BC ends pipeline cross-examination with many unanswered questions

By The Canadian Press - Friday, March 22, 2013 at 3:30 PM - 0 Comments

VANCOUVER – Lawyers for the provincial government have wrapped up their cross-examination of company experts at the Northern Gateway review hearings with many questions left unanswered.

Environment Minister Terry Lake says the province was looking for more information on how pipeline proponents would deliver the world-class oil spill prevention and response promised as part of the $6-billion project.

He says Northern Gateway did not demonstrate under oath that it would be able to access or respond to a spill in the remote areas the pipeline will cross or that the company will be able to recover sunken oil.

Continue…

Thomas Mulcair and pipeline politics

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, February 21, 2013 at 1:54 PM - 0 Comments

While in Calgary this week, Thomas Mulcair restated his objections to the Northern Gateway pipeline.

When asked to clarify his position regarding the Northern Gateway pipeline project, Mulcair launched. “I am adamantly opposed to Northern Gateway. Is there anything unclear in what I just said?” he asked. And he went on. “It is madness to think of bringing those supertankers into that pristine coast. It is a non-starter. It is the most abject misunderstanding of the importance of protecting the environment I have ever seen in Canada. The company that continues to propose that is the same company that was described by the highest level of the U.S. administration as the, quote, Keystone Kops.”

… The irony in all this is that Enbridge was one of the luncheon sponsors – and Mulcair was seated to the right of one of its government relations execs.

At last report, 75% of Albertans were in favour of the Northern Gateway pipeline (but only 35% of British Columbians felt likewise).

Mr. Mulcair does support sending oil east from Alberta, but one such proposal, from Enbridge, is a source of concern for environmentalists.

Smackdown in Western Canada: Christy Clark vs. Alison Redford

By Tamsin McMahon - Monday, October 29, 2012 at 2:54 PM - 0 Comments

Premier Alison Redford/FLICKR

On the night roughly a year ago when Alison Redford became the first female leader in Alberta’s history, she fielded a call from someone whom many at the time predicted would become one of her greatest political allies. Along with well wishes from Saskatchewan premier Brad Wall and Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Redford spoke with Christy Clark, if not B.C.’s first female premier, certainly the woman who has done the most to shake up her province’s political scene.

The conversation was friendly. Clark offered her congratulations and the two joked about just how wrong the pundits had been about both women’s chances of winning the premiership of their respective provinces. “I said, ‘Alison, how did the pollsters get it so wrong?’ ” Clark recalled in an interview with Maclean’s earlier this year. “And she said, ‘Christy, of all the people in the country I can’t believe you’re the one asking me that.’ ”

For many, Redford’s election was considered a win for B.C. After all, the two premiers, part of a growing powerhouse of women in Canadian politics, have some remarkable parallels.

Both are the same age—46—and born in B.C. (Clark in Burnaby, Redford in Kitimat). Both are mothers to preteens—Clark’s son Hamish is 11, Redford’s daughter Sarah is 10. Both were long-time party loyalists who spent time in federal government, Clark working for Chrétien-era transportation minister Doug Young and Redford for Joe Clark. What’s more, both were once married to party stalwarts and maintain close ties with their ex-husbands. So close, in fact, that both recruited their former spouses to work on their campaigns.
Continue…

Pipeline opponents gather for a protest at the B.C. legislature

By The Canadian Press - Monday, October 22, 2012 at 6:50 AM - 0 Comments

VICTORIA – Critics of the Northern Gateway project are hoping for a big turnout today at the B.C. legislature to protest the proposed pipeline.

The sit-in was organized by a coalition of groups that want to send a clear message to the provincial and federal governments about the plan to pipe crude from the Alberta oil sands to a tanker port in Kitimat.

Organizers are hoping at least a thousand people will join the protest in a show of force against the project.

Peter McHugh, spokesman for the organizing group, Defend Our Coast, said some of the protesters are prepared to go to jail, and

McHugh added that protesters do not take lightly the prospect of civil disobedience, and they hope the protest is peaceful.

“We mean to deliver a message to Christy Clark and the federal government that British Columbians oppose these tar sands, tankers and pipelines,” McHugh said.

He hopes the protest shows that opponents of the project run the gamut from grandmothers to business owners.

The Northern Gateway issue is a tipping point for the public, said Nikki Skuce of ForestEthics.

“People have thought about the Enbridge and Kinder-Morgan pipelines as a real key issue, whether it’s to do with climate change, Harper bullying, cutting environmental legislation, First Nations rights and title, shipping raw resources and the jobs that go with it overseas,” Skuce said.

“This is the first, the culmination, of building on what people have said when they said they’ll do whatever it takes to try to stop these projects.”

Everyday people are mobilizing, she said.

The threat of protests and civil disobedience harkens back to the War in the Woods of B.C. in the 80s, when confrontations between environmentalists and forestry workers were commonplace as the two battled over the province’s old growth forests.

