support for a moratorium.
Minister Luke Randall’s response was deeply disappointing. He looked visibly uninspired, and instead of addressing the main issues like grid capacity, ratepayer impacts, onsite gas generation, emissions, wetlands, old-growth forest, noise, wells, and the lack of proper rules for hyperscale AI data centres, he broadly discussed data sovereignty and economic growth, and leaned on vague assurances that New Brunswick already has a “robust” framework to protect the environment, the power grid, and the economy.
"Robust" is a word this Liberal government loves to toss around, and it has become a substitute for actual evidence.
If the framework is so robust, why refuse to vote on a motion requiring legislation to ensure AI data centres do not increase power prices, harm communities, or harm the environment?
The truth is that New Brunswick does not have a proper regulatory framework for hyperscale AI data centres. Existing processes were not designed to deal with projects of this scale: massive 24/7 electricity demand, private onsite gas generation, enormous greenhouse-gas emissions, grid and ratepayer risk, destruction of wetlands and old-growth forest, impacts on wells, noise, and long-term community consequences.
Even worse, Randall admitted that public support is being considered. So New Brunswickers may be asked not only to sacrifice grid capacity, wetlands, old-growth forest, air quality, and quality-of-life, but potentially public money as well.
This was the final opposition day of the session. The Liberals dragged out earlier debate and left only about 50 minutes for this issue. When Megan Mitton asked for unanimous consent to hold a vote before the House adjourned, Liberal MLAs refused.
. . .
Residents showed up. Megan Mitton worked to protect New Brunswickers. Ian Lee spoke up for his constituents in Lorneville. The Liberals refused to address residents’ concerns and refused to let MLAs vote.
New Brunswick needs a moratorium on hyperscale AI data centres until residents, ratepayers, the grid, wetlands, forests, wells, air quality, and communities are protected.
The issue is far from over. Continue to push Premier Holt and MLAs for a data centre moratorium. Email, call, visit your local MLA's office.
With more data centres being considered in Belledune and Miramichi, in addition to Lorneville, this issue is becoming more and more critical and will impact all New Brunswickers.
New Brunswick needs a moratorium on hyperscale AI data centres until proper legislation is in place to protect residents, ratepayers, communities, the power grid, wetlands, forests, wells, air quality, and the environment.
. . .
A proposed 390-megawatt data centre in Saint John would produce the equivalent of 6.6 per cent of the province’s 2023 greenhouse gas emissions, according to an environmental impact assessment.
The assessment, or EIA, for the data centre project being proposed by Beacon AI and VoltaGrid for King William Road in Lorneville was filed April 14 as part of a provincial review process under the Clean Environment Act.
The project is part of the Spruce Lake Industrial Park expansion, which was approved by Saint John council for rezoning and passed an EIA last year.
“Filing the EIA is a significant step and reflects the level of detail and rigor that’s gone into the project to date,” Lauren Armstrong, vice-president corporate affairs for Beacon, said Friday. “This project will be a transformational investment in New Brunswick and New Brunswickers, and we’re excited to move it forward.”
The park expansion has faced opposition from residents who have raised issues about the potential impact on area residents and the environment, which includes wetlands, bogs and old-growth trees. A lawsuit from Save Lorneville activists regarding the rezoning decision is now making its way through the courts.
On Thursday, a researcher for a provincial conservation group said that the assessment report “confirms our concerns – This project should not be built.”
“It would significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions at a time when New Brunswick must reduce them, while also threatening large areas of high-value wetlands, peatlands, old forest, and nearby coastal ecosystems, all based on an incomplete environmental assessment with unresolved risks,” said Moe Qureshi, director of climate research and policy for the Conservation Council of New Brunswick.
Provincial spokesperson Vicky Lutes said that a “robust framework” is in place as part of the EIA process, including a committee review to “ensure that all potential impacts, including greenhouse gas emissions, are thoroughly examined and appropriately addressed.”
In the EIA, consultants say that “mitigation measures have been proposed to avoid or reduce potential adverse residual environmental effects,” including designs that reduce air and noise emissions, an environmental management plan, stormwater management plan, complaint resolution procedure, and an emergency response plan.
Armstrong said that the filing of the EIA is “not an endpoint, but the beginning of a formal review that allows for input, refinement, and continued community and stakeholder engagement.”
