Category Archives: Pipelines and Supertankers

Kinder Morgan may win in court, but it’s quickly losing social licence

November 6, 2014Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersfeaturedDamien Gillis

Kinder Morgan may win in court, but it's quickly losing social licence — Citizens protest Kinder Morgan outside BC Supreme Court (Photo: AJ Klein/facebook)

Houston-based pipeline giant Kinder Morgan may obtain an injunction from the BC Supreme Court today to remove protestors from a Burnaby Mountain blockade of the company’s exploratory work. In all likelihood, it will also secure a positive verdict from the National Energy Board at the end of its hearings into the proposed Trans Mountain pipeline expansion – and Harper Cabinet approval thereafter.

But these will be pyrrhic victories the company loses its social licence in the process. And that’s precisely the way things appear headed for the $90 Billion Houston-based energy titan.

Corrigan-vs.-Goliath

Burnaby issues Kinder Morgan stop work order over pipeline survey — Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan has been a thorn in Kinder Morgan’s side (Image: Youtube)

The Burnaby Mountain blockade was catalyzed by the strong stance taken by Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan against Kinder Morgan’s plans to build expand its Burrard Inlet shipping terminal and massively expand tanker traffic to over 400 ships a year through south coast waters.

Corrigan has made no secret about his enmity for the project altogether, but it was at Burnaby Mountain that made his stand.

When the company announced a proposed change to its pipeline route earlier this year, involving tunnelling under Burnaby Mountain, Corrigan recognized a golden opportunity. Invoking whatever municipal powers he had at his disposal, the mayor sought to block access for Kinder Morgan to the mountain – arguing that its survey work would negatively impact protected wilderness areas.

What resulted has been a protracted, complex legal battle, waged in the BC courts and before the federal energy regulator conducting the hearing into the pipeline. While Justice Brenda Brown denied the city’s injunction application to keep the company off the mountain, the NEB surprisingly went the other way, refusing to take the company’s side and override municipal by-laws.

Enter the citizens

Into this impasse strode a group of citizens, who in September constructed a camp at the base of the mountain, along Centennial Way, physically blockading the company’s work. Over the past week, including further hearings today, Kinder Morgan has been seeking an injunction which would give it the power to have protestors removed by police.

Knowing the way these hearings usually go, if not today, then sometime very soon Kinder Morgan will likely get what it’s seeking. But as the old saying goes, “Be careful what you wish for.”

Pipeline Jujitsu

What began with Corrigan’s David-vs.-Goliath battle is starting to look like a shrewd jujistu move, using his opponent’s strength (it is the largest energy transmission company in North America) against it. And now that ordinary citizens have taken up the torch – some still haunted by the memory of the company’s 2007 spill that covered their North Burnaby neighbourhood in diluted tar sands bitumen – Kinder Morgan looks more and more like a ham-fisted ogre with each passing court date.

List of critics, offences grows

The company is increasingly riling citizens and offending First Nations – who remain steadfastly opposed. But it’s not just grassroots citizens and indigenous groups. It’s prominent politicians, academics, economists, and other public figures who are increasingly lining up against the company. Here are just a few poignant examples:

Questions from the company during NEB hearings as to First Nations food fishing have sparked a viral facebook page, with thousands of pictures from around the province displaying how aboriginal people value wild salmon

The Burnaby Mountain protestors include prominent academics like SFU Biochemistry professor Lynne Quarmby, who noted in a recent press release that over 80 groups from around the world are now supporting their legal battle. “I don’t think Kinder Morgan wants you to hear what I have to say – and I think that is why they are trying to silence me,” Quarmby told media outside the court house last week.

Quambry is joined by SFU Professor Stephen Collis, who spoke out publicly against a 1000-page legal document dropped on him by the company last week, threatening $5.6 million in damages for “trespassing” in the public Burnaby Mountain park the company is trying to gain access to

Heavy-hitting aboriginal leaders like Grand Chief Stewart of Union of BC Indian Chiefs have indicated their full support for the Burnaby protests and local First Nations opposition to the project, declaring, “We stand in absolute solidarity with individuals, groups and First Nations that are standing in public opposition to these ill-conceived, uninvited, unwanted heavy oil pipeline proposals in the province of British Columbia”.

The NEB process itself is under attack as well. Former BC Hydro head Mark Eliesen recently dropped out of the pipeline hearings via a scathing letter to the regulator, calling the process a “farce”

This follows a long list of grievances against the hearings over the exclusion of 80% of applicants, the lack of any opportunity for cross-examination from interveners, and a slew of issues with the application process itself – highlighted by people like local NDP MP Kennedy Stewart

Corrigan is joined by Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson – who seems destined for a fresh mandate come Nov. 15 – in steadfast opposition to the project. Though on paper municipal governments lack much political power to block large-scale energy projects, it would be a serious mistake to underestimate the influence of these two cities and powerful mayors over the project.

Even the Clark Government has expressed concern at Kinder Morgan’s evasiveness toward the province’s questions about the project. The company couldn’t find a friendlier provincial government if it tried, so pissing off this bunch would seem counter-productive.

