Resolutions Passed!

A big thank you to the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Kamloops that passed the following resolutions today!  Please fee free to borrow from the links or other information if you need  it.

 

Support guide for anti-pipeline resolutions

prepared by UU-SEA committee

Using this guide: Text of the “whereas” preamble is printed in red, followed by additional supporting information.  Footnotes (most with clickable web links) are at the bottom of each page. 

A.       WHEREAS the effects of climate change are real, and we must immediately lower  carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels;

Evidence for warming. “The idea that Earth is warming partly because of the emissions of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere is one of the most certain concepts in natural science. The idea that greenhouse

gases increase radiative forcing is an old idea that has withstood a variety of analyses to emerge intact

(an accessible history is available on the Web site of the American Institute of Physics at www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm ). The peer-reviewed papers that provide the evidence that human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases over the twentieth century have led to increases in temperature and changes in rainfall, wind, humidity, sea level, ocean acidity, snow cover, etc. have been assessed rigorously through the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in a series of reports. No serious academic body, significant institution, or national government doubts the basic science (e.g., Somers 2009).”  [1]  

Effects: Climate change is increasing the intensity and frequency of extreme weather events like Hurricane Sandy, and causing record low Arctic sea ice levels,  droughts, wildfires, earlier springs and later falls, and increasing acidification of oceans.  For more details on these effects, click on these links:

 

http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2012/10/more-vids.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010%E2%80%932012_Southern_United_States_drought

http://www.biodivcanada.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=4E014B36-1&offset=2&toc=show

http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/Ocean+Acidification 

we should approve no new pipelines in the absence of a comprehensive federal carbon dioxide reduction plan;

 

Current plans: An international assessment of countries' performance in fighting climate change has placed Canada near the bottom (54th of 61) among the world's biggest emitters of greenhouse gases.  Only Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kazakhstan, Turkey, China, Poland and Russia were ranked lower. [2]  Our country’s current plans to reduce the “intensity” of emissions and store carbon dioxide are completely inadequate to the problem – they will do nothing to solve the problem of climate change.   “The carbon in Alberta’s economically recoverable oil sands reserve would release 69 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide if it was all extracted and burnt - the equivalent of a hundred years of Canada’s total greenhouse gas emissions. British Columbia has adopted a leadership role and it is essential that Canada do the same, to accept our moral responsibility and demonstrate leadership to the rest of the world.”  [3] 

 

B.      WHEREAS the other environmental costs and risks of these projects are unacceptably high; 

Spills: Enbridge pipelines have a history of spills with poor responses. The US National Transportation Safety Board went unusually far in criticizing the Enbridge response to its massive Michigan pipeline spill.  Citing pervasive organizational failures, failure to correctly identify deterioration of the pipeline and poorly trained staff in the Edmonton control centre who ignored safety procedures, the NTSB likened the Enbridge response to the Keystone Kops.[4]  Perhaps more seriously, Enbridge resisted pressure to include documents detailing the Kalamazoo spill and response until the review panel demanded this information be included.  Although the Michigan Kalamazoo River spill was the most serious of Enbridge spills, it’s important to note that it was not an isolated event.[5]  Kelly Marsh, a Kitimat millwright, crunched Enbridge's own numbers and found that the risk of at least one medium or large spill over 50 years is around 82%.  Even Enbridge acknowledged an 18.8 per cent chance of a full bore rupture during the expected life of the pipeline.  [6]   

Once a dilbit pipeline ruptures, it is no ordinary oil spill, especially if it comes in contact with water.  Because tar sands oil, or bitumen, is too thick to flow, it needs to be mixed with a thinner, or diluent.  The mixture is referred to as diluted bitumen, or dilbit for short.  When exposed to air, the diluent evaporates and the remaining heavy oil sinks in water, instead of floating on the surface, making clean-up very difficult . The EPA reported in October 2012 that large amounts of oil are still accumulating in three areas of the Kalamazoo River, and asked Enbridge to dredge approximately 100 additional acres. During the original cleanup effort, dredging was limited to just 25 acres because the EPA wanted to avoid destroying the river's natural ecology.  [7]

Tankers:  The waters of Douglas Channel (the waters where tankers would pick up oil form Northern Gateway's terminus) are very dangerous.  Mal Walsh, a Master Mariner with 40 years of experience in the international oil exploration and shipping industry, has called Enbridge's tanker routes “flawed and dangerous.” [8]   The tankers in Vancouver picking up oil from Kinder Morgan's terminus would sail through a very busy port, alongside heavily populated communities. The Kinder Morgan pipeline project would result in a quadrupling of tanker traffic from the Burnaby terminal.[9]  Officially, there is still a moratorium on oil tankers on BC’s west coast, although it is already being ignored.