The proposal includes four “data halls” for computing equipment and a 190-watt modular natural gas plant on a 89-hectare parcel of land, as well as 10.3 kilometres of electrical 345 kilovolt electrical transmission lines and a 4.5-kilometre natural gas pipeline, according to the review, penned by Saint John-based consulting firm Stantec.
The natural gas plant is part of the plan to ensure consistent power generation while avoiding taxing the grid at peak times, with NB Power saying in February that the facility is not factored into its projections of an energy shortfall by 2028.
Two hundred MW would be drawn from the grid, with 190 drawn from the plant, according to the review.
The goal of the project is described as developing “a modern, reliable, and economically sustainable facility” to fill demand for “secure high performance computing capacity,” according to the review.
It suggested the centre would employ “up to 1,200 direct and indirect employment opportunities” during construction, with priority to hiring locally, would employ 210 people during operations, increase opportunities in contracting and procurement for local businesses and generate municipal and provincial property tax.
The companies intend to buy the land, according to the review, and have been looking at preliminary routes for the transmission and gas lines but have not yet started on negotiations with landowners.
“The primary reason for the selection of Lorneville versus other locations is the proximity of power availability and fiber connectivity,” consultants write in the review, saying that they considered other options but proximity to electricity, natural gas, industrial water, telecommunications and municipal servicing was “a critical siting requirement.”
The consultants say that site preparation, including clearing vegetation and removal of topsoil, would be expected to start late 2026. Construction would take place over about two years, with the modular natural gas plants constructed by VoltaGrid offsite, according to the review.
The project is expected to use “closed-loop liquid cooling, resulting in the need for only small quantities of make-up water” after drawing 3,500 cubic metres from the industrial water supply, consultants say.
Operations would continue 24/7 year-round under normal conditions, the EIA said. The project has a minimum design life of 25 years but can be extended indefinitely, according to consultants, with plans to reach an estimated 15-20 year agreement with a customer.
In November, the project held an open house that was attended by 147 people, the proponents said, with issues raised including long-term jobs associated with the project, proximity to residential areas and noise levels for the project, traffic control, loss of wetland and old-growth trees, power consumption, emissions, water usage and what happens after the project.
The proponents also say they are continuing to reach out to Indigenous groups and are performing a Mi’kmaq Rights Assessment, according to the review.
The natural gas generation was one of the main sources of emissions, according to the review. The consultants called natural gas “the cleanest burning fuel of the available options,” and said that the engines had a high-efficiency emissions control system.
But it said that the natural gas plant would generate the equivalent of 755,187 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions, including carbon monoxide, nitrous oxides, sulphur dioxide, formaldehyde, ammonia and small particulate matter. That would amount to 6.6 per cent of the province’s emissions total in 2023, according to the report.
“With the province committing 46 per cent reductions from 2005 emissions levels by 2030 and net-zero emissions by 2050, the project will have an impact on New Brunswick’s achievement of … reduction targets that will need to be managed,” consultants wrote.
Qureshi said the added emissions are “completely incompatible with our climate commitments,” saying there’s “no credible plan” for how the impact will be managed.
“That number alone should stop this project in its tracks,” Qureshi said in an email Thursday. “The province is supposed to be reducing emissions – not adding a major new fossil fuel source.”
Armstrong said the project “is being designed with a combination of measures to reduce and manage emissions intensity over time,” including high-efficiency generation, optimization and options to “integrate lower-carbon energy sources as they become available.”
“It is an evolving system that can incorporate improvements over time as policy and technology develop, and can be a major economic driver for the region, fueling research and innovation in this and other areas,” she said.
The land for the project areas includes “several wetlands, swamps and coastal marshes, contributing to natural water retention,” according to the review. Field surveys suggest that 27 hectares or about 30 per cent of the data centre project area is wetland, with 0.6 hectares of wetland in the pipeline route and six hectares in the transmission line route.
A peat bog along the northern border of the project area was found to have “high function ratings” for phosphorous retention and wildlife habitat, according to the review. Construction would require vegetation clearing and grubbing as well as excavation of wetland habitat, the review said.
The consultants said that large trees were scattered through the area but were not necessarily indicative of old-growth forest, with no New Brunswick standard for when a forest becomes old growth.
Using Nova Scotia guidelines, the consultants found that two of eight sections of forest investigated qualified, with two more of the sections hitting an average age of 100 and qualifying within 10 years, according to the report.
To the south of the data centre project area, there’s a saltmarsh at the mouth of Marsh Brook designated as a provincially significant wetland, according to the report. It said that construction activities may affect drainage and “flow regimes to receiving waterbodies,” saying that with mitigations, including stormwater management plan and on-site erosion and sediment control, the effects “will be negligible.”