Much of the above has transpired since this independent poll in July, which found that 70% of Burnaby citizens supported their mayor and council’s tough stance against Kinder Morgan.

Clearly, this Texas-based company has a few things to learn about doing business in BC. If it continues on this path, it may well win a few battles but wind up losing the war.

Rafe: Runaway Simushir may be safe now; BC’s coast is anything but

October 20, 2014Energy and Resources, Pipelines and SupertankersfeaturedRafe Mair

Runaway Simushir may be safe now, but BC's coast is anything but — The Simushir under tow from US tugboat Barbara Foss (via Maritime Forces Pacific Facebook)

The incapacitation of a Russian cargo vessel off Haida Gwaii caused great panic amongst all of us who watched the events unfold over the past weekend. The seas were very heavy – not an unusual state of affairs for that part of the world at this and other times of the year.

For very good reason, the Haida Nation was extremely worried and upset about the developments. It looked up for a while is if they might have to deal with this themselves and, course, although they were prepared to use and sacrifice their own vessels, none of these were built for this kind of an emergency. Eventually, the chance intervention of an American tugboat got the situation under control.

During the time of this emergency, the story was covered regularly on the BBC and CNN, in addition to our own local news. It was a national and international news event. One ship! No accident! No oil-soaked beaches! No dead and dying birds!

What about hundreds of oil tankers?

This being so with one vessel in trouble off our coast – and far from the first – what are the risks when the number of tankers off the coast is in the hundreds, plus those coming out of Vancouver and Howe Sound? The risks involved are enormous. If one vessel, not carrying bitumen, can threaten this much damage and cause so much concern, consider that we’re bound to have that happen over and over again. The law of averages means we’ll have accidents. Indeed, the law of averages is that we will have accidents on an ongoing basis – as a group of learned fossil fuel transport engineers found after examining Enbridge’s plans.

In addition to tankers carrying bitumen from the Enbridge pipeline, if, heaven forbid, it ends up being built, we have the prospect of more tankers on the south coast from Kinder Morgan’s planned pipeline expansion to Burnaby. The very minimum number of extra tankers a year coming out of Vancouver will be 404 – more than one per day. In addition to that, there will be, if the LNG plant goes ahead in Squamish, another 40 tankers coming out of Howe Sound.

(Let me pause there for a moment. It has taken us 50 years to clean up Howe Sound after Britannia mines, pulp mills and so on. We now have salmon back, herring back, shellfish back, whales back – the whole recovery has been a near miracle made possible by the efforts of the people of British Columbia. Now all of this is jeopardized so that an Indonesian billionaire can make buckets of money providing virtually no employment and no money to the local community or the province.)

Accidents happen

The companies, of course, say that they have a great safety record and that they don’t think that anything will happen. Companies say this all the time and have hugely expensive public relations departments and outside agencies to help them disseminate that message.

The problem, is obvious – notwithstanding all of the optimism of the companies and governments, accidents will happen. You cannot have something in the order of 450 huge tankers a year coming out of the harbour of Vancouver and Howe Sound without having accidents – they are inevitable.

It is not just a question of an accident that we must concern ourselves with. If the accident is going to be a benign one, or one where very little damage is done, that’s one thing. The fact of the matter is that a serious accident to a tanker will be catastrophic. Remember the Exxon Valdez, which was carrying ordinary crude oil, not bitumen. As this incident and the Enbridge catastrophe in the Kalamazoo River teaches us, is all but impossible to clean up.

Kinder Morgan would change Vancouver forever

Like many of you, I have lived in the greater Vancouver area all my life. Many of you will have been here for a number of years; even those who have just arrived will know of the beauties of our harbour, the Salish Sea, the Gulf Islands, and the southern part of Vancouver Island. For the vast majority of us, this is why we live here.

I must confess to you that I have forgotten about the beauties of the many beaches in Vancouver itself. I have forgotten the joys I had as a child and then as a younger person using these beaches. I have forgotten how important these beaches are to tourism. I have forgotten how beautiful these beaches are and how much their very presence adds to the enjoyment of people who live here.

That’s the problem, isn’t it? We all become so familiar with the wonderful surroundings in which we live that we tend to ignore them. All of these things, however, when we think about them, become hugely important to us. And we are about to jeopardize all of that in order to transport highly toxic bitumen from the Tar Sands to the Far East.

Saving BC falls to provincial, local governments

We tend to forget that the ultimate responsibility for this rests with the provincial government. We have to pretty much forget the feds. It’s true, that they are the ones that will approve the pipelines but the provincial government and indeed local governments have a great many ways to curtail them while Ottawa – the Harper version – has no intention of doing so.

Let’s face it, the federal government is hopeless. They simply do not care. They go through the motions, always knowing what the results will be.

We know that the prime minister and his idiotic finance minister, Joe Oliver, have already committed to both the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline and Kinder Morgan. They really don’t care what the National Energy Board, their poodle, says anymore than they care about what the people of British Columbia think.

While they are the ones we really ought to be petitioning, we know that’s hopeless. One only has to look at what BC Tory MPs are saying. Like the little pet parrotts they are, they all squawk the government line.