Effects of pipeline building on pristine environment: The Northern Gateway pipeline threatens woodland caribou. Scientific literature suggests that “linear disturbances actually contribute to population decline,” said Elena Jones, a wildlife biologist with Resources North, a joint government-industry organization based in Prince George, B.C. She has studied caribou in the region for a decade. “They don’t co-exist well with development,” she said.[10]

Environmental deterioration through expanded tar sands: The  mined tar sands in Alberta are never as biodiverse as untouched land.  One study compared 20 reclaimed areas (with an average age of 16 years since reclamation) to 25 undisturbed sites.  Seventy per cent of the reclaimed sites were in poor ecological health: lower biodiversity, less-productive plants and more land exposed to erosion.[11]  Also, plant communities and carbon cycling in reclaimed wetlands around the world average about three-quarters of what they would if undisturbed — even after a century. And the colder the climate, the slower the recovery. In addition to site quality, the quantity of reclaimed land plays a role.  Year after year, we see the gap between disturbed land and reclamation increasing at an exponential rate. [12]

 Uncertain benefits: There is a solid body of evidence that suggests the benefits of pipeline construction are overstated.[13]  Moreover, "Enbridge gives a much rosier picture of growth in oil production in Canada in its pitch for the pipeline than it gave to its investors at a shareholder meeting." [14]   There is also doubt as to whether the pipeline capacity is even needed before 2025.[15]  In addition to all the environmental risks, economic risks in the event of a major spill are a real concern.  Questions have been raised as to whether the oil companies could be held liable if the insurance they carry proves inadequate.[16]  This may leave taxpayers are on the hook for the costs of any oil spills.   Finally, the energy return on investment for the Enbridge project is very low: we get 2.41 barrels of oil out for every 1 barrel of energy we expend getting the oil.[17]   Energy return on energy investment (EROI) is becoming an accepted approach to determining the viability of energy projects. In this case, we assert that such a high-risk project cannot be justified by such low returns. 

C.      WHEREAS we wish to demonstrate solidarity with the over 100 First Nations, the Union of BC Municipalities and many other groups who have publicly opposed these projects; 

A majority of folks in BC are opposed to the pipelines.[18]  First Nations are opposed.[19] ,[20]   The UBCM passed a resolution opposing pipeline projects like Northern Gateway and Kinder Morgan's twinning that would expand tanker traffic in coastal waters.[21]  The municipalities of Burnaby and Vancouver are on record opposing the twinning, which would result in 5 times as many tankers in the port.[22]  The Vancouver Unitarian Church passed a resolution stating their opposition to the proposed pipelines.  Kairos holds that the Northern Gateway project is “inimical to respect for God's creation.”  They say the Gateway project poses threats of contamination, and  contributions to increased carbon emissions and in turn climate change, that would disrupt eco-systems critical to shared survival.[23]

BE IT RESOLVED  

1.       THAT we, the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Kamloops, oppose the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline to Kitimat, BC and the proposed expansion of the existing Kinder Morgan pipeline to Burnaby, BC; and

2.       THAT we encourage our members holding financial instruments containing Enbridge or Kinder Morgan stock to divest or cancel those financial instruments, informing the companies or managers of mutual funds of the reasons for these actions.

SECOND RESOLUTION

BE IT RESOLVED THAT the President of our Fellowship, with the help of the Social and Environmental Action Committee, communicate this resolution to elected officials, selected First Nations and journalists, as well as selected financial, environmental, social justice and faith groups in Canada, including the managers of the Canada Pension Plan.

