Category Archives: Pipelines and Supertankers

Some Journalists Still Buying the Line that Technology Will Save Us from Oil Spills

Share

Craig McInnes of the Vancouver Sun today has an article essentially supporting the Enbridge Pipeline and the tanker traffic down our coast. His position is that with all the science available these things can be done safely. Craig deserves a trip to the woodshed or, as also happened in my young days, to have his mouth washed out with soap. This usually careful journalist ignores two essential points: the mathematical certainty of accidents and the appalling consequences that will follow.
 
With the pipeline, no amount of surveillance will prevent ruptures, leaving aside the possibility of vandalism. As we know, this modern, scientifically savvy company, Enbridge, has had 811 accidents since 1998. Craig seems to forget that we’re dealing with an 1,100 km pipeline through both the Rockies and the Coast Range thence through the Great Bear Rainforest and over 1,000 rivers and streams, including several that are vital salmon spawning locations. This means that even when a leak or rupture occurs, the only way to get to it is by helicopter. Surveillance may be state of the art, indeed, way ahead of its time – but what’s the good of surveillance if you can do nothing?
 
The tanker situation is brushed aside with the notion that double hulling will end problems. Craig doesn’t seem to know that there have been several major double hulled catastrophes in the past couple of years and none of them hit rocks but other ships!
 
It frightens me a little that Craig seems to brush aside the concerns of First Nations as if there concerns are of no moment but simply sentimental shots in the war against palefaces. The National Energy Board’s Joint Review Panel on Enbridge heard an earful in Bella Bella from experienced First Nations Mariners about the considerable dangers of navigating their coastal waters – watch video here. The Common Sense Canadian in its March 8 edition also published this must-read account on the topic from longtime coastal fisherman by John Brajcic (also pasted below in its entirety)
 
These First Nations have lived and fished this super hazardous coast for a millennium or more. Their forte is not the efficacy or otherwise of science but what happens when there is a spill which they and anyone else who has thought it through is a certainty.
 
Allow me to use my favourite analogy: Suppose you had a revolver with 100 chambers and only one bullet and you stuck it up against your temple. If you are only going to pull the trigger once, the odds are easily calculable. You can do the same with any number. If, however, you are going to pull that trigger with no restriction as to number of times, you are no longer looking at a probability but an explosion waiting to happen. It becomes a mathematical certainty.
 
Now let’s suppose that the bullet was a marshmallow. It wouldn’t matter because no harm would be done. Bitumen from the Tar Sands is not marshmallow!
 
Bitumen doesn’t mix with water and for all practical purposes doesn’t evaporate. What it touches it kills. Spills on land or sea are lethal, and here is the worst part – it is all but impossible to clean up. The July 2010 Enbridge spill into the Kalamazoo River, easily accessed, hasn’t been cleaned up yet and likely never will.
 
It is this fact that puts paid to arguments like Craig’s – the consequences of a spill are utterly devastating – this isn’t like the oil that spilled out of the Exxon Valdez but many, many times worse.
 
Craig does his readers much harm by not making an honest assessment of the risks involved (in fact they are certainties) and worse – not telling the horrible consequences which must flow.


Have you thought about whether or not there’s a soul? What about near death experiences? Should the Book of Revelation scare the pants off us? Find out what other religions and experts say with my new book The Home Stretch available online for your computer, kindle, kobo or iPad for the miserly sum of $9.99

John Brajcic’s must-read account of the navigational dangers of BC’s north and central coast

As a fisherman who has worked his whole life on the coast of BC, I have many concerns about oil tankers leaving Kitamaat (proper spelling double “a” and it means ‘people of the snow’).

All of the discussions, I have heard, have been about concerns regarding pipeline ruptures and what can happen on the land route. My concern is what will happen if there is a loaded oil tanker heading to sea and it  hits a reef or shore or breaks up causing another Exxon Valdez.