The responsibility rests with Premier Clark and her government. There are a great many things that she can do to stop both of the pipelines and any subsequent tanker traffic.

Premier Clark abdicates duty

Here is the problem – premier Clark and her government have no intention of doing a damned thing.

Why do I say that?

She is in thrall to foreign energy companies. All one has to do is look at their policy with respect to liquefied natural gas (LNG). LNG plants contribute tankers just as pipelines do. In the case of the one proposed for Squamish in Howe Sound, there will be at least 40 tankers per year if we accept the company’s word. Though they may not be carrying bitumen, they are hardly without risk – and catastrophic risk at that.

World-Class rhetoric

I must confess that I am sick and tired of hearing about “world-class accident prevention” and “world-class recovery” after the accident that wasn’t going to happen.

World-class means absolutely nothing. They are two words intended to comfort us all without having any specific guarantee attached to them. They are just words without substance. Moreover, what we do know of as “world-class” isn’t worth a damn if we look at the results of tanker accidents around the world.

Moment of truth

We are coming, as a people, to the moment of truth. The National Energy Board – which incidentally won’t let you ask questions of their witnesses – will approve the Kinder Morgan pipeline. That having happened, who’s to stop 404 bitumen-laden tankers?

Now is the time we must let this provincial government know, in no uncertain terms, what we feel and the consequences we will visit upon them at election time if they ignore us.

Christy Clark is the premier of British Columbia, for God’s sake! She and her government have a sworn duty to protect us and the environment in which we live. Her obligation is not to LNG companies, or the tar sands or pipeline companies, nor to those who own the tankers, but to us, the citizens and the place in which we live.

Surely, we must hold her to that duty.

Rafe: Heavy oil advertising, editorials taint Canadian mag The Walrus

August 18, 2014Energy and Resources, Media, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersfeaturedRafe Mair

Rafe: Heavy oil advertising, editorials taint Canadian mag The Walrus — Enbridge is a major Walrus sponsor (Photo: Damien Gillis)

I am afraid I really am a gloomy Gus today. It has just struck me that there is an absence of good guys in the world. Whether it’s big business or government they mostly do it to us and reek of self interest.

We don’t seem to have anybody we can trust anymore. There was a time when, while you couldn’t trust the newspapers, you would be able to find within the paper columnists that weren’t bought and paid for. They consistently gave you points of view that challenged you and made you think. Thank God for online papers like this one and thetyee.ca and for all of the renegades who put so much time and effort into blogging.

Whether on-line papers and bloggers have yet achieved the kind of circulation that will really move public opinion I don’t know but they are a ray of light in an otherwise bleak picture.

And then there were three

My printed purchases now are down to three.

I subscribe to the Atlantic because it does have excellent articles and entertains and make me think too. I am looking forward to the forthcoming issue where Hillary Clinton apparently criticizes the foreign policy of President Obama and has spent every waking moment since trying to explain to the president that she really didn’t mean it.

I also subscribe to the Guardian Weekly because it provides excellent columnists and great, what British refer to as leader writers.

A couple of years ago I was turned onto a Canadian publication called the Walrus. This magazine is unique in that it refuses to accept my cancellation.

Enbridge features heavily in Walrus

Normally when I read it, I just get angry at how Toronto-centric it is. It is a view of the rest of Canada from a Toronto point of view, tailored to Toronto prejudices. This last particular issue was a huge departure because it had an article on Andrew Weaver, the BC Green party MLA. It was only a page long but there was something real and truly British Columbian. It was not terribly interesting and if you lived in British Columbia not a very new story but it was about the West Coast and that, for the Walrus, is unique.

What I had hoped to get from the Walrus was controversy. I was led to believe that there would be articles on the environment and critical of things like the Tar Sands and so on. Well, the latest issue that I have, September 2014, is anything but.

The first two pages are a huge double page ad by Enbridge. Enbridge appears again with another full-page ad and also as a sponsor of various things in which the Walrus is also involved in such as lecture series (in Toronto, of course.) There is also an insert on aboriginal art, sponsored by, guess who?

I suppose you take your advertisers where you can find them and I’m sure the Enbridge people have nothing whatever to do with the content of Walrus. Well, I wonder.

Waxing poetic about the Tar Sands

One of the feature articles this month, lo and behold, is called “If We Build It, They Will Stay” by a man named John van Nostrand. Van Nostrand’s claim to expertise is that “he is an architect, an urban planner, and the founding principal of the Planning alliance in Toronto”. (Really, I’m not making this up!)

This article looks at the whole north of Canada as one belt of resources to be exploited. British Columbia is noteworthy for a large entry at Kitimat called liquefied natural gas. Next door to it in Alberta is oil, gas, and bitumen.

When you read the article, the section on the Tar Sands is almost religious in its zeal. It could have been written by the PR department of, say, Enbridge. Needless to say there is not a critical word about any of the environmental concerns many of us have about LNG and the Tar Sands.

Now, could this have anything to do with the fact that Enbridge is such a big advertiser?

