Removal of fuel rods from the Unit 4 cooling pool is a first step in decommissioning the plant where three reactors melted down after the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami, a process expected to last decades.
The Nuclear Regulation Authority said at its weekly meeting the proposal by the plant operator, Tokyo Electric Power Co., is appropriate and the removal can start in November as planned.
The Unit 4 reactor was offline when the Fukushima Daiichi plant was hit by the disasters, but the building was damaged by hydrogen explosions and fire.
TEPCO has reinforced the structure and says the building can survive a major quake, but the unit’s unenclosed pool containing 1,533 fuel rods has caused international concern.
The company has prepared a massive, steel structure that comes with a remote-controlled crane to remove fuel rods, which would be placed into a protective cask and transferred to a joint cooling pool inside a nearby building, which is much lower and considered safer.
Naoto Kan testifying at a Japanese hearing to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster
Former Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan (2010-2011) addresses the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear crisis which happened on his watch. While his decision to continue propping up the grossly negligent Tokyo Electric Power Company is disappointing, his bold vision for an end to nuclear power should be a clarion call for the world’s nuclear powers.
The accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant was the most severe accident in the history of mankind. At Unit 1, the fuel rods melted down in about five hours after the earthquake, and molten fuel breached and melted through the reactor pressure vessel. Meltdowns occurred in Units 2 and 3 within one hundred hours of the accident. At around the same time, hydrogen-air blasted in the reactor buildings of Units 1, 3 and 4.
Each reactor building contains a fuel pool to store spent fuel. At one point, there was a possibility of meltdowns in those fuel pools as well. If a meltdown occurs in a fuel pool, which sits outside a reactor, a tremendous amount of radioactive material would be released directly into the atmosphere.
The continuation of such a release could mean the realization of the worst-case scenario: a situation where 50 million people within a 250-kilometer radius of Fukushima, including Tokyo and its greater metropolitan area, would have to be evacuated.
[quote]The accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant was the most severe accident in the history of mankind.[/quote]
Fortunately, the situation was prevented from developing further thanks to the tireless self-sacrificing efforts of the Tokyo Electric Power Company, the Self Defense Forces, the firefighters and the police force to supply cooling water into the reactors and the fuel pools. Indeed, we were so close to seeing the worst-case scenario unfold. Had it reached the worst-case scenario, Japan would have had to suffer from long-term chaos and the tremendous amount of radioactive material released would have impacted other nations as well.
Kan does 180 on nuclear power
Before the Fukushima accident, with the belief that no nuclear accident would happen as long as the safety measures were followed properly, I had pushed the policy of utilizing nuclear power. Having faced the real accident as Prime Minister, and having experienced the situation which came so close to requiring me to order the evacuation of 50 million people, my view is now changed 180 degrees. Although some airplane crashes may claim hundreds of casualties, there are no other events except for wars that would require the evacuation of tens of millions of people.
Avoiding accidents “technically impossible”
In spite of the various measures taken in order to prevent accidents, it is technically impossible to eliminate accidents, especially if human factors such as terrorism are taken into account. Actually, it is not all that difficult to eliminate nuclear power plant accidents. All we need to do is to eliminate nuclear power plants themselves. And that resolution lies in the hands of the citizens.
[quote]It is not all that difficult to eliminate nuclear power plant accidents. All we need to do is to eliminate nuclear power plants themselves.[/quote]
There is another issue. Operating nuclear power plants means creating spent nuclear fuel. It takes enormous amounts of money and time to deal with nuclear waste. What this means is that we are leaving the huge problem of nuclear waste for future generations to care for. There is no other way but to go down in the path toward achieving zero nuclear power, for the sake of our children and grandchildren.
The ability to exterminate ourselves
We humans have created nuclear weapons that have the ability to exterminate ourselves – it’s a fundamental paradox of our existence. People have done many things to prevent nuclear wars. One of the examples is The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. On the other hand, rules governing nuclear power plants, except for the ones that prohibit the use of nuclear material for military purposes, are basically left to each nation.
