Chiefs of the Tsimshian First Nation speak out against Enrbidge at a 2012 Prince Rupert rally
You would have thought that they would have had the decency to wait until the Joint Review Panel had made its report before the two western-most premiers made a deal on the pipelines. Of course there was no need to because the federal government that prizes “process” so much has already made it clear it wasn’t going to pay any to attention the panel unless it supports pipelines.
I wonder what my MP, Conservative John Weston thinks of this considering how he’s been so vocal about “process”, it being his constant buzzword for environmental matters. Will he stand up in the House and condemn his government and the provincial governments for cocking a snook at the “process” he praised as for the reason for gutting the protection of fish habitat?
There is no sense getting worked up about Christy Clark and Alison Redford’s pact – yet. I suspect all environmentalists will condemn this cynical bit of business, where BC trades its environment for pipelines. I can assure you that The Common Sense Canadian will do so and will keep it up as long as necessary.
What is more important now is support for First Nations as they formulate their battle plan and thereafter.
One can never be sure of steadfastness until it is seen in action. Reading between the lines, one would have to conclude that Enbridge, Kinder Morgan and the senior governments are satisfied that they can get over this hurdle. From my meetings with leaders and working the room at conventions, I don’t believe this. First Nations leaders are politicians too and must answer to their voters. Whether those voters can – pardon the bluntness – be bought off or not remains to be seen.
If First Nations – particularly the coastal nations who have been unshakable in their resolve – maintain their position hitherto, it will obviously do very little good to the governments and corporations who have to ship their grisly product once they get it to the coast.
I’m too damned old to be shocked or surprised at what a government or company will do for a vote or some money.
I don’t know what my colleagues in the environmental movement will do – I suspect we will know soon.
For me, this creaky crock will fight these pipelines and tankers as long as he has the breath to do so.
Quebec’s Chaudière River (photo courtesy of Greenpeace Quebec)
Sediment from the Chaudière River, near the site of the Lac-Mégantic train derailment four months ago, shows high levels of contaminants according to testing done by Greenpeace Quebec and the Société pour vaincre la pollution (SVP). Despite months of cleanup operations sediments collected from the river show higher-than-acceptable levels of several chemicals, including cancer-causing polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).
Quebec Environment Minister Yves-François Blanchet said the department continues to monitor the safety of the water, reports the Montreal Gazette, and will take into consideration the two groups’ test results.
In late September Quebec’s environment department lifted a drinking-water ban for several downstream communities who rely on the Chaudière River for water.
Lac-Mégantic water sample (photo: Greenpeace Quebec)
“Sampling has not stopped, analyses have not stopped, the teams are still on the ground,” Blanchet said in the National Assembly Wednesday. He added “information is still publicly available on the Environment Ministry’s website, such that we know that there is no immediate threat.”
27 times acceptable pollution levels
Both Greenpeace Quebec and SVP say pollutant levels in samples taken 4.7km downstream of the lake are 27 times higher than accepted levels.
The Lac-Mégantic derailment resulted in the release of an estimated 5.9 million litres of oil that burned or spilled into the town’s lake and the Chaudière river.
Recently Quebec environment updated those oil spill figures from a previously estimated 5.6 million litres.
The precise amount of oil released into the lake and river is still under question. The environment department estimates around 100,000 litres of oil contaminated the river although Greenpeace’s Patrick Bonin questioned that amount given the high level of contamination present in their samples. Researchers could both see and smell oil in river at the time of testing.
According to Bonin this is the second round of testing the groups have undertaken. Results in both instances were sent to the environment department.
Government pressured to release its own test results
The groups are calling on Quebec to release the details of its water sampling to the public, including what methods are in use and all results.
“In my view, the evidence points to a fundamentally flawed regulatory system, cost-cutting corporate behaviour that jeopardized public safety and the environment, and responsibility extending to the highest levels of corporate management and government policy making,” wrote author Bruce Campbell, the centre’s executive director.
Shipments of oil by rail have increased by 28,000 percent since 2009.
