Category Archives: Urban & Transport

Port Metro Vancouver illustration of Deltaport and proposed Terminal 2

No Economic Need for Terminal 2 at Roberts Bank

Share

by Susan Jones

The Vancouver Fraser Port Authority, commonly known as Port Metro Vancouver (PMV), is moving forward with plans to extensively dredge the environmentally-sensitive estuary of the Fraser River to build another man-made island for a new terminal with 3 container berths.  The island will be 115 hectares (284 acres) plus an intermodal yard and a widened causeway with road and rail expansions.  The Project will impact 210 hectares (519 acres) of internationally-significant fish and wildlife habitat at Roberts Bank.  There is no economic or environmental justification for Port Metro Vancouver (PMV) to proceed with these plans.

Port Metro Vancouver claims:

B.C. Container traffic is expected to double over the next 10 to 15 years (2.9 to 5.8 million TEUs)

– Throughput for PMV and Prince Rupert will almost triple (i.e. 9M TEUs) by 2030

However looking at the facts:

Port Metro Vancouver experienced zero net growth in TEUs from 2007 to 2011, with a 14% decrease in 2009.  PMV has been handling about 2.5 million TEUs annually since 2007 with 2.1 in 2009.  There has been little growth in demand for several years. The world economic situation for containers is uncertain.  PMV needs to justify the growth forecasts.

– Prince Rupert is an expanding container port which handled .4 million TEUs in 2011.

– Existing BC port facilities are operating at about 60% of utilization – PMV is operating at about 57% utilization.  Approximately 70% of laden containers coming to the Lower Mainland are destined for elsewhere in Canada.  Approximately 10% are destined to the United States and 20% are B.C. bound.

– If there is growth, PMV and Prince Rupert have plenty of capacity without building a second terminal at Roberts Bank.  With improved efficiencies and planned expansions in the inner harbour and Prince Rupert, the ports will be equipped to handle 9 million TEUs by 2020 and at least 11 million by 2030.    This level of capacity can meet PMV’s most aggressive forecasts for 2030 container traffic.  This is all without Terminal 2 at Roberts Bank.

– A double increase would require a Compound Annual Growth (CAGR) of 7% which is not happening. The current CAGR is less than 2%

– A study commissioned by Port Metro Vancouver shows the PMV is looking at the highest case scenario of growth which is unrealistic:Preliminary Container Traffic Projections for Port Metro Vancouver: 2011 to 2030 – May 27, 2011 by Worley Parsons Canada.

– The current PMV statement is based on the “high case” forecast.  To date, PMV has not even realized the “low case” forecasts.

– The “low case” projection for 2011 was 3.02 million TEUs for PMV and Prince Rupert.  The actual business for 2011 was 2.9 million TEUs (2.5 for PMV and .4 for Prince Rupert).

– The lowest case projections for the Deltaport Third Berth in 2006 have not been realized.  PMV forecast 2.8 to 3.5 million TEUs by 2010.  This has still not been achieved.

Deltaport Third Berth Project Comprehensive Study Report, July 2006, page 37:  The following forecasts, in TEUs, for the Vancouver Port Area, are set out in Table 6:  

Note: These figures do not include Prince Rupert.  In 2010 and 2011 PMV handled 2.5 million TEUs, well below the lowest cast forecast of 2.8 million TEUs.  In fact, PMV handled 2.5 million TEUs annually from 2007 until 2011 (with a drop to 2.1 in 2009).  It appears that there will be some increase in 2012 but still the compound annual growth will only be 2%.

– The Worley Parsons Study of 2008 made forecasts of 5.53 million TEUs to 7.87 million TEUs by 2030 for Port Metro Vancouver terminals (does not include Prince Rupert).  There is already capacity to handle 5 million TEUs in BC.  With planned upgrades at Centerm and efficiency improvements, the capacity can easily reach 7.8 million TEUs by 2030.  The Port of Prince Rupert has capacity for 750,000 TEUs with plans for 2 expansions which will increase capacity to 2 million TEUs and up to 5 million TEUs respectively.