Surely only a cynic would think that. Then, of course, sensing a touch of cynicism in the back of my mind, I went back over the ads in the Walrus. They have very few traditional ads. There was one from Subaru and the only other typical national ads I could find was were RBC and Rolex. Everything else are little ads inviting me, for example, to go to dinner at the Royal York Hotel or see Madame Butterfly at the Four Seasons Centre for the performing arts in Toronto.

Walrus’ charitable nature

Not wishing to be unfair, I thought I should take a look on the masthead and see if there were any mission statements and things of that sort. I thought it might also tell me a bit about who these cats are running this magazine.

Well, there was a surprise in store for me. It says the Walrus Magazine is a project of the charitable, nonprofit Walrus Foundation.

Now one’s first reaction would be, well charitable organizations have got to take their money wherever they can find it. Except that’s not usually how it works.

A magazine put out by charity is usually very careful not to get involved in controversy. It may write articles that are thought provoking in nature but they are in very careful not to take money from people who have a large axe to grind. One of the reasons for that, of course, is that they don’t want pressure put on them to make certain that their articles don’t offend the ” money” folks. Let me assure you there’s no danger of that happening here!

Now, I am going to admit this is not the world’s biggest deal. I frankly don’t give a rats ass what the Walrus publishes, whose backside it kisses or who it’s target audience is. It can, for all I care, get its money directly from the Mafia.

What I find so disappointing is that here is an opportunIty for a Canadian publication to make an honest effort to expose to Canadians, Canadian issues.

A blow job for the industry, financed by the industry

“If We Build It, They Will Stay” was a glorious opportunity to lay before for the Canadian people the whole issue of northern development particularly with regard to resources. The article stretches from the the Yukon to Newfoundland and Labrador and should open up a lot of controversy, provoking a lot of intelligent conversation. It is, rather, to put it somewhat indelicately, a blow job for the resource industry in a magazine that is obviously financed by the resource industry.

What is really worrying, is that there maybe some Canadian out there that doesn’t recognize this. Of course, Enbridge is banking on this.

As I said when I started, I’m grumpy today and that’s largely because there are so few places to go where you can get information that will lead you to further information and then on to a healthy public debate.

If the Walrus does nothing else, it adds fuel to the argument that the electronic and print press in this country is captive to “big money” and in the case of the Walrus, is not even very subtle about it.

[signoff3]

$Rafe-with fracking, tankers world-class safety is just a weasel word$

Rafe: With fracking, tankers “world-class safety” is a weasel word

July 19, 2014Energy and Resources, Fracking, LNG, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersfeaturedRafe Mair

Rafe-with fracking, tankers world-class safety is just a weasel word — BC Premier Christy Clark touts “world-class” safety for fossil fuel projects (Canadian Press)

Many times I have referred to Premier Clark’s demand that Enbridge and others have “world-class” cleanup processes in place. To repeat myself, these are “weasel words” and mean absolutely nothing. “World-class” firefighting procedures doesn’t mean the building didn’t burn down.

I was delighted to read Stephen Hume’s column in the Vancouver Sun of July 17, where he talks about “weasel words”, especially the term “world-class”, and other matters. This particular article is about fracking and in his surgical way, Hume carves up the government for it’s utter lack of process and covering each and every one of their tracks by use of the words “world class”.

Government naively accepts industry’s word on safety

We have seen a similar absence of investigation by the Clark government into the risks of LNG, be it in pipelines, plants, or tankers. This government is now known for two things: an utter lack of preparation and lying through their teeth.

British Columbia under Christy Clark is brought to the position where we are to have pipelines and oil tankers; LNG plants, pipelines, and tankers; and fracking for natural gas, without any idea as to the safety of these projects. Premier Clark and her cabinet lickspittles simply take the company’s word that what they plan is environmentally benign.

Companies lie by their very nature. They spend hundreds of millions of dollars on public relations every year. One only has to look at the ads from Enbridge over the last year or so to see the kind of money they spend and the sort of message that they put out.

Many British Columbians accept the need for oil pipelines, LNG, and fracking and the tanker traffic associated with them and I must ask my fellow citizens upon what do you base your support? Do you have some information about the safety of these projects that we don’t? If so, would you be so kind as to vouchsafe it to the rest of us so that we can, perhaps, change our minds?

British Columbians face onslaught of projects

A couple of years ago, in a speech, I observed that the attacks on the environment of British Columbia were so many, so varied, and so widespread that it would be difficult for us to deal with them just because of their sheer volume. Unfortunately this has manifestly been proved true.

[signoff3]

Citizens of a democracy, faced with this sort of an onslaught, have a right to expect that their government will stand at the gate and not let anybody by who is going to do harm. We are entitled to believe that our government will investigate each and every potential environmental assault and advise us of what dangers we face.

We expect governments to give a full accounting on the danger of oil spills from pipelines and tanker accidents; we expect a full investigation by the government of safety factors as well as the environmental concerns around LNG plants, pipelines and tankers; we expect our government to make a thorough investigation of fracking before the first undertaking starts. On that latter point, fracking is going ahead full blast and the government hasn’t lifted a finger to deal with its safety or environmental concerns – like massive climate impacts and water contamination, as recent, reputable studies reveal.