Justin Trudeau addresses a progressive think tank in Washington, DC (photo: Chip Somodevllla/Getty)
To Justin Trudeau, it’s not that Keystone XL is a bad idea, it’s that Stephen Harper can’t sell it.
For many Canadians, Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau represents a fresh-faced, progressive alternative to Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative Government. And yet, in terms of energy policy, it’s increasingly clear that he and Harper differ little. Both support the development of the Tar Sands and are backing efforts to move bitumen to new customers in Asia. Both are championing the controversial, proposed Keystone XL pipeline to the US Gulf Coast.
Through a series of recent speeches advocating for Keystone and other projects, it appears the biggest distinction the Liberal leader offers between himself and his chief political rival is the manner in which he sells the Tar Sands.
Justin made Alberta his first destination after being minted as Liberal leader, suggesting at the time that Mr. Harper was doing a bad job of representing Kesytone and the Tar Sands.
Harper alienates both friend and foe
Mr. Trudeau echoed those sentiments in a speech last week (read in full here), on the eve of the Conservative Party convention, at Calgary’s Petroleum Club. There, he made the case to a room full of western energy power brokers that Mr. Harper’s political style is hamstringing their efforts. “Alberta’s interests have been compromised more than just about anyone else’s by Mr. Harper’s divisiveness,” he told them.
“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.”
Mr. Trudeau’s comments follow those of Kinder Morgan Canada CEO Ian Anderson, also delivered at Calgary’s Petroleum Club a few weeks ago, criticizing Harper’s Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver for his heavy-handed tactics with pipeline critics. Anderson suggested the Harper Government’s approach has only made life more difficult for companies like his, which is seeking to build a controversial pipeline expansion to Vancouver.
Justifying Keystone
In his own speech to Canada’s oil men and women, Mr. Trudeau made no bones about his support for projects like Keystone:
[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]
So it’s not the idea of Keystone or potential east and west-bound pipelines in Canada on which Justin disagrees with the PM. It is simply that Mr. Harper lacks the diplomatic chops, the soft touch required to peddle this economic vision to Canadians and the world.
“Whether it is the bullying around Keystone and Northern Gateway, their one-sided approach to regulation with C-38, or the demonization of people who care about the environment, the message from Mr. Harper and his government has been clear: this is a black and white, us vs. them world, and you are either with us or against us,” Trudeau told his Calgary audience.
Mr. Trudeau goes to Washington
Justin is shopping his message abroad as well. Two weeks ago, he was in Washington, DC, delivering a speech to a generally anti-Keystone crowd at the Centre for American Progress. “The challenge is to demonstrate that it can be done in the sense that we’re protecting our environment and making sure that we’re making the right gains toward sustainable energy sources in the long run,” Trudeau declared.
And there is evidence that his approach is gaining traction. According to the Toronto Star, Matt Brown,a senior fellow at the Centre – which has taken a position against Keystone – observed later on Twitter, “many in the room had found the Liberal leader’s position ‘compelling’ and ‘balanced’.”
How Mr. Trudeau’s remarks struck Canada’s energy moguls is another question. But one thing is clear: this bunch has money and isn’t shy about getting involved in elections. In BC’s recent contest, they played both sides, funnelling millions to the Liberal and NDP campaigns.
If Justin Trudeau really does have their back…If he’s able to spin a kinder, gentler Tar Sands…If he’s able to persuade our southern neighbours in ways Mr. Harper can’t, all while the PM’s political woes mount…surely these Calgary nabobs will give serious thought to backing young Justin.
And – who knows – an honourary membership at the Petroleum Club.
LEPREAU, N.B. – NB Power says the Point Lepreau nuclear power plant recently released water containing low levels of a chemical used in its steam generators into the Bay of Fundy.
The provincial Crown utility says the release of hydrazine occurred Sunday from a valve located on the non-nuclear side of the station.
NB Power says the release was contained and subsequent testing on Monday showed the chemical had dissipated to levels below detection.
The company says the release won’t harm marine life or ecological systems and nobody was injured.
Hydrazine is used to remove the oxygen from the water in the plant’s steam generators and helps protect tubes from corrosion.
