Tag Archives: BC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers

Energy Minister Coleman Scolds Terrace Council for Opposing Enbridge

February 17, 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 CTV.ca on BC Liberal Energy Minister Rich Coleman’s recent comments scolding Terrace city council for coming out officially in opposition to the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipelines. (Feb 15, 2012)

Coleman said Wednesday he can’t tell municipal politicians what to do, but he prefers local politicians to follow the B.C. government and hold off on taking a stand on the controversial project until the completion of federal environmental review hearings in 2013.

“We’ve said all along, the premier’s said all along, we’re going to wait for that (joint review panel) process. I think some of these other jurisdictions should do the same,” he said.

Coleman said he believes it’s important to let the federal review process play itself out before deciding whether or not to support the Enbridge Inc., Northern Gateway project.

More than 60 B.C. First Nations and aboriginal organizations have signed a declaration opposing the plan to build a 1,177-kilometre twin pipeline from Alberta to the northwest B.C. port of Kitimat, where huge oil tankers will ship oil to Asia and the United States.

The Union of B.C. Municipalities also voted against the oil pipeline at their meeting last fall. Terrace announced its opposition at a council meeting earlier this week.

“You’ve got to wait until you hear it all,” said Coleman. “This is an important project for Canada, everybody knows that, and through this process there could be tweaks and changes that would actually allay people’s concerns that may be out there.”

Terrace councillors voted 5-2 Monday to oppose the pipeline, saying the project may be good for Ottawa and Alberta, but leaves Terrace, Kitimat and the surrounding communities with few benefits and most of the environmental risk.

Veteran Fish Scientist Highlights Key Risks from Enbridge Pipelines

February 17, 2012Energy and Resources, Fisheries, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, Oil and gas, SalmonDr. Gordon F. Hartman

Dr. Gordon Hartman is a retired senior biologist and manager for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans with a deep knowledge of the region affected by the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline. Here he provides an essential summary of the threats from the pipeline to fish populations as well as the very real geological concerns surrounding the project.

Introduction

There are very serious and reasonable concerns about the risk of tanker traffic accidents as the ‘oil’ starts its 150+ km tanker journey from near Kitimat, through the narrow Douglas Channel to the open ocean. A report by Anthony Swift and four other authors presents a ‘must read’ review, “Pipeline and Tanker Trouble: The Impact to British Columbia’s Communities, Rivers, and Pacific Coastline from Tar sands Oil Transport”.

The following short article examines three of the specific risks that exist in the 1,170 km double pipeline before the oil ever gets to the tankers. In the report by Anthony Swift and others, 11 ‘special places at risk’ are listed.

In the proposed ‘double line’ system up to 525,000 barrels/day, of bitumen and a diluting condensate, are to be pumped ‘westward’ in a 91 cm pile line. Diluting condensate, from off shore, is to be pumped ‘eastward’ at a rate of up to 193,000 barrels/day (Bustard and Miles 2011). A major failure, caused by an event such as a landslide, would release materials from both lines.

The following article is based, to a large degree, on the articles that are listed at the end. Such a list is clearly not comprehensive. Regardless of that, because they are based on work done by people with decades of competent professional experience, it is clear that there are serious risks along the line before the oil ever reaches the tankers. Pipeline spills into rivers in Northwest B.C. mountains: ‘not if, but when’.

Geological Concerns

The proposed corridor crosses three different physiographic units, each of which presents different hazards to a pipeline. “The geology and geomorphology of west central B.C is complex and destructive landslides are common. Various landslide types have occurred along the proposed pipeline corridor within the defined physiographic units:” (Schwab 2011). The types of landslide and the risks are discussed in this paper.

There are three things that are important to note:

There are several kinds of slope failures that may affect land uses below them
Some of these landslides originate far upslope, travel several km, and become large and destructive. Remedial measures are not easy to plan for
Most of the dated and large landslides are associated with wet, warm, weather. Climate change patterns suggest conditions will become warmer and wetter.