Public can’t rely on government

We, who pride ourselves on being environmentalists, must do extensive investigations on our own to learn the facts. There is absolutely no point in going to government departments to find out what they know because they know nothing. It is idle to go to the companies involved because they are incapable of telling the truth.

This is the extent of democracy under the Christy Clark government.

NDP ‘opposition’ not much better

One would like to think that the NDP, her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, would be different.

Unfortunately, the leader of the NDP seems to favour LNG. He is thinking about fracking. He is also, apparently, confused about the proposed Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion and on this critical issue, the Party Policy falls all over its own feet.

British Columbians left on their own

It is the totality of tanker traffic carrying diluted bitumen (dilbit) and LNG which has not been assessed by the government and doesn’t seem to be bothering the opposition – yet this is a massive issue.

We are left in British Columbia on our own. Those people to whom we pay a great deal of money to manage our affairs are in thrall to big industry, which finances the Liberal Party and supports it politically. It, like the government, is hugely economical with the truth. We citizens must then inform ourselves.

As I see it, we have only one political option. I am, God knows, no socialist. I ran against the NDP twice and beat them twice. I stood against them in the legislature. My last two votes in provincial elections have been for the Greens.

Having said that, the Greens are not going to win the next election and the NDP do have a chance.

What the NDP must do to regain public’s support

If the NDP are to win they have to increase their support substantially.

If the NDP do increase their support by candidly, fully and fairly looking at environmental matters and reporting to us faithfully as to their findings and encourage the fullest debates, I not only think they have a chance to win, but would be an acceptable government to have.

One thing that I must say in conclusion – I cannot believe that my fellow citizens would be insane enough to support Christy Clark and her bunch once again.

If that happens, we deserve what we get, even though our kids sure as hell don’t.

Two legal challenges filed against Northern Gateway

July 12, 2014Energy and Resources, First Nations, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersfeaturedCanadian Press

By The Canadian Press

VANCOUVER – Two legal challenges were filed Friday against the federal cabinet’s approval of the Northern Gateway pipeline.

The Gitxaala (git-HAT’-lah) First Nations, who hail from the North Coast of British Columbia, filed an application for judicial review with the Federal Court of Appeal.

Ecojustice filed a separate application on behalf of ForestEthics Advocacy, Living Oceans and the Raincoast Conservation Foundation.

The environmental groups are asking for a court order quashing the approval of the pipeline proposed by Calgary-based Enbridge (TSX:ENB).

Ecojustice lawyer Barry Robinson says the federal approval was a flawed decision based on a flawed report by the federal environmental assessment panel.

The groups also want the Conservative cabinet to provide reasons for approving the project that would link the Alberta oilsands with a marine terminal on the B.C. coast.

READ: Native law expert: First Nations hold power to stop Enbridge

[signoff3]

Rafe: First Nations, Constitution are Canadians’ best defence

July 10, 2014Energy and Resources, First Nations, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersfeaturedRafe Mair

First Nations, Constitution are Canadians' best defence — Chiefs of the Tsimshian First Nation speak out against Enrbidge at a 2012 Prince Rupert rally

Big money now rules the world. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class gets squeezed. No government in the world is doing anything about this – least of all the Conservative government in Canada.

The only people fighting this, and for their own reasons, are First Nations. We all do things for our own selfish reasons so that was not meant to be a criticism, but simply a statement of fact.

It is time we looked at the reality of the Roger Williams case in light of the fight against big business and see how it plays out. The best places to look are at the Northern Gateway and Kinder Morgan pipelines.

‘Compelling and Substantive’

In light of the Williams case, they both face the same problem. Each of them must now consult with the appropriate First Nations. They may well consider that since they have been turned down they have already consulted with them to but my advice under the Williams case is to do it again and get turned down again.

They will then have to convince the crown, in this case the federal government, that their project is “compelling and a substantive” and consistent with the crown’s fiduciary obligation to aboriginal peoples.

I, frankly, think that it would be enormously difficult for a government to make that decision under any circumstances I can imagine. If nothing else, the political ramifications across Canada, with every First Nation, would be enormous. For a First Nation anywhere in the country to learn that one of their brethren, in trying to protect the environment of its land, was forcibly frustrated by the government would be a huge blow and would spread throughout the aboriginal community, and in my opinion, rightfully so.

Pipeline approvals will trigger lawsuits

Let us suppose for sake of argument that the crown, whether provincial or federal, does make such a decision. There would be, immediately, a lawsuit. Going on the past, a lawsuit would take five years , minimum, to resolve. Without any doubt it would go to the Supreme Court of Canada and from the company’s point of view, they would realize that the aboriginals have the longest winning streak in history in that court.

The main point is that no matter what, Northern Gateway and Kinder Morgan have got a very long time to wait before they get the final decision in their favour, if they ever do.

Let us suppose they did get that final and for them favourable decision. This would not end the matter because in my view the public of British Columbia would still raise hell and there would be civil disobedience.

In short, I think that the Williams case spells paid to the two pipelines in question.