The protests have been endorsed by unions such as the CAW and the B.C. Teacher’s Federation, as well as celebrities including actor Ellen Page and singer Dan Mangan.

Enbridge (TSX:ENB) defends the $6-billion pipeline project saying it will generate $81 billion in revenues for federal and provincial governments over 30 years.

The provincial government is not in session, but protesters say it will get the message.

About 4,500 people have signed an online pledge on the group’s website promising support for the protest in Victoria and another provincewide protest planned for Wednesday at MLA offices in 55 communities.

For some, the Northern Gateway pipeline has become a lightning rod for discontent not only with the expansion of the Alberta oil sands, but with B.C.’s Liberal government and the federal Conservative government that has made sweeping changes to environmental laws.

The protests have garnered support from unions including the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union, the Canadian Auto Workers, the B.C. Teacher’s Federation, the Canadian Union of Public Employees and the United Fishermen and Allied Workers’ Union.

They have the backing of Greenpeace, ForestEthics, the Council of Canadians and several First Nations, and have been endorsed by high-profile activists such as David Suzuki and Stephen Lewis. Celebrity supporters include filmmaker Michael Moore, singers Sarah Harmer and Dan Mangan, and actors Ellen Page, Mark Ruffalo and Darryl Hannah.

The pipeline would carry diluted bitumen from the Alberta oilsands through northern B.C. to a tanker port in Kitimat in one pipe, and condensate from Kitimat east to Alberta in another.

Enbridge has estimated that opening up Asian markets to Canadian oil would boost Canada’s GDP by $270 billion over 30 years, and would generate $81 billion in direct and indirect revenues to the federal and provincial governments. Of that, B.C. would receive about $6 billion, while Ottawa would receive about $36 billion and Alberta $32 billion.

Environmental review hearings in Prince George, B.C., have been adjourned for one week, and will resume Oct. 29.

The three-member review panel has until the end of next year to complete its report.

Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs, said he will be in Victoria on Monday.

“The Harper Government has clearly demonstrated that it is only their blatant sell-out to industry agenda that matters,” Phillip said in a statement.

He said environmental laws “are being systematically bulldozed aside in Parliament to the delight and benefit of tar sands development projects such as the Northern Gateway Enbridge project and the expansion of the Kinder-Morgan pipeline.”

Kinder Morgan has proposed its own $4.1-billion Trans Mountain project that would expand an existing pipeline from Alberta to Vancouver.

— By Dene Moore in Vancouver

Opponents prepare for Northern Gateway protest at the seat of power

By The Canadian Press - Sunday, October 21, 2012 at 7:49 PM - 0 Comments

VICTORIA – Opponents of the Northern Gateway pipeline gathered Sunday for a protest school of sorts, in preparation for what they hope will be a massive show of environmental force on Monday.

An estimated 300 protesters, who organizers say are willing to risk arrest, attended the day-long protest boot camp being offered by Defend Our Coast, the coalition of environmental groups behind the sit-in planned Monday on the grounds of the provincial legislature in Victoria.

Spokesman Peter McHugh said the group hopes at least a thousand people will come out to show the provincial government that British Columbia voters do not want a pipeline or tanker port proposed by Calgary-based Enbridge Inc (TSX:ENB).

McHugh said protesters do not take lightly the prospect of civil disobedience, and they hope the protest is peaceful.

“It’s not our first choice as Canadians, but when the government doesn’t listen, and the people we’ve elected are not representing the people that elected them, civil disobedience is a tactic,” he said.

The provincial government is not in session, and no one from Victoria police was available to discuss their plans for the protest.

About 4,500 people have signed an online pledge on the group’s website promising support for the protest in Victoria and another provincewide protest is planned for Wednesday at MLA offices in 55 communities throughout the province.

For some, the Northern Gateway pipeline has become a lightning rod for discontent not only with the expansion of the Alberta oil sands, but with the provincial Liberal government and the federal Conservative government that has made sweeping changes to environmental laws.

The protests have garnered support from unions including the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union, the Canadian Auto Workers, the B.C. Teacher’s Federation, the Canadian Union of Public Employees and the United Fishermen and Allied Workers’ Union.

They have the backing of Greenpeace, ForestEthics, the Council of Canadians and several First Nations, and have been endorsed by high-profile activists such as David Suzuki and Stephen Lewis. Celebrity supporters include filmmaker Michael Moore, singers Sarah Harmer and Dan Mangan, and actors Ellen Page, Mark Ruffalo and Darryl Hannah.

The $6-billion pipeline project would carry diluted bitumen from the Alberta oilsands through northern B.C. to a tanker port in Kitimat in one pipe, and condensate from Kitimat east to Alberta in another.

Enbridge has estimated that opening up Asian markets to Canadian oil would boost Canada’s GDP by $270 billion over 30 years, and would generate $81 billion in direct and indirect revenues to the federal and provincial governments. Of that, B.C. would receive about $6 billion, while Ottawa would receive about $36 billion and Alberta $32 billion.