Prince Rupert and Port Metro Vancouver can build to a capacity of 11 to 12 million TEUS by 2030, without ever building Terminal 2.  With a current need for 2.5 to 3 million TEUs, there are plenty of options for gradual growth, if it occurs.

– The Worley Parsons Study of 2008 did not:

  • study in any depth the impact that Prince Rupert port will have on demand in Vancouver
  • consider a scenario of continued lower growth due to the global economic situation
  • explore options for enhancing supply of terminal capacity at the existing Vancouver terminals
  • compare the economic and environmental costs of various options for capacity expansion in the region

– The results of the May 2011 Worley Parsons container traffic study have been over-stated to try and justify the need for Terminal 2.

– The market study by Worley Parsons is inadequate to justify a $2 billion project

– Alternatives can be undertaken at dramatically lower economic and environmental costs

– Economically it is cheaper, and environmentally sensible, to carry out earlier plans for expansions at Centerm and perhaps Vanterm in the deep sea Vancouver harbour before dredging internationally significant habitat at Roberts Bank in the Fraser River estuary.

– Terminal 2 at Roberts Bank is estimated to cost $2 to $2.5 billion.  Port Metro Vancouver requested bids in 2008 and selected a joint venture between APM Terminals North America and SNC-Lavalin (APM Terminals/SNC-Lavalin), as the preferred proponent for the Terminal 2.  None of the bidders was willing to fully fund the project and Port Metro Vancouver may have to find at least $1 billion to fund the project.

– Funding Terminal 2 initial works without operator commitment opens huge new risks for PMV, including unlimited cost exposure, unfair competition claims and unaccountable use of public assets.

– Currently there are about 600,000 containers (TEUs) going through BC ports that are US bound. If the same US/Canada mix applies going forward this could increase to as much as 1.6 mill TEUs. The US has already expressed concerns about BC ports handling US traffic. It could be argued that T2 is being justified solely on the US bound traffic.

– Port Metro Vancouver is moving forward with the Terminal 2 Project without a proper cost/benefit analysis and without credibly considering alternatives.

– Worldwide there is a new focus on shorter logistics chains to reduce the environmental footprint.  The newly dredged and enlarged Panama Canal is scheduled to open in 2015 which will dramatically affect the container trade business on the west coast of North America.

– The new Panama Canal will be the epicenter of a strategic supply chain shift. According to Jones Lang Lasalle, 25% of imports currently coming through the West Coast could shift to East Coast ports as a direct result of the Canal expansion. In fact, the firm cites the Panama Canal as one of the five most compelling change agents in the supply chain going forward. Port Metro Vancouver could therefore lose as much as 600,000 TEUs annually.

– Canadian West Coast container business is important and should be executed with overall planning of best options.  Instead, Port Metro Vancouver competes with Prince Rupert and favours Roberts Bank over the other lower mainland ports, namely Vanterm, Centerm and Surrey Fraser Docks.  PMV also fails to form partnerships with inland terminals which provide ample industrial land.  Ashcroft Terminals is a viable option which is a crossover area for CP and CN railways and it has plenty of industrial land with appropriate infrastructure.

– Port Metro Vancouver is ignoring recommendations from a 2008 study commissioned by David Emerson, federal Minister of Trade, Asia Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative: Strategic Advisor Report:

  • “We recommend that the development of a system of inland terminals as on overall strategy to serve the following purposes:” The document provides 7 purposes including the fact that this would reduce truck traffic and port congestion. (p. 21)
  • “We recommend that policy makers develop container capacity in Prince Rupert before making investments in Vancouver, beyond what have been announced to date. We believe that capacity can be expanded in Prince Rupert relatively quickly and such a strategy will allow time for Vancouver to develop solutions to its congestion.” (p. 12)
  • “We recommend that the ability of ports to finance expansion be reviewed…there must be an appropriate ability to finance this development, for it includes a significant element of risk.  The current structure and rules regarding the financing of ports are completely inadequate.” (p.12)

Port Metro Vancouver is ignoring warnings from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans that:  “there was no possible amount of mitigation projects they could envisage that would compensate for the environmental damage that T2 would cause.” (source:2007 pre-bid meeting for T2)

Terminal 2 at Roberts Bank makes no economic sense and public assets will be exploited to fund an environmental disaster with the wilful destruction of orca, salmon and migratory bird habitat.

