Category Archives: Pipelines and Supertankers

Enbridge, Harper and Consequences for Speaking Out

February 2, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, PoliticsBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, Oil and gas, Politics, rafe mairRafe Mair

Did Prime Minister Harper threaten Tides Canada with “consequences” if they didn’t stop funding supporting campaigns – specifically that of ForestEthics – against the Enbridge Pipeline project?

ForestEthics says so, which is enough to have all Canadians, no matter what their stance on this issue or others, demand the Prime Minister make it clear that all Canadians, subject to the Criminal Code of Canada, have a constitutional right to say what they please on all issues, big and small – without consequences.

I have had experience with this. Back in 1992, when the Mulroney government was shoving the Charlottetown Accord at us, I was one of a very few people in the media that was opposed and said so with a passion.

One day my “mole” in the Conservative caucus – and at the same time a national media person – told me that Mulroney was going to retaliate against me by having me face a tax audit. I went on the air the following morning and reported this on the hope that this would discourage such a threat. Whether it worked or not I cannot say – I can say that no such audit was ordered.

The information I was given may not have been accurate but the sources were such that I felt very vulnerable.

(Before going on let me say that in those days I was making a lot of money from different places and had one of Canada’s best tax accountants, Russ Wilson, handling my affairs, as he still does. As with anyone making that kind of money there are always “grey” areas so that a tax audit could simply stop you cold in whatever you were doing until their audit was over. Ask any small business person what that kind of interruption can do…These days, an old man, I make very little money, have no pensions other than OAP and CPP, and we travel on our kids’ inheritance, so I’m not much of a legitimate target.)

I raise this issue because there is no end of ways a government can hassle you with “consequences” but this is a very effective one.

The “consequences” Tides Canada would pay, as I understand, would be taking away their charitable tax status, and by extension, their ability to support other environmental organizations and their own affiliate groups like ForestEthics. In the environmental field there are a number of very competent active and effective groups who have such an exemption, without which they simply couldn’t function.

The government doesn’t have to take away the exemption – all they have to do is threaten to do so, “or else”.

Let me be clear: I do not say that this will become Mr Harper’s way of shutting us all up. I have no evidence to support such an allegation other than the Tides/ForestEthics matter.

What I do say is that this sort of tactic has been used before – in the Richard Nixon days it was common.

What I also say is that the pipelines/tankers issue is shaping up to be a huge fight with the Harper Government, the oil and tanker businesses and most of the business community lined up against ordinary citizens and distinctly unwealthy environmental groups and spokespeople.

We who stand resolutely against the ruination of our environment also have the mainstream media against us. It’s a daunting task yet what I read and hear every day is support from ordinary, decent British Columbians who are undaunted by this huge array of corporate and government power.

The collision between Mr. Harper and the people of British Columbia is being made more certain by every assurance the PM gives to companies and governments that the gunk from the Tar Sands will be available to them. Every utterance from him and his Resources Minister Joe Oliver makes it clear that environmental hearings are nothing more than a nuisance and should be cast aside so we “can get on with it”.

I have left the biggest issue to the last: First Nations. The federal government has many financial arrangements with First Nations. Will there be “consequences” for the 131 Chiefs who oppose the pipeline/tanker plan from the heart; from the depths of their long heritage?

We are en route to a very serious collision and the purpose of this article is twofold: warn the public about how governments in the past have fought issues and demand from Prime Minister Harper that he state clearly and unequivocally that dissent on this or any other issue will not come “with consequences” from him and/or the federal government.

If we cannot have that assurance, look for serious consequences for people who put their environment, their treasures, the very soul of this province ahead of ruining it by people outside our province, who don’t give a fiddler’s fart for our feelings about our land and rivers and flora.

We are listening, listening very hard Mr Harper, for your clear unequivocal statement that we can oppose your plans without “consequences”.

The Race to Get Liquid Natural Gas from BC to China

January 31, 2012Energy and Resources, Fracking, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, fracking, Oil and gasCommon Sense Canadian

Read this article from the Financial Post on the race to build gas pipelines and up to six liquid natural gas (LNG) processing facilities in BC to ship gas to the Asian market. (Jan. 28, 2012)

KITIMAT, B.C. — In a climate of growing hostility toward energy industry development across North America, Timothy Wall, president of the Canadian unit of Houston-based Apache Corp., took the road less travelled to the heart of Kitimat.

He flew multiple times to the 9,000-resident town on the northern British Columbia coast to ensure support for his liquefied natural gas plans.

