Category Archives: Oil&Gas

Tsawwassen LNG plant would harm Treaty 8 First Nations, northeast

December 14, 2015Energy and Resources, Fracking, LNG, Oil&GasfeaturedCommon Sense Canadian

Tsawwassen LNG plant would harm Treaty 8 First Nations, northeast — Tsawwassen First Nation Chief Bryce Williams announcing LNG plans or his community

Will LNG proposals put coastal First Nations at odds with those fighting to protect land and water in Treaty 8 Territory?

By Kevin Washbrook

On an unusually chilly afternoon last month I had the opportunity to listen to Chief Liz Logan of the Fort Nelson First Nation and Grand Chief Stewart Phillip of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs at the Drums for the Peace Rally in front of BC Hydro headquarters in downtown Vancouver. The Rally was held to mark the start of Treaty 8 First Nations’ federal appeals court case, which argues that the BC government’s approval of Site C Dam infringes on their treaty rights.

I was struck by the speakers’ determination to continue fighting Site C in court even as BC Hydro races to clear land for this destructive project. It saddens me that Christy Clark would willingly sacrifice the traditional territory of Treaty 8 Nations, not to mention some of the best farmland in BC in pursuit of her government’s obsession with exporting LNG, but that afternoon I was buoyed by the resilience of these front line land defenders. The fight against Site C clearly isn’t over.

Tsawwassen chief downplays LNG plant’s impacts

Premier Christy Clark and TFN Chief Bryce Williams get a tour of FortisBC's nearby Tillbury LNG facility upgrade (Instagram - FortisBC) — Premier Christy Clark and TFN Chief Bryce Williams get a tour of FortisBC’s nearby Tillbury LNG facility upgrade (Instagram – FortisBC)

Like many people, a few days later, I was surprised to hear Chief Bryce Williams of Tsawwassen First Nation announce a joint proposal with FortisBC and others for yet another LNG terminal, this one on Tsawwassen Nation treaty lands at Roberts Bank on the Fraser delta. Chief Williams explained that he was neutral on the proposal and that it would be put to a community vote, but he also took effort describe the project as relatively low impact, including pointing out that the LNG terminal would be powered by electricity, and not natural gas, if it went ahead.

Cooling and condensing natural gas into a compact liquid for export is a very energy intensive process, so powering up this new LNG terminal would take a lot of electricity. As I listened to Chief Williams I had to wonder, is this the LNG project that will make Site C dam inevitable? And if so, how will Chief Williams and the Tsawwassen people justify that to the Treaty 8 Nations in Northeast BC who are fighting to keep it from being built?

Lots more fracking needed to supply LNG plant

When Fortis, the BC government and the many LNG proponents now active in BC describe their LNG proposals as “low impact”, they are talking about the LNG facility itself. However, that LNG doesn’t come from nowhere. If the Tsawwassen LNG proposal goes ahead it will require an enormous amount of natural gas from the fields of Northeast BC — and that demand will trigger more well drilling and more fracking, and contaminate more fresh water in Treaty 8 territory.

Listening to Chief Williams I was reminded of Dene-Cree lawyer Caleb Behn — recently featured in the movie Fractured Land — who, along with many others, is working hard to reduce the impacts from all the seismic exploration, roadbuilding, well drilling and fracking generated by the natural gas boom in their traditional territories in the northeast.

LNG industry’s inconvenient upstream truths

These upstream impacts are an inconvenient truth that LNG proponents don’t like to talk about when they pitch their proposals. Thanks to a model developed by the Pembina Institue and Navius Research, we’re now able to produce a solid estimate of the upstream impacts of any given LNG proposal.

The Pembina model says that over a 30-year period, sourcing natural gas to supply the the Tsawwassen LNG project could require more than 2000 new wells in northeast BC, could use more than 30 billion litres of freshwater, and could produce more than 11 billion litres of waste water. The model also says that over that 30-year period the Tsawwassen project could generate more than 47 million tonnes of climate emissions during the drilling, processing and transport of gas to the LNG facility on the Fraser Delta.

On Wednesday December 16 Tsawwassen First Nations community members will vote on whether to move forward with their LNG proposal. I have no doubt that Fortis and the other project partners are actively promoting the benefits that would follow from approval. I sincerely hope that community members also have access to information on the upstream impacts that would be generated by that approval, so that they can make a fully informed decision on the project.

Kevin Washbrook is a director of Voters Taking Action on Climate Change.

Fed up with LNG, Kispiox residents band together to stop Petronas pipeline

December 9, 2015Energy and Resources, LNG, Oil&GasfeaturedDamien Gillis

Fed up with LNG, Kispiox residents band together to stop Petronas pipeline — Kispiox Valley residents at a recent gathering (photo: submitted)

A group of residents from the Kispiox Valley in northwest BC is vowing to stop a pipeline destined for Petronas’ contentious, proposed LNG plant on Lelu Island, near Prince Rupert. “We tried working with the BC Government and the pipeline companies but they have ignored our concerns. Now it’s time to act together – as First Nations and non-First Nations, united,” says retired community development consultant and valley resident Gail MacDonald.

The group – made up of doctors, farmers, loggers, farriers, nurses, business owners, and guide outfitters – was cemented at a December 3 gathering at the Kispiox Community Hall to discuss LNG projects, particularly that of Malaysian energy giant Petronas.

Work ramping up

Opposition in the valley to LNG projects has been galvanized by preparatory work for the pipeline that would feed the Petronas project, several hundred kilometres down the Skeena River, amid vital estuary habitat for wild salmon. The residents are dismayed by construction work in their own region, such as recent logging done for a work yard – especially since Petronas still lacks federal permits for its LNG project and no commitment has been made by the company to build it, with global LNG prices having plummeted to well below the profitability level.

“Residents were shocked to learn that while no LNG project has received a final approval or investment decision, the BC government has granted permits for pipeline work at several locations near their community and considerable work has already begun,” a press release from the group explains. “This has occurred without communication between the BC government and local residents.”

New statement follows unheeded declaration

This recent ramping up of the community’s resolve to stop LNG development follows a virtually unanimous declaration, signed by 150 of the valley’s residents last year.

“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,” it noted.