Exclusive use

There is another interesting feature arising out of the Williams case. A reader of my column in The Tyee points out that the Chief Justice talked about “exclusive use” of the land in question. What if two nations shared land by way of an understanding, tacit or otherwise? Would they not be able to claim that they should to share ownership of that land now because the two of them had had exclusive use?

I suppose the real point I’m making is that there are plenty of legal questions left and I can only wish that I had just graduated from Law School aged 24 instead of having done so in 1956!

First Nations stand best chance of protecting BC

As I have said elsewhere, I by no means think that the Williams case adversely affects development in British Columbia. It changes the rules and it changes who gets the money but First Nations want development too. They are, I might happily add, much more concerned about environmental matters than large international developers or governments. They are concerned about values like caribou, fish, and trees. They, in short, care about the sort of things that many other British Columbians are also concerned about but can’t get their governments to give a damn about.

First Nations know, as we all should know, that “dilbit”, which is the oil that would be transported by these pipelines, is lethal stuff. One need only look at the Kalamazoo River to see what happens when Bitumen, or dilbit, spills. As long as human beings are involved, we will have spills. Many, if not most, of these spills will be in virtually inaccessible places. We know from Kalamazoo that even if they spill is accessed, there is very little the company can do about it.

Living so close to the land and the oceans as First Nations do, they are keenly aware of these facts. Large international companies, and their client governments, don’t give a damn about these things – never have and never will.

The bottom line is that in the great war against marauding capital there is only one “Peter at the dike” and that’s our aboriginal community, as supported by the Canadian Constitution.

[signoff3]

BC govt, City of Vancouver: Kinder Morgan dodging pipeline questions

July 5, 2014Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western CanadafeaturedCanadian Press

City of Vancouver-Kinder Morgan ducking pipeline questions — Mayor Gregor Robertson and Vancouver Council have some tough questions for Kinder Morgan (facebook)

By Dene Moore, The Canadian Press

VANCOUVER – Kinder Morgan has failed to answer many of the questions put to the company about its proposed Trans Mountain pipeline through the regulatory review process, charge a chorus of critics that includes the province of British Columbia and the city of Vancouver.

Kinder Morgan ignore 40% of city’s questions

The city submitted 394 written questions as part of the National Energy Board’s regulatory review process but said the Texas-based company did not respond to 40 per cent of them, covering everything from emergency management plans to compensation in the event of an oil spill.

“We submitted almost 400 questions and only about 248 of them were answered,” said Sadhu Johnston, deputy city manager. The rest “were quite inadequate in the way they were answered, with either no answer or only partial answers.”

[quote]As interveners we are trying to assess the proposed project and are finding it quite difficult to get information on the project. That does make it hard for us to fully evaluate the proposal and to prepare our experts and our expert testimony to ask the right questions and formulate an opinion.[/quote]

Both the city and the province submitted requests to the energy board Friday asking the regulator to compel Kinder Morgan to respond to the outstanding requests.

Province stonewalled too

Kinder Morgan bills customers for pipeline application — Proposed Kinder Morgan tanker terminal expansion

The B.C. Environment Ministry issued a statement saying they had submitted more than 70 information requests to the company through the board, dealing with maritime and land-based spill response, prevention and recovery systems.

“In a number of cases, Kinder Morgan’s responses to the information requests do not provide sufficient information,” the statement said. “That makes it difficult for the province to evaluate whether the Trans Mountain expansion project will include world-leading marine and land oil spill systems.”

As part of the board review of the pipeline that would link the Alberta oil sands to Port Metro Vancouver, the company had to respond to more than 10,000 questions submitted by hundreds of groups and individuals granted intervener status by the board.

No direct, oral questioning of Kinder Morgan

Under new rules for the regulatory review, there is a strict timeline and the board decided not to allow direct oral questioning of company officials. All questions must be submitted in writing ahead of hearings set to begin in early 2015.

It’s a very restrictive process, Johnston said.

“It’s really become quite undemocratic, the way the NEB is running the process,” he said.

[signoff3]

The city said the responses it did receive made it clear that the company will not cover the first responder costs incurred by Vancouver in the event of disaster and it said the responses from Kinder Morgan raise questions on the economic feasibility of the project.

Weaver: Answers ‘simply unacceptable’

B.C. Green MLA Andrew Weaver has also complained about the responses provided by the company to his 500 questions.

He filed a motion with the energy board Thursday asking for full and adequate responses and a revised review timetable to incorporate “new and reasonable” deadlines for information requests and evidence.

“Many of the answers I received are simply unacceptable,” Weaver, a Nobel Prize-winning climate scientist, said in a statement.

Kinder Morgan declined a request for an interview.

Scott Stoness, vice-president of regulatory and finance for the company, said in an emailed statement that Trans Mountain believes it provided robust responses to questions “that were within the scope of the regulatory review.”

Some of the information is market sensitive or would be a security risk to release, he wrote.

“It is normal in regulatory processes that there are debates about whether questions are appropriate and/or in scope,” Stoness wrote.