He unleashed a team to explain the challenges and the benefits.

He won over the local aboriginals, the Haisla Nation, by meeting with them, acknowledging their rights, making them his landlords.

“We had a big push … trying to make this a win-win for everybody,” Mr. Wall, who is originally from Houston, said in an interview.

“We told the stakeholders in the Kitimat area that there would be challenges, but that we would work through them. That with everybody pulling in the right way, we would get there.”

The two-year effort paid off with widespread community support for Apache’s plan to pipe natural gas from fields at the other end of the Rockies, build a terminal down the canal in Bish Cove to liquefy it, and transport it by tanker to Asia.

All this at a time the same community was giving another major project, the Northern Gateway oil sands pipeline, a rough ride.

“Adversaries” and “Allies” of Tar Sands Named in Harper Government Strategy Documents

January 31, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western CanadaBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, Oil and gas, PoliticsCommon Sense Canadian

Read this report from CBC.ca on federal government documents recently obtained by Greenpeace that show the Harper Government listing off “allies” and “adversaries” to the Tar Sands. (Jan. 31, 2012)

The federal government considers the media, the biodiesel industry and environmental and aboriginal groups “adversaries” in its attempt to advocate for Alberta’s oilsands, according to documents obtained under access to information legislation.

Energy companies, the National Energy Board, Environment Canada, business and industry associations, meanwhile, are listed as “allies” in a public relations plan called the “Pan-European Oil Sands Advocacy Strategy.” It is dated March 2011.

The documents were obtained by Greenpeace Canada and Climate Action Network and released to the media on Thursday. The groups say Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government is working hand-in-hand with the oil industry to silence critics.

Time for Dix to Take a Stand on Pipelines and Tankers

January 27, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western CanadaBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, KinderMorgan, Oil and gas, PoliticsRafe Mair

This is an open letter to NDP leader Adrian Dix and his Energy Critic, John Horgan.

It’s time, gentlemen, to pee or get off the pot.

The issues of the proposed Enbridge pipelines and tanker traffic on our coast demand your immediate statement of policy.

In order that there be no misunderstandings, here are the facts, gentlemen – not assertions or opinions but plain simple to understand facts:

A spill from both pipelines and tankers is a dead certainty.
There is no way these spills can be cleaned up.
The record of Enbridge is appalling.
First Nations, be they on the coast or along the proposed pipeline right of way are opposed – 131 of them.
Neither the federal government nor Enbridge have considered the real possibility of terrorism or vandalism.

The pipelines, one to take the bitumen to Kitimat and the other to take gas condensate back, traverse arguably the last untouched rain forest on earth. It’s certainly as rugged and remote from civilization as anywhere else.

Unlike other pipelines Enbridge has built, the route for the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline crosses the rugged, mountainous terrain of the Northern Rockies and the Coast Mountains of British Columbia. Enbridge has no experience in this sort of terrain – most likely because no other government has been so stupid and uncaring as to give them or anyone else a right-of-way. The pipeline would cross some 1,000 streams and rivers, including sensitive salmon spawning habitat in the upper Fraser, Skeena, and Kitimat watersheds. Five important salmon rivers that would be impacted are the Stuart River, Morice River, Copper River, Kitimat River and Salmon River.

Surely you must be shocked to know that this pipeline is to be constructed by Enbridge which, since 1998, has had 811 “accidents”. The bottom line is, gentlemen, that this project would, beyond any doubt, have spills in terrain inaccessible except by helicopter, which spills would have a disastrous and permanent impact on our beautiful province.

There is nothing Enbridge can do after a spill – they can’t get there. Certainly no heavy equipment could be taken there and, even if it could, the damage will be permanent.

A useful step would be to look at the situation in the Kalamazoo River where Enbridge had a leak in July 2010 which has not been cleaned yet and never will be – the damage is forever. (You will note that Kalamazoo, Michigan is not deep inside rugged mountains.)

Let’s look at tankers on the coast.

Again, a spill is a mathematical certainty, certified as such by Environment Canada, scarcely full of radicals. Double hulling will help diminish the number of spills but they still are a certainty. In the past two years 4 double hulls have sunk.

Just as a luxury cruise ship can run aground in broad daylight under sunny skies and kill 29 people, a tanker will spill. And the consequences will be horrible.