Claire Harris, manager of health, safety and environment at Point Lepreau, said when the valve malfunctioned, the liquid containing hydrazine flowed into the Bay of Fundy rather than to a treatment system.
When employees conducted tests in the area of the spill, they found the concentration of hydrazine was less than one part per million of the water samples taken, she said.
Utility downplays risk
“The concentrations we’re talking about are not considered toxic,” said Harris. “It amounts in laymen’s terms to one drop of water in a 40-gallon drum.”
She said a team is still evaluating precisely how much of the liquid was released.
NB Power says it is continuing to monitor the spill area and has reported the incident to the Canadian Coast Guard and the provincial Environment Department. The company has repaired the broken valve.
“This was brought about by a small relief valve that failed as part of our startup processes,” said Harris.
[quote]From time to time we’re going to see equipment failure and we want to make sure we learn from this.[/quote]
It’s not the first time hydrazine has been released at the plant. In December 2011, water laced with hydrazine was released by accident into the Bay of Fundy.
Kathleen Duguay, a spokeswoman for NB Power, says that earlier incident was different and links should not be drawn between them. She said the first leak was caused by a drum that overflowed rather than by a piece of broken equipment.
In Canada we are at a major cross-roads, with some big government leaders pushing pipelines that will lock the country permanently into the “petro-state” column, while at the same time scientists, environmental experts and economists saying that we are lighting a “carbon bomb” for the long term.
Politicians, like Stephen Harper, Justin Trudeau, Clark and Redford think building massive pipelines to the US and off our coasts to send unprocessed oil sands from Alberta to out-of-country export facilities is a wonderful idea.
At the same time, scientists at esteemed scientific organizations like NASA, say that building Keystone and pumping more oil sands out of Alberta pretty much guarantees runaway climate change and atmospheric disruption.
On one hand, a political win and some short term payouts that will mainly go to foreign oil companies like ExxonMobil and PetroChina. On the other hand, extreme weather, droughts, wildfires and heat waves for generations to come.
Big bucks for foreign oil companies, drought and wildfires for Canadians! The choice is yours. Seems like a no-brainer to me. I think my kids deserve a safe and stable future.
ST. JOHN’S, N.L. – Newfoundland and Labrador is shutting the door on applications for hydraulic fracturing or fracking for oil and gas while it reviews regulations and consults residents.
Plans to frack wells near Gros Morne National Park pending government approvals had raised concerns about groundwater pollution and the impact on one of the province’s prime tourism draws.
Natural Resources Minister Derrick Dalley said Monday that no fracking applications will be accepted before the review is complete and made public. He set no deadline.
“We need to be cognizant of the consequences of the decision and we’ll move through that process in due time,” he said outside the legislature.
Dalley said the Progressive Conservative government’s top concern is health and safety, telling the house, which began its fall session Monday:
[quote]In making this decision, our government is acting responsibly and respecting the balance between economic development and environmental protection.[/quote]
Fracking concerns
Hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, involves pumping water, nitrogen, sand and chemical additives at high pressure to fracture shale rock formations and allow gas or oil to flow through well bores to the surface. It’s increasingly used across Canada and the United States as energy demands grow while conventional sources wane.
Fracking and UNESCO heritage
The province has not yet received formal applications to frack wells in western Newfoundland although exploration licences have been granted in what’s known as the Green Point shale near Gros Morne National Park.
The prospect of drilling near Gros Morne, a spectacular hiker’s paradise recognized by UNESCO world heritage status, set off intense debate. It has also raised alarms about groundwater pollution and other risks.
It’s believed Newfoundland’s west coast has deep shale formations that hold oil — unlike more shallow coalbed gas deposits in western Canada and parts of the U.S.
More independent research needed
Still, the Council of Canadians has warned that a lack of independent research before and after fracking means safety assurances ring hollow.
NDP Leader Lorraine Michael said her party has long urged the government to halt any fracking applications until the process is better understood.
“There are a lot of issues that are out there in the environmental world,” she told reporters. “Some of them are proven, some aren’t. And I think we have to make sure before we go any further that we have absolute proof that if there are environmental concerns, which there are, that they can be dealt with.”
