Tag Archives: featured

LNG tankers in Fraser River? Brief chance to comment on sneaky project

June 4, 2015Energy and Resources, LNGfeaturedCommon Sense Canadian

Existing courtesy Fortis BC LNG plant in Fraser River (courtesy of Eoghan Moriarty/RealHearings.org) — Fortis LNG compression station near Fraser River (beige tank) – courtesy of Eoghan Moriarty/RealHearings.org

The following is republished with permission from The ECOReport.

by Roy Hales

UPDATE: Following complaints that the CEAA email system for public comments on the project has been out of commission throughout the 20-day comment period, the window for feedback has been extended until June 24

The National Energy Board has already granted an export license, to US based WesPac Midstream, for a facility that could bring up to 120 LNG tankers and 90 LNG barges into the Fraser River every year. The public’s opportunity to make their concerns known ends June 11. There are only eight days to comment on Delta’s proposed LNG terminal (WesPack Tilbury Marine Jetty).

Thought it was a joke

Voters Taking Action On Climate Change (VTACC) sent out an alert after seeing a notice about the proposed LNG facility on the British Columbia’s Environmental Assessment Office’s (BC EAO) website.

The first notice MLA Andrew Weaver, of BC’s Green party, received was an email from the ECOreport, “I thought it was a joke, a spoof on LNG. It is remarkable that this is potentially going ahead. The Tilbury facility is there already to provide natural gas at peak times in the Lower Mainland, or there are little communities here or there that need natural gas.

He added:

[quote]But the proposal to have up to 120 LNG tankers and 90 LNG barges a year is just truly remarkable. What has it come to that we are starting to see these massive fossil fuel projects being brought forward with days to have any input on? I’m an MLA in the province of British Columbia. I read a lot. I’m pretty much up on what is going on in the province and I have eight days notice )about the WesPack Tilbury project) because you emailed me about it![/quote]

The ECOreport also attempted to contact the provincial NDP critic for natural gas development, who was not available to comment.

CEAA “sent out a press release”

A spokesperson from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) said they sent out a news release on May 22. She said there will not be another opportunity for the public to comment unless the CEAA decides an environmental assessment is necessary.

Wespac Plan — Access Trestle And Loading Platform Design from WesPac Tilbury Marine Jetty Project Project Description CEAA Summary

In the CEAA project description, it says “WesPac is committed to ongoing consultation and engagement with Aboriginal groups that are interested in the Project.” Both the Musqueam and Tsawwassen have signed agreements and WesPac is in discussions with several other First Nations. They also provided a list of First Nations that have no yet responded to their queries:

Hwlitsum;
Lake Cowichan;
Lyackson;
Semiahmoo;
Squamish;
Seabird Island First Nation;
Shxw’ow’hamel First Nation;
Skawahlook;
Soowahlie First Nation;
Stó:lō Nation;
Stó:lō Tribal Council;
and Tsawout First Nation.

BC’s existing LNG facilities

BC has two existing LNG facilities, both owned by FortisBC. Tilbury LNG Facility, next to the proposed WesPack site, is 43 years old. Fortis began a $400 million expansion project last October. This adds 1.1 million gigajoules of liquefied natural gas (LNG) to storage and 34,000 gigajoules per day of liquefaction capacity. Another LNG facility opened near Ladysmith in 2011.

WesPac aims to start construction next year

Premier Christy Clark’s government appears to endorse this project. A notice on their website proclaims, “The WesPac LNG marine terminal will provide a means of loading LNG onto carrier ships for export.” BC’s Environmental Assessment Office has requested that it be allowed tosubstitute a provincial revue for the federal process.

WesPack expects to start construction of its’ terminal next year. It will take 15 months to build the WesPack Tilbury Marine Jetty and they expect it to be operational for at least 30 years.

Project Shipping Route from WesPac Tilbury Marine Jetty Project Project Description CEAA Summary

One of the proposed domestic customers is BC ferries, which has ordered three LNG fueled ferries that can accommodate 145 vehicles and 600 passengers.

Weaver said, “BC ferries has suggested is it will provide with the new ships to LNG power instead of diesel. It is cleaner, it is a domestic market for a domestic product. I’m totally for that, but you just need a small capacity for that. If Fortis and others would come to people and say, ‘look BC ferries wants to start using LNG. We need to provide a fueling station for it and this is how we propose to do it.’ You could build a social license from a project like that.””

Barges of up 4,000 m of LNG capacity will service coastal communities through-out the regional market.

Much larger LNG carriers, meant for foreign markets, have up to 90,000 m of capacity. They can tie up at the Marine Jetty for up to eight days, but will normally depart after 24 to 48 hours.

LNG terminal absurd

Kevin Washbrook, director with VTACC, thinks it is absurd to build an LNG terminal on the Fraser River.

“I think once enough people become aware the push-back will be so high, and the assessment so rigorous, that it will be easy to say this makes no sense. Just on the siting of the review process and the lack of a proper assessment of the location, I think there are reasons for everyone to be concerned about this project. Even LNG supporters accept that you have to be careful about where you put these things,” he said.

Weaver agrees:

[quote]Anybody who claims these days that a major infrastructure , or resource project, is a done deal need not look much further than some of the projects around British Columbia that have run into resistance. Not the least of which is the Enbridge (Northern Gateway) pipeline or the implications of the recent Tsilhqot’in decision with respect to resource projects on First Nations land.[/quote]

Business done respectfully

Weaver insists, “British Columbians are fed up with being treated disrespectfully, things being ramrodded down their throats in terms of a top down push to governance.”

This is not a lesson the Canadian or British Columbian governments appear to have learned.

“Is British Columbia open for business? Absolutely, but business done respectfully – not irresponsibly like we are seeing here, with little attempt to actually engage the public. I wonder how many people living along the Fraser River even know about this?” said Weaver.