 

---

[1] The Psychology of Global Warming: Improving the Fit between the Science and the Message by Ben R. Newell and Andrew J. Pitman, American Meteorological Society, August 2010

[2] Climate Change Performance Index 2012, Germanwatch (funding from European Union) http://germanwatch.org/klima/ccpi.pdf

[3] Guy Dauncey, Founder, BC Sustainable Energy Assoc. http://www.bcsea.org/blog/guy-dauncey/2012/06/13/alberta-oil-pipelines#_edn3

[4] National Transportation Safety Board press release, July 10, 2012  http://www.ntsb.gov/news/2012/120710.html

[5] A Decade of Enbridge Spills, Watershed Sentinel http://www.watershedsentinel.ca/content/enbridge-spills

[6] http://www.princegeorgecitizen.com/article/20121019/PRINCEGEORGE0101/310199996/-1/princegeorge/millwright-proponent-crunch-numbers

[7] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-12/epa-worries-dilbit-pipeline-spill-still-threatens-kalamazoo-river-.html 

 

[8] http://www.vancouverobserver.com/blogs/earthmatters/master-mariners-critique-proposed-enbridge-tanker-routes

[9]http://www.surreyleader.com/business/147227875.html 

[10] http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/10/12/bc-enbridge-northern-gateway-hearings.html

[11] http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/rebuilding-land-destroyed-by-oil-sands-may-not-restore-it-researchers-say/article552879

[12] http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/rebuilding-land-destroyed-by-oil-sands-may-not-restore-it-researchers-say/article552879

 

[13] http://www.policyalternatives.ca/newsroom/news-releases/enbridge-northern-gateway-pipeline-new-reality-check-employment-numbers-finds

[14] http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/enbridge+overstates+economic+benefits+northern+gateway/7262534/story.html

[15] http://www.albertasurfacerights.com/upload/files/HUGHES_Northern_Gateway_Pipeline_November_2011.pdf

[16] http://thetyee.ca/News/2012/06/05/Gateway-Oil-Spill-Insurance

[17] http://www.bcsea.org/sites/bcsea.org/files/webinars/20120522-Peter-Jacob-Gateway-EROI-Webinar.pdf

[18] http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/47051/opposition-to-northern-gateway-remains-high-in-british-columbia

[19] http://www.watershedsentinel.ca/content/first-nations-who-oppose-enbridge

[20] http://wcel.org/sites/default/files/First%20Nations%20that%20have%20declared%20opposition%20to%20proposed%20Enbridge%20tanker%20&%20pipeline%20project.pdf

[21]http://www.albernivalleynews.com/news/171558991.html 

[22] http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Vancouver+Burnaby+mayors+decry+Kinder+Morgan+pipeline+expansion/6457014/story.html

[23] http://www.kairoscanada.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/SUS-RE-NorthernGatewayEthicalFramework.pdf

US Geological Survey

From the US Geological Survey's website:

As much as 44 billion tons of nitrogen and 850 billion tons of carbon stored in arctic permafrost, or frozen ground, could be released into the environment as the region begins to thaw over the next century as a result of a warmer planet according to a new study led by the U.S. Geological Survey. This nitrogen and carbon are likely to impact ecosystems, the atmosphere, and water resources including rivers and lakes. For context, this is roughly the amount of carbon stored in the atmosphere today.  http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=3436
 

Whaddya mean - when this region begins to thaw? Ask the Inuit and Dene in the north - the permafrost is already thawing! 

At his home in Arviat on the western shores of Hudson Bay, the snow is arriving later and melting sooner. Hunters are falling through the ice or becoming trapped in slush. Polar bears are so desperate for food that they are raiding the town’s garbage dumps.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/inuit-hunter-takes-climate-change-message-to-durban-conference/article4180093/

Or watch the video below.....

And just in case you have forgoten that what happens in the Arctic affects us in the south,  George Monbiot described the effects of Arctic melt on our food supply here.

http://www.monbiot.com/2012/10/15/empty-promise/

The jet stream is a current of air travelling eastwards around the upper northern hemisphere. It separates the cold wet weather to the north from the warmer, drier weather to the south. Wobbling along this ribbon are huge meanders called Rossby waves. As the Arctic heats up, the meanders slow down and become steeper. The weather gets stuck.    Stuck weather is another way of saying extreme weather. If the jet stream is jammed to the north of where you are, the weather stays hot and dry, and the temperature builds up – and up. If it’s lodged to the south of you, the rain keeps falling, the ground becomes saturated and the rivers burst their banks. This summer the UK and the US seem to have found themselves on opposite sides of stuck meanders, and harvests in both countries were savaged by opposing extremes of weather.

