Clean Economy News
Most Viewed Stories
Oil Sands Opponents Turn Focus to Enbridge's Pacific Pipeline Project
ALBERTA, Canada—Enbridge Inc's proposed $5.3 billion pipeline to British Columbia poses a raft of environmental risks, according to a new report that signals the project will become the next battleground over the future of Canada's oil sands.
The study by a trio of environmental groups, released on Tuesday, comes fast on the heels of a decision to push back approval of TransCanada Corp's Alberta-to-Texas Keystone XL pipeline by more than a year.
The delay has led Canada's oil industry and Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government to intensify their emphasis on exporting oil sands-derived crude to Asia.
The Enbridge project, known as the Northern Gateway pipeline, is the first attempt at doing that in scale.
But the new report—issued by the Natural Resources Defense Council, Pembina Institute and Living Oceans Society—says the project would threaten native communities, salmon fishery and wildlife habitat on land and in waters off the West Coast.
The report uses last year's Enbridge pipeline rupture and oil spill in Michigan, and even the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, as examples of why governments and regulators should block the proposal to bisect the rugged Western Canadian province with steel pipe.
Northern Gateway would move 525,000 barrels of crude a day to the port of Kitimat, where it would be loaded onto tankers and shipped to Pacific Rim refiners. The project is a key part of the Harper government's plans for a National Energy Strategy.
Regulatory hearings are scheduled to begin in January and will take months. About 4,000 people have registered to comment on the project.
"The Joint Review Panel assessing the proposed project and the cabinet ministers with final decision-making authority over its fate should reject the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline given the grave safety risks it would impose on a culturally, economically, and ecologically valuable region," said the report.
Numerous Threats at Once
The study also aims to build general opposition to Alberta oil sands development, which green groups say is 23 percent more carbon-intensive than conventional oil production. By contrast, a much-referenced report last year by IHS CERA, the energy consultancy, said it was 6 percent more carbon intensive when judged from production to end use.
Environmentalists used similar greenhouse-gas intensity and other arguments in their battle against Keystone XL. They include an unproven assertion that oil sands-derived crude is more corrosive in pipelines, increasing risks of ruptures.
An Alberta study released last week disputed that argument, but pointed out there is still no formal, peer-reviewed research on the controversial issue.
The report said Enbridge has failed to gauge the impact on the pipeline if numerous threats emerged at once, as with the March 11 earthquake and tsunami in Japan, which contributed to the Fukushima nuclear plant catastrophe.
"A fall frontal rain storm that triggered a rock avalanche could rupture the pipeline. Poor weather conditions combined with associated floods and erosion could prevent ground or air access for emergency response crews," it said.
"Avalanches, rockslides, explosions, or leaks from the [proposed adjacent] natural gas pipeline all can have cumulative impacts that worsen the ability to respond."
(Reporting by Jeffrey Jones; Editing by Frank McGurty)
Republished with permission.
Comments
CITIZEN-LAUNCHED "REFERENDUM" ON PIPELINE, TANKERS AND TAR SANDS
Submitted by Anthony Marr (not verified) on April 22, 2012 - 9:16pm.
CITIZEN-LAUNCHED "REFERENDUM" ON PIPELINE, TANKERS AND TAR SANDS
On April 15, I published a blog in which I stated my intention to wage a CITIZEN-LAUNCHED INITIATIVE ("referendum") for British Columbians to vote on whether or not they want the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline the purpose of which being to carry the world's dirtiest oil across the pristine province to be built, and accident-prone supertankers to be allowed in the hazardous BC waters, where, in both cases, spills are not if but when.
To fight the tar sands and its pipelines and tankers is beyond the capability of any individual group, even the highly activistic Dogwood Institute, even the super-rich Greenpeace. But to shout "Environmentalists Unite!" is one thing, to actually unify them into a single fighting force and unleash it into the arena is another. A province-wide "referendum initiative is the only way that can do it.
Whether this project will go ahead will depend on the participation and support it will garner, which should includes upwards of 4,000 volunteers throughout the province. External support will also be required.
So, here is the blog:
http://homosapienssaveyourearth.blogspot.ca/2012/04/citizen-launched-ref...
Recently, when I called for action on behalf of our children's children, I received a response that said, "I don't know them, I will never meet them, I will be long gone. Why should I sacrifice a single dollar in my pocket for a hoard of total strangers who don't even exist yet?" This person, and those like him, can stop reading right now. For those who will stay with me, I thank you in advance.
In 1996, I was head-campaigner in a Western Canada Wilderness Committee campaign nick-named the "Bear Referendum", which was a formal citizen-launched initiative, registered with Elections BC, towards banning bear hunting in British Columbia. This necessitated me to execute a 60-day road tour from June to August throughout BC covering 50 cities, in most of which I was confronted by townhalls full of hostile hunters and guide-outfitters, many times over 50, once up to 130. WCWC founder and project Proponent Paul George wrote, "Anthony's blunt and unflappable style infuriated the opposition". All in all, I returned to Vancouver after the tour unscathed.
