Regulator OKs oil pipeline to Pacific Coast
Source: Associated Press
Regulator OKs oil pipeline to Pacific Coast
By ROB GILLIES
Dec. 20, 2013 3:02 AM EST
TORONTO (AP) Canada's regulator recommended Thursday the government approve a proposed pipeline to the Pacific Coast that would allow Canada's oil to be shipped to Asia.
A three-person review panel said opening Pacific markets to Canadian oil is important to the economy and thus supported Enbridge's controversial pipeline. There are 209 conditions, but no major potential stumbling blocks such as a route change.
Natural Resource Minister Joe Oliver said the government will review the report and consult with affected aboriginal groups before making a decision. Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservative government has staunchly supported the pipeline after the United States delayed a final decision on TransCanada's Keystone XL pipeline that would take oil from Alberta to the U.S. Gulf Coast.
~ snip ~
There is fierce environmental and aboriginal opposition and court challenges are expected. Opponents fear pipeline leaks and a potential Exxon Valdez-like disaster on the pristine Pacific coast. About 220 large oil tankers a year would visit the Pacific coast town of Kitamat.
Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/regulator-oks-oil-pipeline-pacific-coast
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Ultimately, no one really knows what the long-term impacts of large-scale oil spills will be. Following the Exxon Valdez oil spill, for instance, the regions productive herring fishery suddenly collapsed four years after the spill occurred, and it has yet to recover.
In addition, oil has lingered in the ecosystem far longer than many predicted. A 2001 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration study surveyed 96 sites along 8,000 miles of coastline and found that a total area of approximately 20 acres of shoreline in Prince William Sound is still contaminated with oil. Oil was found at 58 percent of the 91 sites assessed and is estimated to have the linear equivalent of 5.8 km of contaminated shoreline.
In 2010, the journal Nature explained that some researchers initially calculated that Exxon Valdezs oil would dissipate within years or even months or that it would quickly degrade or be washed away by high-pressure hoses. However, due to the natural geology of the environment, pockets of oil have remained, buried half a meter below the surface of some beaches.
Critics of the delay say the ongoing struggle to hold Exxon accountable for unanticipated environmental damages in Alaska offers clear lessons to be learned regarding the continuing process of determining BPs long-term liability for the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe, a spill that was 20 times larger than Exxon Valdez.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/07/15/2301451/25-years-after-exxon-valdez-oil-spill-company-still-hasnt-paid-for-long-term-environmental-damages/
TexasTowelie
(110,972 posts)After Fukushima it is difficult to describe anything associated with the Pacific as pristine.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Or perhaps, someone has a 3rd degree sunburn on their face, so ignore the gangrene in their foot?
The issue is not the pristineness of the entire vast Pacific Ocean, it is the pristine condition of the the pathway of the proposed pipeline from Alberta through British Columbia, and the waterways through which the huge oil tankers would have to navigate. And of course, any huge body of water is not going to be totally pristine - however it's presently pristine enough in the B.C. area to support a major fishing industry. A major issue is the impact on fisheries. As I posted/documented elsewhere on this thread:
"There has been an informal moratorium on all oil tanker traffic off the coast of BC since 1972, renewed by the House of Commons in 2010 after the Harper government said there was no official moratorium. As for the Northern Gateway pipeline, all we have been told is that Enbridge, the pipelines owner, says it has a foolproof plan to manage all this. The area is one of the richest and most productive ecosystems on the planet, all based on the salmon. It is critical habitat for seventeen types of marine mammals, including the endangered blue, fin, right, sei and orca whales. Rivers critical for sixty percent of BCs multi-million-dollar salmon catch run through the region."
As to Fukushima's discharge of irradiated water, there remains a variety of projections on how the water has dispersed and how much the radiation has been diluted. It may or may not prove to have an impact on B.C. waterways & salmon.
As to the impact on fisheries of ONE spill by a tanker, the Exxon Valdez, read on:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/06/exxon.valdez.alaska/
(snip)
Three years after the 11 million-gallon spill in Prince William Sound blackened 1,500 miles of Alaska coastline, the herring on which he and other Cordova fishermen heavily relied disappeared from the area. Platt and some others stuck around, fishing for salmon and hoping things would improve. The herring never returned to Cordova. Platt's income plummeted, severely straining his marriage and psyche. He dipped into his sons' college funds to support his family. . . People's lives were ruined.