Susan Jones is a longtime Tsawwassen resident and researcher on issues related to port and highway expansion in Metro Vancouver.

Share

Northern BC Mayor Pushes for Transit on Highway of Tears

Share

Highway 16, also known as the Highway of Tears, has once again been in the news as new DNA technology allowed police to link a deceased sex offender to the 1974 murder of 16-year-old Colleen MacMillen of Lac La Hache, B.C., who disappeared while hitchhiking. Much of the media attention has focused on how amazing technology allowed police to solve a crime decades after it was committed and years after the murderer died.

However, very little attention has been paid to a forward-looking resolution by Smithers’ Mayor Taylor Bachrach which passed nearly unanimously at the Union of BC Municipalities convention in September. The Highway of Tears Safety Resolution calls for the provincial government to finally implement the recommendation of the 2006 Highway of Tears Symposium Recommendations Report for improved bus service between northern communities. The report points out that most of the murdered and missing are young indigenous women, and that most of the cases are unsolved.

Mayor Bachrach said in a telephone interview with The Common Sense Canadian that improved highway transit service would have “multiple benefits, not the least of which is women’s safety.” He expressed interest in directing carbon tax revenue to both passenger rail and highway bus service as a way to both reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve safety.

Mayor Bachrach, who rides his bicycle for transportation in Smithers and was formerly a commuter on BC Transit’s bus service from the Village of Telkwa to Smithers, defies the stereotypes of rural BC residents as all being wedded to 4-wheel drive pickups. Unlike residents of Metro Vancouver, Bachrach sees the devastating impact of global warming in the form of dead pine trees killed by the pine beetle outbreak set loose by milder winters on a daily basis.

A few hours’ drive south on Highway 16 brings you to Burns Lake, where the local sawmill lies in ruins after an explosion caused by sawing dead pine trees the equipment was never designed to handle. The explosion killed two workers and leaves the economic future of the town in doubt as the timber supply shrinks and becomes less secure with the warming climate.

Without the income to buy and operate cars, young people will put themselves at risk hitchhiking if there is no reasonable and affordable alternative, and in recent years the provincial government has allowed companies including Greyhound to cut service to smaller communities. Owning and driving a car is just not affordable to many in BC’s interior, particularly indigenous youth. The high fares Greyhound charges for short and medium distance trips to smaller communities is a significant barrier to many, even if there is bus service when needed.

Highway bus and passenger train service is an essential safety service, preventing both crash deaths and death from violence, as well as being an essential environmental measure to reduce carbon emissions from excessive automobile use. It is time to put real pressure on the provincial and federal governments to fund good affordable highway bus and passenger train service across the province and country. Public transit is not just an urban issue.

Highway of Tears Safety Resolution – passed by UBCM delegates in Vancouver September 28, 2012:

WHEREAS a number of young women, mostly aboriginal, have been murdered or have gone missing along a stretch of Highway 16 in northern British Columbia now referred to as the “Highway of Tears”;

AND WHEREAS many of these missing women are believed to have been hitch hiking between communities where there is a lack of public transit:

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that UBCM petition the British Columbia government to implement the recommendation of the Highway of Tears Symposium by establishing and funding a shuttle bus service between northern communities.

Share
Vancouver's new housing density and affordability strategy raises concerns

Vancouver’s new housing density and affordability strategy raises concerns

Share

Vancouver's new housing density and affordability strategy raises concerns

Read this story from the Vancouver Sun on a new housing strategy being floated by the City of Vancouver, designed to promote affordability through greater density, that is drawing criticism from a number of sources. (Oct. 3, 2012)

The promise of greater housing affordability in Vancouver through increased community density sits just fine with David Grigg.