Matt Horne of the Pembina Institute said, “It is disturbing that a project of this scale could potentially be approved without an environmental assessment. In addition to being a large industrial facility in the Lower Mainland, it would also necessitate an expansion of shale gas wells, roads and pipelines in northeast B.C. It should absolutely go through an environmental assessment process. And while environmental assessments in Canada have serious flaws, conducting one would at least ensure the WesPac proposal undergoes the same scrutiny as other LNG proposals around the province.”

“A loud public response in the next few days is needed to ensure this LNG proposal receives the careful assessments our region deserves,” said Washbrook. “Environment Minister Leona Aglukkaq should commit to a federal panel review for this project, and she should reject BC’s request to substitute a provincial review. Given the BC government’s clear bias in favour of LNG exports, handing this over to the province would be like putting the foxes in charge of the hen house.”

(Click on this link to access a form where you can ask federal Environment Min Aglukkaq to 1) conduct an assessment of this project and 2) reject BC’s request to substitute a provincial assessment instead.)

Top Photo Credit: The Fortis LNG compression station is located at the middle of the photo (beige storage tank). The LNG terminal would be located immediately downstream (to the right) and the vessels would load where the old wooden pilings are in the river – courtesy Eoghan Moriarty | RealHearings.org

Rio Tinto skips air scrubbers to cut costs at Kitimat smelter

June 2, 2015Health and EnvironmentfeaturedCarol Linnitt

Rio Tinto's Kitimat smelter (Damien Gillis) — Rio Tinto Alcan’s Kitimat smelter (Damien Gillis)

The following story is republished with permission from Desmog Canada

When the B.C. Ministry of Environment approved Rio Tinto Alcan’s application to modernize its aluminum smelter in Kitimat, B.C., local resident Emily Toews assumed that would mean an improvement in the plant’s emissions.

But the modernization project, which will increase the plant’s production, will raise sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions by 56 per cent from 27 to 42 tonnes per day.

Toews, who suffers from asthma, told a tribunal in Kitimat Monday she decided to remain in Kitimat in 2010, rather than move to West Kelowna with her husband, because she had “previous knowledge that the modernization project would reduce emissions.”

The tribunal, hosted by the B.C. Environmental Appeals Board, is entering its third week in Kitimat after two weeks in Victoria. The board began investigating the government’s approval of the Rio Tinto Alcan modernization project after Toews and fellow Kitimat resident Lis Stannus asked it to overturn the decision, saying increased sulphur dioxide emissions endangered their community’s health.

The project, granted approval from the B.C. government in 2013, will reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the smelter, but not sulphur dioxide emissions because Rio Tinto Alcan was not required to introduce scrubbers, commonly used in smelters to remove the pollutant from airborne emissions.

Toews, who has a 10-month old child and is a kindergarten teacher, said she’s worried about the impact the increased pollution will have on the community’s children.

Sulphur dioxide, a pungent pollutant that results primarily from fossil fuel combustion, irritates the skin as well as the mucous membranes of the eyes, nose, throat and lungs. Exposure to sulphur dioxide aggravates the respiratory systems of asthmatics and is known to negatively affect the respiratory systems of children and the elderly.

She told the tribunal that several children in the Kitimat school where she teaches suffer from asthma.

“Working at an elementary school there are a lot of illnesses going around,” she said. “During allergy season I often have to help kids, or help administer their medication before they go outdoors.”

”I’m concerned for other people in the community,“ she said.

Emily Toews in Kitimat (Carol Linnit) — Emily Toews in Kitimat (Carol Linnitt)

Toews questioned why, if solutions like scrubbers are a possibility, the province didn’t require them when approving the smelter modernization project.

Scrubbers, which can either create dry sulphur waste or can use seawater which converts SO2 to sulfates for a benign release into the ocean, are commonly used in European smelters.

Toews told the panel she cannot see why the province wouldn’t require Rio Tinto Alcan to employ scrubbers to eliminate the SO2 emissions problem in Kitimat.

“No I’m not opposed to the modernization project, however I am opposed to increasing one emission — sulphur dioxide — and I don’t understand why that emission was left out of this ‘state of the art’ modernization process,” Toews said.

[quote]I’d like this panel to consider having Rio Tinto produce the best state of the art reduction in emissions possible with the technologies that are available and to my knowledge there are technologies that are available to do that.[/quote]

An expert witness who previously gave testimony during the hearings told the panel Rio Tinto Alcan was avoiding paying for the installment of scrubbers and thereby externalizing the costs of SO2 emissions onto the health of local households.

Chris Tollefson, a lawyer representing Toews’ co-apellant Lis Stannus, said the company is primed to install scrubbers in a “plug and play” manner.

“There’s no dispute on the evidence that these scrubbers can be installed with relative ease,” he told the panel.

[quote]In fact, the [Kitimat modernization project] has been designed and built with an onsite area specifically set aside for scrubbers to be retrofitted…on what the experts describe is a ‘plug and play’ basis.[/quote]

Tollefson said the company’s issue with scrubbers is cost — an estimated $100 to $200 million for installation, not including operating costs. The company estimated the modernization project would cost $3.3 billion but overruns have the project nearing $5 billion last summer.

Rio Tinto Alcan has “made this very clear to the provincial government…that they simply do not want to spend the money.” Government officials from the B.C. Ministry of Environment were also too concerned with Rio Tinto’s interests, Tollefson previously argued, alleging the project’s approval without scrubbers at the provincial level is the result of regulatory capture.

Tollefson said he is asking the panel to “weigh the financial benefit to Rio Tinto Alcan of not being held to a rigorous environmental standard against the cost to the environment and human health of allowing Rio Tinto Alcan to increase itsSO2 emissions by 56 per cent.”

The hearings, conducted by the B.C. Environmental Appeals Board, are currently underway in Kitimat.

Rafe: What Tom Mulcair must do to become Prime Minister

June 2, 2015Canada, Politics, Species At RiskfeaturedRafe Mair

Can Tom Mulcair become the next prime minister of Canada?

Barely 6 months ago that question would have brought loud guffaws but the Alberta election and recent polls showing the NDP slightly ahead of its two main rivals have reduced the guffaws to nervous coughs.