[quote]We understand some interveners may not be satisfied with the answers we provided. That is why the NEB process allows for interveners to make motions on the responses we submitted.[/quote]

They will have another opportunity to question the company and to submit their own evidence later this year, he said.

READ ABOUT Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan’s battle with Kinder Morgan

Kispiox Valley citizens band together against LNG pipelines

July 1, 2014Energy and Resources, LNG, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersfeaturedDamien Gillis

Kispiox Valley citizens band together against LNG pipelines — Some of the Kispiox Valley citizens opposed to LNG (Photo: NoMorePipelines.ca)

A group of citizens from the Kispiox Valley – northwest of Smithers, BC – has signed a declaration “against the LNG projects proposed to pass through their community.”

The approximately 160 signatures from local landowners and residents represents a significant proportion of the valley’s population. Located along two pipeline routes designed to carry shale gas from northeast BC to proposed liquefied natural gas terminals in Prince Rupert, the residents are strategically positioned to cause problems for the province’s LNG vision.

New map shows multiple proposed oil, gas pipelines for BC — The yellow and pink lines above depict the proposed pipelines to supply BG Group and Petronas’ Prince Rupert LNG plants, respectively. The two lines converge in the Kispiox Valley, north of Hazelton.

The declaration cites impacts to “northern rivers, salmon, air and water quality” as key issues for the community. Citizens of the region have expressed concerns about early work by Spectra Energy and TransCanada Pipelines – the former slated to build a line servicing BG Group’s proposed terminal north of Prince Rupert; the latter hired to construct the proposed Petronas/Progress pipeline to the same coastal region.

Initial work surrounding these projects has already sparked concerns from bear biologists about impacts on grizzly bears in the Khutzeymateen Inlet Conservancy – widely thought to have driven the gutting of the BC Parks Act through Bill 4, which opened protected areas up to pipeline construction.

First Nations and local environmental groups have also pointed to the potential impacts on wild Skeena River salmon from Petronas’ proposed plant on Lelu Island, amid prime eelgrass habitat for out-migrating smolts.

The full declaration reads:

Be it known that we, the undersigned community of the Kispiox Valley, British Columbia, believe that the well-being of ourselves and our neighbours, our livelihoods and economy, and our lands and waters are paramount. We highly value intact ecosystems that sustain and support a vibrant and diverse watershed.

This includes thriving populations of wild Pacific salmon and steelhead, healthy forests with abundant wildlife, and clean air. These lands and waters are woven into the fabric of our lives, and are deemed as vital and necessary elements that support our economy, our community, and our way of life. We recognize and honour the Gitxsan, and hold in high regard their culture and traditional methods of responsible stewardship.

Our rural community is a proven model of economic and social resiliency, comprised of diversely skilled professionals, trades people, farmers, forest and resource workers, guides/outfitters, and creative and versatile entrepreneurs. We support common sense practices of conservative resource management, renewable energy production and use, agriculture as the basis of a strong local food system, and the long-standing wild salmon economy of our region.

The Skeena, as one of the last great salmon rivers of the world, connects our livelihoods to our communities, and our communities to each other. What occurs upstream or downstream affects us all. In recognition of this, we accept a shared regional and global responsibility to protect our water and air.

Therefore, we cannot stand by and allow any industrial presence, including oil and gas development, that would threaten or harm our values and responsibilities as outlined in this declaration.

[signoff3]

Is Harper setting up BC govt to reject Northern Gateway?

June 29, 2014Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, PoliticsfeaturedCommon Sense Canadian

Is Harper setting up BC govt to reject Northern Gateway — Christy Clark photo: Darryl Dyck/CP)

By Geoff Salomons

To many, the recent decision by the Harper Government to approve the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline – a project it has so emphatically been pushing – is not surprising at all. What was surprising was the relative lack of fanfare in which the announcement was released. As Jennifer Ditchburn noted, there was no MP, let alone the minister responsible, to make the announcement: just a simple press release four paragraphs long entitled “Government of Canada Accepts Recommendation to Impose 209 Conditions on Northern Gateway Proposal”.

In this release, the government highlighted the role of the (emphasized) independent panel in making the recommendation. It noted that this is another step in a long, thorough process. It urged Enbridge now to demonstrate how it will meet the 209 conditions the independent panel put forth, as well as the additional work Enbridge has to do to “fulfill the public commitment it has made to engage with Aboriginal groups and local communities along the route” (ignore for a moment the fact that the “duty to consult” is 1) the Crown’s responsibility, not Enbridge’s; or 2) one would assume extends to Coastal First Nations that are adamantly opposed to the pipeline due to spill potential, and isn’t restricted to First Nations living along the pipeline Right-of-Way). Finally, it stated:

[quote]It [Enbridge] will also have to apply for regulatory permits and authorizations from federal and provincial governments.[/quote]

Enbridge faces big hurdles with First Nations

All of this seems all well and good. Shortly thereafter, the First Nation groups stood up to voice their continued opposition and, to be clear, the “duty to consult” provision will likely be the most difficult hurdle for Enbridge to overcome – especially in light of the Supreme Court’s Tsilhqot’in decision, which closely followed the Enbridge announcement.