If international rules govern nuclear war, why not power plants?
I believe that we need to have international rules regarding the construction of nuclear power plants, too. Nuclear accidents will happen sometime, somewhere, even though no one can predict when or where. Can we prevent the disastrous situation of forcing many people to evacuate when an accident happens? Is it possible to safely treat nuclear waste? We need international rules to address these concerns.
Healthy energy alternatives exist
China leads the world in renewable energy investments
It is possible for mankind to get enough energy without relying on nuclear power – by using natural energy such as solar, wind, and biomass. To help curb global warming, we need to stop the use of not only nuclear power but also fossil fuels. If all nations make serious efforts to develop new technologies, I believe it’s more than possible that in fifty years we mankind will have all our energy needs met entirely by natural energy.
[quote]I believe it’s more than possible that in fifty years we mankind will have all our energy needs met entirely by natural energy.[/quote]
For the sake of the human race and of our planet earth, the desirable path is for the entire world to walk in the direction of zero nuclear reliance. I have become firmly convinced of that.
TORONTO – Ontario won’t conduct its own environmental assessment of a plan to reverse the flow of the Line 9 oil pipeline that runs through the province, Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli said Monday.
Calgary-based Enbridge Inc. (TSX:ENB) wants to reverse Line 9 and increase its capacity to move 300,000 barrels of crude oil per day, up from the current 240,000 barrels.
It has also asked for permission to move different types of oil between southwestern Ontario and Montreal, including a heavier form of crude.
Liberals abandon provincial assessment
The proposal has sparked protests by hundreds of demonstrators, who have rallied outside the National Energy Board hearings in Toronto and Montreal.
Ontario’s New Democrats are pushing for a separate provincial assessment of the proposal, but Chiarelli said that’s not necessary.
The assessment is a federal responsibility because the pipeline crosses provincial boundaries, he said.
Ontario has intervened in the recent hearings to emphasize that public safety and environmental protection must come first, he said.
The province also called for a “stress test” for the whole system to be assured that the pipeline is safe, Chiarelli said.
“At this point in time, constitutionally we have to rely on what’s there in federal legislation,” he said.
Complain to your local MP
Chiarelli said that if residents feel that the National Energy Board isn’t doing its job to protect the public, then they should complain to their local MP and Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
“If Ontario does its own environmental assessment … that cannot override,” he said.
“That might inform, but the National Energy Board is responsible for getting the right information on which to make a decision.”
NDP: Ontario has responsibility for protecting water
It’s not the black-and-white issue that Chiarelli makes it out to be, said NDP energy critic Peter Tabuns.
Ontario has passed legislation that spills into areas of federal jurisdiction, such as the Toxics Reduction Act, he said. Other provinces are looking at consultations over pipeline projects.
“The NEB may have jurisdiction over approving a pipeline, but Ontario has a responsibility for protecting its water, it has a responsibility for protecting its land and its air,” he said.
[quote]The federal government can challenge Ontario if it wants, but Ontario is the only jurisdiction that’s going to look out for itself on this.[/quote]
Sending the Tar Sands East
Line 9 originally transported oil from Sarnia, Ont., to Montreal but was reversed in the late 1990s to pump imported crude westward.
Enbridge is now proposing to flow oil back eastward to service refineries in Ontario and Quebec.
The NEB panel has heard from interveners who said the reversal would put First Nations communities at risk, threaten water supplies and could endanger vulnerable species in ecologically sensitive areas.
Frack water pit in BC’s Horn River Basin (photo: Damien Gillis)
By Anna Novacek – republished from Energy Law BC
As the only province in Canada that does not regulate groundwater use, BC has been referred to as the “wild west” of groundwater.
Groundwater has and will continue to be relied on heavily by the LNG industry as a key source of the extensive amount of water necessary to conduct hydraulic fracturing. While the amount of water will vary between wells due to the changes in geology and the size of the reservoir, the volumes can be immense. EnCana Corp. states that between 200,000 and 1.2 million litres of water (roughly 1/10th to one half of an Olympic swimming pool) is needed to complete one well.