I think Mulcair can do it but he needs BC to do it.

A mug’s game

Let’s back up a bit. If one had all of the up-to-date polls from every constituency in Canada with expert analysis on each, it would still be a mug’s game to pick the winner of the next election. One can only really go on a “tummy feel” from information gained from a media which is none too bright and considerably less than politically independent.

The polls aren’t always helpful for the obvious reason that they are only snapshots of the moment the poll is taken, along with the fact that people may not always tell the truth.

Having completed my advance excuses, let me say why I think that Greater Vancouver may decide this issue.

Truman defeats Dewey

Often elections are simply a rehash of the previous one with the same players, similar issues, and similar outcomes. Every once in a while, though, a big change takes place and it seems to catch us all by surprise, even though a tiny bit of 20/20 hindsight tells us we should have known.

The two classics one thinks of are the British election of 1945 and the US presidential election of 1948 – both long ago but still apropos to today.

In 1945, Clement Attlee and the Labour Party threw out the great war hero, Churchill. It was considered a huge upset but when one looks at the result it’s obvious that the polls had the election much closer than the Conservatives and mainly Tory pundits did.

Moreover everyone forgot that the Tories had been in power since 1935, that there had been huge changes and a world war. There were substantial social issues to be dealt with, something the Tories weren’t noted for being enthusiastic about.

The second was 1948 in the United States. The odds-on favourite was Thomas Dewey, Governor of New York, who had run against Roosevelt in 1944 and lost. The largely Republican press tried to convince the people that Truman was a combination of incompetence and crookedness and played up Dewey, a famous crime-busting District Attorney, as a knight in shining armour. Truman went to the people by train, with speeches at every whistle stop, where a plant would holler “give ’em hell, Harry!”. When he eventually beat Dewey, he had the pleasure of holding up a headline from The Chicago Tribune saying “Dewey Defeats Truman” – one of the more famous 20th Century photographs.

Again, with 20/20 hindsight it becomes clear that the polls were much closer than reported and that the win by Truman wasn’t nearly as much an upset as everyone thought.

In both of the above cases, there was a public mood that transcended the stated issues.

In the former, the British people, while grateful indeed to Churchill for his war efforts, saw the “boys” coming home and wondered where their jobs were, where their homes would be and how they were going to exist in a society that was still very much run by the elite. Ennui dominated and an overriding mood for some new brooms to begin sweeping.

In the second case, the people of the US suddenly saw Dewey as Alice Longworth Roosevelt saw him, “the little man on the wedding cake”; at the same time they saw Truman as their kind of guy who would stand up and fight for them. There was a mood that the status quo, dominated by the establishment, was out of date and it was a new era where the “little guy” needed an ordinary guy as champion.

Trudeau’s C-51 mistake

I think our election in October is going to be a “mood” election more than one of issues. Canadians from coast-to-coast are fed up with Harper and the right wing who have marginalized themselves with Bill C-51.

Trudeau, has not only failed to catch on, he has shot himself in both feet over Bill C-51. In spite of the 1970 War Measures Act, the public sees the Liberals as usually strong on civil liberties and remember that Trudeau’s father brought in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I don’t think I’m alone in being put off by Justin Trudeau suddenly deciding to support C-51, then loftily promising to change it “when” he’s elected.

Mulcair has been the consistent one on this file, along with Elizabeth May. The public has swung from being about 80% in favour of the bill to being very much opposed, catching Trudeau with his backside exposed.

Harper the chicken

Harper, whose unpopularity increases by the moment, has not done himself any good by ducking the debates. He looks like a “chicken” and that’s exactly what he is. There is no substantial reason for him not to face his opponents and the public doesn’t like cowardice in a leader one bit, nor should they.

Mulcair has benefited from the fact that Elizabeth May must take votes from him in order to have a substantial result. Not long ago it seemed pretty clear that Ms. May would do just that, but as happens so often in politics, things changed – suddenly she’s no longer the only option for environmentalists. The best perhaps, but not the only.

Kinder Morgan is key to Vancouver votes

Mulcair, far from being a sure thing, will need the Greater Vancouver seats and, unless he hustles his ass on the Kinder Morgan pipeline issue, he risks abandoning that area to the Greens.

We know that Mulcair supports a West-East Tar Sands pipeline and that he is dead against the Northern Gateway line, however the votes in Greater Vancouver are not about the West-East pipeline or Northern Gateway but Kinder Morgan.

Mulcair is partway there with his criticism of the National Energy Board and a pledge to do something about it. But that’s not specific enough to gain votes.

As it sits right now – and remember, as Harold Wilson said, in politics six weeks is an eternity – Mr. Mulcair can win or lose the election based what he decides on Kinder Morgan. He’s in a good position to take a strong stand against it in light of recent studies and information. If he does that, he could join Attlee and Truman.

If, however, Mulcair continues to waffle, the people of Greater Vancouver will not support him and that could cost him the big banana.

Geologist: Minister inflating shale gas, LNG potential by 6 fold – threatening Canada’s energy security

May 29, 2015Energy and Resources, Fracking, LNGfeaturedCommon Sense Canadian

The following rebuttal from geoscientist David Hughes to BC Minister of Natural Gas Rich Coleman is republished with permission from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. The minister has been vocal about Mr. Hughes’ recent report on LNG, published by the CCPA.

After a lot of media coverage on my Clear Look at BC LNG report, Rich Coleman, Minister of Natural Gas, weighed in saying “the report ignored the studies of B.C.’s own scientists” and “they don’t do their research”. In fact, if Mr. Coleman had bothered to read my report, he would have noted that my numbers are cited from BC Oil and Gas Commission reports – the scientists Mr. Coleman employs.

The BC Government states that “British Columbia’s natural gas supply is estimated at over 2,933 trillion cubic feet” and “British Columbia has more than an estimated 2,900 trillion cubic feet of marketable shale gas reserves”. These statements strongly imply that this is recoverable gas and therefore is part of future supply and is marketable. In contrast, here are the actual numbers from the BC Oil and Gas Commission (Table 4 from page 6 of the BC Oil and Gas Commission report that the BC Government claimed doubled BC gas reserves).