Then there is the Kinder Morgan line into Vancouver. I’m not in a position to compare the old Trans -Mountain line with the proposed Enbridge line nor compare the consequences of a leak. What I can say is that there will be leaks – as there were earlier this week near Abbotsford and in Burnaby before that – and the spill will be permanent. With a tanker accident in Burrard Inlet and the Strait of Juan De Fuca, surely you can visualize the calamity that would mean to the Gulf Islands and southern coast of Vancouver Island and to the North Arm of Burrard Inlet and Vancouver Harbour itself.

Again, gentlemen, we are not talking risks but certainties.

Mr. Dix, Mr. Horgan, what more do you need for you to speak out in firm commitment from you and the NDP condemning the proposed Enbridge pipeline, the tanker traffic out of Kitimat, the expansion of the Kinder Morgan pipeline and tanker traffic through and out of Vancouver?

I wish to speak plainly. There are many who think that the Common Sense Canadian supports the NDP.

We do not – we stand for a political commitment against the catastrophes I have described. That commitment cannot fairly be inferred from snippets of criticism, but only by you, Mr. Dix, declaring your firm opposition to these certain pipeline/tanker disasters.

If you don’t take a firm stand, what is to differentiate your position from that of Premier Clark?

Kinder Morgan’s Latest Oil Spill in Abbotsford Raises Concerns About the Company’s Planned Pipeline Expansion

January 25, 2012Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Health and Environment, KinderMorgan, Oil and gasCommon Sense Canadian

Read this story from The Vancouver Sun on the recent oil spill at Kinder Morgan’s Abbotsford tank farm and why it rasises concerns about the company’s planned pipeline and tanker expansion in the Lower Mainland. (Jan. 25, 2012)

ABBOTSFORD — A crude oil spill at Kinder Morgan’s Abbotsford facility on Tuesday should serve as a wake-up call about the inherent risks associated with the energy company’s proposed expansion of its Trans Mountain pipeline, according to a national environmental group.

“This should be a reminder to people that there is a very serious risk of oil spills when you’ve got oil pipelines and oil tankers,” said Ben West, a Vancouver-based healthy communities campaigner for the Wilderness Committee.

Abbotsford residents first reported to police and fire service a strong oil smell as early as 4:30 a.m., according to Abbotsford police spokesman Const. Ian MacDonald.

Police investigated and determined it was coming from Kinder Morgan’s Sumas terminal site, in the 4100-block of Upper Sumas Mountain Road.

The spill was in a “containment area” and the only threat to residents was that of “nuisance odours,” said Kinder Morgan spokeswoman Lexa Hobenshield.

“We have placed foam on the oil, which should dissipate the odours significantly,” she said. The cleanup is expected to be completed sometime today, Hobenshield said. It is not known how much oil was released.

Rafe Tells Harper and Oliver He’s Ready for the Bulldozers

January 25, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western CanadaBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, Oil and gas, PoliticsRafe Mair

Joe Oliver, Harper’s Resources minister, is a dangerous man. Indeed so is Harper. They have flung down the gauntlet, essentially saying that violence is the inevitable consequence of BC not taking the Enbridge Pipeline, the consequent tanker traffic, increased capacity and tankers for the Kinder Morgan line – with only a grumble or two from bitching NDP types.

What should really get our juices jumping is the statement that environmental hearings should proceed speedily and obstacles removed from these projects. it obviously being unthinkable that they could stop them.

That is ill-disguised code for, “Listen you assholes, we don’t give a damn about the public process – just get it over with so we can get on with the construction. It doesn’t matter that this monstrous Tar Sands gunk is to be transported through your pristine forests, mountain and streams – get on with it.”

“Pay no attention, peasants, to the fact that Enbridge has had over 800 spills since 1998 and that experience shows that the mess can never be cleaned up.”

“Disregard your stupid bloody salmon – if Newfoundland can get by without cod, you can get by without salmon and, come to think of it, if you have adult seals, there must be pups somewhere to bludgeon and we’ll find a subsidy for you.”

“There’s lots of money there for First Nations so stop bringing them into the discussion – as soon as we find out what their price is we’ll pay it and get on with it…why we in the federal government have been dealing with these savages, er First Nations, since 1867 and they trust us.”

“And who gives a damn that the people in BC are against these projects – we run things here!”

I oppose violence with every remaining sinew in my body but I’m saying to Harper and Oliver that violence is what their policies will bring. I haven’t had a fight since about Grade VII and I lost that one but I can tell you that I’m prepared to stand in the way of that first shovel and take the consequences. And I say to you both that you’re making a mistake if you think you can do these things without very serious consequences.