These points barely touch on the details of Schwab’s report. However, they should indicate, even for starters, that much of the approximately 220 km western end of this proposed corridor is a risky and problematic route in which to build large, double, high volume oil pipelines.

Risks to a Population of Large, Biologically Distinct, Rainbow Trout

A paper by Hagen (2011) presents special concern about risks to the habitat of a race of large and unique Rainbow trout. The proposed route crosses the upper reaches of the Sutherland River, at the eastern end of Babine Lake. This river supports a population of large, biologically distinct Rainbow trout.These fish are similar to the world famous Gerrard Rainbow trout from Kootenay Lake.

The proposed pipeline route ‘traverses through the upper portion of the core spawning and rearing habitats’ of the Sutherland River trout. About 95% of the area below the pipeline crossing of the Sutherland River has been rated by the Provincial Protected Areas Team as having ‘very high conservation values’.

The remoteness, complex habitat, and very limited access of the drainage make the Sutherland River a very difficult area to reach if a pipeline break and spill were to occur at its upper end.

This population of fish contributes, in a major way, to the economically and socially valuable trout fishery of Babine Lake. Furthermore, no other population of large, piscivorous, Rainbow trout has been identified in Babine Lake.

Risks to a High Production Section of the Morice River

Some of the most serious risks to fish habitat and populations, along the route, occur in a 71 km section of the pipeline traversing areas adjacent to the upper reaches of the Morice River and Gosnell Creek. In a 34 km section of the river (Reach 2 in the report), the pipeline is located in, or adjacent to, the floodplain with its “numerous active secondary channels, log jams and wetlands that comprise the core spawning and rearing habitat for Morice River fish populations.” (Bustard and Miles 2011).

In a near hundred page report Bustard and Miles provide in-depth information on the biology and numbers of summer run Steelhead and Chinook, Coho, Sockeye and Pink salmon that use this critical section of the river. Their report examines the impacts of an oil spill within this section of river. It considers downstream impacts in the Morice and Bulkley rivers.

In order to provide a context for comparisons they review three past oil spills; Exxon Valdez, Pine River, and Kalamazoo River. They describe cleanup effectiveness of these spills.

Fish Populations

The section of river upstream from Moricetown (near Smithers) supports an important part of the salmon populations of the Skeena River system. The mean annual escapements of Coho salmon, 1997 – 2010, upstream from Moricetown, are 35,000. From 30 to 40 % of these fish spawn within Reach 2 of the Morice River. The complex river habitat in Reach 2 is ideal for Coho salmon juvenile rearing.

The Morice-Nanika Sockeye stock, 8,000 to 10,000 fish, is the largest in the Bulkley system. Reach 2 is the migration corridor for these fish.

The Morice River is the most important Chinook salmon river in the Skeena watershed. Spawning populations have averages slightly over 10,000 during the last decade. Between 35 and 45% of the young Chinook salmon rearing between Morice Lake and Smithers occur in Reach 2.

The Morice River, upstream from Moricetown, supports the largest Steelhead run in the Skeena River system – average of 19,000 fish per year. Steelhead juveniles rear, preferably, in the log jam habitat of Reach 2.

Other fish species in the Morice River system include Bull trout, Mountain whitefish, Prickly sculpins and Pacific lamprey. These species may not be rated so highly for commercial or recreational use, however, they are important parts of the river system.

Oil Spill Impacts

A pipeline break along the Morice River would spread hydrocarbons through Reach 2 could contaminate a large number of log jams – the habitat of juvenile salmonids winter and summer. There are an estimated 1,000 log jams in this reach. Within this approximately 34 km of braided river habitat there is an estimated 370 km of river shoreline. The degree of ‘habitat oiling’ would depend on river level. However, it is evident that a spill above, or in upper Reach 2 would have an immediate toxic impact on fish spawning and rearing in this section.