Instead of 2,933 tcf, the table lists an ultimate marketable potential resource for BC of just 400 tcf, of which 25 tcf has already been recovered leaving 376 tcf remaining. In my report I added an additional 42 tcf from other potential sources to make sure I was being generous, of which 416 tcf is remaining.

The BC Government’s claim of 2,933 tcf of “marketable shale gas reserves” is therefore preposterous in the light of information from its own scientists. It appears the BC Government has conflated “in-place” resources with “marketable” resources. “In-place” resource estimates are not recoverable – typically no more than 10-20% of the in-place resource is recoverable from shale gas plays. The National Energy Board and BC Oil and Gas Commission scientists have made a best guess at what might be recoverable and suggest it is 376 tcf, or one-eighth of the amount touted by the BC Government. I have been generous in suggesting the BC Government’s number is only overstated by a factor of six.

The BC Government has also been conflating “resources” with “reserves”. Proven reserves have a specific meaning in that they have been proven to exist with the drill bit and are recoverable with existing technology under foreseeable economic conditions. Reserves are numbers you can take to the bank. According to the BC Oil and Gas Commission, proven raw gas reserves in BC were just 42.3 tcf at yearend 2013, a mere 1/70th of what the BC Government is touting as “marketable shale gas reserves”.

If the BC Government knows the difference between “in-place resources” and “marketable shale gas reserves”, its touting of 2,933 tcf of BC gas is deliberate deception. If it does not it is extremely shocking given that Mr. Coleman and his government are the stewards of BC’s remaining finite, non-renewable, heritage of natural gas.

The BC LNG Alliance, an industry lobby group for seven LNG proponents, simply parroted BC Government statements. Its President, David Keane, “said 2,933 trillion cubic feet is a figure that the commission and energy board geologists “do believe we have.”’ Keane further accused me of “cherry picking some of the facts”. If Keane had read my report he would have seen it is based on National Energy Board projections, not mine, so if anyone is to be accused of cherry-picking it is the NEB.

The BC Government and the BC LNG Alliance have no credibility on the gas supply numbers they state for the reasons listed above. But my report was about much more than that. We are dealing with a finite non-renewable resource for which there are no substitutes at the scale we use it. It will be needed domestically in the long term and extraction necessitates environmental impacts. It demands a longer term plan for the sake of the environment and future generations.

How Alberta NDP can get r done with green energy…seriously

May 28, 2015Energy and Resources, RenewablesfeaturedWill Dubitsky

Alberta Prermier Rachel Notley (Alberta NDP/facebook)

In her speech on election night, Rachel Notley spoke of her ambition to diversify the economy of Alberta – including the energy sector – and partner with the energy industry and federal government for a national strategy on the environment.

Is all this possible? The answer is a resounding yes!

Alberta could actually reduce emissions

First, the theoretical wind power production potential of Alberta is equivalent to all the electrical production needs of every province West of Québec.

Second, the potential for wind power to reduce Alberta’s emissions is especially significant in that fossil fuels represent the lion’s share of energy sources consumed for electricity production in the province.

Coal represents 6,258 megawatts (MW), 42% of the electrical power generation sources in the province – and 40% of total electricity use if one takes into account 1,200 MW of imported electricity – out of a total of 15,798 MW produced to meet Alberta’s needs.

Natural gas accounts for 5,812 MW or 40% of the electricity produced in the province and 37% of the total provincial consumption of electricity.

US coal consumption waning

In the larger context of global trends, while global wind energy capacity is growing at 20%/year and solar energy at 50%/year over the past 10 to 15 years, US coal consumption has declined 21% between 2007 and 2014. In the last 5 years more than one third of the US coal-fired generating plants have either closed down or have been the object of announcements of closures to come. This trend will accelerate for the purposes of complying with US Environmental Protection Agency requirements to reduce CO2 emissions from the electrical power plant sector by 30% by 2030 over 2005 levels.

China leads the way

China's emissions drop, global cleantech boom are grounds for optimism on climate change — Chinese solar company Suntech at the Bird’s Nest stadium

And then there is the astounding example of the world’s largest energy and coal consumer, China, which uses more coal than the rest of the world combined. China, which is now by far the world’s largest investor in clean energy technologies – with 1.58 million jobs in its solar energy sector and 356,000 working in its wind sector – saw it’s coal consumption decline in 2014!

Surely, if the world’s largest consumers of coal are reducing their use of this energy source, it may be time for Alberta to get in-step with the world leaders and acquire a more positive international energy profile.

Working with the oil and gas industry

To make the shift to clean electricity happen, the petroleum sector could play an important role.

Specifically, in the event that the new Notley government and energy sector engage in a joint review of fiscal and policy options, a strategy could be developed to facilitate energy diversification among the fossil fuel sectors to become bigger players in the clean energy fields. Indeed, there are already models for doing so.

The new CEO of Norway’s Statoil, Eldar Sætre, a man with a Statoil renewables background, recently announced that the company will be putting a new emphasis on renewables and low carbon activities. To this end, Statoil has set up a new division, New Energy Solutions. To quote the new CEO, “We will strengthen our efforts in the transition to a low carbon society,” making this new thrust one of the three pillars of the company’s strategy.

Also worth noting, Dong Energy, which is 60% owned by the Danish Pension Fund and is the world’s largest investor in offshore wind farms, has a target to shift from 85% fossil investments and 15% in renewable energy, to reversing this ratio by 2040.

Growing green jobs

Equally important, Notley can go beyond home grown clean energy production to include job creation and economic diversification in the province’s energy manufacturing sector.

This could be achieved with the right policy environment for clean energy projects – such as local manufacturing content stipulations in exchange for wind farm contracts and/or financing, as per the Québec and Brazilian models – and possibly including additional incentives for some oil technology firms to become part of a local clean tech supply chain. In short, there may be opportunities for Alberta to manufacture and export clean technologies, as well as produce clean energy for local use.