The retired engineer and his wife, Ruth, already share their sunny Kitsilano home with two other couples. The three families live in separate units in a single complex built on a corner lot at Cypress and 13th. A coach house over the garage makes for a total of four units on the same property.

“We are of very high density and it works really well. You need compatible neighbours,” Grigg said.

But that doesn’t mean he isn’t worried about a recommendation contained in a proposed city strategy that calls for the introduction of so-called thin streets – roads and lanes narrowed to accommodate new townhouses and row housing – into neighbourhoods such as the West End, Grandview-Woodland and Marpole.

The strategy would also see residential towers up to sixstoreys, condominiums and other higher-density housing to be built along main arterial routes such as Cambie, Dunbar and Hastings streets.

City council is set to vote on a staff report Wednesday that outlines priority steps to put the recommendations into action.

Several members of the public are also expected to air their feelings about the plan at Wednesday’s meeting.

In an interview Tuesday out-side City Hall, where the report was earlier raised for discussion, Grigg said he fears the introduction of thin streets into residential neighbourhoods like his will threaten the existing green space and treescape.

He wanted assurances his own peaceful view – a trade-off both he and those who share the property consciously made when they downsized – could not be suddenly replaced by the wall of an unwanted new neighbour.

“All of us are petrified of losing our (natural) light, because that is what we paid for,” he said.

Share

Clark Turns to Blacktop Politics to Reverse Political Fortunes – Raising New Tunnel and Highway

Share

Read this column from the Province’s Mike Smyth on BC Premier Christy Clark’s latest attempt to turn around her sagging political fortunes – this time with talk of a replacement for the George Massey Tunnel and widening the Canada 1 Highway to Alberta. (Sept. 30, 2012)

By promising to replace the congested Massey Tunnel and build a four-lane highway all the way to Alberta – with an asterisk next to the “promise,” that is – Christy Clark is going old-school on us.

Black-top politics! It’s a proud B.C. tradition, going back to the grand old days of Social Credit, and continuing with the Liberals and NDP, too.

Now Clark is proving she can buy votes with asphalt with the best of ’em.

Who wouldn’t want to escape the Massey Tunnel traffic-jam torture chamber once and for all? And a four-lane Trans-Canada Highway to the Alberta border would be sweet for drivers in the Interior.

Clark threw in a new 16th Avenue interchange for Surrey, and a whole bunch of new school and hospital projects too, in a spending-spree speech to B.C. municipal leaders.

Now, before you get too excited about all this, be aware there are a few catches.

For one thing, you’ll have to vote Liberal in the next election to get all the goodies, because none of this stuff will get built by May. In fact, you’ll probably have to vote Liberal in two or three elections, because these aren’t exactly short-term projects.

Clark said replacing the Massey Tunnel, for example, would take 10 years – yes, an entire decade – to achieve. (Never mind that they put men on the moon faster than that.)

Widening 280 kilometres of the Trans-Canada Highway from two lanes to four also would take a decade, she said. Speedy Gonzales, she ain’t.

Then there’s all the fine print and wriggle room attached to the “promises” as well.

On the Massey Tunnel, Clark only committed to “begin planning” the replacement of the tunnel. Would it be replaced by another tunnel or a bridge? How much would it cost? Would it be tolled?

Clark couldn’t answer any of those questions but, by God, she’s going to start planning to answer them at some point (after the election, that is.)

On the Trans-Canada, Clark said the government is prepared to spend $650 million on the project over the next 10 years. But she wants the federal government to cough up matching funds, and there’s no guarantee that will happen.

At the end of the day, you’re left with some very grand and catchy promises – and a very long and dubious road to achieving them.

And don’t forget that it was just over two weeks ago that Finance Minister Mike de Jong was telling a tale of woe about the province’s budget, and promising to cut spending to contain the deficit.

Now here’s Christy saying she’ll spend hundreds of millions of dollars on new highways, tunnels, schools and hospitals.

Does the public ever notice these contradictions?