Newfoundland taking its time
Dalley said the government will take the time it needs to assess the geology of western Newfoundland and compare its existing regulations to other jurisdictions.
Western Newfoundland’s shale-oil deposits have been described as a potentially huge resource. Shoal Point Energy Ltd. (CNSX:SPE) holds three exploration licences. It reached a farmout deal earlier this year with Black Spruce Exploration, a subsidiary of Foothills Capital Corp., for as many as 12 exploration wells to be drilled over the next few years in the Green Point shale, if the province approved.
No one with Black Spruce could be immediately reached to comment on Monday’s announcement.
In Quebec, a moratorium on fracking for natural gas under the St. Lawrence River is now the subject of a $250-million lawsuit by Lone Pine Resources Inc. (TSX:LPR). The company says it bought leases in good faith and is now being denied a chance to develop them.
An aerial photo taken on August 3rd of fracking operations in Texas has caused a rumble online, drawing 20,000 views on the photo sharing site, Flckr.
The photo, posted by Amy Youngs, carries the inscription:
[quote]Saw these strange new human-made landscapes on my flight from Sacramento to Houston. Not farming, not subdivisions, but many miles of rectangular patches etched out of the earth, some with pools next to them, all with roads to them. I doubt that people see these when driving on major roads – I never have – but they were very visible from a plane. Welcome to your new landscape![/quote]
A screen capture from Gordon Wilson’s youtube endorsement of Christy Clark
Some years ago I got into hot water for calling a federal cabinet minister of the female persuasion a “political whore”, a phrase that has nothing to do with sexism and everything to do with having principles for sale.
Christy Clark is paying Gordon Wilson $12,500 a month for four months – probably a permanent gig if he keeps his nose brown enough. Wilson is going to be an advocate for Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG).
Wilson once highly critical of LNG
In April last, before this former BC Liberal leader and NDP cabinet minister endorsed Liberal Christy Clark in the May election, Wilson had this to say about LNG:
[quote]The most compelling reason to be concerned about relying on this golden goose is the fact that the markets we are told will buy all we can supply may not materialize as we think, and even if they do, the price they are prepared to pay for our product may be well below what is anticipated.[/quote]
Quite, Gordon, quite. That was Gordon Wilson the skeptic talking but there is more. Here’s what Wilson the environmentalist had to say last April: “Expanded LNG production also comes with a significant environmental cost.”
Our lad went on to say:
[quote]The impact of an expanded hydrocarbon economy will certainly speed up global warming and cause us to build a dependency on a revenue stream that originates form processes that are poisoning our atmosphere.[/quote]
Precisely, sir, precisely. Given my most articulate moment, I could not have said it better.
The story changes
So what happened to Mr. Wilson? Does he have some contract in his pocket for LNG sales from BC to an Asian customer? Has there been some host of angels descend from Heaven, urging Mr. Wilson to get on the side of God and Christy Clark?
Or is he just a grubby political whore whose price is $50,000 a quarter?
To call Wilson that cannot come without evidence of past prostitutional behaviour. (Yes, I just invented the word, dictionaries please copy.)
Wilson’s first dance with BC Liberals
Mr. Wilson, back in the 80s was a Liberal, both federal and provincial. The provincial wing was in disarray and Mr. Wilson took over, severed its ties with the federal party and built the local Libs into a force to be reckoned with in the 1991 election, when they went from zero MLAs to seventeen and he became Leader of the Opposition.
It was downhill from there. By 1993 it was obvious that there were rumblings in the Liberal caucus that he was entirely too close to their House Leader, the gorgeous Judi Tyabji. The media kept quiet until the late John Pifer got his hands on a love letter from Ms. Tyabji to our hero. None of us, least of all me with my marital record, wanted to make anything of this except the political reality that the Opposition was clearly unraveling and doing a lousy job.
Lie led to ouster
Had Mr. Wilson stated that he and Judi were a thing, with Judi leaving her post, it would have been a 48-hour story at worst.
But Wilson lied – serially lied. He destroyed himself in an interview with CKNW’s Philip Till.
The party held a leadership convention and unceremoniously dumped Wilson for the calamity called Gordon Campbell.