Brazil becomes green power player

This is not that far outside of the box. A case in point is that of Brazil’s WEG, a new entry into the wind turbine manufacturing sector, thanks to Brazil’s incrementally increasing local content rules for wind power projects, which will reach 60% by January 2016.

These Brazilian domestic content requirements – applied under an auction process that is managed and favourably financed to about 60% to 65% of projects’ value by the country’s business development bank – have given rise to WEG diversifying into the business of developing its own wind turbines. Now, what makes this interesting is WEG is a Brazilian home-grown domestic technology supplier that has traditionally served the oil, gas, industrial and power sectors.

WEG has already started making a first turbine prototype and plans to launch its 3.3 MW model in 2017. Working with local suppliers and testing their components, WEG expects to achieve 80% local content and include technologies specifically designed for Brazil’s tropical and sub-tropical temperatures. WEG relies on its local R & D capacity to turn out designs more in-tune with local environments. The company also plans to export its technologies to Latin America and Africa.

Applying the WEG model to Alberta, suppliers there would design components suited to a colder climate and export their products to northern regions.

A “win-wind” model for Alberta

All of the aforementioned considerations could be among the starting points for Alberta participation in a national strategy on the environment, and a provincial policy on economic and energy diversification, as per Notley’s goals. In the words of the late Jack Layton, “Don’t let them tell you it can’t be done!”

Rafe Mair’s Modest Proposal: Scrap environmental assessments

May 25, 2015Energy and Resources, Hydropower, LNG, Pipelines and Supertankers, WATERfeaturedRafe Mair

The 3-member NEB Joint Review Panel for the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline (Damien Gillis)

Do you enjoy being a raw hypocrite?

Well, if you’re a taxpayer in Canada that’s what you are because you support raw hypocrisy every day in the various hearings on environmental matters that take place.

I’ve written in the past, from personal experience, about environmental assessments of independent power projects (IPPs), the environmental disgraces of British Columbia, and how they are so biased in favour of industry that it defies all but spluttering language of anger.

Let’s call the whole thing off

Why don’t we just abolish the National Energy Board and all other boards like it and allow environmental projects to be judged strictly by the industry itself, with the customary pat on the corporate head from the prime minister?

At least this would make honest men and women of us.

The recent resignation of economist Robyn Allan as intervenor in the TransMountain pipeline hearing, coupled with the earlier resignation of former BC Hydro head Marc Eliesen from the same hearing, have made plain that these so-called environmental assessment boards are making mockery of the notion of natural justice and idiots of us who pay for it.

“A rigged game”

Let’s hear first of all from Robyn Allan, economist and a public servant who was a once the president of ICBC

[quote]It’s a rigged game … We’re getting the scope that supports Kinder Morgan. It’s a private sector, ‘How do we get to yes?’ masquerading as a public interest review. [Emphasis added]

… decisions made by the Board at this hearing are dismissive of Intervenors. They reflect a lack of respect for hearing participants, a deep erosion of the standards and practices of natural justice … and an undemocratic restriction of participation by citizens, communities, professionals and First Nations either by rejecting them outright or failing to provide adequate funding to facilitate meaningful participation.[/quote]

Unnatural justice

Marc Eliesen, one of the most distinguished power experts in Canada, having served as head of BC Hydro, Manitoba Hydro and Ontario Hydro, was an intervenor at NEB hearings into the Kinder Morgan pipeline. He resigned last November in a scathing letter, a small part of which follows:

[quote]The evidence on the record shows that decisions made by the Board at this hearing are dismissive of Intervenors. They reflect a lack of respect for hearing participants, a deep erosion of the standards and practices of natural justice…and an undemocratic restriction of participation by citizens, communities, professionals and First Nations either by rejecting them outright or failing to provide adequate funding to facilitate meaningful participation.

… The National Energy Board is not fulfilling its obligation to review the Trans Mountain Expansion Project objectively. Accordingly it is not only British Columbians, but all Canadians that cannot look to the Board’s conclusions as relevant as to whether or not this project deserves a social license. Continued involvement in the process endorses this sham and is not in the public interest. [Emphasis added] [/quote]

A waste of taxpayers’ money

These hearings, whether on the grand scale of the National Energy Board, or merely a smaller environmental assessment of an IPP, are hugely expensive. Many involve travel across the country, staying in the best hotels, sipping the best, and by the end of the day stacking up a substantial tab for you and me to pay every April 30.

No one, least of all I, would object if this process were actually evaluating these projects and making recommendations based upon full and proper hearings with natural justice for all – the “judges” being totally independent of any of the parties involved and noted for giving unbiased advice to the government.

The reality is the opposite. Almost unknown for turning down anything from industry or ruling in favour of intervenors even on minor matters, the results of their deliberations are easily foretold and, in fact, relied upon by both government and industry.

A foregone conclusion

It was instructive to note that when Premier Clark recently made another of her absurd press announcements on LNG, the federal minister for energy, James Moore, had to correct himself after he had – with fulsome support resembling that of a suitor of the seductively smiling premier – suddenly had a flash of awkward memory as he mumbled, “Oh yes, there is an environmental process to go through yet”.

This should not be overlooked. The applicant companies don’t stop their planning or construction pending the outcome of these hearings – why would they when they’re foregone conclusions? The only thing to worry about are the likes of the courageous citizens of Burnaby and their gutsy mayor, Derek Corrigan.

Our leaders can no longer be trusted

All of the foregoing is tied into the phenomenon of this century, namely that those, in the words of the Anglican church, “set in authority over us”, can no longer be trusted for even so much as a word of truth if the contrary suits them better. I can tell you that, at the risk of appearing a cynic, when I hear a politician or an industrialist make pronouncements on anything whatsoever, I don’t believe a single word and I believe that experience proves my skepticism fully justified.

Why not?

Let’s get back to the beginning.