Environmental review hearings in Prince George, B.C., have been adjourned for one week, and will resume Oct. 29.

The three-member panel review panel has until the end of next year to complete its report and — if approved —Enbridge’s most recent projections have the pipeline up and running in 2018.

George Hoberg was one of the protesters attending boot camp on Sunday.

“I believe we have a climate emergency and politics, as usual, is not working so we need to engage in direct action and other forms of disruption to ensure politicians understand the importance of this issue to citizens and to future generations,” said the professor in the faculty of forestry at the University of British Columbia.

“I want politicians to wake up and understand that there will be serious political consequences if they push these projects through.”

Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs, said he will be in Victoria on Monday.

“The Harper Government has clearly demonstrated that it is only their blatant sell-out to industry agenda that matters,” Phillip said in a statement.

He said environmental laws “are being systematically bulldozed aside in Parliament to the delight and benefit of tar sands development projects such as the Northern Gateway Enbridge project and the expansion of the Kinder-Morgan pipeline.”

Kinder Morgan has proposed its own $4.1-billion Trans Mountain project that would expand an existing pipeline from Alberta to Vancouver.

Nobel Prize winner arrives in Fort McMurray before touring pipeline route

By The Canadian Press - Tuesday, October 9, 2012 at 5:23 AM - 0 Comments

FORT MCMURRAY, Alta. – A woman who won a Nobel Peace Prize for her work to ban landmines is leading a delegation of women on a trip from the oilsands in northern Alberta to the coast of B.C. to get a female perspective on energy and pipeline development.

Continue…

Enbridge says without projects like Northern Gateway producers can’t access Asia

By The Canadian Press - Wednesday, October 3, 2012 at 11:18 AM - 0 Comments

TORONTO – Enbridge’s controversial Northern Gateway project could help boost the price Canadian oil producers see by opening up access to the Asian markets, Enbridge (TSX:ENB) chief executive Al Monaco said Wednesday.

Monaco said that without access to the West Coast, Canadian producers will face a further discounting in oil prices compared with international benchmarks caused by a supply glut at a key storage hub in Cushing, Okla.

The glut has caused oil priced at Cushing — the WTI benchmark — to trade at a discount to other international benchmarks.

“I don’t think that is a tenable situation in the longer term,” he said.

Monaco called the $6-billion pipeline project, which faces significant opposition from groups concerned about possible spills from the pipeline, or from a tanker on the West Coast, a strategic project for the country.

“The bottom line on Gateway I think is this: It is a highly strategic project to Canada and there is general agreement that accessing the Asian market is in our interest,” he told an investor conference Wednesday.

“As a resource driven economy, there’s no question that Canada needs access to tidewater and the project is going to generate billions in terms of spinoffs, thousands of jobs and benefits to communities.”

In addition to the Enbridge project, Kinder Morgan has proposed its own $4.1-billion Trans Mountain project that would expand an existing pipeline from Alberta to the Vancouver area.

A joint review panel has been holding public hearings on the Northern Gateway project this year and is expected to report by the end of next year.

B.C. Premier Christy Clark has also set out five conditions before her government will back the project, including provisions for aboriginal consultation and the province receiving a “fair share” of the economic benefits.

Northern Gateway would carry roughly 525,000 barrels of bitumen a day from Alberta’s oilsands producers to Kitimat, B.C., where it would be loaded on tankers headed for Asian markets.

Not much changes after B.C. and Alberta premiers meet over oilsands

By macleans.ca - Monday, October 1, 2012 at 6:51 PM - 0 Comments

CALGARY – It appears not much has changed following a brief meeting between the premiers of B.C. and Alberta over the proposed Northern Gateway oilsands pipeline.

B.C. Premier Christy Clark says she continues to have environmental concerns about Enbridge’s (TSX:ENB) $6 billion project.

Speaking in Calgary, Clark also reiterated B.C. wants a share of the revenues from the pipeline.

Premier Alison Redford also stuck to her guns, saying Alberta is not willing to share any revenue from the project because the oilsands resource belongs to Albertans.

Redford says the entire country would benefit economically from the pipeline.

The pipeline would carry diluted bitumen from the oilsands from Alberta across some of B.C.’s most pristine lands and waterways before being loaded onto tankers bound for Asia.

‘Take it from me’

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, September 28, 2012 at 10:04 AM - 0 Comments

Jim Prentice raises concerns about pipeline development on the West Coast.

The Calgary native told his hometown audience that Ottawa’s neglect of the aboriginal relations could doom proposed oil pipelines, including Enbridge Inc.’s Northern Gateway project and Kinder Morgan Inc.’s TransMountain pipeline expansion.