[quote]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…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.[/quote]

First Nations question unauthorized LNG deals

Chief Gwininitxw, Yvonne Lattie of the Gitxsan Nation questions the legitimacy of some of the deals being held up by industry and government as evidence of First Nations’ support for LNG projects:

[quote]Deals are being signed by a few Hereditary Chiefs but most of us don’t want this industry in our traditional territories. A Hereditary Chief does not have the sole authority to make decisions, as he or she has many house members who have a say on what happens in their traditional territories.[/quote]

Gilbert Johnson, a member of the local Kispiox Band, adds, “The BC Government is ignoring our concerns and has put oil and gas interests above the public interest. The corruption we’ve seen in their dealings with both First Nations and non-First Nations is staggering. We will not stand idly by and let this continue.”

Project faces multiple legal challenges

In addition to this newly formalized opposition from the Kispiox Valley, Petronas and its partners face challenges from a number of fronts, including court cases led by the Gitga’at First Nation, the Lax Kw’alaams Nation and the Gitxsan group known as Madii Lii. Members of both Madii Lii and Lax Kw’alaams are also maintaining resistance camps physically challenging pipeline and plant construction in their respective territories. Meanwhile, the Haida Nation has banned LNG tankers in their coastal waters.

Rafe: How does oil-boosting Postmedia boss get into News Hall of Fame?

November 28, 2015Energy and Resources, LNG, Media, Oil&GasfeaturedRafe Mair

Rafe: How does Oil-boosting Postmedia boss get into news Hall of Fame? — Paul Godfrey (Photo: Samja Frkovic / Flickr – Victoria Rose)

In the news recently was an item about Paul V. Godfrey, C.M., the President of Postmedia, the largest newspaper chain in the country, owning some 15 papers in major centres plus a slew of community papers across the land. M. Godfrey has been admitted to the Canadian News Hall of Fame.

I have one or two questions for Mr. Godfrey, arising out of investigations I’ve been doing in recent months.

Mr. Godfrey, can we agree that Postmedia wholly owns the Vancouver Province, the Vancouver Sun, and the National Post, which circulate in Vancouver?

A question has occurred to me, Mr. Godfrey: Does Postmedia have some sort of deal with the Fraser Institute whereby you give that organization a great deal of coverage on almost every issue that deals with fossil fuels and the environment?

Now, a couple of years ago I would have been scared stiff to ask that question for fear of being sued for the inferences likely to be drawn from it. However, after the stranger deals of yours I have uncovered in the last few months, I realize that you are in no position to get too excited about questions along this line.

Nothing to worry about, says Fraser Institute

What piqued my interest recently was an article in the Vancouver Sun by the Fraser Institute assuring us that we had no need to worry about LNG tankers on our coast. The writer advised that the only major oil spill in the last 20 years was from a Ferry, not a Tanker so relax everybody.

I’ll not devote too much time to this absurd declaration but simply ask why the Fraser Institute doesn’t tell the whole truth and, secondly, avoids examining places where there’s a lot of tanker traffic, unlike BC where there is very little?

The fatal flaw in the Fraser Institute’s presentation comes in a few little words in one paragraph which talks about “The oil spills at sea”. This is similar language to what Woodfibre LNG uses, as does the self-declared expert – from the industry, I might add – Captain Stephen Brown.

The problem with this and similar pious declarations is obvious: Howe Sound, the Fraser River, Saanich Inlet, Strait of Juan de Fuca, Douglas Channel, Hecate Strait and so on are not at sea, or the high seas, in the words of WLNG’s Byng Giraud, and I would direct the learned gentleman to such places as the Bosphorous and the Dardanelles – to name but two places which more replicate what tanker traffic will face on the BC coast. Indeed, if the Fraser Institute would just subscribe to gCaptain (free) and read of regular tanker mishaps all over the worldn they might not spout such tendentious shit.

The question I ask Mr. Godfrey is:

[quote]Does Postmedia or any of its papers have a deal with the Fraser Institute similar to its one with the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers? Or the formal partnership with Resource Works, the less than truthful advocate for Woodfibre LNG?[/quote]

Postmedia partnered with LNG lobby

My interest in this matter arose out of the partnership deal between the Vancouver Province and Resource Works. I admit my involvement – I, along with most citizens of the area, am vigorously opposed to WLNG.

When I read Resource Works’ mission statement and saw that the Province was a partner in their nefarious venture, I was horrified. This was so unethical and so contrary to the formal and informal principles that have always guided the newspaper industry that I couldn’t believe what I was reading. I must tell you, Mr. Godfrey, that when my findings were I printed here, the publisher Damien Gillis and I were concerned that it was some sort of strange mistake, even a hoax, and that we’d be sued. We took the chance – nobody else in the media was prepared to – and when no denial came from Postmedia or the Province, we had to assume we had struck paydirt.

Composite of Resource Works "Partnerships" page — Composite of Resource Works “Partnerships” page

In following through on this revelation, I discovered that the National Post, through its publisher, Douglas Kelly, had pledged its troth, in truly loving terms, to the fossil fuel industry!

Being a curious sort of bugger, I followed through and, lo and behold, came across the two agreements between Postmedia and the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), certified by documents. The first came by way of a Powerpoint-style presentation pitching Postmedia’s offer to CAPP for a nationwide editorial and ad campaign. The presentation was leaked online, picked up by Greenpeace, then published by The Vancouver Observer last year. The other is a deal between the Financial Post and CAPP – freely available on parent Postmedia’s website.

I have repeatedly made these findings public – or as public as one can when no newspaper will print them – and in the absence of a denial from Postmedia concluded, hard as it was to believe, that these agreements were for real even though they demonstrate that Postmedia are little more than humble shills for the fossil fuel industry.

Bearing in mind that the Sun, Province and National Post, and a dozen other daily papers in Canada, belong to Postmedia and take their marching orders from you, Mr. Godfrey, it must surely be fair to ask: How can you defend managing your papers so as to burnish the image of the fossil fuel industry, of all groups?

This obviously includes avoiding stories which would be harmful to your partners in that filthy industry. When the fix is in, what the media does not report is even more important than what it does.