Our family has a long history in the area. My father started fishing there in the 30’s and in 1949, at the age of 13, I went out on his seine boat. In 1957 I became a Captain of a  seiner and I fished the area for over 50 years, usually from 5 -20 weeks per year. At present my son operates our family’s seiner and continues to fish this area. Our combined  family’s presence in this area is over 80 years.

I have been hired by Fisheries and Oceans Canada to participate in stock assessments for salmon and herring. In 1968 we were hired by Shell Oil Company to assist in the positioning of Sedco’s drill rig in Hecate Straits.

We have spent so much time in Fisheries and Oceans Canada designated area 6 that lifelong friends – the late Alan Hall of Kitamaat and Johnny Clifton of Hartley Bay – were made. I have seen the waterfall at Butedale frozen solid, bone dry and running so hard you could not tie up your boat.

With our family’s 80 plus years of fishing in the Whale Channel area we have firsthand knowledge of tides, weather, types of fish and bird life. The area from Kitamaat to Hecate Straits is designated Area 6, by Fisheries and Oceans Canada and is the most consistent salmon producing region in British Columbia with runs in the odd and even years.
 
In Area 6 there is:

  1. Within the Central coast area 128 salmon bearing streams
  2. Kitasu Bay to McInnes Island is a major herring spawning  ground
  3. All 5 species of salmon, herring, crab, mussels, clams, abalone, prawns, eulachons, pilchards, hake, geoduck, mackerel, halibut cod, pollock, otters, eagles and many birds, plus whales and porpoises
  4. Tides that fluctuate over 20 feet causing currents of up to 5 knots
  5. Being a region of heavy snow and glaciers there are very strong freshets from May to the end of July
  6. The outflow winds from Douglas Channel can be extreme during summer and winter
  7. Weather in Hecate Straits –  because of strong complex currents, waves have been recorded up to 30 metres. The highest wind gusts recorded for November, December, January, February and March is 180 -190-plus km per hour.

If a ship enters Laredo Channel from Hecate Straits at McInnes Island the tanker would have Lenard Shoal and Moody Bank at the bottom of Aristazabl Island. On the east side of Aristazabl Island there are 2 very  dangerous rocks known as Wilson and Moorhouse. Campania Sound is also a very treacherous body of water from Dupont Island to Hecate Straits.

There are many rocks and to name a few, Bortwick, Cort, Ness, Evans, Cliff and Janion also Yares Shoal. This area is a minefield of reefs. These rocks are spread out between Rennison Island, Banks Island and Campania Island. This route would be extremely dangerous to tanker traffic. Using the Otter Pass route, Nepean rock becomes a very prominent problem for ships’ travel.

Should a major oil spill occur I feel an oil boom would not be able to contain it because of the velocity of the current in this area and the oil could travel 20-50 miles in one 6 hour tide. This area is not the Mediterranean or a lagoon.
 
If a spill occurred in Laredo Channel the herring spawning area at Kitasu Bay to Price Island could be totally destroyed, possibly forever. The eel grass which the herring need to spawn on could be wiped out. Some years over 10,000 tons of herring spawn in this area.
 
A spill at freshet time would be the  most devastating. Due to the differences of its viscosity, salt water is heavier and would be lower and the fresh water being lighter, becomes a shallow layer at the surface. The juvenile salmon live in this fresh water layer as they  migrate to sea. The juvenile salmon jump like raindrops and if they were migrating in a spill area the oil could wipe out an entire run. Some streams could become barren of salmon.
 
I have tried to point out, so people know, the dangers of the entire marine area and what could happen if there is ever a spill. I have spent my entire life around Princess Royal Island and the vicinity.  I personally am totally opposed to the Kitamaat  terminal for oil tankers.

John Brajcich and his family have been commercial fishermen on BC’s north and central coast – where oil supertankers would pass – for some eighty years.