Wilson’s finer points
Before going further, I must acknowledge my debt to Wilson on the Meech Lake/Charlottetown issue. We were very close on that issue, along with Gordon Gibson and the late Mel Smith, QC. Wilson introduced me to Clyde Wells, Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, who became all but a fixture on my show at CKNW.
Moreover, I have to say that a couple of years ago I urged him to try and form a new party of the “centre” where I perceive the political vacuum to be. I have never questioned his ability to articulate issues. In fact he may be the perfect political animal.
Trading principle for money
My quarrel is with his crass trading of principle for money.
Wilson, when Campbell was selected, most ungraciously quit the Liberal Party and formed, with the lady of his choice, Judi Tyabji, the Progressive Democratic Alliance.
This was not to last. As the NDP tottered towards its 2001 wipeout, Wilson was asked to join its cabinet, which he did, while making it abundantly clear that he would never join the party.
But he did. In fact, he ran for their leadership. And in terms that made him sound like he was as committed as if his Dad had worked the coalmines of Wales.
I was at that leadership convention and I was astonished to hear him speak as if socialism was burned into his soul. He demonstrated – dare I be so bold as to say – that he was a political whore who, quite clearly for personal aggrandizement, had gone from being an enemy of the NDP to a cabinet minister in an NDP government; from rejecting the party to an aspirant, and a serious one, for their leadership.
In deep financial trouble, Wilson takes money to shill for LNG
Now Wilson moves from being skeptical of LNG and all its obvious flaws into a position of solid support for it.
Are we supposed to believe that this volte-face had nothing to do with $12,500 a month, which could easily morph into $150,000 a year?
We learned from reporter Bob Mackin a week before the May provincial election that Wilson’s return to the Liberal fold came amidst mounting legal and financial pressures – including the court-ordered sale of the Sunshine Coast home he shared with his wife.
Am I, taking the risk of a lawsuit, not entitled to say that Gordon Wilson, for all his many talents, is indeed a political whore whose principles can be precisely valued at $12,500 a month – to be expanded, because Premier Clark will have no other choice, to $150,000 per annum and perhaps beyond?
I like Gordon Wilson. I am still an admirer of his many abilities.
But he is, price tag stamped on his forehead, a political whore.
VANCOUVER – Opponents of the British Columbia government’s liquefied natural gas plans set up a three-metre mock fracking rig on the premier’s front lawn on Sunday, as Premier Christy Clark prepares for a trade mission to Asia to sell the province’s LNG potential.
A small group from Rising Tide Vancouver Coast Salish Territories set up the mock rig and promised more protests to come in the western province as the provincial government is set to pursue a massive expansion of the LNG industry.
Over 23,000 active fracking wells in BC
Maryam Adrangi, of the Council of Canadians, said there are already 23,000-plus fracking wells in operation in northern B.C.
Opponents of shale gas extraction say the method of injecting high-pressure water into the ground to shatter rock and release the gas contaminates drinking water and causes other environmental problems, including increased greenhouse gas emissions and earthquakes. Said Adrangi:
[quote]No one should have to face the impacts of fracking, which include having all of their freshwater being used by industry and for corporate profit and then having unidentified, toxic chemicals put back into the water cycle.[/quote]
Promises of fracking “prosperity”
But proponents of the industry — including Clark — say it’s an industry with multibillion-dollar potential that could change the face of B.C.
Natural Gas Development Minister Rich Coleman just returned from a trip to Asia, saying final investment decisions are expected on several projects in the next year.
Clark will undertake her own trade mission to the region this month with the aim of furthering the province’s LNG prospects.
Coleman spent 12 days in China, South Korea and Malaysia last month, where he met with eight companies interested in the province’s nascent LNG industry, including Petronas, a state-owned oil and gas company that announced last month that it will invest $36 billion in B.C. on an LNG plant and pipeline proposed in Prince Rupert (read a different perspective the Petronas deal, showing how it is actually a massive giveaway of BC’s gas resources, here).
“The spotlight on British Columbia’s LNG potential is shining bright and we are open for business,” Coleman said in a statement last week.