Special treatment for Fraser Institute

Perhaps there is no deal or nudge, nudge, wink, wink, understanding with the Fraser Institute. If that’s so, the question is obvious: Why do they get so much coverage in your newspapers and why don’t less right-wing think tanks get any, or at best very little? I guess you’d be pretty hypocritical to agree to brown-nose industry no matter how destructive they are and at the same time give equal time to those who care about sentimental things like the environment, the atmosphere and global warming.

Forgive a final question, Mr. Godfrey:

[quote]Considering your lovey dovey relationship with Resource Works and, even worse, with CAPP, and the journalist’s duty to report to the public free of any interest in conflict with that duty, aren’t you just a tad embarrassed at entering The Canadian News Hall of Fame?[/quote]

Fractured Land hits theatres

November 19, 2015Energy and Resources, LNG, Oil&GasfeaturedDamien Gillis

Making Fractured Land: Caleb Behn and Wade Davis (left) being interviewed by directors Fiona Rayher and Damien Gillis (Photo: Zack Embree)

When I’m not wearing my Common Sense Canadian publisher’s hat, I’m making movies. For the last five years, one in particular, called Fractured Land – which examines the “fracking” and LNG industries through the eyes of a young Indigenous lawyer from northeast BC named Caleb Behn.

Caleb and his family graciously welcomed us into their world – one fraught with complex choices brought about by the energy and resources we down south, in the big cities, benefit from, without facing the impacts of the messy extraction process. Caleb’s world is an impossible balancing act – many of his family members work in the oil and gas industry but are deeply troubled by its effects on air, land and water, not to mention their traditional way of life in the Peace Valley and Fort Nelson regions.

Very early on in the creative process, we came to see the literal fracking of shale beds deep underground as an apt metaphor for what was going on inside people like Caleb, his family and community.

10 Vancouver screenings starting Friday

Now, after a lot of hard work and incredible support from a large community of people, my Vancouver-based co-director Fiona Rayher and I are proud to share the 80-min documentary with audiences across BC and around the world. After six packed screenings on the Island and the Sunshine Coast over the past couple of weeks, we’re kicking off a 10-screening run in Vancouver this Friday, Nov. 20 (tickets to that first show are sold out but available for others).

This process began with a number of Canadian-based international film festivals in recent months – Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, and Toronto’s Hot Docs, where we world-premiered the film last April to a warm reception. We were delighted to introduce it to our home town at the Vancouver International Film Festival earlier this Fall, and humbled by the response, winning both the Best BC Film Award and the VIFF Impact Canadian Audience Award. Now, we’re taking the show on the road with screenings planned all around BC – see the full list here.

Drilling deeper

Much of the reaction to the film is based on the compelling character at its core and the fact that this is no typical “issue” or environmental film. It’s a story about a man who, while unique and exceptional in many ways, also personifies the struggles we face as a country – the push and pull between creating jobs and protecting what’s left of our natural world.

LNG & Fracking: Risky Business for BC — A drill rig in northeast BC

The medium of feature-length film afforded me an opportunity to delve into the sort of issues we discuss here at The Common Sense Canadian on a daily basis on a much deeper level – which is why I encourage our readers to catch a screening. The list below is just a starting point – we are planning many more for the new year, including a variety of panel discussions and q&a’s with the filmmakers and in some cases Caleb himself. We will also soon be unveiling a community screening program, enabling groups and individuals to host their own screening of the film in their community.

Special screening to feature Wade Davis

I’m particularly excited about our screening this coming Tuesday, November 24, at the Rio Theatre – a terrific venue – which will be followed by a q&a with the filmmakers. Also, on December 1, we’ll be hosting a special screening with My Sea to Sky at the Kay Meek Centre in West Vancouver – featuring a panel discussion with celebrated author Wade Davis and retired KPMG partner Dr. Eoin Finn on the controversial, proposed Woodfibre LNG project. Then, we’re excited to take the film up north, to the communities along the proposed LNG pipelines and terminals who would be directly affected by our government’s LNG policy.

In addition to these theatrical screenings, the film has started to be broadcast by CBC’s documentary Channel (the first one was on November 8 – more to come next year), and will be carried by Knowledge Network down the road. I hope you’ll get chance to see the film and spend a little time in Caleb’s world – and, in the process, perhaps develop a better understanding of our own.

November and December Screenings

• Nov. 20 @ 8:30 PM: Vancity Theatre, Vancouver, BC (purchase tickets, get more info)

• Nov. 21 @ 8:30 PM: Vancity Theatre, Vancouver, BC (purchase tickets, get more info)

• Nov. 22 @ 8:30 PM: Vancity Theatre, Vancouver, BC (purchase tickets, get more info)

• Nov. 23 @ 4:45 PM: Vancity Theatre, Vancouver, BC (purchase tickets, get more info)

• Nov. 24 @ 7 PM: Rio Theatre, Vancouver, BC (purchase tickets, get more info)

• Nov. 25 @ 6:30 PM: Vancity Theatre, Vancouver, BC (purchase tickets, get more info)

• Nov. 26 @ 1 PM: Vancity Theatre, Vancouver, BC (purchase tickets, get more info)

• Dec. 1 @ 6:30 PM: Feat. Wade Davis @ Kay Meek Centre, West Vancouver, BC (purchase tickets, get more info)

• Dec. 3 @ 8:15 PM: Vancity Theatre, Vancouver, BC (purchase tickets, get more info)

• Dec. 6 @ 7:00 PM: Lester Centre for the Arts, Prince Rupert, BC (purchase tickets, get more info)

• Dec. 7 @ 6:30 PM: Roi Theatre, Smithers, BC (purchase tickets, get more info)

• Dec. 8 @ 7:00 PM: Gitanmaax Tri-town Theatre, Hazelton, BC (purchase tickets, get more info)

• Dec. 9 @ 7:00 PM: Mount Elizabeth Theatre, Kitimat, BC (purchase tickets, get more info)

• Dec. 10 @ 7:00 PM: Sportsplex Banquet Room, Terrace, BC (purchase tickets, get more info)

Rafe: BCNDP convention shows they still don’t get it on LNG

November 16, 2015Energy and Resources, LNG, Oil&Gas, Politics, Western CanadafeaturedRafe Mair

Rafe- BCNDP convention shows they still don't get it — BCNDP Leader John Horgan at the party’s recent convention (NDP/facebook)

Political pundits are busy analyzing the recent NDP convention and I can tell you it’s easier to interpret the entrails of a rooster. Conventions organized to look like sunny expressions of the party’s solidarity and readiness for an election usually disguise more than they reveal.