 

Share

Watershed Sentinel Reports on Enbridge Hearings, Rally in Comox

Share

Read this report from the Watershed Sentinel on last weekend’s National Energy Board hearings in Comox on the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline and supertankers on BC’s coast. In addition to the consistent testimony in opposition to the plan, over 2,000 people rallied outside the hearings to say no to Enbridge. (March 31, 2012)

Speaker after speaker poured out their passionate pleas to an impassive panel at the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline hearings in Comox, BC, March 30 & 31.  Some described in loving detail their ocean-side worlds and the terrible weather on the north coast. Others discussed the economics (risk versus benefit) of the 1,170 kilometre pipeline from Alberta to Kitimat BC, where the diluted bitumen would be loaded on tankers to travel the narrow passages of BC’s west coast Great Bear Rainforest. A few short-term construction jobs, no royalties, and the enormous financial and ecological risk of oil spills on land and sea, in order to provide oil to Asia do not add up for British Columbians of most walks of life.

Brian Voth, a forest worker from North Island, described the beauty of San Josef Bay: “If it was fouled by an oil spill, that would break my heart,” and concluded, “If there was an oil spill, the broken hearts would be piled higher than high.”

The reasoning was exquisite.  Kathy Smail from Cortes Island pleaded: “The environment is not a stand-alone subject. As we all know, shifts in the environment alter everything around us. Our economies, our health, our social well-being, our cultures. As our earth warms and our weather changes and our propped up economic house of cards collapses, what we could have left is the safety net of a relatively intact environment that shelters and nourishes us. It is hopelessly optimistic of me to even wish for such things but I am compelled by my grandchildren, my community, and the uncertain future for all creatures to strive for this. I implore you to do whatever you are able to halt the Northern Gateway Project.”

Outside the hearing room on a chilly Saturday afternoon, over 2,200 islanders rallied, cheering, singing, and promising that their resistance and support of First Nations would be strong. They came from one end of Vancouver Island to the other, Port Hardy to Victoria, to be a part of the “Our Coast, Our Decision – No pipelines, No tankers”rally. They drummed, they cheered the dancers from the Ko’moks First Nation, they stood in awe listening to Ta’Kiaya, the 11-year-old singer from Sliammon across the water in Powell River. Their signs expressed the same range of thoughts and feelings as the speakers inside. Many protested the threat of oil spills. One sign read “Big Steve, Keep your Pipeline in your Pants.” Artists from the community had spontaneously pitched in with beautiful signage and some people unconnected to the rally organizers hung a 30-foot banner at the bridge to Comox, “No Pipelines, No Tankers”, write it here along with giant cut outs of local animals.

Read more: http://www.watershedsentinel.ca/content/vancouver-island-says-no-enbridge-gateway-pipeline

Video by the Peaceful Direct Action Coalition, Comox Valley, BC:

 

 

Share

Budget 2012: At Least the War on the Environment is Going Well

Share

Until this year, the purpose of the annual Canadian federal budget was to project government revenues, lay out spending priorities and forecast economic conditions for the upcoming year. Reading Budget 2012, announced last week by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, it soon becomes clear that this government has no intention of being encumbered by pedestrian fiscal objectives. The Harper government has instead opted to present what is first and foremost a policy document – one that brazenly asserts the government’s ideological agenda for the coming three years.

If the overriding economic policy goal of this government was not apparent previously, with the release of Budget 2012, there can no longer be any doubt. The Harper gang has dispensed with even the pretense of meeting its basic environmental fiduciary responsibilities in favour of the almost totally unimpeded exploitation of Canadian resources. As Green Party leader Elizabeth May told me this week, the government is effectively telling the Canadian people that they plan “to eviscerate existing laws. This isn’t really a fiscal statement. They’ve used the budget as an instrument of massive overhaul of environmental law and policy and the overriding directive is oil and gas at all costs – the environment be damned.”

Should you happen to belong to the unlucky (and clearly misguided) lot with the audacity to be concerned about the proposed Enbridge and Kinder Morgan pipelines, this is not a budget for you. In fact, perhaps the best we can say about Budget 2012 is, as Rafe Mair put it, at least “we now have it in writing what the bastards are up to!”