“Stakeholders in Asia want to diversify their energy portfolios and B.C.’s natural gas is in high demand. We are strengthening relationships and securing investments to make it happen, which will create unprecedented economic wealth and jobs for the people of our province.”
Fracking controversy looms
It is estimated that B.C. has 1,400 trillion cubic feet if natural gas — enough to support production and LNG exports for over 80 years, according to the province (read shale gas expert David Hughes’ rebuttal to these wildly inflated estimates). There are currently at least 10 LNG projects proposed in the province, three of which already have approved export licenses from the National Energy Board.
Clark has said the industry could be worth a total of $1 trillion by 2046, and could create over 100,000 jobs in the province, but critics vow to be vocal.
The ever slippery Joe Oliver, Canada’s minister of natural resources – who never misses a chance to put a positive spin on Canada’s horrendous energy track record – is happily trumpeting the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) alleged recognition of Canada “as a world leader in energy efficiency”.
Says Joe, “The IEA’s Energy Efficiency Market Report 2013 ranks Canada second, along with the United Kingdom, for its rate of energy efficiency improvement between 1990 and 2010. It also highlights Canada’s successful energy efficiency programs, which provide consumers with greater market choices and help industry reduce costs and improve the bottom line.”
The efficiency improvement being bandied about is 23.5%, which sounds impressive but clearly isn’t producing results in carbon emissions reductions, proving once again that you can’t always rely on the numbers, particularly those emanating from the PMO.
Moreover, whatever gains Canada has made in terms of energy efficiency to this point, our future potential in this area is severely undermined by the Harper Government’s recent decision to cut all innovation funding for 2013-14. Compared with other nations like China, the US and Germany, Canada is falling far behind on the development of renewable energy and green jobs.
Top per capita energy consuming countries 1990 to 2010 with projections to 2015 Canada versus the rest of the world.
Check out these graphs from the IEA’s “Economist Intelligence Unit” which will give you a sense of Canada’s place in the world in terms of per capita energy consumption. For 25 years we’ve consistently been the bottom of the barrel, with virtually no improvement from 1990 to 2015.
[toggle_simple title=”1990 – 7.7 Tonnes of Oil Equivalent Energy for Canada versus…?” width=”616px”][/toggle_simple][toggle_simple title=”1995 – 7.9 Tonnes of Oil Equivalent Energy for Canada versus…?” width=”616px”][/toggle_simple][toggle_simple title=”2000- 8.2 Tonnes of Oil Equivalent Energy for Canada versus…?” width=”Width of toggle box”][/toggle_simple]
[toggle_simple title=”2005 – 8.4 Tonnes of Oil Equivalent Energy for Canada versus…?” width=”616px”][/toggle_simple]
[toggle_simple title=”2010 – 7.6 Tonnes of Oil Equivalent Energy for Canada versus…?” width=”616px”][/toggle_simple]
[toggle_simple title=”2015 – 7.7 Tonnes of Oil Equivalent Energy for Canada versus…?” width=”616px”][/toggle_simple]
If “Energy Efficiency” isn’t the answer then what is?
What Joe also neglects to point out is that the IEA, in its Worldwide Trends in Energy Use and Efficiency Report, promises that “the overall message from the indicators is clear; the current rate of energy efficiency improvement is not nearly enough to overcome the other factors driving up energy consumption. As a result we are heading for an unsustainable energy future. We must find new ways to accelerate the decoupling of energy use and CO2 emissions from economic growth.”
Using the PMO’s office as tar sands bully pulpit hardly helps with said decoupling – in fact, it is quite the opposite.
At the same time, scientists at esteemed scientific organizations like NASA, say that building Keystone and pumping more oil sands out of Alberta pretty much 
[/toggle_simple][toggle_simple title=”1995 – 7.9 Tonnes of Oil Equivalent Energy for Canada versus…?” width=”616px”]
[/toggle_simple][toggle_simple title=”2000- 8.2 Tonnes of Oil Equivalent Energy for Canada versus…?” width=”Width of toggle box”]
[/toggle_simple]
[/toggle_simple]
[/toggle_simple]
[/toggle_simple]