What this NDP clambake tells me is that the party is sick to death of leadership fights and “the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t” – a highly dubious substitute for skill and character.

The good news first

Starting with the good news, the party caucus has done a decent job of exposing government malfeasance, in the health and the email scandals in particular, and demonstrating the general incompetence of the Premier and her cabinet. (Not too tough considering how willingly they do that on their own.)

Unfortunately for the NDP, history tells us that these sorts of issues don’t have “legs”. When it comes to election time, the public has different considerations; from experience they expect government misbehaviour and only want to know what will happen to their pocketbook in the next four years. Election after election has proved that.

It’s also true that parties tend to lose elections rather than win them and the Clark/Coleman government, now old and corrupt, is ready for a rest – a long one. A permanent one, in my view.

Why back LNG?

To take advantage, the Opposition must look like a government in waiting. If, however, as we have just seen in the recent federal election, voters want rid of a government badly enough, they’ll say, “they can hardly be worse than this bunch” and overlook opposition inexperience.

It’s foolish in the extreme for an Opposition to rely on this happening, yet Mr. Horgan, in his keynote speech, said nothing about the environment and showed no inclination to back off the party’s idiotic, wholehearted support for LNG. If this remains NDP policy, it will offer the atrocious Clark/Coleman bunch a lifeline because voters do care about these issues and before you write Premier Photo-op off, remember Mair’s Axiom I: “You don’t have to be a 10 in politics, you can be 3 if your opponent is a 2.”

Whether or not Mr. Horgan realizes it, LNG will be an issue in 2017, much including the proposed Woodfibre LNG plant. The Horgan-led NDP has badly let down those who expect that an Official Opposition will ask some basic questions about controversial and dangerous mega-projects like this one. WLNG is not a NIMBY issue at all but a real and substantial danger to life and limb, not to mention to the environment of this beautiful fjord.

Howe Sound belongs not to those who live near it but to all British Columbia – it’s a jewel in the provincial diadem. Thanks to a lot of volunteers particularly, Howe Sound has nearly recovered from decades of dirty industry; the herring and salmon runs are returning to what they once were, sea mammals, including several types of whales, are back, as are seals, sea lions, and even porpoise. It is incredibly beautiful and unspoiled even though next to a metropolis. I would have thought that not even the most cynical politician would place all this in jeopardy without at least asking a few simple questions of the government. I was obviously wrong.

Woodfibre gets a free ride

There’s the appalling environmental assessment pantomime which the government relied upon to approve WLNG with very significant aspects of the proposal not properly canvassed.

Before getting to the basic environmental questions, I must ask Mr.Horgan why he has never questioned the Clark/Coleman government about the integrity of Woodfibre LNG?

It’s owned, as most now know, by a crook from Indonesia best known for paying a $200+ million fine for evading taxes; for burning down jungles; and brutally evicting people who may be uncomfortably in the way of his plans. He’s not hard to investigate, Mr. Horgan, so why don’t you want to know why the Clark government is involved with this sort of man in an operation of this magnitude?

There’s the question of the plant itself, the pipelines involved, the safety of converting natural gas into LNG, the disposal of waste – especially warm water – the impact on marine life around Squamish, which is becoming increasingly important. All the normal environmental concerns and questions the citizens of Squamish and surrounding areas want answered were sloughed of or ignored by the ersatz environmenal assessment “process”.

Mr. Horgan, why won’t you, as Leader of the Official Opposition, on behalf of all British Columbians but Squamish people especially, carefully examine the Clark/Coleman bunch on these critical issues? Isn’t that your job?

Tanker danger

Then there’s the question of transportation of the LNG by tankers down Howe Sound itself. Here, in a nutshell, is the explosive (sick pun intended) issue.

The Society of International Gas Tankers and Terminal Operators (SIGTTO)* – the acknowledged world authority on LNG issues – has set standards for the LNG tanker trade. SIGTTO’s #1 and overriding criterion is that there is no acceptable probability of a catastrophic LNG release, i.e. the only acceptable probability is ZERO.

On the critical issue of separation, Sandia International Laboratories has defined for the US Department of Energy three hazard zones of 500m, 1600m, 3500m surrounding LNG tankers. The largest, a circle of 3500m radius, centred on the moving ship, represents the minimum safe separation between tanker and people. Other LNG hazard experts say at least 4800m is a more realistic minimum safe separation.

Plainly – and you need only look at the chart – Howe Sound is far too narrow. Surely that in itself must be fatal to the project!

Isn’t the safety of Howe Sound, extending to western West Vancouver, even worth a question to the Premier, Mr. Horgan?

Let’s just sum up what you evidently see as unwarranted whining, Mr. Horgan.

1. The owner of the company we must depend upon for taxes and royalties, plus caring of our delicate environment, is a big-time tax evader with an utterly appalling environmental record.

2. The people of Squamish and surroundings, facing the immediate consequences of any environmental “accidents”, are asked, and arrogantly expected, to accept a phoney environmental process, where the “fix” was in from the start, and which gave Woodfibre LNG the patented Christy Clark corporate whitewash. They would have been more honestly dealt with by a denial of process than by a process reminiscent of a Soviet Show Trial.

3. The most disastrous consequences to be feared are from a tanker mishap, which, mathematically, is not a possibility or even a probability but a certainty – merely a matter of time. This time will clearly be abridged by an utter lack of concern about internationally-recognized rules re: hazard and separation zones yet, Mr. Horgan, you haven’t uttered a peep to the government about this critical issue!

NDP ignores call for help

We’ve asked for NDP help, yet on these issues, of so much concern to so many of your fellow citizens, the Official Opposition, including you and your MLAs – because of your blanket approval of LNG – has been as scarce as a tumbler of Glenfiddich at a temperance meeting.