Why not abolish the whole bloody business? Let’s rid ourselves this wasted outlay of money. It’s rather like the poor citizens of the late Soviet Union having to pay for their court system and it’s a plethora of “show trials”.

Won’t this leave us without any environmental protection?

If so, what’s changed?

Is it a better to have a fake process and an environmental travesty or to have the same result without having to go through the humiliation?

The reality is that we ought to have a proper system. In this country, however, where the far right rules, you would have to be smoking something questionable to think that that would ever happen.

At the end of the day (my favourite cliché I might say), it will be up to the public and environmentalists – which these days are almost one and the same thing – to expose the dangers posed by the undertakings proposed by those who couldn’t care less about the environmental consequences and, in order to put money in their own pockets in great gobs, pretend that they’re only doing it for the greater good of the public and that we should all be eternally grateful.

Premier Clark spews more hot air with LNG non-announcent

May 21, 2015Energy and Resources, LNG, Oil&GasfeaturedDamien Gillis

Premier Christy Clark announcing...the same thing she's announced many times before (BC Govt) — Premier Christy Clark announcing…the same thing she’s announced many times before (BC Government)

For all the fanfare of yesterday’s press conference, you’d think Premier Christy Clark would have some big, new development to announce for her much-vaunted but yet-to-be-built LNG industry. Sorry folks, nothing to see here.

All Clark had to offer was warmed up leftovers from the umpteen previous press conferences, media advisories and political speeches she’s been making for the past several years. Still no final investment decision from Malaysian energy giant Petronas – only “the beginning of the company’s final decision path toward an investment decision”, whatever the heck that means. The “path” to any real bucks being forked out by a single one of the 18 companies and global consortia proposing LNG plants is proving to be a long and winding road.

Are we there yet?

For years now, we’ve watched the likes of Chevron and Petronas punt their promised final investment decisions to next quarter, next year, some vaguely defined point in the future – while many others have outright fallen by the wayside (BG Group, Apache, Encana, EOG to name a few). But we never seem to get there.

And what if we did ever get there? At this point, after all the slashing of royalties and taxes, all the gutting of environmental protections, all the deals with China, India and Malaysia to supply the labour via foreign temporary workers, what’s actually left for the people of BC?

Take your ball and go home

BC should not be bullied by Petronas over LNG taxes — Petronas CEO Shamsul Abbas lecturing BC at last year’s LNG conference (Damien Gillis)

In her press conference yesterday, Clark boasted that the “memorandum of understanding” with Petronas locks in low royalty and tax rates for years to come. This is supposed to be good news for the people of BC?

As I noted back when Petronas CEO Shamsul Abbas took the stage at a glitzy, taxpayer-funded BC LNG conference last year – to lecture us about not “killing the goose that lays the golden egg” – if these are the only terms under which the likes of Petronas will come set up shop here, then we don’t need them. It’s as if they’re saying, “Cut your public benefits and environmental standards to zero, or we’ll take our ball and go home.” Well, take your bloody ball and go home then.

It’s not all about money

And this is all assuming that with enough money on the table (which of course there isn’t), we’d go for this deal. Well, increasingly, the public and First Nations beg to differ. Just look at the Lax Kw’alaams Band and their recent rejection of an unprecedented bag of loot – $1.15 BILLION and $100 million worth of crown land. Apparently, there’s more to money for some of us – like protecting wild salmon that would be severly threatened by Petronas’ proposed plant on top of the Skeena River eestuary.

That’s what yesterday’s announcement was really about: quelling investor fears over the very public face plant that was the failed Lax Kw’alaams deal. Except that Clark has nothing meaningful or new to offer. And she’s panicking now. After all the big promises of a $100 Billion “Prosperity Fund” in the last election – the thing that vaulted her past the NDP, long favoured in the polls – even she now must realize that it’s time to put up or shut up (well, we can dream on the latter)

Yet that’s looking less and less likely. Her other favourite horse – tax fraudster Indonesian billionaire Sukanto Tanoto – is facing an uphill battle in Howe Sound. First Nations and citizens along the various pipeline routes are digging in their heels. Asian LNG prices have plummeted to well below the break-even point for BC LNG exports, obliterating the entire business case for the industry.

In fact, about only way the Petronases of the world can hope to see a profit from BC LNG is by picking your and my pockets. The only way this industry makes sense is with huge, unbilled environmental externalities and massive taxpayer subsidies.

Take it or leave it, says Mr. Abbas.

Leave it, then.

Rafe: In absence of political leadership, public and First Nations stepping up

May 18, 2015Canada, Politics, UncategorizedfeaturedRafe Mair

Citizens line the Sea to Sky Highway to protest Woodfibre LNG (My Sea to Sky)

Dr. David Suzuki, in a recent column well worth reading, talks about a change in attitude across the country – changes with First Nations, increasing environmentalism, a new government in Alberta. Big changes are happening everywhere.

I wonder how many British Columbians have thought about the disgraceful attitude of industry and government towards our environment and the contempt they show for those who disagree with them?

Dr. Suzuki covers a number of these areas and I’ll just deal with one or two of my own.

Private power play

Let’s go back to the Independent Power Projects (IPPs) of the Campbell government which have destroyed our rivers and continue to cost BC Hydro huge amounts of money that we cannot afford. They are nothing more than Liberal slush. They are economic disasters for Hydro and any doubts on that score are dispelled by economist Erik Andersen, who no stranger to these pages.

Herring fishery fiasco

Another revealing moment came with the Heitsuk First Nation in Bella Bella when the federal government finally had to shut down the gillnet fisherey, as Damien Gillis documented in these pages, proving that the Heiltsuk knew more about the health of the fishery than did DFO.

Premier welcomes crook to BC LNG industry

Woodfibre LNG- Shady PR firms, lobby violations, fraudulent owner - Is this the kind of business BC wants to welcome — Sukanto Tanoto (right), owner of proposed Woodfibre LNG

Let’s move ahead and talk about LNG and I want to bring up a point, which I have spoken of before, but is absolutely critical when the British Columbians make their judgment about the LNG companies and Premier Christy Clark and her group. We only need to look at the proposed plant at Woodfibre LNG to make my point. Yes I have written about this but I think the point must be hammered again and again.