“The obligation to consult with and accommodate first nations … these are responsibilities of the federal government,” said Mr. Prentice, who held posts as minister of Indian affairs, industry, and environment before leaving government in 2010. “And take it from me as a former minister and former co-chair of the Indian Claims Commission of Canada, there will be no way forward on West Coast access without the central participation of the first nations of British Columbia.”

Endangered and threatened species pose threat to pipeline proposal

By Dene Moore, The Canadian Press - Wednesday, September 26, 2012 at 5:43 AM - 0 Comments

VANCOUVER – One of the most powerful foes of the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline through northern British Columbia is not a lawyer or a conservation group or any of the many First Nations who have lined up against the project.

It’s a very large, very, very old fish.

The Nechako white sturgeon is listed as an endangered species under the federal Species At Risk Act, a designation which is supposed to legally protect the sturgeon’s habitat so the species can recover.

The pipeline is planned to cross the Stewart and Endako rivers, where the highly imperilled species — there are estimated to be only 335 left — live.

But the recovery plan for the distinct sturgeon species has languished for seven years in draft form, never officially published and, therefore, never offering that protection. That recovery plan was due on Aug. 15, 2009.

“That (plan) creates an obligation on the government to ensure that the critical habitat of the white sturgeon is legally protected,” said Susan Pinkus, a biologist for EcoJustice, one of a coalition of conservation groups who will announce today they will sue Ottawa to force it to enforce its own legislation on the proposed pipeline route.

“This is a population that (the Department of Fisheries and Oceans) has assessed as being able to tolerate no additional harm, for obvious reasons. These guys are just barely hanging on.”

Exposing this species on the brink to potentially catastrophic disruption puts it in jeopardy, she said.

“I can see how this would be controversial and perhaps uncomfortable, but I also think that this is why the Species at Risk Act exists,” Pinkus said.

The sturgeon is just one of several endangered or threatened species along the proposed route of the twin pipelines that would carry bitumen from the Alberta oilsands to tankers on the B.C. coast.

The status of the sturgeon and Pacific humpback whales are mentioned repeatedly in countless documents obtained by The Canadian Press through Access to Information legislation or found among the thousands filed with the joint review panel conducting an environmental assessment of the project.

“Under SARA, all harm, harassment or killing of individuals from a species listed as endangered or threatened is prohibited,” said a Fisheries and Oceans memorandum on the project.

Once a species is listed, the department must develop a recovery strategy and action plan, which identifies and legally protects critical habitat from destruction, the 2011 document noted.

“The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans may only enter into an agreement or issue a permit authorizing a party to engage in activities affecting a listed wildlife species under SARA section 73 if pre-conditions are met. In particular, the harm to individuals associated with the activity cannot jeopardize the survival or recovery of the species.”

The document, a memorandum submitted to the regional director general, noted several species of concern along the proposed pipeline route.

Various populations of eulachon, a small smelt-like fish, are considered endangered or threatened by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada and are under consideration for listing under SARA. The same applies to quillback rockfish and yellowmouth rockfish, and northern abalone are listed as threatened under SARA.

The conservation groups pursuing court action over the pipeline proposal note that the marbled murrelet, a bird listed as threatened under SARA, and the southern mountain caribou, considered threatened, also live along the route.

Pinkus has particular concern for the humpback whale.

“If you superimpose the draft humpback whale critical habitat that DFO has identified, and the tanker route, you’ll be horrified. It goes straight through it,” she said.

Commercial whaling, overfishing of their prey, entanglement in fishing nets, noise and chemical pollution, as well as habitat destruction have led to their threatened status, says the SARA listing.

“A problem that has arisen in recent years is collisions of whales with ships. As ships get bigger and faster, it becomes harder for the whales to get out of the way. Many shipping lanes cross migration and feeding areas, making the risk of collision more likely,” says the SARA listing.

But like the white sturgeon, the deadline for a recovery plan has come and gone with no plan in sight. A draft plan has languished for more than two years.

The Fisheries documents submitted to the environmental assessment panel note that Northern Gateway proposed a trenchless crossing as the primary construction method on the Endako River, where the white sturgeon are present, and impact would be negligible.

“However, there is some risk that a trenchless crossing may not be feasible because of the site conditions,” the Fisheries documents say, adding that the contingency plan has an elevated risk of adverse impacts.

“It will be important for the proponent to ensure mitigation measures are sufficient and are implemented to avoid the risk of impacts to sturgeon.”

In the end, the department said the risk posed by the project to fish and fish habitat can be managed through mitigation and compensation measures.

But critics say that if Ottawa hadn’t broken its own laws around species at risk already, that would not be the case.

Earlier this month, Environment Minister Peter Kent told The Canadian Press that the Conservatives government is looking at an overhaul of the species at risk law enacted in 2002 by a Liberal government.

Kent said he wants to make the Species At Risk Act more efficient.

“There are improvements to be made,” Kent said. “Sooner rather than later we need to address changes to the Species at Risk Act to be more effective.”