Read more: http://www2.canada.com/theprovince/columnists/story.html?id=65fef882-933c-4d63-baf3-b6da106e5670

Share

Cash-Strapped Translink Cutting Back on Expansion Plans

Share

Read this story from the Georgia Straight on Translink’s recent announcement that it will be paring down its plans for expanded service in order to cut costs in the face of a budget deficit. (Sept. 17, 2012)

TransLink is putting off some planned expansion projects over the next three years, including 306,000 hours of increased bus service, after falling short of projected revenues.

But through $98 million in annual efficiencies identified by TransLink over the next three years, the transit authority is planning to proceed with some expansions, such as the region’s contribution to the Evergreen Line project, and an increase of 109,000 in annual hours of transit service.

“There’s 306,000 hours of service that is not going to be introduced over the next three years. It’s needed service, we just can’t deliver it,” Robert Paddon, TransLink’s executive vice-president of strategic planning and public affairs, said at a news conference today (September 17) on the authority’s draft 2013 Base Plan.

Some of the planned projects that will not proceed include expanded SeaBus service on Sundays and holidays outside of the summer months. While B-line service on King George Boulevard will go ahead under the draft plan, the service won’t extend to White Rock Centre as originally anticipated.

In addition to the efficiencies, TransLink will also draw on its reserve fund to maintain existing services and allow some of its planned improvement projects to go ahead.

Some of the other projects that will proceed over the next three years include upgrades to Expo Line stations such as Commercial-Broadway, Metrotown, New Westminster and Joyce-Collingwood. Rapid bus service will be launched on Highway 1 over the Port Mann Bridge between Langley and New Westminster, however a 10-minute frequency along the route will only be offered during peak hours. Buses will run every 30 minutes during off-peak hours.

The 2013 draft plan is contingent on the mayors’ council on regional transportation voting in favour of a two-year $30-million property tax hike. The mayors have previously voted against the increase.

TransLink officials said the transit authority’s budget has been challenged by factors including lower than expected fuel-tax revenues, and lower than anticipated fare and toll revenues.

Read more: http://www.straight.com/article-781151/vancouver/translink-cut-back-some-transit-expansion-projects-part-threeyear-plan

Share
Vancouver's car shares reshaping transportation, cutting carbon emissions

Vancouver’s car shares reshaping transportation, cutting carbon emissions

Share
Vancouver's car shares reshaping transportation, cutting carbon emissions
Car shares like this co-op are fast changing Vancouver’s transportation scene

Read this story from The Tyee on Vancouver’s three diverse and thriving car share programs and how they are reshaping the city’s transportation system and helping to reduce its carbon footprint. (July 31, 2012)

A year back, Alexis Hinde decided to try an experiment: she ditched her private vehicle and switched to a car sharing group. Since then, she said she’s sharply cut back the time she drives.

“It used to be if it was raining I would take my son eight blocks to daycare in the car, because it’s easy to be lazy about that sort of thing. Whereas now if it means having to reserve a car and the expense of that and everything else, I’ll just walk with [my son] to daycare or get on the bike and take him,” she said.

It’s a lifestyle switch that appears to be growing in popularity, as vehicles stenciled with car share company logos become a common sight on Vancouver’s streets. Though each company is different, car shares offer a variety of rental vehicles, often by the hour, and they spare customers the expense of paying directly for maintenance and insurance. After use, share members can drop off vehicles curbside and just walk away. It’s the convenience and potential savings that drew Hinde in.

Of the three car share groups in Metro Vancouver, Modo is now at 9,000 members, up from roughly 7,000 in 2010, and over the last five years, Zipcar has expanded “steadily” to more than 11,000 Vancouver members, according to Business In Vancouver. Car2go has experienced significant growth since setting up shop last year, reporting that 15,000 members have now signed up to drive the company’s small fleet of Smart cars.

And now there’s evidence that growth is starting to achieve what proponents claimed it would. Vancouverites are shedding their private vehicles, reducing their drive times, and lowering their impact on the environment.