As the oil and diluting component mix moved downstream, progressively more of the diluting component would evaporate. With this evaporation, the increasingly concentrated bitumen would sink and become incorporated in the streambed leading to long term impacts, especially for salmon egg development.

In Reach 2, eggs or alevins are present in the gravels year- around. Juvenile Chinook, Coho and Steelhead are also in this reach every month of the year. The ‘oiling’ and cleanup of this section of the river would totally alter the channel structure and log jam habitat for such fish. It could not be re-built as it was before a spill.

Where the bitumen became ‘imbedded’ along the many km of river habitat, adequate removal would be nearly impossible. Below a spill in Reach 2, the oil “could very quickly reach downstream habitats in the lower Morice and Bulkley rivers, and potentially the Skeena River.” (Bustard and Miles 2011). The average velocity of the Morice River between May and November is at least 1 m/sec. – too fast for containment booms. A spill in Reach 2 of the Morice River would take 12 hours to reach a point near Smithers.

Bustard and Miles conclude by describing the array of difficulties in effectively capturing and cleaning up spilled oil in Reach 2. The location is remote, access is poor, the river is large and fast, the channel is large and complex, and the ‘enormous’ volume of woody debris would limit boat access to many reach sections. To the date of their writing, the proponent has not provided the information needed to show that an oil spill adjacent to Reach 2 could be effectively controlled or remediated.

There are other sections of the pipeline along which there are other concerns. The cumulative risks and impacts of pipeline breaks along with the potential for tanker accidents make the whole project one of folly, risk and ecological disaster. Surely, we can do better.

G.F. Hartman, February, 2012

References and reading

Bustard, D. and M. Miles. 2011. Potential effects of an oil pipeline rupture on Reach 2 of the Morice River. A submission to the Joint Review Panel: Enbridge Northern Gateway project. 100 p. http://northwestinstute.ca/

Hagen, J. 2011. Rainbow Trout of the Sutherland River in the Babine Lake Watershed, British Columbia, and Risks Associate with the Northern Gateway Pipeline. A Submission to the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project Joint Review Panel. 15 p.

Levy, D. 2009. Pipelines and salmon in Northern British Columbia. Prepared for the Pembina Institute. 46 p. http://pembina.org/pub/1894

Schwab, J. 2011. Hillslope and Fluvial Processes Along the Proposed Pipeline Corridor, Burns Lake to Kitimat, West Central British Columbia. Prepared for Bulkley Valley Centre for Natural Resources Research and Management. 27p. http://www.bvcentre.ca/

Skeena Wild. Enbridge. 2011? Project Overview. http://skeenawild.org/conservation-issues/enbridge/

Swift, A., N. Lemphers and three co-authors. 2011. Pipeline and Tanker Trouble: The Impact to British Columbia’s Communities, Rivers, and the Pacific Coastline from Tar sands Oil Transport. 30 p. http://www.pembina.org/pub2289

City of Terrace Officially Opposes Enbridge

February 16, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, PoliticsBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, Oil and gas, PoliticsCommon Sense Canadian

Read this story from the Terrace Standard on the community’s recent city council vote to officially come out against the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipelines. (Feb 14, 2012)

The city of Terrace now opposes the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline Project after a 5 – 2 vote during tonight’s Feb. 13 council meeting.

First, council voted to clear its former neutral position, paving the way to decide its stance anew. Then, each council member took a turn expressing their views, concerns, and the implications of a municipal body taking a stance. After, a majority voted to oppose the project 5 – 2.

Councillors James Cordeiro, who initiated the vote, Stacey Tyers, Marilyn Davies, Bruce Bidgood and Lynne Christiansen voted to oppose the project.

“I believe Terrace is open for business,” said Bidgood during the meeting. “It’s just not for sale at any price.”

Cutting Enbridge Deal with Alberta is Bad Advice for Christy Clark

February 16, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western CanadaBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, Oil and gas, Politics, rafe mairRafe Mair

Bob Plecas has an op-ed piece in the Vancouver Sun – they whose recent papers are celebrating their 100th birthday have carried the art of media masturbation to new heights once thought unreachable.