What was more intriguing for me was the response from BC Environment Minister Mary Polak. She noted that this was just the first of BC’s five previously stated conditions. She then went on to note that “the Federal government also highlights the fact that there are important permitting decisions that are properly the jurisdiction of the provinces.” Interesting.

Harper couldn’t reject Enbridge

What is interesting is that in no plausible scenario could Stephen Harper reject the Northern Gateway pipeline, given this government’s behaviour in backing the oil industry generally speaking, doing its best to discredit environmental opposition and going so far as to label such opposition “radicals” with an ideological agenda, and criticizing the Obama administration for delaying its decision on Keystone XL.

Once the Joint Review Panel gave its approval – subject to its conditions – the door was wide open. The problem is the political opposition, not only within the “radical” environmental circles, but broadly speaking in British Columbia is increasing. 300 scholars signed a letter arguing that the Joint Review Panel was fundamentally flawed, particularly because it included upstream oil sands development as a benefit, while excluding the environmental and climactic costs associated with such development.

[signoff3]

Numerous polls have come out showing increasing opposition to the project (to be fair, the polls do vary, depending on whether pro-pipeline or anti-pipeline framing is given to the questions – yet even the most pipeline-friendly polling questions show 50% opposition). If Harper rejects the project based on political calculations, it looks bad, particularly to his base in Alberta. If he approves the project, he potentially loses BC in the 2015 election, which doesn’t look bad, it is bad.

The question is whether the Northern Gateway project has become such a political landmine that Harper has essentially written it off (knowing the likely outcome of First Nation challenges in court) and is searching for a way to reject the project, without him rejecting the project.

Where does BC govt stand?

Enter British Columbia. It is at this point that the comments made by BC Environment Minister Polak seem much more significant. Opposition to Northern Gateway is significant. Christy Clark has issued five conditions which must be achieved in order for her to approve the project. One of them – “Ensuring British Columbia receives its fair share” – seems almost impossible, given the structure of federal equalization payments.

In either case, it is a way for Premier Clark to publicly look like she is saying “help me find a way to yes” when she knows, politically, that she’ll have to reject it anyway. If public opinion in BC is truly in opposition to the extent that it seems, and the Federal Government’s press release makes me think that it is, then rejecting the pipeline is a political win for Premier Clark.

In addition, it would take the Northern Gateway off Stephen Harper’s agenda and let him focus his attention on other, less politically volatile pipeline proposals. The emphasis of the provincial role in issuing permits by the federal government, and shortly thereafter re-emphasized by Minister Polak could very well be coincidental. Unless this is exactly what Stephen Harper wants.

Geoff Salomons is a University of Alberta Political Science PhD student studying environmental policy, democratic theory and long-term policy problems.

Gitga’at women erect symbolic blockade of Enbridge tanker route

June 20, 2014Energy and Resources, First Nations, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersfeaturedCanadian Press

Gitga'at women erect symbolic blockade of Enbridge tanker route — Photo: Andrew Frank/Flickr

By The Canadian Press

HARTLEY BAY, B.C. – The women of the Gitga’at Nation of British Columbia planned to erect a symbolic blockade made of yarn across the Douglas Channel on Friday to protest the federal government’s approval of the Northern Gateway pipeline.

The crochet chain was expected to stretch 2.5 nautical miles, or about 4.5 kilometres, across the opening of the narrow channel tankers will have to navigate to a marine export terminal set to be located in Kitimat, on the north coast.

“It’s to show that we’re prepared to do what it takes to stop them because we can’t let it happen. It’s the death of our community, our culture,” said Lynne Hill, who came up with the crochet blockade.

[quote]And if there was an oil spill there would be nothing left.

[/quote]

Members of the community in Hartley Bay — best known for rescuing passengers from the Queen of the North ferry as it sank in 2006 — initially planned to set out at 6:30 am to string the crochet chain across the water.

That departure was delayed by weather, and a flotilla of boats planned to set out by noon to drape the multi-coloured yarn, decorated with community memorabilia and messages of hope, between buoys across the ocean. The slender chain is more than six kilometres long to ensure it will reach from one side of the narrows to the other.

[signoff3]

Hill, 70, said the protest began in Hartley Bay and spread, with supporters sending in crochet links from all over Canada. One woman knit an entire kilometre-long link by herself, she said.

On Tuesday, the federal government granted final approval to the pipeline that will bring oil from Alberta to the B.C. coast for export, with 209 conditions. Hill said it was a devastating day for the Gitga’at.

She said community members will see the tankers from the project pass right in front of the remote community at the mouth of the channel, about 630 kilometres north of Vancouver. The village is reachable only by boat or plane.

“We thought right down the line that somebody that cared would be listening to what we were saying. Not just us — to what lots of people were saying,” she says.

[quote]When the joint review panel was here we thought they were listening. We thought they heard what we had to say.[/quote]

Hill says the crochet chain is a warning that the Gitga’at will do what it takes to stop the pipeline.

“We get our food from the sea. We travel on the sea,” she says.

Check out Gitga’at Chain of Hope Flickr photostream by Andrew Frank