Surface water is regulated by short term water use approvals found under Section 8 of the Water Act [RSBC 1996] c. 483 (“the Water Act”). Surface water licensees are required to use water in accordance with the Water Act, the terms and conditions of their licence, and to pay annual water rentals. None of these requirements currently apply to groundwater users, even those using it on a large scale.
With a legislative proposal for a new Water Sustainability Act, however, this may be changing.
Updating century-old Water Act
BC’s current Water Act is 104 years old. The Water Act Modernization process began in 2009, and has included on-going workshops and consultations with the public, First Nations and stakeholders, resulting in a Water Act Modernization Report on Engagement in September 2010, and a Policy Proposal for the new Water Sustainability Actin December 2010. The original plan was to introduce the new Water Sustainability Actin 2012; however the “complexity of developing legislation with widespread implications for British Columbians” resulted in delay.
Public feedback sought
On October 18th, 2013 the province released a legislative proposal for a new Water Sustainability Act. A summary of this proposal can be accessed here. The proposal is open for public feedback until November 15th, 2013. It is expected to be submitted to the legislative assembly as a bill in 2014 for debate and final approval.
Key changes
The changes to provincial regulation of groundwater outlined in the legislative proposal for a Water Sustainability Act include:
Large volume users would be required to obtain authorization and pay application fees and annual water rentals to access groundwater. Groundwater use for ‘domestic purposes’ would generally be exempt from this requirement
Information will be collected from all well owners to help improve understanding of aquifers and how they interact with lakes and streams
A database of all groundwater wells in the province will be established to help inform future water allocation decisions
The minimal standards under the Ground Water Protection RegulationBC Reg. 299/2004will be expanded to require the mandatory submission of well records for new wells, as well as requiring testing and disinfection of a water supply well after drilling to reduce the risk of contamination, and guidelines for ensuring contaminants are stored away from water supply wells.
The requirement regarding well drilling and the protection of groundwater will be updated. It is proposed that the WSA would clarify that drilling into or penetrating an aquifer is a ‘disturbance’ and requires a qualified well driller.
The complete legislative proposal is available here.
Devil’s in the details
The key question is whether the new Water Sustainability Act will be designed to restrict or minimize groundwater use in any way, or instead focus more on initial approvals, the provision of information and increasing reporting requirements. The application of exemptions within the new legislation will also be an important factor determining how industry will ultimately be affected.
Thousands of citizens spoke out against Enbridge at last year’s “Defend Our Coast” rally” (TJ Watt photo)
The cynicism of both our senior governments regarding tankers and pipelines is appalling.
The pact between Premier Clark and Alberta Premier Redford – followed two days later by the Harper government’s Speech from the Throne – does precisely what many of us have said all along was their intention, to approve pipelines and tankers, irrespective of the findings of the Joint Review Panel (a farce), the wishes of First Nations and the wishes of the people.
This is not the time to despair but for two separate lines of action.
Enbridge pipeline requires referendum
First, and critically important in the short term, the people of BC must demand and press for a province-wide referendum. Would anyone suggest that the ravaging of our environment is less important than on the way we vote – i.e. the STV referendum – or a tax, as in HST? Would Premier Clark dare to take that position?
What it will take is a concerted effort, one where we all fight no matter what organizations we represent.
I suggest that all environmental organizations get under one roof for this struggle – it can be anyone of many. The Wilderness Committee, Living Oceans Society, Dogwood Initiative, Forest Ethics, Pacific Wild, and the list goes on. I can say that The Common Sense Canadian would get behind such an effort.
Civil Disobedience
We must also be prepared, and let the government know we are prepared for massive civil disobedience. It must be peaceful and large enough that there aren’t enough jails to begin to hold all the protesters.
I believe that will happen spontaneously, so let’s for the moment deal with the referendum.