I assume that the editor in charge of its op-ed page, being a Fellow of the far right Fraser Institute, chooses his op-ed writers with care and, if part of that mandate is to push the government’s agenda, Fazil Milhar has done well indeed with Mr. Plecas.

Mr. Plecas was a deputy minister when I was in government and has written a biography of former premier, Bill Bennett.

I always thought he was a bright lad but clearly he is captive of the right as his article clearly demonstrates.

In this screed, Plecas is telling Premier Christy how to win the next election. Here is one of his suggestions, indeed his first choice:

The Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline. Demand Alberta share in the revenue from the pipeline between the oil (sic) sands and Kitimat as a condition for BC’s support. As proposed Alberta would gain all the benefits while BC takes all the “risks’’ (emphasis mine). Royalty splitting would have BC dedicate its share towards safety, first nations and communities in the North…

You will note that Mr. Plecas, as a faithful follower of the right, says the “oil” sands which is Liberal Party’s mantra. Oil sounds so much better than “tar” sands which has the nasty problem of the accurate description.

Now, Bob, repeat after me: there is no “risk” to BC from these two pipelines – THEY ARE MATHEMATICAL CERTAINTIES WHICH WILL RE-OCCUR FOR THE LIFETIME OF THE PIPELINES.

Bob, your article is simply untrue. Not only will these pipelines burst, you can’t clean up this stuff, called bitumen. Please look at the Enbridge disaster in the Kalamazoo River which happened 18 months ago and has not been cleaned up and never will. And now we learn the company is back at it with a new spill in Michigan this week! The Kalamazoo River is in populated Michigan not the wilds of British Columbia.

You casually toss aside First Nations, as if Victoria had some vague responsibility to look after the helpless Indians thus ought to give them a share of the revenue.

Bob, you know better than this having been involved in aboriginal affairs as a Deputy Minister.

The truth of the matter – better brace yourself (I would take a shot or two of single malt whisky) – is that First Nations make no case for sharing royalties because they oppose the pipelines. They’re no longer clients of the government but have a special place under our constitution as declared by the Supreme Court of Canada. This pipeline is mostly on unceded land the status of which has not yet been determined. Didn’t you know that, Bob?

How dare you patronize them!

I suppose you’ve done them a favour since your remark clearly shows that you and the government haven’t kept up to date and are wrapped in a time warp of 35 years ago.

Bob, I notice you haven’t dealt with the tankers issue. The First Nations on our coast are dead set against tanker traffic and saw what happened after the Exxon Valdez spill.

Yes, the tankers may be double hulled. Do you not know that in the past two years there have been four double hulled major spills and these vessels weren’t in dangerous waters as we have on our coast?

Bob, how could you be so wrong? Don’t you care for our Great Bear Rainforest? Does it not bother you that these two* pipelines traverse 1,100 km through the Rockies and Coast range only accessible by helicopter. Do you simply not give a damn that 1,000 rivers and streams will be crossed including three essential to wild salmon?

I can’t believe that you would dissemble – nor can I believe you’re stupid.

Unfortunately, Bob, it’s one or the other.

*the second pipeline which runs parallel to the one carrying the bitumen, takes the condensate which is mixed with the bitumen so it will flow, back to the Tar Sands

Rafe Mair’s latest book, The Home Stretch, is now available online at www.kobo.com and www.amazon.com at the appallingly low $9.99

Enbridge Spotlighted at Mountain Film Fest This Wed – Damien Gillis to MC

February 14, 2012Energy and Resources, Pipelines and SupertankersBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, EnbridgeDamien Gillis

Enrbidge Inc.’s controversial proposed Northern Gateway pipeline will be in the spotlight at the Vancouver International Mountain Film Festival this Wednesday evening, beginning at 7:30 pm (doors open 6:30) at North Vancouver’s Centennial Theatre (2300 Lonsdale Ave).