Read more: http://thetyee.ca/News/2012/07/31/Car-Shares

Share
Sockeye and other fish and wildlife are threatened by plans to ship jet fuel through the Fraser River estuary (Land Conservancy photo)

Jet Fuel Tankers in Fraser River Would Put Critical Fish Habitat at Risk

Share

As Parliament debates the watering down and the neutering of environmental legislation in Canada you again must be made aware that the lack of leadership by Environment Canada and DFO (with the laws they now have) have allowed one of the most irresponsible projects to be proposed for construction in the world class Fraser River and its globally significant estuary that is home to some of the largest salmon runs and migratory wildlife populations in the world. If Bill C-38 is passed as is, this valuable river and key fishery habitat will receive less protection than it has over the past  few years despite what the Minister Ashfield has promised – a more focused effort to better conserve key habitats and fisheries. This promise is nothing less than a cruel hoax.

The Fraser River is is one of the most critical fishery rivers and key fishery habitats in the world and that fishery does not now receive proper protection and with Bill C-38 it will get much worse. In the past decade DFO and EC have not done their job in enforcing their sections of the Fisheries Act and above all have compromised proper and comprehensive environmental reviews that can harm fish and migratory birds and their essential habitats.

The Vancouver Airport Fuel Facilities Corporation (VAFFC) attempted to barge jet fuel into the Fraser River in 1988. The then Federal Environmental Review Process held proper hearings and rejected that proposal in 1989 as too great a threat to the estuary and public safety. Imagine – better environmental protection some 23 years ago! Despite that finding, the VAFFC refused to build a safer option – a pipeline from the Vancouver Airport to the Cherry Point refinery and large fuel dock near Bellingham in Washington State.

Two years ago VAFFC detected that times had changed and environmental laws were not being applied (despite the misleading claims of the opposite from DFO Minister Ashfield and Ministers Kent and Oliver) and applied to ship giant Panamax tankers of cheaper jet fuel from offshore locations into the very fragile and highly productive Fraser River Estuary, build a large offloading terminal several kilometers upstream and there store up to 80,000,000 litres of toxic and highly flammable jet fuel on the shores of the Fraser River. So as to ignore the Federal CEAA process, whose weak regulations did not even trigger a comprehensive or public panel review of this major project, VAFFC asked the BC Environmental Assesment Office for a voluntary review and Port Metro Vancouver (PMV) then accepted the Province as a lead in a so called harmonized review with PMV. Most citizens and local city councils have found this arrangement totally unacceptable and unethical.

Why would the Federal government allow a junior government lead review when this is a federal airport, federal port, federal migratory birds, federal fish and habitat and relates to a federal pilotage authority, federal navigable waters and Canadian shipping laws? Also why would the Federal Government delegate environmental impact review to the port (PMV) that is dedicated to industrial development in fish and wildlife habitat areas? This is one of the greatest conflicts of interest imaginable. In this project, PMV will indeed profit from any project approval. Only a lower level Environment Canada official to date has stated in writing that this project is unacceptable (August 2011) – i.e.: “The project would present a new and unacceptable risk to the locally, nationally and internationally-important fish and wildlife populations of the Fraser River Estuary, including migratory birds and species at risk…” and “Environment Canada is of the opinion that there is a limited ability with currently available technologies to effectively control a potential Jet-A fuel spill in the Fraser river Estuary”.

Last week the PMV released a new report rationalizing the low risk of tanker traffic in the Fraser River. This is despite the fact that the VAFFC could have up to 100 tankers and barges a year entering the estuary full of toxic and  flammable jet fuel. We have had a safety systems engineer review the tanker traffic report produced by offshore consultants for PMV. A covering letter from VAPOR and the VAPOR tanker traffic critique are attached for your information and action.

It is urgently requested that BC MLAs and federal MPs look into this matter, in that we are witnessing a serious slide into a high risk activity in this world class fish and wildlife habitat area and the BC and Federal environmental assessment processes seem unwilling to relate to this project in a a serious or meaningful way. Also if Bill C-38 is passed by the Harper Government, this type of irresponsible risk exposure to our environment and public safety is bound to increase greatly over the next several years and our living resources in the river and their habitats will again be further degraded. Our children and grand children will damn those that allowed this to happen.