Apart from the whole issue of LNG, we have a Premier who has brought to us a company wholly owned by crook, Sukanto Tanoto, who has defrauded governments and who has been an environmental catastrophe in Indonesia where he plies his trade. Premier Clark asks British Columbians, her fellow citizens, to accept within our community a man whose entire operation is geared to steal taxes and royalties and who shows no intention of caring about environmental standards such as those covering the minimum acceptable width of Howe Sound for LNG tankers.

Moreover, Premier Clark and Sukanto Tanoto know what those standards are. We have brought them to their attention as forcibly as possible. We didn’t make them up – they are accepted by the US government. We have printed, here, the industry standards set by SIGTTO, Society of International Gas Tanker and Terminal Operators Ltd.

We have shown them charts with the appropriate lines drawn showing the clear limitations. This paper has carried them. Clearly, Howe Sound is utterly inappropriate for LNG freighters.

Why hasn’t premier Christy Clark squarely and honestly faced up to these issues?

Why hasn’t the NDP and leader John Horgan forced the premier to face these issues and come clean with us?

Green groups demonized for defending public

This in no way lessens our need to raise all of the environmental concerns which have been brought forward not by a government caring our interests but by environmental groups. Not only are these groups bearing the brunt of the work, they are being pilloried and insulted by people like Prime Minister Harper and Finance Minister Joe Oliver not to mention our own premier and her pet poodle, Rich Coleman.

Now we come to the part where the government is supposed to provide environmental assessment and protection but the overwhelming evidence is that this process is so badly flawed as to be beyond a joke.

So what do we do now?

MPs, MLAs useless

Why, of course, in a democracy we go to our MP or MLA MLA.

We might just as well ask the neighbourhood cat for all the help we are going to get. In my own constituency where the Woodfibre LNG plant is proposed, the MP, John Weston, and MLA Jordan Sturdy are as useless as tits on a bull and indeed worse – because they are so much part of the problem, they only aggravate matters when asked to get involved.

These are some of the factors that enter into the utter disgust people have for those in charge of corporations and governments, the main one of which is that nobody tells the truth. In fact, at the risk of sounding like a cynic, when I hear a captain of Industry or his PR creep on the one hand or a politician on the other, I don’t believe a word they’re saying, not a single word. Ever.

What does this mean for federal election?

It’s interesting to contemplate what effect this public disgust will have on the voters. As I write this, the three major parties are almost to level according to the polls with the Greens far back.

But we have seen that polls are not terribly accurate these days. One only has to look at the United Kingdom and Alberta.

My bet is that Dr. Suzuki is right and that there will be a great many surprises. I believe that applies to my constituency of West Vancouver-Howe Sound-Sea-To-Sky Country.

But there’s one more thing, quickly.

If Dr. Suzuki senses it correctly, and he is an excellent position to do so, no matter what happens in the election, the public is no longer prepared to put up with the same crap from Ottawa, Victoria, and the Corporate Head Office. How that plays out will be fascinating to watch and be a part of.

Suzuki: Canada seeing real change with energy, politics and First Nations

May 16, 2015Energy and Resources, First Nations, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersfeaturedDr. David Suzuki

Tahltan First Nations and supporters peacefully occupying a Fortune Minerals drill last year (Beyond Boarding) — Tahltan First Nations and supporters peacefully occupying a Fortune Minerals drill (Beyond Boarding)

Recent events in Canada have shown not only that change is possible, but that people won’t stand for having corporate interests put before their own.

When plummeting oil prices late last year threw Alberta into financial crisis, people rightly asked, “Where’s the money?” They could see that an oil producer like Norway was able to weather the price drop thanks to forward planning, higher costs to industry to exploit resources and an oil fund worth close to $1 trillion! Leading up to the election, the government that ran Alberta for 44 years refused to consider raising industry taxes or reviewing royalty rates, instead offering a budget with new taxes, fees and levies for citizens, along with service cuts.

Alberta does the unthinkable

The people of Alberta then did what was once thought impossible: they gave the NDP a strong majority. Almost half the NDP members elected were women, giving Alberta the highest percentage of women ever in a Canadian provincial or federal government.

PEI follows suit

On the other side of the country, voters in Prince Edward Island followed B.C. provincially and Canada federally and elected their first Green Party member, as well as Canada’s second openly gay premier. Remember, homosexuality was illegal in Canada until 1969!

Tahltan beat back coal mines

In my home province, after a long struggle by elders and families of the Tahltan Klabona Keepers, the B.C. government bought 61 coal licences from Fortune Minerals and Posco Canada in the Klappan and Sacred Headwaters, putting a halt to controversial development in an ecologically and culturally significant area that is home to the Tahltan people and forms the headwaters of the Skeena, Stikine and Nass rivers. The Tahltan and the province have agreed to work on a long-term management plan for the area.

Lax Kw’alaams turn down a billion dollars for LNG

On the same night as Alberta’s election, people of the Lax Kw’alaams band of the Tsimshian First Nation met to consider an offer by Malaysian state-owned energy company Petronas of $1 billion over 40 years to build a liquefied natural gas export terminal on Lelu Island near Prince Rupert, at the other end of the Skeena River, an estuary that provides crucial habitat for salmon and other life. The 181 people attending unanimously opposed the offer. Two nights later in Prince Rupert, band members also stood unanimously against the proposal.

[Editor’s note: A final vote in Vancouver scheduled after this column’s deadline also yielded a rejection of Petronas’ project]

The message is clear: integrity, the environment and human health are more important than money. Gerald Amos, a Haisla First Nation member and community relations director for the Headwaters Initiative, said the federal Prince Rupert Port Authority’s decision to locate the facility on Lelu Island also demonstrated a failure to properly consult with First Nations. “By the time they get around to consulting with us, the boat’s already built and they just want to know what colour to paint it,” he said.