The evening will feature four compelling documentary films from the past year – White Water, Black Gold, Tipping Barrels, The Pipedreams Project, and On the Line – each offering a unique perspective and artistic approach to the issue of pushing Tar Sands bitumen through BC’s landscape and coastal waters.

A similar event last year drew a packed house of 800 to the Centennial Theatre – click here to see some highlights.

I will have the privilege of MC’ing this year’s event, titled “Sacred Headwaters”, which will also feature appearances by several of the filmmakers.

Two of the films on the program are short documentaries that involve outdoor adventures through the waters of the Great Bear Rainforest – the site of proposed supertanker traffic carrying Tar Sands bitumen from the port of Kitimat, the terminus of the would-be pipeline from Alberta. The First of these, Tipping Barrels, is a recently-released film that follows two surfers, Arran and Reid Jackson, soaking up big waves and the spectacular fauna and flora of the Great Bear. Meanwhile, The Pipedreams Project documents the two month journey of a pair of young kayakers’ along the proposed tanker route down BC’s rugged coast.

The evening will also feature a pair of feature films – extreme adventure filmmaker Frank Wolf’s On the Line and David Lavallee’s White Water, Black Gold. Both films are also journey stories. On the Line follows the voyage of Wolf and his friend, hiking, cycling and paddling the entire 1,100 km proposed pipeline route from Bruderheim, Alberta, to Kitimat. White Water, Black Gold “follows David Lavallee on his three year journey across western Canada in search of the truth about the impact of the world’s thirstiest oil industry.”

These four films offer compelling human stories and a spectacular visual feast of BC scenery as the backdrop for a vital discussion about a project that threatens to irrevocably change the very nature of these special places.

Tickets are $18 in advance, $20 at the door.

Harper Tells China He Will Ensure Enrbridge Pipeline is Built

February 14, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western CanadaBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, Oil and gas, Politics, Stephen HarperCommon Sense Canadian

Read this story from Reuters reporting on on Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s recent assurances to the Chinese that the controversial Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline will be built, despite heavy opposition in BC. (Feb 10, 2012)

(Reuters) – Canada’s prime minister on Friday made his strongest comments yet in support of a proposed pipeline from oil-rich Alberta to the Pacific coast, saying his government was committed to ensuring the controversial project went ahead.

Enbridge Inc’s Northern Gateway pipeline, which is strongly opposed by green groups and some aboriginal bands, would allow Canada to send tankers of crude to China and reduce reliance on the U.S. market.

An independent energy regulator — which could in theory reject the project — last month started two years of hearings into the pipeline.

In remarks that appeared to cast some doubt on the regulator’s eventual findings, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said it had become “increasingly clear that it is in Canada’s national interest to diversify our energy markets”.

He continued: “To this end, our government is committed to ensuring that Canada has the infrastructure necessary to move our energy resources to those diversified markets.”

Harper stepped up talk of oil sales to China in the wake of a U.S. decision last month to block TransCanada Corp’s proposed Keystone XL pipeline from Alberta to the Gulf Coast of the United States.

Enbridge CEO Complains Chinese Growing “Frustrtated” at Pipeline’s Regulatory Delays

February 14, 2012Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, Oil and gasCommon Sense Canadian

Read this story from The Globe and Mail on Enbridge CEO Pat Daniel’s recent joint trade mission to China with the Harper Government. (Feb. 10, 2012)

Chinese oil executives are growing frustrated with regulatory delays in plans for the Northern Gateway pipeline, even as interest in Canadian oil and gas surges in the energy-hungry country, the head of Enbridge Inc. says…

…“They’re frustrated, as we are, in the length of time it takes,” Mr. Daniel said in an interview on the sidelines of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s mission to China. “They’re very anxious to diversify their supply, they’re very dependent on the Middle East for crude.

“[Canada] seems like the perfect match that should last a long time, but if you don’t move it along, people do lose interest. We don’t have forever,” he continued. “The fundamentals in the business can change and you must take advantage of opportunities if and when they present themselves.”