Spewing more carbon into the atmosphere is going to kill off the human species.   Selling more oil faster is just plain suicidal. The Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline is an EXTREMELY stupid idea - speeding up the export of oil from the tar sands will ACCELERATE climate change.

Arctic Sea Ice REACHES RECORD LOWS!!!!!

Yes I'm shouting - but holy crap!  Arctic sea ice is at record lows in a clement summer (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/aug/27/arctic-sea-ice-shrinks-lowest-extent)  - and we're not at the end of the melt for this year!

The Arctic sea ice fell to 1.58 million square miles, or 4.10 million square kilometers, down 27,000 square miles from 2007, the lowest since satellites began measuring the ice in 1979, according to the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center.  "It's a little surprising to see the 2012 Arctic sea ice extent in August dip below the record low 2007 sea ice extent in September," said Walt Meier, a scientist with the data center.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/27/us-usa-arctic-melting-idUSBRE87Q0ZF20120827

 

A video of the extent of the melt ........

Why does this matter to us down south?   http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2012/08/wasislac.html#more

Climate change models predicted the Arctic would see  ice free summers by the end of this century if we kept up burning fossil fuels .  Now it looks as if we'll see that by the end of this decade.    The IPCC models were CONSERVATIVE! Looks like we can't count on being  safely dead before climate change  bites hard unless we're 83  - today.  

We'll  see nastier, more unpredictable, even COLDER weather.  We may be faced with more pollution - Arctic ice has trapped a lot of toxins - and as it melts, where will they go? Political tensions between Arctic countries that stupidly view the melt as an opportunity to drill for oil may increase (!!!! exclamation points for that mindset).  Climate change will accelerate as permafrost melts and gives off its carbon stores and methane;   increased heat is captured by open water, and the balmy, balmy warmth melts methane clathrates.

It is to be hoped lots of folks realize this is not good at all - we need to STOP burning fossil fuels.  If  millions of us took to the streets in non violent demonstrations, governments would pay attention.

(We sure as hell don't need the Northern Gateway pipeline! )

Northern Gateway Redux

A devestating analysis of the Northern Gateway pipeline by a geologist.  David Hughes states that:

Speedy liquidation [of the Alberta tar sands]  means not only a revenue giveaway but exponential growth of pollution and water contamination. (Current mining waste liabilities already total more than $20-billion.)   

"Enbridge's rationale for the Northern Gateway Pipeline is based on its own unsubstantiated and highly optimistic projections for growth in oil sands production beyond 2025," reports Hughes. "This may serve Enbridge's corporate needs and those of its shareholders but does not consider the longer term environmental and energy security needs of Canadians."
http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2012/01/12/HughesReport/
 

 Ouch!   Enbridge makes more money, the Canadian public faces more pollution and water contamination, and attempts to clean up oil spills on BC 's coasts....this pipeline is not worth the risks!



You still have time to register your opposition with the Joint Review panel: please see the post below for the link.

Northern Gateway

Why oppose Enbridge's Northern Gateway piepline?

Firstly, the US National Transportation & Safety Board recently  released a report on Enbridge's 2010 Kalamzoo pipeline spill.    They were scathing in their assessment of Enbridge's culture and safety record.

"This investigation identified a complete breakdown of safety at Enbridge. Their employees performed like Keystone Kops and failed to recognize their pipeline had ruptured and continued to pump crude into the environment," said NTSB Chairman Deborah A.P. Hersman. "Despite multiple alarms and a loss of pressure in the pipeline, for more than 17 hours and through three shifts they failed to follow their own shutdown procedures." http://www.ntsb.gov/news/2012/120710.html
 

 Why would Enbridge's culture suddenly  shift ?   Furthermore, their spill cleanup plans appear to be less than thorough - a slip  related to their culture of ignoring safety perhaps? 

Enbridge Inc.'s response plan for a potential spill of Northern Gateway oil into the pristine waters off British Columbia doesn't take into account the unique oil mixture the pipeline would actually carry, documents show.
http://thetyee.ca/CanadianPress/2012/08/26/Northern-Gateway-Dilbit-19895506/

Secondly, a long list of First Nations are opposed to this pipeline.  http://wcel.org/sites/default/files/First%20Nations%20that%20have%20declared%20opposition%20to%20proposed%20Enbridge%20tanker%20&%20pipeline%20project.pdf
At what point will we accept the  Delgamuukw decision and the fact that First Nations have a right to control development of their lands?

