On Tuesday of this week, as expected, Ottawa gave Enbridge the green light for construction of the Northern Gateway pipeline. The approval is subject to Enbridge meeting 209 conditions set out in a controversial report prepared by a Joint Review panel, consisting of representatives from the National Energy Board and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. In addition, the government of British Columbia has named five of its own conditions, while B.C. First Nations and Environmental defence groups have pledged to use every means at their disposal to block Northern Gateway.
The Facts:
The Northern Gateway pipeline would stretch from Burdenheim, AB to Kitimat BC, a total distance of 1177 km across rugged, mountainous terrain and through the territory of several B.C. First Nations. It in fact consists of two pipes: The one most people think of is the one flowing west carrying crude oil from the oil sands to Kitimat on the B.C. coast. This pipe would be measure about 36” in diameter, with a capacity of up to 525,000 barrels per day. The second pipeline (20” diameter) would send condensate, a light hydrocarbon similar to pentane eastward at about 193,000 barrels per day. The condensate helps thin out viscous heavy crude for easier pipeline transport. On the land-use side of things, 70% of affected land is considered to be ‘previously disturbed,’ meaning that it has already experienced adverse environmental effects.
The Argument for Gateway:
The vast majority of Canadian crude oil exports are to the United States. Enbridge argues that this crude is being sold to the U.S. at discounted prices. There is also a very strong emerging energy market in Asian countries across the Pacific (also known as the Pacific Rim). Construction of the pipeline would have huge economic benefits for Canada and for B.C., of this there is no question. If we take today’s crude oil price, about $115 USD a barrel (Source Bloomberg.com) and were to multiply that by the daily pipeline capacity and that by 365 days a year for about a 30 year lifetime… you get the idea. Add that to the hefty revenue from oil companies competing to purchase space if the pipeline does get built, and well Enbridge will be literally swollen with money (not that they aren’t already).
The other big economic upside being pushed by supporters is the creation of jobs. Enbridge argues that construction of Gateway will create 3000 new construction jobs and 560 long-term jobs. Enbridge has also pledged $3 million towards training programs for the construction industry. The hope would also be that services-related and other new jobs would be created in the small towns along the route.
The Argument Against Gateway:
Where to begin? As previously mentioned, the pipeline route runs through First Nations territory. These First Nations have legal rights to that land, and have made it pretty clear that none of them want to see this pipeline get built through their homes – and who can blame them? After the official ‘apology’ to aboriginals a while back for the turmoil of residential schools among other injustices that they suffered through, certainly Enbridge and the federal/provincial governments will lose even more credibility with these groups if a shovel gets in the ground on their territory. Chiefs have promised to challenge Gateway, in court and on the ground, until it is put to bed for good.
In terms of the environment, there are huge concerns for B.C.’s marine and land species, particularly those that are already considered to be at-risk, such as woodland caribou and the grizzly bear. Furthermore, there is of course risk of oil spills, on both land and in water at the Kitimat end of the pipeline, located at the head of the Douglas Channel. Reflecting back to the B.P. oil spill in the U.S. a few years ago, is this something we really want to risk in our own country? The spills are not only costly to wildlife and the environment; they are also costly (yes, in money), and at time impossible, to fully clean up.
The Verdict
Though the 209 conditions set out in the report do address these risks, researchers, scientists, environmental groups and even the BC government remain against the project for the time being. Enbridge has a lot of work to do, including networking and educating affected BC communities and First Nations, getting up to speed on and implementing the best spill-control technology possible, making environmental risk management/assessment plans for each of the species at risk and the list goes on and on.
One of the more intriguing conditions on the project is that Enbridge must begin construction by December 31, 2016 in order to continue with the project unless otherwise directed by the National Energy Board. So yes, the green light from the federal government is a step forward for Enbridge but it will be a very lengthy road to construction, likely full of court battles, and they will likely be under a bit of a time crunch. It seems doubtful that they will be able to fulfill this condition, however it is perhaps also not unlikely that the National Energy Board would grant them an extension. Nevertheless, it will be quite a while before we see any shovels in the ground on this one.
Leave a Reply