Is this the care you will show for British Columbians if you become premier?

Yes, the sunny simpleton and her trained seals now running the province must be replaced, but with the likes of you, sir? A man lacking the political or moral courage to help citizens threatened by crooks, environmental rapists, and tanker disasters, as our Premier? A Leader of the Official Opposition who doesn’t understand his duty? A man who imposed a catastrophic LNG policy on his party because he’s afraid of losing a couple of seats where highly destructive and dangerous fracking is prevalent?

God forbid!

BC deserves the Green Party or a new party representing the people of the province, not just cheerleaders led by a political sissy. But time is short, with just a year and a half left for serious contenders to get their asses in gear.

*WLNG claims that because they are members of SIGTTO that their plan is safe. This is corporate bullshit. Membership does not imply let alone confirm compliance and, indeed, anyone reading this can join SIGGTO as an associate member – which is all WLNG is!

Large group of First Nations, scientists, green groups calls on Trudeau to reject Petronas LNG project

November 9, 2015Energy and Resources, First Nations, LNG, Oil&GasfeaturedDamien Gillis

Northern First Nations band together to block Petronas' LNG plans — Gitxsan leaders of Camp Madii Lii stand behind the Lax Kw’aalams Nation at Lelu Island (submitted)

A letter written by Lax Kw’alaams Hereditary Chief Yahaan (Donnie Wesley), calling on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to reject Petronas’ controversial LNG proposal near Prince Rupert, has gained a long list of unlikely, high-profile supporters.

The signatories include over 70 leaders of First Nations, environmental organizations, businesses, unions, university groups and faith groups, plus several scientists and academics such as David Suzuki and Wade Davis. Amongst the notable First Nations leaders are Garry Reece, Chief Councillor of the Lax Kw’alaams Band Council, Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, President of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs, Chief Na’Moks (John Ridsdale) of the Office of the Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs, and Fort Nelson First Nation Chief Liz Logan.

Federal decision expected soon

The plea comes in advance of a decision on the project’s federal environmental permits, expected in early 2016 or sooner – following several delays. By contrast, the BC government has already enthusiastically signed off on the project, but without the support of local First Nations, who rejected the government and proponent’s offer of some $1.15 billion in economic benefits and a significant grant of crown land.

Since then, hereditary leaders of Lax Kw’alaams and their supporters have been occupying Lelu Island in defiance of test drilling and exploratory work by contractors for the proponent. This has led to increasing tensions between First Nations and the Port Authority, which claims jurisdiction over the test work.

“The people of Lax Kw’alaams have unanimously voted ‘No’ against the project because of devastation it would cause to Flora Banks,” said Chief Yahaan on the occupation.”

[quote]It’s a habitat for juvenile migrating salmon, crabs, eulachon, halibut…We are here and we’re telling the people of Canada and British Columbia that we’re not giving up Flora Banks.[/quote]

“Lelu Island is part of the Yahaan’s tribal territory of the Gitwilgyoots,” according to a media release on today’s letter.

Watershed moment for LNG opposition

The letter could signal a watershed moment in the growing movement against LNG development and the fracking that would supply it with fuel. “This is the first time that such widespread and unprecedented agreement has been reached in BC on LNG”, said Greg Horne of the Skeena Watershed Conservation Coalition. “From every corner of the province, we are all in agreement that Lelu Island and Flora Banks is the worst possible spot on the north coast to site an LNG facility”.

Whereas projects like the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline and Kinder Morgan’s TransMountain project have seen strong, clear resistance from early on – especially amongst First Nations – LNG has proven a more complex issue. The combination of economic benefits offered to communities and the perception that LNG is somehow less dangerous environmentally than Tar Sands bitumen has meant that traditional oil and gas opponents were slower to take on the Clark government’s LNG vision. But that has changed over the past year, as more groups have connected the dots between fracking in northeast BC and the LNG industry; while the enormous climate impacts of the industry have begun to become clear.

Meanwhile, risks to marine habitat and wild salmon from LNG terminals have sparked a backlash amongst coastal nations and communities along the proposed pipeline routes, where several resistance camps have emerged in recent years.

“Of all the thousands of miles of coastline, they chose the one location most critical for Skeena salmon”, said Des Nobels, Northern Outreach Coordinator, T. Buck Suzuki Environmental Foundation. A separate letter from the United Fisherman and Allied Workers Union (UFAWU) and environmental groups emphasizes the same point to the new PM:

[quote]We urge you to reject this project outright because mitigation will not be possible. The importance of this specific site is long standing common knowledge in the scientific community.[/quote]

Even if it receives its federal permits, Petronas faces un uphill battle to get its project built – including potential court challenges from First Nations and a rapidly cooling global market for LNG – which led a leading Malaysian business publication to predict the project would be put on hold for a number of years.

Trudeau ‘disappointed’ at Obama’s killing of Keystone XL…Get over it

November 6, 2015Energy and Resources, International, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, PoliticsfeaturedDamien Gillis

Trudeau 'disappointed' at Obama's killing of Keystone XL...Get over it — Justin Trudeau visits US Capital in 2013 (Susan Walsh/Associated Press)

It’s official: After seven years of withering on the vine, the Keystone XL pipeline from Alberta to the US Gulf Coast is dead, by President Barack Obama’s hand.

Newly-minted Canadian Prime Minister and avowed Keystone supporter Justin Trudeau is reportedly disappointed at the decision but says he respects the US government’s right to make it. “The Canada-U.S. relationship is much bigger than any one project and I look forward to a fresh start with President Obama to strengthen our remarkable ties in a spirit of friendship and cooperation,” said Trudeau in a statement.

Obama finally came to the long-awaited decision on the basis that the project would “not serve the national interests”, adding:

[quote]The pipeline would not make a meaningful long-term contribution to our economy.[/quote]

He also noted that it had taken on an “overinflated role” in the climate debate and relations with Canada.

The announcement explains proponent TransCanada’s recent request to the US government to “pause” its pipeline review – which the Obama administration rejected just two days before officially killing the project. It evidently didn’t want to drag the process out any further, preferring, at long last, a clean break.