Public must demand referendum
As a starting point, let’s everyone make it clear in letters, emails and social media messages to Premier Clark that we demand no less than the right to decide the fate of our province. And let’s start now.
And, I make this plea to fellow activists – let’s get a plan for action up and running as soon as we can. I repeat that we at The Common Sense Canadian will be there to share developments on this front with the public – and to make a strong case for why this initiative is so necessary.
We simply cannot sit on our backsides and let these bastards get away with it.
The home energy management (HEM) market continues to attract attention, especially with the increasing presence of newer stakeholders like broadband service providers (e.g., Verizon, AT&T, and Comcast) and security companies (e.g., ADT and Vivint). However, the products and services that constitute the HEM market continue to struggle for more traction. In recent years, the industry’s expectation had been that a smarter grid would enable a wider use of new tools and incentives for consumers to use energy more efficiently, such as demand response (DR) or dynamic pricing. People would save money and utilities would benefit from lower overall consumption and not having to spend capital so quickly on new power-generating plants.
[quote]Over the coming decade, a continued desire among consumers to reduce bills, regulatory mandates for greater efficiency, wider use of variable pricing schemes, and a strong green sentiment will combine to help drive adoption forward with growth of the home energy management market from $300.7 million in 2012 to $1.8 billion in 2022.[/quote]
But the HEM market has been fairly sluggish, with plenty of trials and only a few cases of utility-led deployments or significant consumer uptake. That view is starting to change a bit. Over the coming decade, a continued desire among consumers to reduce bills, regulatory mandates for greater efficiency, wider use of variable pricing schemes, and a strong green sentiment will combine to help drive adoption forward. These market forces will be countered by indifference to potential savings, a resistance to paying extra for HEM hardware, unsettled standards for interoperability, a crowded vendor space, and tepid support by many utilities. Nonetheless, the driving forces will spur some gains, particularly where mandates are strongest.
Navigant Research forecasts that global revenue from various segments of the HEM market will grow from $300.7 million in 2012 to $1.8 billion in 2022.
The aftermath of Colorado’s recent flood in heavily fracked Weld County (David Lavallee)
by David Lavallee
I first heard about the flood that left the Colorado fracking industry underwater by way of a story on The Common Sense Canadian. I happened to be in neighboring Utah on a shoot for my new documentary, entitled To the Ends of the Earth. This documentary focuses on the economic consequences of our “ends of the earth” exploration for oil.
News of the flood did not draw my attention initially – after all, epic floods are commonplace nowadays. In the past year we have witnessed a series of events which, in isolation, don’t seem to add up to much – but taken together tell a powerful story of the shifting carbon balance of our planet, our home.
[quote]Not since the wholesale slaughter of cetaceans 150 years ago has energy been this violent. [/quote]
Cyclone Phailin, a storm the size of France, recently pounded the eastern coast of India. The storm surge for Hurricane Sandy (widest storm in US history) left the global financial capital, Manhattan, underwater. Floodwaters left the town of Canmore and the city of Calgary, Canada’s energy capital , underwater. Meanwhile, an observatory in Mauna Loa Hawaii measured a long-feared milestone – 400 PPM carbon dioxide in the atmosphere – a record last beaten 5 million years ago.
So the simple fact of a flood in Colorado didn’t immediately grab my attention (despite being a “one in 10, 000 year event”). What grabbed my attention was the richness of the metaphor – one of the industries (among many) causing this calamity was actually underwater. Add to that Manhattan and Calgary – where myriad decisions are made, decisions changing the carbon balance of our planet – underwater!
Weld County, Colorado fracking capital
Weld County, Colorado is the site of some of the most intense fracking in the world (a powerful short film on Colorado fracking can be found here.
There are 50, 000 wells in Weld County alone. During the flood, emergency procedures were enacted and the wells were shut in, averting a catastrophic spill of the many hundreds of proprietary toxic waste chemicals that typically get injected a mile below the ground into ancient coral reefs that have lain dormant for many millennia – until violent underground explosions crack open these formations releasing the shale gas.