Just how bad is it? Well, don’t take my word for it. Last week on CBC, the respected columnist Chantale Hebert of the Toronto Star, hardly an eco-zealot, said this was the most anti-environment budget she had seen in her 20 years covering Parliament Hill. Even the very moderate, if not conservative, editorial board of the Globe and Mail singled out the environmental provisions in the Budget saying “The Conservatives are continuing their dishonourable attack meant to intimidate environmental groups, in a budget item that stands out for adding a needless new cost.”

Steven Guilbeault of the NGO Équiterre said that the budget “seems to have been written for, and even by, big oil interests…the Harper government is gutting the environmental protections that Canadians have depended on for decades to safeguard our families and nature from pollution, toxic contamination and other environmental problems.” And true to form, reaction from oil and gas companies, mining and pipeline companies has been predictably jubilant.

So just what does the Harper government plan to do? First, in what appears to be a return to the glory days of McCarthyism, the Harper gang plans to launch an $8 million campaign at Revenue Canada to investigate and crack down on environmental groups that the government deems are engaged in activities that are too political, including the extent to which these groups are funded by foreign sources.

There is no new funding for climate change programs. In fact the words climate change are mentioned only twice in passing in the entire 498 page budget plan.
 
The Conservatives will eliminate the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy, which was a panel of business and environmental leaders who made policy recommendations on a variety of sustainability issues. A widely respected, non-partisan agency, the Roundtable was founded by the Conservative government of Brian Mulroney in 1988. Its reports of late, however, had annoyed the government as they were mildly critical of their plans to achieve its stated objective of reducing Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions. The result? The Harper government has  killed them.
 
Environment Canada’s budget is being cut again, this time by 6%, along with grants for scientific research in universities.The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (or CEAA) is in line for a 40 per cent cut. Touting a ‘one project, one review’ principle, CEAA will be overhauled with federal responsibilities being downloaded on provinces; newly imposed timelines, and a limiting of the scope of reviews. Joint panel environmental reviews are to be limited to 24 months, National Energy Board hearings to 18 months and standard environmental assessments to one year. All this will be imposed retroactively, thereby impacting reviews, such as Northern Gateway, that are currently underway. The changes could jeopardize the capacity of people to participate in reviews and it further undermines the ultimate goal of reviews in ensuring environmental protection is a priority in all projects.
 
The budget does not renew funding for the popular EcoENERGY energy efficiency program. Minimal tax support will be given to ‘clean energy’ and energy efficiency, but only to the tune of $2 million – a tiny drop in the bucket in a multi-billion dollar budget.
 
Finally, some changes are planned for subsidies to the oil and gas industry on Canada’s East coast but tar sands subsidies remain untouched. Currently, $1.38 billion a year is allocated to energy development through subsidies.
 
Although not specifically mentioned in the Budget plan, the government is also widely suspected to be planning to gut key conservation provisions of Canada’s Fisheries Act, the nation’s most significant and oldest piece of environmental legislation. The Aboriginal People’s Television Network has also learned that that the Harper Conservatives are changing Canada’s mining regulations so that prospecting companies could soon have free-reign on reserve lands.

So what to make of all this? If the stakes weren’t so high, we may otherwise see this Budget as an unfortunate aberration, a government that clearly has an axe to grind or some kind of vendetta against environmental groups. Yet it’s important to appreciate the significance of what the Harper gang is trying to accomplish: namely, to clear the way for resource development projects that will not easily be undone. The environmental legacy of this government will be felt for a long time to come if they are permitted to implement their agenda unimpeded.

A prestigious conference was held last week, at which some of the world’s leading scientists and academics called for the official designation of a new earth epoch: the Anthropocene. Addressing the ‘Planet under Pressure’ gathering in London, England, scientists said that one species has left an indelible mark through climate change, dwindling fish stocks, continued deforestation, rapid species decline, and human population growth. Anthony Giddens, the British political scientist known for his holistic view of societies, described the Anthopocene as a “runaway world” in which we have unleashed processes more powerful than our attempts to control them.