On that note, Mr. Trudeau would do well not to sulk over the death of a project he once ventured to Washington, D.C. to defend. Trudeau also argued in a speech to Canada’s oil men and women at Calgary’s Petroleum Club that then-PM Harper’s downfall was his ham-fisted handling of the file, not the fact that he was backing it. Trudeau argued that he could do a better job selling the project south of the border. “Alberta’s interests have been compromised more than just about anyone else’s by Mr. Harper’s divisiveness,” Trudeau told the energy industry.

“It has made enemies of people who ought to be your friends, and turned what should have been a reasonable debate into an over-the-top rhetorical war. Most importantly, it has impeded progress.”

But he made no bones about his support for the project, saying:

[quote]Let me be clear: I support Keystone XL because, having examined the facts, and accepting the judgment of the National Energy Board, I believe it is in the national interest…On balance, it would create jobs and growth, strengthen our ties with the world’s most important market, and generate wealth…Most of all, it is in keeping with what I believe is a fundamental role of the Government of Canada: to open up markets abroad for Canadian resources, and to help create responsible and sustainable ways to get those resources to those markets.[/quote]

Apparently, Mr. Obama didn’t share those views – nor did the woman who wants to replace him in the Oval Office, Hilary Clinton. The former secretary of state, who at one time oversaw the project’s review, has spoken out against it during her presidential campaign.

By the time Mr. Trudeau took over the file from Harper, it was clearly too far gone for him to do anything about it. Now, if he’s serious about forging a new relationship with Obama and the US, he would do well not to shed a tear over Keystone and to move on to more important matters.

Rafe: Woodfibre LNG opposition isn’t NIMBYism – it’s based on real fear

October 31, 2015Energy and Resources, LNG, Oil&GasfeaturedRafe Mair

Rafe- Woodfibre LNG opposition isn't NIMBYism - it's based on real fear — Photo: Flickr/KsideB

If you don’t think that the approval of an LNG plant in Squamish – Woodfibre LNG – was a raw political decision, you not only believe in the tooth fairy, you must be the tooth fairy herself.

The alleged “environmental assessment” by the Province, was a farce – as has been the federal process thus far. The government solemnly avers that everything is up in the air until there’s a full blown investigation with evidence taken on all matters of concern and a judicious decision rendered strictly on all the facts.

This, and I hate to disillusion you, is utter crap. I’ve attended too many environmental assessments and – forgive me for repeating myself – I would rather have a root canal without an anesthetic than go to another. They’re about as fair as a Soviet Show Trial. The sole reason for the “process” is to make a government decision appear fair and of course it does the very opposite.

I’m not a spokesman for any of the groups, in the Howe Sound area or elsewhere, who are opposing this project. The principal organization is My Sea To Sky of which I am a keen supporter but not a member, much less a spokesman. It’s generally conceded that the principal spokesman is the eminent Dr. Eoin Finn, whom I support and admire immensely. I’m dedicated to the fight and I certainly offer my two bits worth from time to time but what I say has no sanction, official or otherwise.

Having said that I can issue this warning to Premier Clark:

[quote]If you and your tiresome toady, Rich Coleman, think that this will be a slam dunk, think again. I might say that I’ve warned you of this in these pages several times. Remember what happened to John Weston, until recently our MP, who steadfastly ignored his constituents on this issue and was humiliated on October 19.[/quote]

Tanker risks ignored

Your so-called environmental assessment spent little if any time on one of the most critical issues, namely the width of Howe Sound and it’s suitability for LNG tanker traffic. In this regard, there has been, even for matters of LNG, an unbelievable amount of bullshit.

Much of it has been peddled by Captain Stephen Brown, President of the Chamber of Shipping of British Columbia, scarcely an independent observer. His mantra, to cover all possible questions on LNG tanker transport, is that they have a perfect record for the last 50 years, 75,000 voyages without incident.

Captain Brown misses a rather important qualification to these statistics – he’s only counting voyages on the high seas. He studiously ignores problems inshore, in fjords, harbours, rivers and coastal waters. The last time I looked, Howe Sound is a long way from those high seas the good skipper speaks of.

If you want a more accurate picture, subscribe, for free, to gCaptain published daily on the goings-on in the shipping industry. It reports about one serious tanker accident every two or three weeks. If you take the time to consult the archives you will know that Captain Brown should have his mouth washed out with soap.

One interesting place to look is the Bospherus, between Turkey and Greece, leading into the Black Sea, which is by no means unlike Howe Sound and is a veritable hotspot for tankers bumping into things.

It’s not my position that LNG tankers are unsafe for they’re remarkably well constructed vessels and, from what I read, about as safe as a tanker can be. That being said, they still run into things, as often as not because of human error, and when they do, they pose a very substantial danger – especially to narrow fjords like the Bospherus and certainly Howe Sound if this madness isn’t stopped.

LNG accidents aren’t small

This is the second misleading part, to put it charitably, of Captain Brown’s statements. It’s by no means only how many accidents there will be that’s important but how serious they are when they happen.

That this is a matter of huge concern and community action was recently outlined in these pages by My Sea To Sky co-founder Tracey Saxby:

[quote]So far community opposition has been loud and clear, with Powell River, Lions Bay, Gibsons, West Vancouver, Bowen Island, and Squamish all signaling strong opposition to Woodfibre LNG through recent resolutions. My Sea to Sky has partnered with more than 20 other organizations that oppose this project, and our volunteers have hit the streets to gather over 4,400 signatures (and counting) to the Howe Sound Declaration, stating opposition to the project.

There is no social license for this project in Howe Sound. A rubber stamp isn’t going to change that.[/quote]

And those concerns are very real, not mere NIMBYism. If we’re to have some 500 tankers going out of Vancouver harbour every year and the odds of an accident are, let’s say, 1 in a 1,000 – hell, say 1 in 10,000 – it’s only a matter of time, and not much time at that, before there is a serious accident. Make that 1 in 100,000 then look me in the eye and say you still want to bring your family to Lions Bay to live.

That’s what troubles those who are concerned about LNG traffic in Howe Sound and waterways like the Fraser River or Saanich Inlet.

The issue is not if a serious accident will occur, but only when.