Concerns over frack fluid leaks overblown
Not since the wholesale slaughter of cetaceans 150 years ago (back then oil came from Spermaceti, not BP) has energy been this violent. Only 75,000 gallons of crude oil/condensate were reported spilled in the flood, an amount that paled in comparaison with toxic waste from the flood that washed over feedlots – agricultural waste, because of it’s volume, is arguably a far greater contaminant than a small amount of condensate.
Yet the social media circles were abuzz with outrage over the spills, and rumours of the coming human health crisis from leaked frack fluid – tempest in a teacup.
I watched this debate unfold and wondered what parallels there were with my own province’s current battle against Enbridge (with its focus on spills) and the fracking of northern B.C. Could it be that the environmental movement is missing the point?
Fracking your front yard
Allow me an alternate view of what the point could be. Consider the daily operations of a frack well. In Weld County, drilling operations are occurring in the one place that big oil has been forced to go now that there is no place else left to drill: your front yard. The proximity of wells to people’s homes, playgrounds, schools in this area is quite simply shocking.
Nosebleeds and ethyl benzenes
Near Longmont, CO. I met and interviewed Rod Brueski, a local organic farmer. He showed me his family’s “blood panel” document, a medical procedure that they underwent as part of a study to determine the effects of living near a frack well (100 metres from his house). “My son has uncontrolled nosebleeds that last three hours,” he told me as he pointed out the variety of hexanes, ethyl benzenes and xylenes that are now in their blood.
Forget the 75,000 gallons that leaked, this industry was a disaster even before the flood hit.
A flood certainly provides an opportunity for environmentalists to point out to an industry its antisocial shortcomings, but let’s not lose sight of the bigger picture.
Governor Hincklehooper sues constituents over fracking ban
Brueski took advantage of an opportunity to point out to the governor of the state his antisocial tendencies. Governor Hincklehooper is thought of in the activist/environmental circles as being a Halliburton puppet, who advocates vociferously for the oil and gas industry at the expense of the general public. As evidence to that effect, Brueski told me he is actually using state taxpayer’s money to sue the community of Longmont for wanting to pass a municipal bill that bans fracking within city limits (a reasonable bill, one would think).
Our cameras rolled as Brueski gave the governor, who was on a flood impacts tour, a piece of his mind. It is destined to be a powerful scene in my upcoming film, one that won’t likely end up on the cutting room floor.
The root of the problem
As easy as it is to vilify the governor though, that also isn’t the point. It’s not the man in power, it’s the culture of people that placed him there. It’s the anachronistic, so-called democratic institutions that allow a person like Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, with so little of the popular vote, to gain and hold power for so long.
It’s a culture of instant gratification, which has turned 40% of our economy into a casino (aka the financial services sector). It’s what turned our economy into a Ponzi scheme – a house of smoke and mirrors that almost collapsed completely in 2008, and will certainly collapse globally someday soon (Communism, which once held sway over half the globe, collapsed – is it that big a stretch to believe that capitalism could too?).
The bigger picture, bigger than oil spills from Enbridge into the Skeena river, bigger than poor leaders who lack a true democratic mandate, bigger than the volume of frack fluids spilled into the South Platte river of Weld County is the culture that perpetuates these things.
The Growth Imperative
If I had to boil it down into a few words, they would be these: the growth imperative. We have created a society in which the fortunes of politicians rise and fall based on the growth numbers they post. A society and culture so out of step with the biosphere that sustains us that we have come to view infinite growth as normal , like it’s always been this way (only since the 1950’s has it been around, really).
Infinite growth is impossible in nature, and that’s a really good thing. To paraphrase Richard Heinberg, author of The End of Growth (whom I interviewed for my film), imagine a 2 pound hummingbird – there’s a reason nature didn’t create such a creature.