The herring loss alone has cost the region about $400 million over the past 21 years, according to the developmental director at Cordova's Prince William Sound Science Center. The average fisherman suffered a 30 percent loss in income after the spill, but those who specialized in just herring lost everything, Kopchak said.
"The Valdez oil spill was a tragic accident and one which ExxonMobil deeply regrets," Exxon said in a separate statement" . . . As a result of the accident, Exxon undertook significant operational reforms and implemented an exceptionally thorough operational management system to prevent future incidents. ExxonMobil has a long history of community support throughout Alaska and we continue to expand that focus," the statement said.
Well, we all see how well that "exceptionally thorough operational management" worked out in Arkansas, where the state has had to sue Exxon to clean up its major spill there. So the Canadian company assures us it has a fool proof plan? Cripes. What next - sell us the Brooklyn Bridge?
If you are located in Texas, any chance you have a personal interest in the oil bidness? Full disclosure on that subject, if you please.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)The peoples of the First Nation and Canadian environmentalists are truly David versus Goliath, particularly with Prime Minister Harper's conservative government support for this dirty oil pipeline.
From the OP link:
"The Northern Gateway Project is being vehemently opposed by Indigenous Peoples who will not put their territories, waters and communities at risk," Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, President of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs. "We are prepared to go to the wall against this project. We have no choice."
Meanwhile, China's growing economy is hungry for Canadian oil. Chinese state-owned companies have invested billions in Canadian energy in the past few years.
"They follow this quite closely," said Wenran Jiang, an energy expert and special adviser to Alberta's Department of Energy.
He said Canada's regulator hasn't put any major conditions on the approval.
Here is an excellent, detailed and really shocking article spelling out how Canadian PM Harper has gutted environmental regulation, assessment, oversight and enforcement across the board in Canada, and in particular in regard to the dirty oil pipeline:
The Harper Conservatives and Their Dirty Oil Pipeline
There has been an informal moratorium on all oil tanker traffic off the coast of BC since 1972, renewed by the House of Commons in 2010 after the Harper government said there was no official moratorium. As for the Northern Gateway pipeline, all we have been told is that Enbridge, the pipelines owner, says it has a foolproof plan to manage all this. The area is one of the richest and most productive ecosystems on the planet, all based on the salmon. It is critical habitat for seventeen types of marine mammals, including the endangered blue, fin, right, sei and orca whales. Rivers critical for sixty percent of BCs multi-million-dollar salmon catch run through the region.
[The Oct 7th Toronto Star article is at : www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1267961why-northern-gateway-shouldn-t-go-near-great-bear-rainforest ]
From issue #63
http://subterrain.ca/blog/108/the-harper-conservatives-and-their-dirty-oil-pipeline
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Greed and hubris have clearly made these people go insane. This is a horrible idea!
mitty14u2
(1,015 posts)Ironically, the spill, which occurred on March 29, came just days after the company was awarded the Green Cross for Safety medal, in honor of its "comprehensive commitment to safety excellence," by the National Safety Council. Clearly it was a bit premature.
The Justice Department and the State of Arkansas are seeking damages for alleged violations of federal and state waste and pollution laws respectively, while Arkansas is also seeking a ruling that Exxon is liable to pay for damages resulting from the spill of about 5,000 barrels worth of oil. During a news conference, Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel said that the "lawsuit is based on the fact that the pipeline rupture caused the release of Canadian tar sands oil that polluted the states air, soil and waters, [and] has caused a significant and lasting negative impact upon our states environment, and Exxon as responsible party for the incident should be penalized for those impacts." The company says that it is aware that the lawsuit has been filed but has yet to review the allegations against it.
As TransCanada, the company behind the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, has stepped up its efforts to combat opposition to the project by hiring a "communications specialist" with no known experience on energy and environmental issues, the damage caused by the spill in Mayflower highlights just a few of the very real dangers posed by the short-sighted project.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/48887/arkansas-oil-spill-u-s-government-and-arkansas-sue-exxonmobil-over-spill