Mr. Daniel said they hope to have approvals completed within two years and construction in three, so that oil can begin flowing by late 2016 or early 2017, despite heavy opposition from environmental groups and first nations who fear the impact of an oil spill on some of Canada’s most untouched wilderness and coastline.

Two Thousand Gather in Prince Rupert to Speak Out Against Enbridge

February 14, 2012Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, Oil and gasCommon Sense Canadian

Read this report from the Vancouver Observer on the recent historic gathering of Frist Nations and British Columbians in Prince Rupert to protest the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline. (Feb 5, 2012)

“It was an incredible day,” Prince Rupert city councillor Jen Rice said.

“We may associate negative feelings and negative emotions with this project, but the irony of it is that it actually brings people together.”

According to the CBC, Hartley Bay councillor Cameron Hill has said in the past that he is willing to die to stop the Enbridge project.

“Because I don’t know any other life,” he explained. “This is the life I have and been brought up in. This is what I want my kids to enjoy. And I want them to have the life that I have had, which I consider to be the best life ever.”

Redford Signals Alberta’s Intent to “Clear a Path” for Tar Sands Through BC

February 9, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western CanadaBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, Oil and gas, Politics, rafe mairRafe Mair

I wasn’t surprised at what Alberta Premier Alison Redford recently said, namely:

The Alberta government is looking to clear a path for the oil sands through British Columbia by upping the economic benefits for its western neighbour – including the option of paying to modernize and expand West Coast ports.

Premier Redford’s government stressed Tuesday there were no formal discussions, much less a formal proposal, but some in the Alberta government acknowledge that British Columbians need to see a tangible benefit if they are to bear the risks of an oil pipeline and associated West Coast tanker traffic headed to Asia.

I was only surprised that it took so long for this vague testing of British Columbia opinion – and we must understand that this is all part of proposing bribes to BC to overcome its fast-growing aversion to the Enbridge pipeline.

An old golfing pal of mine and I were in the same meeting which was trying to get pros to come to a golf tournament our club was putting on. One of the group suggested some incentives, whereupon John Kelly said, “I stand foursquare against bribery – unless, of course, it gets the job done.”

We have just seen the beginning of a bribery process.

Premier Redford made her remarks in a speech – premiers are very careful what they say in speeches so one thing is clear: these remarks were not made just for the hell of it or off the cuff. This statement outlined vaguely what is to come.

The Harper government is in a pickle. When the PM told the Chinese that their investment in the Tar Sands (NOT the Oil Sands as the flacks want it) was safe, it didn’t seem possible that the people of BC would make a fuss about The Northern Gateway, a two way pipeline from the Tar Sands to Kitimat.

In making his commitment, Harper has painted himself into a corner, big time. How do you tell the Chinese that environmentalists, for God’s sake, have scuppered their huge commitment?

I’ll tell you what I think has happened:

Harper reminded Premier Photo-Op that she’s in a serious financial bind which Ottawa could be of assistance over, say, the HST money Victoria owes. It would help, Harper probably told his new pal Christy, if you would butt out of this and don’t, in the name of all that’s sacred, talk about tanker traffic in the Inner Passage and good things will happen for you.
Harper then told Premier Redford that Ottawa and Edmonton must prepare an incentive package for BC in order to stop those radical neo-communists from making massive protests and civil disobedience.
Harper urged Redford to put up a trial balloon such as offering money to help building quays to handle the 300 or so tankers out of Kitimat every year.
When the Prime Minister returns from China there will be meetings in Ottawa and Edmonton where we’ll put some meat on the bones of our bribe, er, incentive package for BC.

In the next year or so, we’re going to see just what British Columbians are made of as we get money thrown at us – serious money – in exchange for the right to ruin our great and very rare wilderness.

That this or something like it will happen is sure. We just don’t know when and how much.