Thirdly, the tankers that will carry the dilbit through BC's very dangerous coastal waters are five times the size of the tankers delivering condensate. A master mariner familiar with these waters stated:

Kitimat operates a port situated over 100 nautical miles from the open hostile waters of the Queen Charlotte Sound and the Dixon Entrance. It is reached through navigationally difficult and narrow channels, and clearly represents a cheaper fix for the pipeline termination point for tar sands bitumen export. It shows again the lack of respect given to the power of the sea and the vagaries of human error or mechanical breakdown.
http://www.vancouverobserver.com/blogs/earthmatters/2012/04/23/marine-industry-experts-open-letter-against-enbridge-pipeline-and

Fourthly, the Energy Return on Investment on the oil from this project is only 2:41 . In other words, the EROI is 2.41 barrels of oil out for every barrel in.   Check out the calculations on EROI of this project  at:  http://www.bcsea.org/sites/bcsea.org/files/webinars/20120522-Peter-Jacob-Gateway-EROI-Webinar.pdf   

Finally,  we need to stop burning fossil fuels.   We must - MUST! - make societal changes that reduce our dependece on fossil fuels, instead of continuing to build expensive infrastructure that
maintains and supports our dependence. 

The reasons to support this pipline are ....ummm - I can't think of any long term benefits for the public and for the planet.  Please let your provincial and federal representaives know that you oppose this project - particularly if you voted for the Right Honorable Stephen Harper!   He needs to hear from his past and  potential supporters that they are opposed to this pipeline - even if he is reading this news in the newspaper.  A poll

reveals a deep wedge between Alberta and B.C., two political pillars of Harper's majority government, and suggests a growing distance between Alberta and the rest of the country....
And it shows that Canadians outside Alberta, and especially British Columbians, don't buy the federal government's argument that the entire country benefits from oilsands expansion.
A surprising 41 per cent of B.C. respondents who voted Conservative in 2011 said they don't support the project that is closely identified with the Harper government.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/Poll+finds+Alberta+increasingly+alone+strong+public+support+Northern+Gateway+pipeline/7139440/story.html

You have until August 31, 2012 to submit a letter to the Joint Review Panel on Northern Gateway stating your opposition to this project.

http://gatewaypanel.review-examen.gc.ca/clf-nsi/prtcptngprcss/sbmtdcmtlctrncll-eng.html

PS If you live outside the provinces of BC or Alberta, your voice is as important as ours.  Please contact your federal representive and the Right Honorable Stephen Harper and let them know you are opposed to this pipeline. 

Energy Return On Investment Explained

From the transcripts of the Joint Review Panel on Naorthern Gateway:

7325. So what can be said? What conclusion can we reach from these calculations? What is the ratio of energy gained from the diluted bitumen to energy expended in extracting, diluting, pumping, shipping and rendering it equivalent to crude oil for refining purposes?

7326. When you place the energy output of a barrel of oil above the line and the energy input below the line, the 16,042.1 kilojoules per litre, you multiply the 6.142 gigajoules per barrel by 1000 to get kilojoules per barrel, all of the units cancel out and you are left with an energy return on investment ratio of 2.41 for the entire process, from extraction to the rendering of it equivalent to a barrel of crude oil at the destination.

7329. Depending on whether the extraction process is mining or in situ, the energy return on investment for oil sands extraction is either greater than or less than one barrel of oil expended to produce six barrels of oil. For the process of which the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project is a part, the energy return on investment is one barrel of oil expended to achieve 2.41 usable barrels of crude oil equivalent at the refinery.

https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/ll-eng/livelink.exe/fetch/2000/90464/90552/384192/620327/628981/783833/International_Reporting_Inc._-_Vol.13-WedJan18.12_-_A2L2R0?nodeid=783834&vernum=0&redirect=3&redirect=4

Ain't the Internet grand?

You can watch a BCSEA webinar by the engineers who made the above presentation at:
http://www.bcsea.org/past-webinars   BCSEA is grand as well!

Please scroll down to

May 2012

Alberta to China: What's the energy return ?