The easy stuff is gone
Globalization and our economy today is a ten pound hummingbird, struggling to fly after it has gorged on free-flowing nectar. We are now fat, and the nectar of our civilization, oil and gas, doesn’t flow so freely anymore. It is fracked a mile down and a mile horizontally in Colorado, mined or steamed at enormous cost in the Tarsands – the only free-flowing stuff left is in the Arctic, and we need to dodge icebergs to get it. Just ask Shell how easy it is to access after their prize drill ship, the Kulluk, ended up on the rocks of Kodiak Island last New Year’s eve.
The rise of Extreme Energy
Quick – look around the room you are in and name one object in it that doesn’t have oil’s footprint in it, either in its manufacture or in the transportation of it to your door. This era is all about the rise of extreme energy – can we have avocados from Argentina or apples from New Zealand, brought to us on ships using oil shale (energy return = neutral – it takes a barrel of oil to make a barrel of oil shale!) or fuel our vehicles ten years from when the energy surplus from the tarsands has diminished to a 1:1 ratio because they moved into the final marginal deposits, nothing else being left.
“Economies don’t run on money, they run on energy,” Andrew Nikiforuk told me in a recent interview.
[quote]Money is just a metaphor for energy surplus.
[/quote]
Real solutions
Do I want the fracking industry to clean up their mess in Colorado, and do I want Enbridge to use state-of-the-art spill response systems if they manage to get their stinking bitumen pipe through my province? Absolutely. But I am asking far more than that – of myself and my society. I’m asking that we shift our culture of consumption that is the root cause of all these issues.
I’m asking that we recognize and rebuild a society in which the growth imperative is an anachronism, a barbaric incarnation of yesteryear, not the going concern it is today. I’m asking politicians to help create a structure that helps us plan for a non-growing economy, that helps us localize our food sources and transition off of fossil fuels that are becoming too expensive for our economy to afford anyways. I’m asking those same politicians to restructure political institutions in such a way as to be adaptive of current realities (such as climate change) and to help build a resilient society.
I suspect when we go to a protest against an Enbridge pipeline, it’s more than just the pipe we are protesting. It’s what’s in it, and what that means for us all, either economically or environmentally.
Let’s not lose sight of that, because if we do, we fall into the failed paradigm of economy vs. environment – a paradigm that puts us in a position of winning a few battles here and there but losing the war. Let’s create a new paradigm – a life-after-growth paradigm that focuses on human wellbeing.
If this is too much to ask, then let’s start with this – Halliburton and Hincklehooper: clean up your mess! We’re gonna think real hard on how you can make it up to us.
David Lavallee is the Director and Producer of the award-winning film, White Water, Black Gold. He hopes to complete his new film, To the Ends of the Earth, within a year.
Alberta firefighters on the scene of a burning oil train wreck (Dan Reidlhuber/Reuters)
STONY PLAIN, Alta. – Residents of a tiny Alberta community near the site of a train derailment remained out of their homes for third day as CN Rail struggled to get the upper hand on a fire that was threatening the area.
Staff monitoring the derailment near Gainford carried out another controlled burn Monday evening to get rid of any remaining propane in pressurized tank cars that left the track over the weekend.
[quote]We’re not going to let people back until we get the notice that all the crews on the ground are satisfied that it is safe to be back. – Mayor Rod Shaigec[/quote]
It’s the second time in as many days that CN (TSX:CNR) had attempted to vent and then ignite the gas that remains on the train. CN had hoped to have people home after a first controlled burn on Sunday night.
Said Warren Chandler, a spokesman for the railway:
[quote]Unfortunately when we went to inspect the cars … we found that not all the cars had vented their propane. We hoped for an early return, but in the interests of safety, we can’t do that yet.[/quote]
‘Controlled burn’
The controlled burn procedure involves placing small explosives on the hulls of the derailed propane tank cars, then detonating them to punch small holes in the pressurized car shells.
The gas vapour ignites as it escapes and is supposed to burn off in a controlled manner.
Gainford residents have been out of their homes since early Saturday morning when 13 cars on a freight train went off the rails about 80 kilometres west of Edmonton.