It is urgent that you now act on these matters in that Canada will be greatly diminished if this type of irresponsible environmental planning and assessment is allowed to continue.

Share
Economist and author Jeff Rubin (image: gulfofmexicooilspillblog)

Renowned Energy Economist, Peak Oil Expert Jeff Rubin Speaking at Capilano This Thursday

Share

Former CIBC World Markets Chief Economist-turned Peak Oil spokesperson Jeff Rubin will be discussing his latest book, The End of Growth, at Capilano University this Thursday evening, starting at 7:30.

After building a successful career out of accurately predicting the rise and fall of oil prices for his clients, Rubin shocked many in the financial community when he left his position at CIBC to focus on informing the public about the dangers of an oil-dependent globalized economic model. He and a growing number of energy and economics experts believe the end of cheap, easy-to-get fossil fuels means higher and more volatile energy prices which will render the distance and energy-intensive global economy unworkable in the near future.

Rubin’s first book on the subject, Why Your World is About to Get A Whole Lot Smaller: Oil and the End of Globalization became a Canadian bestseller in 2009, launching his career as an author and public speaker on issues surrounding Peak Oil.

The Toronto-based Rubin’s stop in North Vancouver is part of a speaking tour publicizing his sophomore effort, The End of Growth.

In addition to his two books, Rubin publishes a weekly blog on the Globe and Mail’s website, titled Jeff Rubin’s Smaller World. 

On his own website, Rubin explains:

It wasn’t subprime mortgages but triple-digit oil prices that brought down the world economy.

And unless that economy started to wean itself off an ever-depleting supply of affordable oil, there would be other recessions to follow as economic recoveries would simply push oil prices right back into triple-digit range. But weaning our economy off oil meant, at the same time, making fundamental changes in the way we live.

This is not the kind of message investment banks want their chief economists delivering these days, to either governments or investors. But the urgency of this message grows with every passing day.

Tickets for Thursday night’s show are available online through Capilano University.

 

Share
Jericho Sailing Club slams Harper's closure of Kits Point Coast Guard Station

CKNW: Jericho Sailing Club slams Harper’s closure of Kits Point Coast Guard Station

Share

Jericho Sailing Club slams Harper's closure of Kits Point Coast Guard Station

Read this story from CKNW on the reaction to the Harper Government’s decision to close Kits Point Light Station without public consultation. (May 22, 2012)

The General Manager of the Jericho Sailing Centre says closing the Kits Point Coast Guard station impacts the safety of all marine recreational users.

Mike Cotter says with 250,000 boat launches a year they have their own volunteer rescue team who could now see their number of emergency call outs double.

Cotter says there was certainly no consulation before closing the coast guard station despite comments from Heritage Minister James Moore.

“I am baffled when I see the Ministers comments that this had broad public consulation before hand, it certainly didn’t. Our facility is putting more individuals out on the water for recreation than any other facility in the Vancouver area and this is the first time we have heard of it.”

He says it is disappointing to see a decision like this made in Ottawa by people who have no idea what local needs are.

“I would like to see them come out to Vancouver and take a first hand look at the situation and not sit back in Ottawa and make a decision that really affects people here, safety here. In the face of growth in recreational boating in the growth of marine tanker traffic through Burrard inlet this makes no sense at all.”

Cotter warns the move will negatively impact safety.

“I would like to invite the Minister {James Moore} to come down to Jericho and I will give him a tour in a rescue boat and he can see for himself because I think from his vantage point he is not getting a clear picture.”

He says the coast guard are also first reponders in the event of an oil spill in Burrard inlet and moving them farther away makes no sense.