The Conservatives made dramatic changes earlier this year to other environmental laws and the Fisheries Act — changes decried by conservation groups for putting resource development ahead of the environment.

Cory Williamson, a member of the Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative, said there are only about 335 white sturgeon left.

“The population is in continual decline,” he said.

The remaining fish are 40 to 70 years old. They spawn but the eggs and larvae don’t survive.

The prehistoric fish, which can grow up to six metres in length and weigh as much as 500 kilograms, has changed little since dinosaurs roamed the Earth but teeters on the brink of extirpation, he said.

“We have a recovery plan that’s been in draft format for a number of years now,” he said. “There are, I believe, legal prohibitions on harm to individual sturgeon, but because the recovery plan hasn’t been formally published yet, there is no legal protection for habitat.”

Brian Frenkel, the chairman of the community working group for the Nechako White Sturgeon recovery initiative, said there are several pipelines proposed for the area.

For five years, his group has been looking for $3- to $4 million to build and operate a sturgeon hatchery.

“The federal government has done a good job of creating a Species At Risk Act, and our group fought hard to put sturgeon on there,” Frenkel said.

Since then, Ottawa has “fallen flat on their face on that.”

“We’re so far from Ottawa,” Frenkel said. “Out of sight, out of mind.”

Megaproject angst not new, Carruthers tells panel

By Dean Bennett, The Canadian Press - Tuesday, September 4, 2012 at 7:38 PM - 0 Comments

EDMONTON – Controversial megaprojects are as old as Canada itself, but their long-term benefits to the nation’s growth are both undisputed and profound, the president of the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline told a review panel Tuesday.

In opening remarks to the panel, John Carruthers said his proposed $6-billion project to ship Alberta oilsands crude to Asia-bound tankers on B.C.’s west coast “is no different.”

“Canada has witnessed this (controversy) as far back as 1871, when the Canadian Pacific Railway was constructed in return for British Columbia agreeing to enter Confederation,” Carruthers said.

“Similarly, national projects such as the St. Lawrence Seaway and the TransCanada Pipeline have all attracted great attention and debate but, when constructed, laid the foundation for significant benefits for generations of Canadians.”

His comments came as the three-member panel entered the question-and-answer phase of hearings into the project.

Proponents say the 1,170-kilometre dual line, from Bruderheim near Edmonton to a marine terminal in Kitimat, B.C., is critical to the industry given the rapid growth of the oilsands and the soaring energy demand in Asia, particularly China.

In an updated report delivered at the hearing, Texas-based energy consultant Muse Stancil said that Asia’s appetite is so voracious, the net benefit of Northern Gateway to the oil industry would be $24 billion through 2035.

“There is ample market demand for Canadian crude in northeast Asia, with an estimated total potential demand that is over four times the design capacity of Northern Gateway,” said the report.

There is also potential demand in California, but Stancil said it’s hard to quantify given the state is implementing a new low-carbon fuel standard.

More importantly, said the researchers, Northern Gateway will change the game as far as market dynamics in North America.

“It can be expected to have a material effect on the distribution patterns and pricing dynamics for Western Canadian crude, as crude producers for the first time will have a high-volume alternative to their historical markets within North America,” said the report.

“Northern Gateway allows the Canadian crude producers to both stop selling to their least attractive refiner clients (from a pricing prospective) and reduces their need to ship heavy crude via comparatively expensive rail transport.”

China is the big buyer, it said. The Asian giant is already getting more and more crude from Russia and Kazakhstan. Even with those sources, it can’t get enough.

“Even if all the inland crude pipeline expansions (from Russia and Kazakhstan) are completed, China will need to further increase its water-borne imports by millions of barrels a day,” it said.

Tuesday’s hearing launched the stretch run in the hearings.

The panel, representing the National Energy Board and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Authority, has been travelling around British Columbia and Alberta throughout the year hearing evidence.

The pipeline has sharply divided public debate, particularly in B.C., and the hearings have been witness to protests and demonstrations.

Environmentalists and many First Nations leaders in B.C. say given that the line would traverse 1,000 streams and rivers along with delicate wildlife habitats, the risk of a spill makes the line too risky at any price.

The line has also become a political stare-down between the Alberta and B.C. governments.

British Columbia Premier Christy Clark has said without a better cut of the profits, B.C. won’t even consider signing on. Alberta Premier Alison Redford has said her government has no plans to share the oil royalties that would accrue if the line was built by 2017 as planned.

Enbridge (TSX:ENB), in documents already submitted to the panel, has said the line is big enough to boost everyone’s bottom line.

The Calgary-based company says that over the next 30 years the line will boost Canada’s GDP by $270 billion.

It estimates total revenues in direct and indirect benefits to the federal and provincial governments at $81 billion, with $48 billion in labour income.

It estimates 62,700 person years of employment over the three-year construction phase, split almost two-thirds to B.C. and one-third to Alberta.