Two explosions were reported, so people were ordered from their homes as a precaution. No one was injured.
Over 100 people evacuated
As of Sunday, 126 people had registered with the evacuation centre.
Three of the rail cars were carrying liquefied petroleum gas, commonly known as propane, and caught fire. Four of the derailed freight cars were carrying crude and didn’t break open. CN said those units have been removed from the scene.
Parkland County spokeswoman Jackie Ostashek said some impatient residents have begun taking matters into their own hands.
“There have been some concerns about people trying to breach the roadblocks. We’re trying to ensure that people understand what we’re doing and why we’re doing it,” she said.
Emergency crews have escorted a few people back to their property, she said.
[quote]Where it was safe to do so, we did have fire crews assist people to go back. They took them there only after the determination that they were outside the immediate threat area. It is not something we are encouraging doing and only in exceptional circumstances.[/quote]
Mayor: community frustrated
Mayor Rod Shaigec acknowledged there’s frustration among those affected.
“All the reports that I have is that they are satisfied with the information they’re receiving,” he said.
“Certainly there’s people that are frustrated. (But) every measure is taken to ensure this is going to be addressed as quickly as possible with the focus on safety.
“We’re not going to let people back until we get the notice that all the crews on the ground are satisfied that it is safe to be back.”
Evacuees to be reimbursed
Evacuees are being asked to document their expenses while they are out of their homes so that CN can reimburse them.
“We will ensure that verified claims for damages are promptly honoured,” Chandler said.
On the weekend, officials said there had been no damage to private property in the vicinity of the blast. On Monday, Chandler would not confirm that.
“At a later date, once those priorities are accomplished, we can begin looking at those options,” he said.
CN not ready to pronounce cause of derailment
CN said it is not ready to say what may have caused the derailment or what damage may have occurred, either to the rail company’s infrastructure or the Yellowhead Highway, northern Alberta’s main east-west artery.
MONCTON, N.B. – A group opposed to shale gas development in New Brunswick is raising questions about the RCMP’s enforcement of an injunction against protesters last week in the province.
Jim Emberger of the New Brunswick Anti-Shale Gas Alliance says the Mounties should be asked about the authorization, timing and necessity of their actions Thursday near Rexton.
Emberger says there have been many peaceful anti-shale gas demonstrations in the province.
Forty people were arrested and weapons seized when the Mounties enforced the court-ordered injunction to end the blockade of a SWN Resources storage compound for exploration equipment and vehicles.
Six police vehicles including an unmarked van were burned and the RCMP have said they had Molotov cocktails tossed at them.
In response, police fired non-lethal beanbag-type bullets and used pepper spray to defuse the situation.
Emberger told a news conference in Moncton that his group will track the position of candidates on the shale gas issue in next year’s provincial election.
He says the alliance is also raising money to fund a legal challenge to the shale gas industry in New Brunswick.
A new study released today concludes that Koch Industries and its subsidiaries stand to make as much as $100 billion in profits if the controversial Keystone XL pipeline is given the go-ahead by U.S. President Obama.
The report, titled Billionaires’ Carbon Bomb, and produced by the think tank International Forum on Globalization (IFG), finds that David and Charles Koch and their privately-owned company, Koch Industries, own more than 2 million acres of land in Northern Alberta, the source of the tar sands oil that will be pumped to the United States via the Keystone XL pipeline.
[quote]The Kochs have repeatedly claimed that they have no interest in the Keystone XL Pipeline, this report shows that is false.” Said Nathalie Lowenthal-Savy , a researcher with IFG. “We noticed Koch Funded Tea Party members and think tanks pushing for the pipeline. We dug deeper and found $100 billion in potential profit, $50 million sent to organizations supporting the pipeline, and perhaps 2 million acres of land. That sounds like an interest to me.” Nathalie continued, “We all know they will use that money to fund and expand their influence network, subvert democracy, crush unions like in Wisconsin, and get more extremists elected to congress.[/quote]