Pushing the limit

The standard width within which LNG tankers should travel, recommended by world-leading Sandia Laboratories in New Mexico – now the law in the United States (not known for overly strict environmental rules) – sets the danger zone around LNG tankers at 3,500 to 4,200 metres.

Howe Sound is so narrow that its shores are well within danger zone. Looking at a Chart prepared by Dr Eoin Finn and Cmdr. Roger Sweeny, RCN (Ret), based upon proper standards demonstrates beyond question that Gambier, Keats, Bowen, the Sea to Sky Highway, Lions Bay, Horseshoe Bay and West Vancouver would be at serious risk. Proposed LNG Tanker traffic even runs afoul of the standards of the industry’s international trade organization, the Society of International Gas Tanker and Terminal Operators (SIGTTO).

If this point was seriously considered by the pseudo-environmental assessment process, you wouldn’t know it from their report.

Woodfibre’s owner doesn’t inspire confidence

Woodfibre LNG- Shady PR firms, lobby violations, fraudulent owner - Is this the kind of business BC wants to welcome — WFLNG owner Sukanto Tanoto (right)

As Ms. Saxby says, there’s no social license – indeed Liberal MLA, Jordan Sturdy, has not only acted contrary to the wishes of the vast majority of his constituents, he’s pooh-poohed their concerns that Woodfibre LNG is run by the unsavoury, to say the least, Sukanto Tanoto.

Perhaps that’s because Woodfibre LNG, owned by Tanoto, paid big dollars to kiss Sturdy’s political backside with a fundraiser last February at the ultra-posh Capilano Golf Club. The media, as well as Eoin Finn, were refused entry. The entire cost for the event, including big bucks handed over to Sturdy, was paid for by Tanoto, whose massive-tax evasion and rainforest destruction record across the Pacific has put his business reputation into serious question.

“We should not, in my mind, be doing business with people like that,” opines Squamish Mayor Patricia Heintzman.

[quote]It’s difficult for the community to have trust that this person will not cut corners or be disrespectful to our environment.[/quote]

As Ms. Saxby and Mayor Heintzman wonder, is this the sort of business we want in our community in exchange for a minuscule number of construction jobs for local citizens and maybe 100 low-paying permanent jobs (if that)?

Knowing the price of everything, the value of nothing

Premier Clark had best be ready, for Howe Sound is sacred territory to far more than just those of us who live on its shores. She can expect that amongst our allies at the protests to come will be people from all over the province who recognize what Howe Sound really means.

The similarity between the Clark government and the late, unlamented Harper government is uncanny. Neither have the faintest idea about any value that doesn’t have a $ attached. The fact that there might be safety issues, spiritual issues, and plain issues of beauty would never occur to Christy Clark or her “henchpersons” if there’s a buck to be made.

In the words of Oscar Wilde, they know “the price of everything, and the value of nothing.”

I say no more except that it would be wise for our politicians to reconsider this matter.

For it’s not just that the people are angry, they also happen to be right.

Fracking, Site C and the mystery of Hudson’s Hope water contamination

October 30, 2015Energy and Resources, Fracking, Health and Environment, Hydropower, Oil&Gas, WATER, Water and HydrocarbonsfeaturedDamien Gillis

Fracking, Site C and the mystery of Hudson's Hope water contamination — Five year-old River Summer looks on at Brenot Creek landslide (Photo: Leigh Summer)

A series of landslides above the northeast BC community of Hudson’s Hope has been dumping contaminated soils into several local creeks, extending now to the Peace River. Local landowners whose water supply has been affected are demanding answers.

But Mayor Gwen Johansson, who has been monitoring the situation since trouble first appeared last summer, says all she really has is a lot of questions.

The three biggest ones are:

1. Did nearby fracking operations – or related wastewater disposal – cause the landslides?

2. Is fracking wastewater the source of the contamination unleashed into a series of interconnected creeks?

3. If not, and the the contamination is naturally-occurring in local soils, as the Oil and Gas Commission contends, then what are the implications for the proposed Site C Dam, which could further erode and carry contaminated soils downstream for decades to come?

What we do know

Since the summer of 2014, the ongoing slides have spewed sediment laced with toxic heavy metals – including lead, arsenic, barium, cadmium and lithium – into Brenot Creek, which flows into Lynx Creek, which in turn feeds into the Peace River. Large bars of sediment have formed in Brenot and Lynx Creeks and contaminated water has now nearly reached another major river in the area, the Halfway – according to local landowner, Ross Peck.

Farmer Leigh Summer, whose property lies below the slide area, has watched with horror as Brenot Creek has become packed with toxic silt. “Now it’s so muddy that when you put your hand in it, if you have an inch of water over top of your hand, you can’t see your hand,” Summer told the Alaska Highway News. “There used to be fish in the creek, but it’s basically dead today.”

His neighbour, Rhee Simpson, has seen the well she depends on run dry, likely filled in with sediment. “I have no water,” Simpson, a resident and farmer near the creek for 62 years, told the CBC earlier this week. “You can’t play in it. You can’t fish in it. You can’t drink it. Your stock can’t drink it. Someone has to do something to get our water back.”

We also know that there were fracking operations in close proximity to the slide approximately 3 years ago, with more in the surrounding areas of Talisman (now Progress Energy/Petronas’) Farrell Creek play – but likely not close enough to be related. See the map below – provided by the District of Hudson’s Hope (click to expand).

We know that the shale gas extraction process is associated with increased seismic activity – as we were reminded by the recent 4.6 magnitude quake in Wonowon, some 70 km away, as the crow flies. This is most frequently associated with the injection of “produced water” (used fracking fluids) into waste wells to dispose of it underground after a well has been fracked – though in some cases the fracking process itself can trigger seismic activity.

We also know that the terrain in this region is no stranger to landslides, as it’s composed of loose materials like shale, sand and clay. That’s always been a strong argument against Site C Dam by local landowners who know this. The Williston Reservoir, West of the planned Site C reservoir has seen massive expansion since its flooding in 1968, gobbling up the banks of the water body far beyond original predictions, due to the instability of the soils. The terrain East of there, where Site C is proposed, is even less stable. More on that in a moment.

