United People’s (UP) Party Member of Parliament (MP) Francisco Lacroes says utilities provider GEBE (see Tuesday newspaper) should transition to liquefied natural gas (LNG) for energy production. According to him, this will mean less pollution and ultimately lower electricity bills.
He mentioned that the other two Dutch Caribbean countries have chosen to do so. Curaçao and Aruba through their respective utilities Aqualectra are both making the switch, while the latter also plans an LNG import terminal at San Nicolaas. Mind you, both those islands have sizeable wind- and solar-power resources, but still see enough reason to bring LNG into their production mix.
GEBE, on the other hand, has no alternative alternative energy capability to speak of. This makes St. Maarten’s reliance on the current traditional fuels used even bigger.
Lacroes also talked about plans for LPG facilities at the harbour, pointing to the switch to LNG due to environmental regulations in the maritime sector, including cruise ships. According to him, the port has already missed out on signifiant transhipment opportunities due to a lack of such.
Not everyone agrees, as an analysis by the People’s Tribune indicated last July. LNG’s reputation as a "cleaner" fuel is supposedly overshadowed by methane slip, the leakage of unburned methane during storage, transfer or combustion. The MP acknowledged this as a concern but suggested it is being “fixed” through engine improvements.
Lacroes cited a 20-30% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions over the life cycle of LNG compared to marine diesel fuel. According to the website, although this is a frequently quoted industry figure when upstream processes like extraction, liquefaction and transport are included, LNG’s climate benefit drops dramatically.
It further said while the opposition member is correct that more than 185 ports now offer LNG bunkering, that growth may already be peaking. Major shipping hubs such as the Port of Rotterdam and Singapore, which have long championed LNG, are now diverting investment toward future fuels such as green ammonia, hydrogen and methanol.
In a 2024 strategy document, Rotterdam explicitly cited the limitations of LNG and emphasised its pivot toward zero-emission fuels. The World Bank, too, has urged governments not to invest public funds in LNG infrastructure, warning it risks becoming a stranded asset in a decarbonising world.
Is LNG for GEBE and/or Port St. Maarten nevertheless worth considering? That depends on who you’re talking to.