There is no middle way, Prime Minister – this Tar Sands gunk has to go by train or truck through Alberta to Houston because it isn’t coming though BC or through her waters.

Do you understand what this issue means to us, Prime Minister?

Look what happened in Alberta with the National Energy Plan! There were no environmental hazards involved, just money. The country was shaken to its roots by this policy and the Tories could only get into government and stay there by promising to tube the program.

That policy was politically inconsequential compared to the pipelines and tankers.

Think on this Mr. Harper: the roar from BC has not come about from the lack of money accompanying the pipelines – because it’s not about the money – yet you tell us a bunch of barnyard droppings about the billions of dollars and thousands of jobs. Even if that crap was true we’ll not be bought off.

You talk as if First Nations will no doubt succumb to a billion dollar bribe and act as if this is just a money game and that you simply haven’t reached high enough for them.

What if you’re wrong, Mr. Harper – even you must consider the possibility of error. What then? Do you expect the First Nations to do nothing?

I believe you are dead wrong about our First Nations and you’re a damned fool if you simply go into your Ottawa shell and pull the covers over your head.

Prime Minister, you seem to be oblivious of the damage you’re doing.

The province of BC knows that these hearings are phoney but in a curious way they help us because they give people a place to vent their feelings and come together for the fight.

We know that you couldn’t care less that Enbridge has had 811 “accidents” since 1998. But take a moment, Mr. Harper, to check out the July 2010 Enbridge spill in Michigan’s Kalamazoo River; compare that geography with ours and you’ll see that there is no way Enbridge could do anything about a spill in British Columbia, even if they could get anything to it. It’s a problem of nature that not even you and Mr. Oliver can do anything about. Bitumen, because of its viscous nature, is like black ooze – you can’t get rid of it.

We know from experience that spills from tanker accidents last for decades.

MOSTLY WE KNOW WE KNOW THAT ON LAND AND AT SEA, ACCIDENTS ARE NOT RISKS BUT CERTAINTIES.

You must know these things too, Prime Minister, so why are you doing this to us?

Harper Govt Recieves Funding From Same US Foundations That Fund Enbridge Opposition

January 25, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Pipelines and Supertankers, PoliticsBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, PoliticsCommon Sense Canadian

Watch this video from CTV News reporting that several federal government programs receive charitable funds from some of the same US Foundations who support of Canadian anti-Enbridge campaigns. (Jan. 24, 2012)

OTTAWA — Rich American foundations are not only footing the bill for opposition to Canada’s oilsands.

Tax returns show the Canadian government has also been the beneficiary of millions of dollars in largesse from some of the wealthiest private organizations in the United States.

And some of that money came from the same U.S. groups that helped fund Canadian environmentalists.

The grants to the federal government come to light as Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservatives and the pro-oilsands website EthicalOil.org take Canadian environmental groups to task for accepting money from big American foundations to finance their campaigns against the oilsands.

Read story and watch video: http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20120122/canadian-government-received-us-foundation-grants-120122/

Whistleblower’s Affidavit Says Harper Govt. Threatened Tides Foudation and ForestEthics Over Enbridge Opposition

January 25, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Pipelines and Supertankers, PoliticsBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, PoliticsCommon Sense Canadian

Read this story from The Winnipeg Free Press on the case of a recently fired whistleblower’s contention that the Harper Government threatened Vancouver-based charitable organization the Tides Foundation with shutting down all its charitable operations if it didn’t cut off funding to ForestEthics – for its work opposing the Enbridge pipeline. (Jan 24, 2012)

A former employee of an environmental group critical of a proposed oilsands pipeline says the Prime Minister’s Office threatened a funding agency if it didn’t pull its support for the group.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper denies the allegations.

In a sworn affidavit released Tuesday to The Canadian Press, Andrew Frank says he was told by his supervisor at ForestEthics that a PMO official had referred to their organization as an “enemy of the state.” The affidavit describes how staff were told their jobs were at risk after the official told Tides Canada, which supports the work of ForestEthics, that the government would “take down” all of the agency’s projects unless it cut ForestEthics loose.

Tides gets most of its money from private foundations and funds a wide array of social and environmental charities in Canada — from Big Brothers and Big Sisters to the World Wildlife Fund. It also partners with major corporations and governments, including federal government agencies.

Frank was fired from his job as communications adviser at ForestEthics on Monday over his plans to go public.

Should BC Have a Referendum on Enbridge?