My mission for this 60-day tour was to build a volunteer force throughout the province for collecting the prescribed amount of certified signatures for the Initiative Petition during the ensuing 90-day period (August-December) from at least 10% of the registered voters of each and every one of the 75 electoral districts in British Columbia. By the time the tour was concluded, the volunteer force had grown to 1800 strong, even though more were still needed.
The campaign was a huge media draw. By year end, it had generated over 250 newspaper articles and dozens of hours of radio and television debates and interviews, and was hailed by the Canadian national newspaper the Global and Mail as the "highest profile Canadian animal advocacy campaign in 1996". Though a few electoral districts fell short of the 10%, the project was nonetheless widely recognized as the most massive public outreach campaign on the issue of Recreational Hunting and Trophy-Hunting, ever, which raised public sentiments against them to a red heat.
Please see this blog for details of this campaign, and excerpts of some of the media generated:
http://homosapienssaveyourearth.blogspot.ca/2010/12/gratitude-4-to-1800-...
Now, it is 2012, and the world is a much different and far more dangerous place, one in fact in a state of global environmental emergency. Now, it is pipelines, tankers, the tar sands and the threat of runaway global heating. My friend and co-author (of book [HOMO SAPIENS SAVE YOUR EARTH]) Dr. Peter Carter asked me to speak at the public hearing next week at Smithers in northern BC along the "Highway of Tears" and the proposed pipeline route. I was in process of mulling it over when, lo and behold, the commission issued a statement barring input on the environmental effects of the tars sands themselves:
"2.3.1 Assessment of Environmental Effects Associated with Development of Oil Sands
The Panel heard requests from numerous participants that it include environmental effects associated with the development of Alberta’s oil sands in its assessment of the environmental effects associated with the Project. For the reasons that follow, we have not added consideration of the environmental effects of oil sands development to the revised List of Issues."
This is like trying the Michael Jackson murder case while barring all evidence of the source and effect of the drug.
But I'm not surprised. Through my 7 long CARE-tours, the last - CARE-7 - covering 40 states in 7 months, I have participated in and spoken at dozens of public hearings in numerous provinces and states. Perhaps with a few rare exceptions, they are all by-and-large foregone conclusions cemented in closed door meetings of the power-that-be - prior to the public hearing, which then become little more than public displays of pseudo-democracy.
This has driven me to again consider DIRECT Democracy - another citizen-launched Initiative a la the 1996 "Bear Referendum" campaign, this time, by means of a formal Initiative Vote on whether or not the citizens of British Columbia want a pipeline conveying the dirtiest oil in the world from Alberta to the BC coast, and from there via hazardous tanker traffic to China.
Of course, this may not succeed, but, let's face it the "public" hearings will end in the pipeline being built, so, WHAT DO WE HAVE TO LOSE? At least, we will have the 250 newspaper articles and dozens of hours of radio and television debates and interviews, and the project will at least succeed as a huge public outreach campaign.
For the rules of the engagement as set up by Elections BC, please see:
http://www.elections.bc.ca/
The time frame I have in mind is as follows:
May and June - preliminary networking period to build an alliance of environmental and animal advocacy groups in support of the Initiative Proponent which, according Elections BC rules, must be an individual, to counteract the Opponents, which can be any number of groups and organizations, which will include raising funds for the project, given that both the Proponent and the Opponent(s) are both allowed the same expenditure ceiling, and, believe me, the Opponent(s)' funding tank will be filled with oil money.
July and August - the prescribed 60-day organizational period, when I will conduct a 60-day road tour to build the volunteer force and generate media coverage, and of course confront and be confronted by the Opponents, which will generate even more media coverage. This will inform, educate, energize and mobilize the people of BC to action.
September through December - the 90-day Initiative Petition period where the volunteers in all 85 electoral districts will collect the required 10% signatures in all 85 electoral districts.
Whether or not this project will go ahead will depend on how much participation and support will come from the environmental and animal advocacy communities of BC, but by the end of April a firm decision will have been made. If you or your group wish to join this project and make some history, please contact me.
I call, further, for international and global participation in and support for this project, since not just British Columbia, but the entire planet, for now and in our children's future, are at stake.
See Anthony Marr's 3-hour-flight over the tar sands in 50 minutes:
https://vimeo.com/39298276
This is about the rape of our common Mother Earth. We wouldn't allow aliens doing this to our planet, would we? Then why do we allow some oily CEOs and greased politicians do it to her, and to our children? Let's tell them, through a public vote, what we DON'T want.
Anthony Marr, Founder and President
Heal Our Planet Earth (HOPE)
Global Anti-Hunting Coalition (GAHC)
Anthony-Marr@HOPE-CARE.org
www.HOPE-CARE.org
www.facebook.com/Anthony.Marr.001
www.facebook.com/Global_Anti-Hunting_Coalition
www.myspace.com/AnthonyMarr
www.youtube.com/AnthonyMarr
www.HomoSapiensSaveYourEarth.blogspot.com
www.DearHomoSapiens.blogspot.com
www.HOPE-GEO.blogspot.com
www.ARConference.org
Post new comment
|
© InsideClimate News |