Enbridge estimates $2.6 billion in direct tax revenue to governments over the three decades, almost half of that to B.C.

The hearings run until Saturday, then resume in the Alberta capital from Sept. 17 to 28.

Starting next month, they move Prince Rupert and Prince George in B.C. for question-and-answer hearings relating to the lines themselves and the environmental risks and contingency plans.

The panel is tasked with determining whether the pipeline is in the public interest on economic and environmental grounds.

It has to submit its report to the federal government by the end of 2013.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government has said it supports the concept of getting oil to the Asian market, but has said the Northern Gateway decision will rest on science rather than politics.

Elizabeth May vs. Northern Gateway

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, August 31, 2012 at 4:47 PM - 0 Comments

The Green MP has posted her submission to the Northern Gateway review.

The proponent has violated its social licence to operate through a culture of negligence. This failing is well-documented in the report of the United States National Transportation Safety Board  (Enbridge Incorporated, Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Rupture and Release, Marshall Michigan, July 25, 2010, Accident Report NTSB/PAR-12/01, PB2012-916501, July 10, 2012).  The spills and pipeline leaks in Kalamazoo, Michigan in 2010 and additional spill in the summer of 2012 in Wisconsin are ample evidence of the corporate culture of Enbridge being negligent. The panel is commended for accepting the report of the US. NTSB into evidence.  As evidence before this panel, the litany of failures in preventing the Kalamazoo spill and subsequent negligence in ignoring alarms and pumping more bitumen-diluent mix into a broken pipeline must lead to a rejection of this proposal at this time.

Is Nathan Cullen out of order?

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, August 29, 2012 at 4:44 PM - 0 Comments

The Justice Department doesn’t think Nathan Cullen’s request to address the joint review panel considering the Northern Gateway pipeline is in order.

Here is Mr. Cullen’s letter outlining his request. Here is the letter from the Justice Department outlining its objections. And here is Mr. Cullen’s response to the Justice Department’s objections. And here is the website for the Northern Gateway review panel.

Update 6:27pm. Joe Oliver’s office passes along a statement from the Natural Resources Minister.

“The Joint Review Panel independently makes all decisions respecting its proceedings. Our officials will answer any questions that the independent panel deems relevant. Nathan Cullen is seeking to politicize the work of the panel instead of waiting to hear the independent experts report.”

Captain Canada v. Northern Gateway

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, August 28, 2012 at 3:51 PM - 0 Comments

Former NHL star Scott Niedermayer, captain of Canada’s 2010 Olympic hockey team, reiterates his objections to the Northern Gateway pipeline.

With your voice behind us, WWF and the Coastal First Nations have sounded powerful messages about the unacceptable risk this project poses to the Great Bear, our Canadian treasure.  We’ve urged provincial and federal decision-makers to understand what is really at stake here. We’ve helped voice the concerns of communities, leaders, artists and studentsfrom across the country.  And we’ve spoken out for whales, bears, and other animals that cannot do so on their own…

And today, right now, we need your voice more than ever. August 31^st is the deadline for public comment to the Joint Review Panel .  This body is charged with assessing whether the Northern Gateway project is in Canada’s best interest.Please take a few moments to register your comments online right now.

Science and oil

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, August 27, 2012 at 1:31 PM - 0 Comments

Federal scientists have concerns about the expansion of the Jackpine oil sands mine.

In their final submissions to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, several federal departments say they still have questions about Shell’s plans. They include how growth in the industry has outpaced the company’s assessment of cumulative effects, how changing flow in the Athabasca River will affect contaminant levels and how well Shell is able to control effluent from artificial lakes that will be used to store tailings …

Shell has failed to look at the overall picture of how total development has already affected wildlife habitat, let alone the impacts of further expansions, says Environment Canada. Its document goes on to say that where those impacts are measured, Shell’s assessment minimizes them. For example, Shell says the amount of high-quality caribou habitat destroyed is of “low magnitude,” even though the company acknowledges the amount of those losses total about 40 per cent. “It is unclear how Shell Canada defines a 40 per cent loss … as a low-magnitude effect,” Environment Canada says.

And a scientist with the Department of Fisheries, whose job might be eliminated, is concerned about Northern Gateway and Enbridge’s planning for a potential spill.

Enbridge Inc.’s response plan for a potential spill of Northern Gateway oil into the pristine waters off British Columbia doesn’t take into account the unique oil mixture the pipeline would actually carry, documents show … Kenneth Lee submitted a research proposal last December saying the matter requires further study because Enbridge’s plan had “strong limitations due to inaccurate inputs.” ”The Northern Gateway pipeline proposal lacks key information on the chemical composition of the reference oils used in the hypothetical spill models,” wrote Lee, head of DFO’s Centre for Offshore Oil Gas and Energy Research, or COOGER.