The review said that wetlands, old forest and large trees in the project area “will be considered during final site planning,” with wetlands not used for temporary workspaces “unless required for site-specific purposes.”
Consultants say that projections for wetland loss are conservative, saying the “actual footprint of the project” is likely to be smaller than proposed in the EIA.
Provincial Wetland and Watercourse Alteration permits are required for work within 30 metres of a wetland or watercourse, and consultants say any permanent alterations to wetlands would be compensated at a two-to-one ratio.
Armstrong said that wetlands “avoidance has been a core principle in the site design process,” noting that the wetlands in the project area are not provincially designated conservation areas or protected watershed areas.
“The layout has been iteratively refined to reduce interaction with sensitive environmental features,” she wrote in an email. “The overall approach is to minimize the footprint, avoid the most sensitive areas, and manage remaining effects.”
Qureshi said that the presence of old growth forests is a “major red flag,” saying they “take generations to develop and can’t be replaced once they’re cleared.” He said the peat bog has “high ecological value,” through carbon storage, water management and support for biodiversity.
“These are exactly the kinds of areas that should be avoided entirely – not worked around where convenient,” Qureshi said. “The scale of impact being contemplated here is fundamentally at odds with protecting these ecosystems.“
He said two-to-one wetlands compensation “doesn’t reflect ecological reality,” because at the scale of this project, it becomes “more theoretical than real.”
“You cannot recreate a functioning peatland or mature wetland system somewhere else and expect it to perform the same role,” Qureshi said. “There is a point where the environmental debt is simply too large, and this project appears to cross that line.”
He said the CCNB is “very concerned” about the saltmarshes, saying they are “highly sensitive” and “depend on stable water flows and sediment conditions.” He said that “even small disruptions can cause long-term damage,” and that the stormwater and erosion controls proposed are “not foolproof.”
Qureshi said that they are also concerned that the project “is being advanced in pieces,” with key field data for the transmission line and pipelines still to come, with approvals that could be made “in phases … before the full environmental picture is understood.”
Regarding noise, consultants said they did a day of monitoring at one location and used noise modelling to predict the impact at 16 different nearby locations, including residential areas. Cumulative sound levels were predicted to increase by as much as 1.9 decibels by evening and 2.6 decibels by night, but the project was “predicted to comply with applicable noise guidelines in New Brunswick,” consultants wrote.
The predicted low frequency noise differential was estimated between 15.6 and 16.2 decibels, with the consultants saying that there is no New Brunswick guideline, but 20 decibels is the threshold for low-frequency noise in Alberta utility guidelines.
To mitigate noise, the interior would feature acoustic panelling and the building would include air intake grates and silencers for discharge, the report said. They also said they would have a “complaint resolution procedure to address concerns raised by community members” during construction or operations.
Chris Watson, a local resident and member of the “Save Lorneville” community group, is one of three plaintiffs in a lawsuit asking a judge to reverse Saint John council’s rezoning decision on the industrial park, set for a September hearing.
He said data centres are known for a “persistent hum,” adding “if we’re going to be hearing this … 24/7, it gives rise to a huge quality of life and mental health concern.”
He said the one day of sound testing was done on his property, near a roadway, and said that the graph shows spikes at night when vehicles pass, which then drive up the average.
“What I’m getting with my sound monitor and what they’re modelling, it’s going to have a huge impact on our community,” Watson said.
Armstrong said that the analysis found that low-frequency noise effects “are not anticipated.” At the open house in November, she said it was demonstrated that natural gas generation “is not louder than a passing car” and has been used in a residential context in the U.S.
“As the project moves forward, we will integrate best in class design and engineering for noise abatement,” Armstrong said, saying mitigation options include equipment selection, enclosures and site layout adjustments. “These can be deployed to reduce community impact, as is currently done in communities all over North America.”
Watson said he hoped to see more community engagement, suggesting it’s “been basically radio silence” since the November town hall, adding he hasn’t heard anything about plans for the company to meet the Lorneville community.
Lutes said the province’s decision on the EIA review would not be made until “all relevant technical issues are addressed,” with the technical review committee making all questions, responses and reports public. She said there’s no timeline for the review to be completed as it is dependent on responses from the proponent.
Watson wrote a letter to the premier April 15 detailing issues with the project, calling for a moratorium on large data centres until “an appropriate policy and regulatory framework is in place.”