It is against this dismal backdrop that our federal politicians have unleashed the anti-environmental provisions of Budget 2012 upon the Canadian people. I’ve recently been seeing a bumper sticker that captures quite nicely the priorities of our current federal government: “At least the war on the environment is going well.”

Share

Respecting the Power of the Sea – Testimony From Enbridge Hearings in Bella Bella

Share

Highlights from this week’s National Energy Board hearings in Bella Bella on the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and supertankers on BC’s coast. Powerful testimony from three members of the Heiltsuk First Nation, sharing their experiences with the sea. “I’ll never forget it,” said Josh Vickers recounting to the NEB panel a memorable herring fishing trip as a boy. “We were coming back in 40 to 50 foot seas…Our boats were like corks going way up and way down. We couldn’t even see each other – that’s how violent and rough the sea was.”

 

Share

Watch Global TV story on Bella Bella Enbridge Hearings

Share

Watch this video news story from Global TV on this week’s National Energy Board hearings on the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline in Bella Bella – with footage by Damien Giilis. (April 3, 2012)

http://www.globaltvbc.com/video/enbridge+hearings+resume/video.html?v=2219206168&p=1&s=dd#news+hour+final

Share

Bella Bella Opposes Enbridge Story on CBC’s The National Last Night – feat. Footage by Damien Gillis

Share

Check out this story from CBC’s The National on the recent controversy over the scheduled National Energy Board Enbridge hearings in Bella Bella – featuring footage shot by Damien Gillis. (April 2, 1021)

Watch video: http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/TV_Shows/The_National/1233408557/ID=2218694750

Share

Cancelled Enbridge Hearings to Resume in Bella Bella, Youth Embark on Hunger Strike

Share

The Heiltsuk First Nation learned late Monday that scheduled National Energy Board hearings on the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline will resume Tuesday in Bella Bella, following their cancellation Monday in the wake of a peaceful demonstration to which the Joint Review Panel overreacted. Heiltsuk Chief Marilyn Slett is, however, concerned that the panel will not be adding extra hearing days to make up for Monday’s lost testimony time. Meanwhile, students from the community embarked on a hunger strike to protest proposed oil supertankers which threaten their traditional marine food resources.

Share

CBC on NEB Cancelling Day 1 of Bella Bella Enbridge Hearings – incl. Audio Clip

Share

Read this report from CBC on the National Energy Board’s decision to cancel the first day of the Joint Panel Review hearings on Enbridge in Bella Bella after the panel was greeted by a demonstration at the local airport – featuring images and commentary by Damien Gillis. (April 2, 2012)

A public hearing for the Northern Gateway Project has been unexpectedly cancelled after panel members were met by protesters at the Bella Bella airport in B.C. on Sunday afternoon.

 

The review panel was scheduled to hold four days of hearing in the remote community to gather local concerns about the controversial proposal to build a crude oil pipeline from Alberta to the West Coast.

A large crowd greeted the panel members when they arrived in Bella Bella, but later on Sunday afternoon, Monday’s hearing was cancelled. Some high school students in the community reportedly began a 48-hour hunger strike after the panel arrived.

Heiltsuk First Nation Chief Marilynn Slett told a community meeting that the review panel had sent a notice that it would not be proceeding with the sessions because of security concerns.

“It was their perception that it wasn’t a very secure or safe environment,” Slett told CBC News on Monday morning.

But Slett says the protest and the community are peaceful…

…Documentary filmmaker and environmental activist Damien Gillis said the protesters were not threatening anyone.

“The RCMP was in attendance, I’ve spoken to the detachment commander. They are baffled at this reaction. They didn’t observe anything unlawful or remotely threatening.”

North Coast NDP MLA Gary Coons arrived on the plane with the panel members and said all he witnessed was a peaceful gathering.