January 23, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western CanadaBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, Politics, rafe mairRafe Mair

If there’s one thing above all politicians hate it’s democracy. For God’s sake, we can’t have the rabble have a say in decisions! Let them do this once and we’ll never get to run the province again! They believe that we live in a parliamentary, representative “democracy” which means that we hire people, called representatives, to do our thinking for us and take decisions in our name.

Any thinking citizen knows that the public, for many reasons, cannot grapple with all the issues and email a vote on each one. The theory of our government, runs the mantra, is that at election time we can throw those we disagree with out on their duffs. That, at any rate, is the theory.

In practice that doesn’t happen, which means that a government does what it wishes – subject only to elections every four years at which time new issues cloud the old.

There is a way that the public can be consulted: a referendum. This is a tool used in many different ways, under different systems – sometimes as a method to get rid of a politician, sometimes to eradicate legislation, sometimes only to go to governments as popular advice.

I believe there are issues of such importance that the voter must be called upon to render its opinion and I say that the Enbridge pipelines and tanker traffic are just such issues.

On the national scene, in 1992 we had a referendum on changing our constitution when the government could have sought approval of the provinces. This vote was held because the issues went to the root of our social contract.

The referendum resulted in heavy debate in the country, especially in BC. Canada turned down the proposed agreement with BC by far the biggest “no” vote.

In BC recently we had a referendum on the HST. It was easy to handle on the technical side and the public made its decision.

Whether or not that vote was an example of a debate that went to the root of our system of governance is debatable but I give you an issue that clearly does. I refer to the proposed twin pipelines to Kitimat, the subsequent tanker traffic and the expansion of the Kinder Morgan line and its increase in tanker traffic on the south coast. This package of policies to bring bitumen to our coast and ship it by tanker does indeed present a permanent change in policy on an issue that certainly goes to the root of our way of life.

That these Enbridge pipelines will leak is now beyond debate and it’s crystal clear that even if the company does get to a spill in wilderness BC, there is nothing it can do – the damage will be permanent. It’s the same, we surely must agree, with a tanker spill in our coastal waters. Enbridge has an appalling record, over 800 spills since 1998. Moreover, apart from temporary jobs in construction and a handful of permanent jobs, BC gets nothing for being the overland conduit for the highly toxic bitumen from the Tar Sands.

Prime Minister Harper and his Resources Minister Joe Oliver are talking about this all being a done deal.

Does the destruction of our environment not seem to you to be a matter we the public should have a say in?

In making this case I understand that it would not disturb First Nations land and other claims.

Let’s be clear on this – Prime Minister Harper hasn’t any time for democracy.

Because these issues are so important, Premier Clark should hold a referendum but she hasn’t the courage – she’s afraid to threaten Harper on the HST and of more concern, she wants Harper to withhold all support for John Cummins at the local level. That should be easy since Harper and Cummins loathe one another.

So to Premier Photo-Op: Madam, BC has jurisdiction over its coastline so let’s have that referendum.

Oops! I nearly forgot – is the debate I proposed between you and me on our environmental policy a go?

Surely you, with an entire government behind you, can’t be afraid of taking on an old man who would only bring to the debate all he has left – a fire in his belly!

Back to business – will you have a referendum and let the people decide what must be the law concerning pipelines and tanker traffic in this province of ours?

If not, why not?

Enbridge sustainable alternative

January 21, 2012Energy and Resources, Pipelines and SupertankersBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, EnbridgeCommon Sense Canadian

The sustainable alternative to the proposed Enbridge pipeline is not twinning the Trans-Mountain pipeline and increasing tanker traffic in Burrard Inlet. With decentralized energy systems we no longer need to pay the greatest part of the cost (economic, ecological and ethical) of centralized energy: transmission and distribution.

On-site solar, wind and geothermal systems, added to energy-efficient buildings and technologies, can supply all sectors: industrial, commercial, government, and residential. Added to the electricity grid, renewables stabilize it, reduce risk of rolling blackouts, and add energy when the owners have what they need. With renewable energy available at every location—including home charging for your electric car—we can save oil for lubrication, and leave tar in the ground.

A pipeline and more tar sands would cost trillions of shareholder and taxpayer dollars. Investing these in efficiency (we waste more than half of the electricity we generate) and renewables instead, can supply on-site heat and electricity across the country, while creating countless jobs and industries in every local economy.

Instead of wasting resources on the old errors, we can renew local economies here and in Asia. Now is the moment to start on the win-win path that also leaves something for future generations.

The Common Sense Canadian

Critical discussion of key issues shaping our economy and environment.