Koch acknowledges climate change

On a broader scale, change is occurring around the serious threat of climate change. Even well-known deniers, including U.S. oil billionaire Charles Koch, now admit climate change is real and caused in part by CO2 emissions. But they argue it isn’t and won’t be dangerous, so we shouldn’t worry. Most people are smart enough to see through their constantly changing, anti-science, pro-fossil-fuel propaganda, though, and are demanding government and industry action.

Divestment movement gaining ground

We’re also seeing significant changes in the corporate sector. The movement to divest from fossil fuels is growing quickly, and businesses are increasingly integrating positive environmental performance into their operations. Funds that have divested from fossil fuels have outperformed those that haven’t, a trend expected to continue.

Don’t expect miracles from Alberta NDP

We can’t expect miracles from Alberta’s new government, which has its work cut out. After all, it would be difficult to govern Alberta from an anti-oil position, and the fossil fuel industry is known for working to get its way. Although NDP leader Rachel Notley has spoken against the Northern Gateway pipeline proposal, she isn’t opposed to all pipeline and oilsands development, and she’s called for refinery construction in Alberta. But she’s promised to phase out coal-fired power, increase transit investment, implement energy efficiency and renewable energy strategies, and bring in stronger environmental standards, monitoring and enforcement.

I’ve often said things are impossible only until they aren’t anymore. The past few weeks show how people have the power to bring about change.

Written with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Senior Editor Ian Hanington.

Lax Kw’alaams rejects Billion-dollar LNG deal; Lake Babine signs paltry one

May 13, 2015Energy and Resources, LNG, Oil&GasfeaturedDamien Gillis

Lelu Island and Flora Bank (foreground) - site of controversial proposed LNG plant (Skeena Watershed Conservation Soc.) — Lelu Island and Flora Bank (fore) – site of contentious proposed LNG plant (Skeena Watershed Conservation)

The BC Liberal government and LNG industry suffered a blow this week with a final losing vote amongst Lax Kw’alaams Band members over a billion-dollar package offered to support Petronas’ Pacific NorthWest LNG plant near Prince Rupert.

At the same time, a much smaller, quieter deal was being signed by the elected leadership of the Lake Babine Nation, pertaining to the pipeline that would feed the coastal plant – the Prince Rupert Gas Transmission line. On the table in this “Project Agreement” between the 2,440-member band and pipeline contractor TransCanada was a comparatively paltry $3.56 million, plus a piece of a $10 million a year revenue sharing deal to be split amongst a number of First Nations along the pipeline route if it becomes operational.

According to the Prince George Citizen, the upfront sum of $3.56 million will be issued in the following phases:

[quote]When the agreement takes effect Lake Babine Nation will get $324,000, when construction begins they get $1.62 million, and then the same amount when the pipeline is in operation.[/quote]

A pretty big deal

Lake Babine members must be scratching their heads wondering how their leaders settled for so little, while the Lax Kw’alaams Band at the end of the pipeline turned down what has been touted as $1.15 Billion in benefits over 40 years, following a series of votes amongst its members over the past week. All three votes, including one held for off-reserve members in Vancouver last night, went down to defeat. Even the BC government, desperate to see at least one of its many embattled LNG projects go forth, threw in 2,200 hectares of Crown land in the region, pegged at a value of $108-million.

Yet all the money and land couldn’t outweigh members’ concerns over the impacts of the massive plant proposed for Lelu Island on Skeena River salmon. A causeway for ships to dock at the plant would disturb vital eelgrass habitat in the estuary at Flora Bank (pictured above), warn scientists and conservation groups. For this very reason, a smaller coal plant operation was rejected by the federal government decades ago, when stocks were admittedly far healthier than today.

Band won’t bight on salmon assurances

The proponent has agreed to make some modifications to its design and a conveniently-timed report which it paid for argues the impacts will be negligible. But independent scientists disagree, suggesting the project could collapse already troubled Skeena stocks. And let’s not forget – this is the same proponent that literally erased the entire Skeena River and estuary from its initial project maps! So it’s easy to see how a few project tweaks and a company report would do little to sway Lax Kw’alaams members.

The band’s high-profile rejection of the project is no doubt rippling through the Liberal Cabinet room today – yet another blow to the government’s one and only economic development policy. Yet many were quick to point out that the door is still open to PacificNorthwest LNG, despite this week’s setback.

Keeping the dream alive

There was lawyer David Austin – a longtime promoter of controversial energy projects in BC, including the government’s once-vaunted private river power scheme – ready to toss aside First Nations’ rights before the final votes had even been cast. The Canadian Press paraphrased his comments as follows:

[quote]Lelu Island is Crown land managed by the Prince Rupert Port Authority, which means the province technically has the authority to push ahead without support from the Lax Kw’alaams.

Even if the band proves it has aboriginal title — which would require proving it has had exclusive occupancy of the territory — Supreme Court precedent gives the province the right to override that claim.[/quote]

Premier Clark also vowed that an agreement would yet be reached with the band and even Lax Kw’alaams’ councillors suggested they were still open to a deal on the project, so long as it avoided the contentious salmon habitat in Flora Bank. “Lax Kw’alaams is open to business, to development and to LNG,” including this particular project, a statement noted.

Meanwhile, agreements like the one signed by Lake Babine show that there are many more moves to be played out in this chess game. TransCanada boasts similarly vague agreements over the pipeline with the Nisga’a Lisims Government, Gitanyow First Nation and Kitselas First Nation.

And according to CP:

[quote]The B.C. government said it has reached 54 pipeline-benefits agreements with 28 First Nations across the province. Of the 59 First Nations along the natural-gas pipeline ending at Lelu Island only five have publicly announced signing agreements with the government.[/quote]

So the battle over Petronas’ LNG plant is far from over, yet with all the rhetoric and lack of real progress on the project, it’s starting to seem like it’s less about natural gas than hot air.