“It is insulting to the Heiltsuk community and those that were there that they would feel that way. The members of the joint review panel have been welcomed in respectful ways to every First Nations community that they have gone to and this would be no different.” said Coons.

Both Coons and Slett are hopeful a meeting with panel members on Monday morning will help resolve panel’s concerns and get the public hearings back on track.

Read full article and listen to audio clip: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/04/02/bc-bella-bella-gateway-hearing.html

Share

Budget: Harper Govt. Goes After Charities who Question its Resource Development Plans

Share

Read this story form the Hill Times on the Harper Government’s intention laid out in its recent budget bill to go after charities who are critical of its oil and resource development plans. (March 29, 2012)

Opposition MPs say a surprise allegation in the federal budget that Canadian charities are violating federal rules limiting their political advocacy is retribution for widespread opposition from environmental groups to the massive Northern Gateway oil sands pipeline across British Columbia.

PARLIAMENT HILL—Opposition MPs say a surprise allegation in the federal budget that Canadian charities are violating federal rules limiting their political advocacy is retribution for widespread opposition from environmental groups to the massive Northern Gateway oil sands pipeline across British Columbia.

The obscure provision in the budget Thursday to beef up the Canada Revenue Agency’s “enforcement tools” to monitor political activities of charities demonstrates the partisan nature of the Conservative government, opposition MPs said.

NDP MP Megan Leslie (Halifax, N.S.) told The Hill Times the measure is one of several provisions that show the budget, aside from its main thrust of public service spending cuts, is all “pipeline, pipeline, pipeline.”

“The over-arching theme here is this is a budget for the great pipeline to China,” Ms. Leslie said. “This is about pipelines, pipelines, pipelines, and at any cost.”

“Whether it is going after charities, who might have a different opinion, cutting the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy and cutting Environment Canada and not relying on science and evidence, or whether it’s going after the Environmental Assessment Act and weakening it, that’s what this budget says to me, it’s all about pipelines,” Ms. Leslie said.

The reference to political activities of charities was a needle in the haystack of the budget’s total $5.2-billion in broad spending cuts the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) is proposing for the next three years, with a projection that the spending reductions, combined with other economic forecasts, will result in a surplus by 2015, the next federal election year.

But the measure was so unexpected at the traditional pre-budget lockup for journalists that Reuters news correspondent David Ljunggren asked Finance Minister Jim Flaherty (Whitby Oshawa, Ont.) about it at a news conference before Mr. Flaherty tabled the budget in the Commons, asking Mr. Flaherty why the budget was putting the “tax police” on charities.

“We’re not making any changes in the rules relating to charities, we are providing some resources, some additional resources for enforcement of the rules by the Canada Revenue Agency,” Mr. Flaherty said.

“Quite frankly, we’ve had a lot of complaints and concerns expressed by Canadians that when they give money to charities they expect the money to be used for the charities purposes, not for political or other purposes,” he said.

“This not black and white, because the Canada Revenue Agency permits a small percentage of dollars to be used for advocacy and other purposes, but there is clearly a need, in our view, for more vigilance, that charities obey the rules as they are now,” Mr. Flaherty said.

The main budget document noted charities are allowed to engage in political activities, centered primarily on advocacy, as long as the activities are related to their charitable goals and represent a limited portion of their resources—no more than 10 per cent for larger charities.

Read more: http://www.hilltimes.com/news/politics/2012/03/29/feds-attack-charitable-sector-in-budget-for-being-too-political-say-opposition/30234

Share

Watch CTV First Story on Enbridge Pipeline: “Crude Awakening”

Share

Watch this new CTV First Story investigation of the debate over the proposes Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline, “Crude Awakening.” The 23 min documentary examines the conflicts within coastal communities over the promises of jobs from the pipeline vs. the very real threat of an oil spill disaster.

Watch “Crude Awakening”: http://www.ctvbc.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20120321/bc_ctv_first_story_1404_crude_awakening_120322/20120325?hub=BritishColumbiaHome

 

Share