Radicals on film

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, August 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM - 0 Comments

The NDP brings the pipeline fight to YouTube.

The Northern Gateway chronicles

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, August 20, 2012 at 8:00 AM - 0 Comments

So the Prime Minister publicly deferred to science, but the Department of Fisheries might not be able to provide proper scrutiny of Northern Gateway’s impact.

The marine contaminant group that would have been involved in a spill in B.C. has been disbanded and the fisheries and environmental legislation gutted, said Otto Langer, a retired fisheries department scientist. “[Harper] says the science will make the decision. Well he’s basically disembowelled the science,” said Langer. “It’s a cruel hoax that they’re pulling over on the public.”

Former federal Liberal fisheries minister David Anderson agrees. Given the Dec. 31, 2013, deadline set by the federal government, Anderson said scientists in the Fisheries Department simply don’t have time to complete any substantial scientific study of the project. “You can’t do these studies on the spur of the moment. It takes time to do them,” Anderson said. “And the federal Fisheries have just been subjected to the most remarkable cuts, so you’re in the throes of reorganization and reassessment and re-assigning people, and on top of it you throw them a major, major request for resources and work. It can’t be done.”

Meanwhile, David Black’s suggestion that a refinery might be the answer was met with questions, concerns and criticism, but Thomas Mulcair seems to see promise in refining our own oil.

In a radio interview Saturday, Mulcair suggested that efforts to add new refining jobs in Canada would become a “win-win” situation for the oilsands industry and the rest of the country. “But I think that overall, the idea of adding the value in Canada, developing, upgrading, processing, refining, our own natural resources is a good one,” Mulcair told the CBC’s weekly politics show, The House. “That’s what we should be working on together.”

Conservative strategist Rod Love says Enbridge should suspend its application. And the United Church joins other religious groups in opposing the project.

Enbridge video ignores Douglas Channel islands

By macleans.ca - Thursday, August 16, 2012 at 11:26 AM - 0 Comments

Enbridge Inc.’s Northern Gateway pipeline is stirring controversy again, but this time it’s over a video from the company and not the politics around it.

In a video on the Enbridge website that depicts the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline, around 1,000 square kilometres of islands disappear from Douglas Channel in British Columbia.

The proposed project would send bitumen via pipeline from the oil sands in Alberta to Kitimat. It would then be loaded onto tankers to be exported to Asia.

The video shows Douglas Channel as an open funnel leading from Kitimat to the Pacific. It ignores the narrow channels and islands that make up the access route.

Alison Redford won’t back down on pipeline profits

By macleans.ca - Wednesday, August 15, 2012 at 9:44 AM - 0 Comments

Alberta Premier Alison Redford has doubled down on her position that she will not be meeting with B.C. Premier Christy Clark to discuss sharing the profits of the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline.

From the Financial Post:

“She made her position very clear. Ours is very clear. Our position hasn’t changed,” Redford told reporters following a speech to the Canadian Bar Association.

“We believe that it’s very important for economic benefits to be spread across the country and we don’t believe that fundamentally changing Confederation to allow that to happen is appropriate, and so wouldn’t entertain any discussion with respect to sharing of Alberta royalties.”

Redford says she hasn’t heard from Clark since the two were at odds over the pipeline at a premiers’ meeting. She also said she will be going on ahead with the national energy strategy without Clark.

‘We will never stop striving for 100 percent’

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, August 3, 2012 at 5:54 PM - 0 Comments

Enbridge says it can meet British Columbia’s demands and, with concerns being raised in the United States, releases a statement about its safety record.

“Over the last decade we’ve transported almost 12 billion barrels of crude oil with a safe delivery record better than 99.999 percent,” Al Monaco, Enbridge’s president, said in a statement. “That’s good, but for us, it’s not good enough. We will never stop striving for 100 percent.”

In a rarely used amendment to a Corrective Action Order issued on Wednesday, PHMSA said it has concerns about what it called “a pattern of failures” on Enbridge’s system over the past several years and demanded the company present a comprehensive plan, overseen by an independent third party, to improve its operations. Enbridge handed in the plan yesterday but said PHMSA has yet to offer a response.

Meanwhile, the Harper government has set a December 31, 2013 deadline for the joint review of the Northern Gateway pipeline. NDP MP Denise Savoie has posted her submission to the joint review here (pdf).

‘They’re looking to shift the blame to Enbridge’

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, August 3, 2012 at 1:58 PM - 0 Comments

Tim Harper, Reuters and the Globe pick up on James Moore’s comments about Enbridge and the Northern Gateway pipeline.

“This project will not survive scrutiny unless Enbridge takes far more seriously their obligation to engage the public,” he told a radio show Wednesday. Mr. Moore did not agree to an interview on Thursday.