For me and The Common Sense Canadian, there isn’t enough money in the world, much less in the country, that would compel us to sacrifice a square millimetre of our natural heritage and environment to a pipeline.

I close with this: Prime Minister Harper, if he doesn’t back off, is asking for, to use his words, “consequences” – serious consequences.

In the words of First Nations leader Gerald Amos, this so-called Northern Gateway project is “not going to happen.”

Rafe Mair’s latest book, The Home Stretch is now available online at www.kobo.com and www.amazon.com at the appallingly low $9.99

The Myth About Pipeline Jobs and the True Ownership of the Alberta Tar Sands

February 9, 2012Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, Oil and gasDamien Gillis

I do not have the research ability of others, but I do get information from those who have such ability, and I use it. My specialty has been using Hansard and reading bills to find out what is intended by our employees in the House of Commons. I also get letters from ministers such as Joe Oliver, Canada’s Resources Minister, which give me much ammunition.

I first heard Joe announce in the House of Commons that the Keystone XL Pipe line, all 1,000 km of it, would generate 140,000 jobs in Canada. Naturally I wrote to him asking for an explanation – in fact I wrote twice before I got a reply and in that letter he quoted a study (not a report but a study) by the Canadian Energy Research Institute, which he described as an independent think tank specializing in Canadian Energy. So thinking this would answer my questions about the jobs, I read that study. It looked good with lots of graphs and scenarios but I could find no basis or justification for any of it and it appeared to be speculation based on what the energy people wanted to hear.

For one thing, the study was constantly referring to “additional direct, indirect and induced jobs”. How in the blazes does one arrive at any real figure based on that I wondered.

Joe Oliver also claimed in his letter:

The same study also found that, if approved, the oil sands products carried over the Keystone XL would support more than 140,000 additional direct, indirect and induced jobs per year in Canada, and more than $600 billion in economic activity over the next 25 years.

Well, Mr.Oliver, having been in the trucking business for many years, I can tell you that with the unloading of the ships in which the pipes will arrive from Korea, Brazil or wherever, storing and then transporting by truck to the sites, creating the access roads and the laying of the pipes would only take two thousand people at the very most; and how can we be sure that they will be Canadians working the trucks or line machines not US workers as in Kitimat at the demolition of the smelter there? So where are the other 138,000 Canadian jobs going to be? (Besides, these pipeline construction jobs are temporary, whereas the 140,000 you’re promising are to be permanent). Your suggestion seems to be that they will be somewhere in Canada under the ‘induced jobs’ description, but where? Once the pipe is laid how many Canadian workers would be left to run the pumping stations? check for inevitable leaks etc., and standby maintainence crews? So many unanswered questions, and one more: will they be Canadian Union jobs?

No, Mr.Oliver, I am sorry but I just cannot accept this figure of yours as real, even if you try and transfer some of those 138,000 indirect or induced jobs back to the goop sands. You know Mr.Oliver, it is rather like saying that if I post a letter to you in Ottawa, I am giving work to maybe 20 postal workers across the country which come to think of it is a heck of a deal for 55 cents.

Next I wondered why this jobs thing was so important. I realized a simple truth exists that no one in the Harper Government is talking about. Energy production costs have been calculated over the years by how much oil it takes to produce 1 barrel of new oil, and way back it was 1 barrel produced 100 barrels. Over the years the number of produced barrels per barrel spent has decreased and decreased to the point that in the tar sands it takes 1 barrel of oil to produce as little as 2 barrels of goop. Obviously that is not sustainable so another method of justification must be used, and in today’s climate of unemployment and desperation in Canada this promise of hypothetical jobs is perfect.

What we are told is that if we do not approve these disasters in the making we will not have jobs and prosperity.

The future of our country is held hostage to today’s urgent need for goop to export.

A simple message of fear and twisted mythology.