Read original post: http://www.cknw.com/Channels/Reg/NewsLocal/Story.aspx?ID=170744

Share
McNab Beach - just below a proposed gravel mine in Howe Sound

Gravel Mining Project Threatens Ecological, Recreational Treasure in Howe Sound

Share

“Anywhere else in the world, Howe Sound would be a great National Park”
  Dr. Murray Newman, Former Executive Director – Vancouver Aquarium

A large part of the beauty and international appeal of British Columbia’s West Coast can be found in the natural environment of Howe Sound.  Over the past 20 years, Howe Sound has been the subject of millions of dollars in reclamation projects to restore its health, paid for by industry and you the taxpayer.  Regrettably an Alberta based company has proposed a large scale gravel mining and crushing facility at McNab creek that will set back these rehabilitation efforts, especially for local salmon populations.  This proposal comes at a time when the recovering health of the Sound has led to sightings of Pacific white-sided dolphins and grey and killer whales for the first time in decades. We should not allow this progress to be placed at risk.

The massive project as filed by Burnco Rock Products Ltd, envisions at least 1 million tonnes of gravel extracted per year from the creekbed area with spikes up to 4 million tonnes. During the project’s first phase, a 77 hectare industrial pit would be dug out of the McNab Creek estuary to depths of 55 metres below surface grade and more than 15 metres below the water table.

According to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO), the proposed project is likely to result in the destruction of fish habitat which cannot be compensated elsewhere in the Sound.  In its comment on the project, the DFO stated that they “continue to have serious concerns about the extent of the impacts to fish and fish habitat that may result from this project” and concluded that “The project presents a high risk to Salmon and Salmon habitat.”

In addition to the risks to fish habitat, the project description indicates the site could be home to up to 20 species at risk, including a population of Roosevelt Elk that were transplanted to McNab Creek by the BC Ministry of Environment in 2001 in an effort to re-introduce the species to the area.  The McNab Creek estuary and surrounding waters are extensively used for recreational and commercial fishers, tourism operators, boaters, recreational property owners, numerous children’s camps and other compatible users – all placed in profound jeopardy by the Burnco proposal. 

Despite concerns voiced by DFO, local governments and local community groups, the Burnco project has recently begun a review by the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.

This unfortunate situation clearly illustrates the absence of a long term planning strategy for Howe Sound.  The need for a specific Howe Sound plan has been formally recognized by twelve local governments and First Nations representing the communities in the Sea to Sky corridor.   In September 2002, they signed a “Principles of Co-operation” Agreement which identified the importance of community involvement in the consideration of issues affecting Howe Sound and the need to “work together for the greater good because territorial lines on a map mean nothing in terms of sustainability”.  Notwithstanding the wishes of local governments and First Nations, the review of the Burnco project is proceeding without any long term planning process involving those interested parties.

If approved, the Burnco Mine proposal will cause permanent, irreversible damage to a unique natural estuary that is home to at risk species and will also endanger ongoing efforts to sustain marine biodiversity in Howe Sound. In addition, important jobs and significant economic activity and opportunity in recreational tourism and commercial fishery will be put at risk.

Currently, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) review of the project is underway and the initial public comment period on the proposed project closed on February 3, 2012.  CEAA is reviewing the project description and is expected to issue the draft Environmental Impact Study guidelines shortly.  The draft guidelines will be subject to public comment and there is expected to be further opportunity for public participation at other stages in the review.  A companion review will also be conducted at the Provincial level and the BC Environmental Assessment Office is expected to initiate the process by the issuance of the draft Application Information Requirements (AIR) later this spring.  There will be public comment solicited on the AIR.  There is expected to be further opportunities for public participation during the Provincial review process although no timeline for public participation has been published at this time.

It is critical that members of the public and community groups make their voices heard during both the Federal and Provincial review processes.  Information on the Federal CEAA review can be obtained at www.ceaa.gc.ca and on the BC EAO review at www.eao.gov.bc.ca

Further developments regarding the next steps in this review process and details of how to make your views known will be posted at futureofhowesound.org.  To be kept informed of the status of the review process, join our mailing list for ongoing updates.

Les Morton is a representative of the Future of Howe Sound Society.

Share