“Data centres, they’re new to us, right? It’s the new frontier,” Watson said, saying if the right tools aren’t available to evaluate an EIA of this type “then this should be set aside until those tools are available.”
“Bottom line, this is still being planned on some of the worst possible land for this kind of development,” Watson said, saying that he had suggested the former landfill site to the north as a potential option that would present “challenges” but better opportunities for environmental stewardship.
Qureshi said his organization’s position on the review is that the project should not be approved, saying it “needs to fully account for the climate impacts, the loss of wetlands and old forest and the incomplete nature of the current assessment.”
“This project moves New Brunswick in the wrong direction – more fossil fuels, more emissions, and more pressure on sensitive ecosystems,” Qureshi said. “We should be investing in clean energy and sustainable development, not locking ourselves into decades of new emissions.”
Mayor Donna Reardon social media post from On March 12, 2026: “I've been reflecting on our Climate Change Action Plan journey today, it's been a team effort since Council adopted the overall plan back in May 2019 (I was on the team helping shape it). We've focused on cutting green house gas (GHG) emissions and building resilience against things like flooding and sea-level rise.”^(1)
Shape Your City page for the Spruce Lake Industrial Park Expansion: “..We’re actively attracting green and clean sectors.”^(2)
Councillor Brent Harris blog post on the Spruce Lake Expansion: “..prioritizing non-emitting, green-focused, medium industry.”^(3)
Lorneville Community Liaison Committee report: “..ensuring that any industrial development in the area is primarily “green or clean”, with no air pollutants emitted..”^(4)
The Lorneville Data Center development would be New Brunswick’s 3^(rd) highest emitter of greenhouse gases, more than the pulp mill, more than Coleson Cove.^(5,6)
With this data center, 4 of NB’s top 5 emitters would be located in Saint John - two of them in Lorneville.^(5,6)
The data center development would emit:
755,187 tonnes of CO2e/year from the onsite gas plant alone^(5)
1,144,657 tonnes of CO2e/year total carbon project footprint (direct + indirect)^(5)
Air contaminants would include:****^(5)
122 tonnes/year NOx
236 tonnes/year CO
30 tonnes/year PM2.5 / PM10 / TSP
16 tonnes/year SO₂
59.6 tonnes/year formaldehyde
38 tonnes/year ammonia
This data center development would produce:
~15% of Saint John’s current total emissions^(5,6)
~7% of New Brunswick’s current total emissions^(5,6)
This is not the “green”, “clean”, and “non-emitting” future repeatedly promised to Lorneville residents.
ActSJ aims for “decarbonization of industry”, with a goal of 30% CO2e reduction by 2030 and net-zero by 2050.^(7)
CBC New Article From April 28, 2026 - https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/on-track-emissions-reductions-2024-spike-9.7178682
"The higher emissions numbers were released as LePage’s department weighs an environment impact assessment submission from two companies planning to build a data centre in Lorneville and a natural gas plant to power it.
The assessment projects the centre’s gas plant will emit more than 755,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide, which would make it the third-largest emitter in New Brunswick after the Irving Oil Refinery and N.B. Power’s coal-fired power plant in Belledune."
^(1)https://www.facebook.com/DonnaReardonSJ
^(2)https://shapeyourcitysaintjohn.ca/spruce-lake-industrial-park-expansion
^(3)Lorneville Community Liaison Committee (LCLC) Final Report
*^(4)*https://brentharris4sj.ca/op-eds/lorneville
^(6)https://www.conservationcouncil.ca/who-pollutes-our-climate-the-most-in-new-brunswick/
^(7)https://saintjohn.ca/sites/default/files/documents/ActSJ%20Summary%20Report%20Jan%2017%202024.pdf
Environmental impacts are one of the concerns behind the legislation, including water and energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions and the light and noise produced by data centres.
We have definitely talked about wastewater discharge, even from the supposedly closed-loop systems that use more energy and less water,” Sachs said.
"All of those pieces are not addressed in our current environmental permitting.”
Residents of Lorneville and the Green Party have raised concerns about the 390-megawatt data centre proposed for the industrial park in that area of Saint John.
Proponents of the centre recently filed an environmental impact assessment that said the centre would not be hard on the local water supply, but the greenhouse gas emissions from a companion gas plant would make it a top emitter in the province.
And although the natural-gas plant would generate power for some of the centre's needs, a significant amount would have to come from N.B. Power as well.