As many economists have pointed out, and our PM who claims to be an economist refuses to hear, every petro-state has an inflated value to their currency. We already know that we are not doing as well in the export field because our dollar is high in comparison the US dollar, and products such as processed wood are too expensive now. This is why we export way too many raw logs as we well know here in BC. This also applies to any manufacturing we may have left and to such things as wheat. Could it be that the Wheat Board had to go because the only way we could sell our wheat was at a loss to the farmers, which could not happen with the Wheat Board?

Once one realizes that the Harper Government’s measure of worth is mythical jobs, it seems that a lot of their doings make sense to them if not to us. Even the mega-jails are based on temporary jobs for the constructors and the jailers, nothing to do with the criminals who are decreasing in number, not increasing, so a new class of criminal must be created to fill those jails. Oddly enough there seem to be fewer judges appointed so no increase in jobs there. Our Justice Minister is often heard to say in the House of Commons that protecting victims is the main reason for his mega-crime bill and a priority of his government, but a simple reading of that bill shows that the only victims who are in any way protected by this bill are those who suffer as a result of terrorism. What can they do about it? Why they can sue the terrorists! Believe me it is in the bill. More work but no extra jobs for the lawyers?

The economy that goes along with the rhetoric about “our top priority being jobs and the economy” has little value for the Canadian people – it is all to do with corporate bottom lines, and part time jobs without benefits.

As I mentioned, I rely on the research of others who have the ability and means to find things out, and in the case of the ownership of the Tar Sands I have relied on Terry Glavin, who writes in one of his articles on the subject:

The $5.5-billion Enbridge pipeline project is all about sending Alberta bitumen in huge oil tankers to China. Beijing’s own state enterprises are among the project’s major backers, and Beijing has been buying up Alberta’s oil patch at such a dizzying pace lately it’s hard to keep up. In the spring of 2010, China’s state-owned Sinopec Corp. took a $4.65-billion piece of Syncrude. Then the China Investment Corporation, which is run by the Chinese Communist Party, took possession of a $1.25-billon share of Penn West Petroleum. Last summer, the Chinese National Offshore Oil Corporation gobbled up Opti Canada for $2.34 billion. And so on.

Then, last month, Sinopec spent $2.2-billion to take over Daylight Energy Ltd., and last week, Petro-China, with the final push of $1.9 billion, became the owner and manager of the MacKay River oil sands project. This is what Ottawa doesn’t want you noticing.

The point here is that in the past financial interests in Canadian companies has been limited to minority holdings so that control stayed in Canada. But with this Harper government, the world government by corporations is the ultimate goal, and what better way for Harper to achieve this than to sell out all the Canadian companies and resources he can to foreign corporate ownership. He was stopped for a while by the Saskatchewan government with the attempted Potash Corp takeover by BHP Biliton, but he will be back for them again, count on it.

These international oil corporations want their goop out of Canada and onto their home turf for refining and will stop at nothing to get that done. Harper’s problem seems to be that he has to find a way to get Canadians on board with these inevitably disastrous pipeline deals, because he is still subsidizing the tar sands and their wealthy foreign owners with Canadian tax payers’ money. Thus they already own this government, Canada and the Canadian people.

In spite of this foreign ownership there is another problem which I have yet to hear any member of the Harper Government mention and that is the problem of FTA and NAFTA. In those trade deals, touted as soo good for Canada, we can export as great a percentage of the production of our natural resources to the USA as we wish, but we cannot reduce that percentage amount without USA’s approval or costly compensation. We will not get that approval unless the Chinese particularly twist the US Congress’ arms to allow it. Luckily with oil we export almost all of it cheaply so we can buy back the finished product expensively, however where is there room for this huge proposed export to Asia coming from? If we double our production, even of goop, we have to double our export to the USA to maintain the same percentage.

The good news is that these corporate entities do not yet own our souls and spirits, all we have to do is find them again, and stand up for a new Canada based not on dirty, fake, oil and blood money but on respectful trading, real value and – dare I say? – prosperity for all.

Jeremy Arney is a concerned grandfather who ran for the Canadian Action Party in 2008 for Saanich Gulf Islands.