The federal government staunchly supports Northern Gateway, and the opposition New Democratic Party said Mr. Moore’s comments may have been designed to keep B.C. voters happy. ”It’s damage control,” said NDP MP Peter Julian, who is the party’s natural resources critic and represents the B.C. riding of Burnaby-New Westminster. ”The Conservatives have been pushing this for months, and now that opinion has turned against it in B.C., they’re looking to shift the blame to Enbridge.”

Northern Gateway in the pages of the Rolling Stone

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, August 3, 2012 at 11:15 AM - 0 Comments

Rolling Stone takes note of the pipeline debate in Canada.

Harper also went after those who oppose the pipeline. Days before Obama’s decision on Keystone, Harper’s minister for natural resources was denouncing “environmental and other radical groups” who “hijack” regulatory bodies and “use funding from foreign special interest groups to undermine Canada’s national economic interest.” Just to make sure environmentalists got the message, Harper issued a budget that gutted protections for endangered species and pushed through new laws requiring nonprofit groups to “provide more information on their political activities, including the extent to which these are funded by foreign sources.”

In reality, it’s not environmental groups that are funded by foreigners – it’s the companies eager to exploit the tar sands. Many of Canada’s biggest energy companies – firms that are headquartered in Canada and trade on Canadian stock exchanges – are in fact largely owned by foreign interests, including Suncor (57 percent), Canadian Oil Sands (57 percent) and Husky Energy (91 percent). All told, some 70 percent of all tar-sands production in Alberta is owned by non-Canadian shareholders.

‘There’s a difference, I think, night and day between a company that gets public engagement, Aboriginal engagement, environmental stewardship and Enbridge’

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, August 2, 2012 at 4:13 PM - 0 Comments

Heritage Minister James Moore was interviewed by Bill Good yesterday on CKNW in British Columbia about the Northern Gateway pipeline. Mr. Moore was first asked to respond to criticism of how little BC Conservatives have said in response to Christy Clark’s demands and then asked specifically for his thoughts on the proposed pipeline.

Bill Good. So do you think that British Columbia needs to get a much bigger share of the revenue that will be generated by a pipeline if it ever came to be?

James Moore. Well, that’s Christy Clark’s demand and she hasn’t been clear on what actually constitutes a fair share or where the fair share would come from. She’s put five demands on the table, or requests, and many of them, frankly, were already well on their way to being addressed. She knows that. The provincial government knows that. The first three, with regard to environmental assessments, environmental considerations while on land and on the water, those are all things that the federal government has been moving on, we are moving on, and I think those will all be addressed. The aboriginal consultation part is something that coastal First Nations have been very vocal about, will continue to be vocal about, and that needs to be addressed, for sure, by Enbridge, in order for the project to go forward. On the money side, it certainly, of course, it sounds great, as a British Columbian, to say British Columbia should get our fair share and I understand that. But Premier Clark hasn’t been specific about what she’s talking about, how much or where it would come from, so until she’s clear on that, it’s kind of an empty zone to have a debate about this. But I do understand, certainly, the reaction by the rest of the country, when you have one province, who is, geographically, the Pacific gateway for the entire country to the markets of the Asia-Pacific, the perception of us closing the door to the rest of the country doing business with the largest emerging markets in the world, it’s something that’s cause for concern. On the other hand, Christy Clark is very much, I think, in the right in terms of her responsibility to represent British Columbians. To make sure that the rest of the country understands that just because British Columbia is physically the Asia-Pacific gateway, it doesn’t mean that we’re the doormat for companies like Enbridge to think that they can go ahead and do business without having due diligence and taking care of the public’s interest. 

Bill Good. A lot of people would be asking why we are even talking about doing business with Enbridge right now, given their track record, their recent environmental disasters, their what seems to be lack of procedures when it comes to oil spills. Why are we even talking about doing business with that particular company?

Continue…

‘The economic benefits are, in fact, already shared across the country’

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, July 31, 2012 at 8:58 AM - 0 Comments

While former environment minister David Anderson rips Enbridge and praises Christy Clark, Joe Oliver declines comment.

Pressure is now building on the federal Conservative government to step in and respond to B.C.’s demands – by stating, among other things, whether Ottawa is willing to share some of the billions of dollars of federal tax revenue that would be generated by the pipeline or pony up cash for environmental protection.

Federal Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver said Monday that Ottawa has a role to play in pipeline safety and maritime environmental protection, and that “we’re going to fulfil our obligations in that regard.” However, the government doesn’t sound too interested at this time in sharing more of the economic benefits with British Columbia, although it won’t directly state a position on the matter. ”The economic benefits are, in fact, already shared across the country,” Oliver said in an interview with Postmedia News. ”I just don’t want to get into that specific issue at this time.”

Last week, both Jason Kenney and John Baird lamented for the idea that a province would “tollgate” another the movement of another province’s resources.

A report from the Canadian Energy Research Institute projects that the vast majority of tax revenues from three proposed pipelines—Keystone XL, Northern Gateway and Trans Mountain—would go to Alberta.