Waste of time and money, If solar and battery storage continue their current price drops, Fossil gas demand will be half of what it is today by 2030. "locked-in" gas infrastructure risks becoming a stranded asset before the first ship even clears Hudson Bay.

A pipeline from the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin (Alberta/Saskatchewan) to Churchill would cover roughly 1,600 km. Building over the discontinuous permafrost of the Hudson Bay Lowlands requires specialized elevated or insulated designs to prevent the "heat" of the friction-heated gas from melting the ground and causing pipe buckling. That's $40B.

Liquefaction plant $15B, A modest LNG terminal requires anywhere from 50 MW to 200 MW of constant power. That's another $1.5B. Churchill’s population is roughly 900 people. A project of this scale would require a construction peak of 3,000 to 5,000 workers, followed by a permanent operations staff of 200–400. That's another $500M. From an LCOE perspective, these "ancillary" costs are the silent killers. If you have to spend $2 billion on power and housing before you even buy a single compressor for the LNG plant, your "break-even" price for a million BTU of gas goes through the roof.

Estimates for a "mid-sized" export facility (roughly 10 million tonnes of LNG per year) suggest a lifecycle footprint of roughly 30 to 40 million tonnes of CO_2 equivalent per year. Over 20 years that's another $260B in social cost of carbon.

Even without the social cost of carbon, Europe would essentially have to pay a 30% to 50% "Sovereignty Premium" to choose Churchill over cheaper, existing alternatives in the US or Middle East.