See no evil

Fracking operations near Hudson's Hope in 2012 (Damien Gillis) — Fracking near Hudson’s Hope in 2012 (Damien Gillis)

The testing of the Brenot creek slide and contamination been pretty pitiful thus far, given what’s at stake. The OGC has declared the toxins “naturally occurring”, maintaining, “there’s no evidence” that fracking operations are the source of the contamination – which has the ring of the sort of technicality-based, legalistic denials we heard for years from the tobacco industry. As Carl Sagan said, “The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.” Bear in mind, too, that the OGC is hardly known for its tough, independent monitoring and regulation of the oil and gas industry.

The municipality spent its own money to hire independent hydrologist and shale gas expert Dr. Gilles Wendling to conduct some preliminary tests beginning last summer, but it lacks the resources to carry the load with the kind of in-depth, ongoing testing required here. According to the mayor in a letter to the community published in January, 2015 (see page 22), “Dr. Wendling’s readings were consistently above guidelines for the heavy metals, and the origin was sand in the water coming out of the bank at a slide on Brenot Creek.”

Those findings prompted the District to install a water advisory in September, 2014, which the Ministry of Environment supported, formally warning people to avoid the water for personal use, animals and irrigation.

In January, Johansson wrote, “The MoE representative said they have no plans to do anything further, other than file a report. He said he expected that eventually the creek would cleanse itself.”

Well, a year later, the creek has not cleansed itself. According to Johansson, The Ministry Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations (FLNRO) has a landslide specialist who has been monitoring expansion of slide. He has explained that because the slide is so vertical, we can expect that it will continue moving for some time to come.

Mayor Johansson notes that in the old days, this is the kind of work MoE could have been counted on to carry out in a thorough manner but they haven’t been back to investigate further to date. In the wake of recent media attention on the issue, though, officials have indicated they are coming up for a site visit by helicopter next week. If what they see from the air is enough cause for concern – as it well should be – then Johansson hopes they will return to take soil samples and conduct thorough testing.

Another possible culprit

bennett dam-2 — The Williston Reservoir and Bennett Dam

Landowner Leigh Summer isn’t convinced that shale gas activity is responsible – or at least the sole culprit – for the slides. “I was pretty convinced initially, but the flow seems to increase with the level of Williston (Reservoir) increasing, so I have a feeling it’s a conjunction of the two,” he told the Alaska Highway News.

“There’s something going on with the aquifers underneath…I suspect, in my mind, that there’s some connection between one or the other, or both.”

Pandora’s box

Regardless of the cause of the slides, if the OGC is correct and this erosion has simply unleashed naturally-occurring contaminants in the soil – a sort of opening up of Pandora’s Box – that’s a frightening prospect indeed.

Plainly put, if fracking operations are the source of the contamination, that’s bad news. But if they aren’t, that’s perhaps even worse news when you consider that the proposed Site C Dam would engulf much of the area below the slide, closer to the river, and potentially continue carrying contamination far downstream well into the distant future.

“If these contaminants are in the soil, how far along the Peace Valley do they extend?” asks Mayor Johansson. The fact is, given the dearth of studies, we don’t yet have a clue. And the implications could be massive for the region – and well beyond – as Summer notes:

“We are really subjecting ourselves to the risk of having a contaminated reservoir which, obviously, contaminates the river all the way to the Slave (River) and to the Mackenzie (River) and the Arctic Ocean, so it’s pretty significant.”

Either way, we need serious, credible testing now. The Clark government is already spending hundreds of millions of tax dollars, rushing ahead with early Site C construction 70 KM downstream, at the proposed dam site. This despite BC Hydro’s own acknowledgement that the power from the dam won’t be required until at least 2029! If this naturally-occurring contamination extends for a great distance along the banks of the Peace River, then building Site C and flooding this area is a nightmare scenario we would do well to avoid.

Woodfibre LNG may have govt’s rubber stamp, but not social license

October 27, 2015Energy and Resources, LNG, Oil&GasfeaturedCommon Sense Canadian

Woodfibre LNG - Public comment period begins for Squamish project — Citizens line the Sea to Sky Highway to protest Woodfibre LNG (My Sea to Sky)

Op-ed by Tracey Saxby

It really comes as no surprise that the Provincial Government has rubber stamped the Environmental Assessment (EA) for Woodfibre LNG. This is one of their pet projects, and the BC Liberals’ election promise was to develop an LNG industry for BC, whatever the cost. They have continued to push this pipedream, despite plummeting gas prices and increasing pressure from LNG companies to slash taxes and weaken regulations in an attempt to make the industry viable.

This approval simply highlights a conflict of interest: how can the public have faith in the integrity of the BC Environmental Assessment process when the Ministers approving these projects (one of which is Rich Coleman, the Minister of Natural Gas Development) also have a mandate to develop LNG export facilities? Quite simply, we don’t.

An article published in BC Business earlier this year notes:

[quote]…our environmental assessment process is, according to critics, the weakest and most confusing it has been in decades—thanks to abrupt changes in our environmental laws and deep budget cuts to government regulatory agencies.[/quote]

This has not been an open and transparent process, and meaningful community engagement has been limited by short windows for public input, incomplete studies provided by the proponents, and poor advertising of open house events. Thanks to My Sea to Sky’s efforts to get people involved, the public comment period for Woodfibre LNG in March generated a record number of public comments. Has this overwhelming community opposition been adequately scrutinized by the Ministers granting this EA approval, or are the BC Liberals ignoring public input, as well as deleting emails?

The good news is that while Woodfibre LNG has their rubber stamped approval from the Province, they still need approval from the Federal government. Our new Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, has acknowledged that “even though [it is] governments that grant permits, ultimately it’s only communities that grant permission.”

So far community opposition has been loud and clear, with Powell River, Lions Bay, Gibsons, West Vancouver, Bowen Island, and Squamish all signaling strong opposition to Woodfibre LNG through recent resolutions. My Sea to Sky has partnered with more than 20 other organizations that oppose this project, and our volunteers have hit the streets to gather over 4,400 signatures (and counting) to the Howe Sound Declaration, stating opposition to the project.

There is no social license for this project in Howe Sound. A rubber stamp isn’t going to change that.

Tracey Saxby is the co-founder of My Sea to Sky