Trust Us

Enbridge wants approval from the National Energy Board to build its Northern Gateway project through BC, and, as a consequence, permission for its plan to sail  oil tankers  loaded with dilbit through our coastal waters.
This is the firm that was fined 3.7 million dollars for spilling dilbit in Kalamazoo, Michigan.   The US National Transportation Safety Boad said Enbridge employees acted like the Keystone Kops for seventeen ( !!!!) hours after the pipeline ruptured.       They kept pushing dilbit through - and into the Kalamzoo River .

Worse yet, Enbridge ignored corrosion issues for the five years previous to the spill.

In its report, the NTSB said that not only was Enbridge’s response to the spill slow, but the Calgary-based company knew at least five years before the massive leak that the pipeline was corroded and cracked. External corrosion and cracking caused the 471-kilometre pipeline to rupture, the NTSB said. Roughly 15,000 defects were identified in a 2005 report, a presenter at the hearing said. About 900 of those were dug up, he said, with Ms. Hersman noting the one that spilled was not among those tapped for digging.

The company expects to spend $765-million cleaning up – five times more than the next costliest onshore cleanup effort – with its insurance footing most of the bill. 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/regulator-slams-enbridges-keystone-kops-response-to-michigan-river-spill/article4402752/

Trust us to build the Northern Gateway project - if something goes wrong we'll clean it up - just like in Michigan.  We - - me and you - the Canadian public - may be on the hook for their "Keystone Kops" kapers in BC, however.  

Canadian and especially B.C. taxpayers aren’t adequately protected in the event Enbridge Inc.’s proposed Northern Gateway oilsands pipeline suffers the same kind of catastrophic failure that resulted in a US$765-million — and counting — spill in Michigan two years ago, says a former senior Canadian insurance executive....   Ms. Allan argued in her submission Enbridge is basing its risk assessment in B.C. and Alberta on the company being able to detect and deal with leaks within minutes.  But she pointed out it took 17 hours before the company reacted to the Michigan spill of more than 20,000 barrels of bitumen crude....The purpose of the structure Enbridge has chosen — a limited partnership — is to limit the exposure investors have for liabilities of the company, not to ‘make good’ on [a] catastrophic spill event,” she told the JRP. 

http://business.financialpost.com/2012/07/05/canadian-b-c-taxpayers-could-bear-brunt-of-costs-in-event-of-gateway-spill-expert/?__lsa=de7216b2http://business.financialpost.com/2012/07/05/canadian-b-c-taxpayers-could-bear-brunt-of-costs-in-event-of-gateway-spill-expert/?__lsa=de7216b2

 

Why would anyone trust Enbridge to build this pipeline?  Why would we trust anyone to build this pipeline?

Someone needs to save Canada’s two largest pipeline operators from themselves...When your newest, presumably state-of-the-art assets are deficient, that’s hardly a public-confidence builder....http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1226064--enbridge-transcanada-pipeline-safety-is-a-pipedream-david-olive 

More importantly, why would anyone trust the politicans that trust Enbridge? Bear that in mind when you vote in the upcoming provincial election - and the next federal election.

And then there's the  climate change implications of our addiction to oil ....see the post immediately below... but even without considering climate change, this pipeline is a TERRIBLE idea.

Oil and British Columbia

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNN7h2teaCA
Not from the world of black humour:
"Enbridge Inc. faces a record $3.7-million US penalty for a 2010 Michigan oil spill that leaked more than 20,000 barrels of crude into a tributary of the Kalamazoo River. The U.S. pipeline regulator, in issuing the civil fine Monday, said its investigation uncovered two dozen violations related to the July 25 rupture on Enbridge's Line 6B near Marshall.  The fine is the largest ever proposed by the U.S. Transportation Department's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration."
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/energy-resources/Enbridge+with+fine+2010+Michigan+spill/6874631/story.html

Does this "record" fine matter to Enbridge?  In terms of money  -  well.....maybe.  And maybe not. In August 2011, a Calgary newspaper reported that:
"Enbridge, which is also one of Canada’s largest natural gas distributors, said Friday it earned $259 million or 35 cents a share, up from $138 million or 19 cents a share a year earlier. Revenues soared to just under $5 billion from $3.5 billion in the same period last year."
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1034999--enbridge-s-profits-rise-as-revenues-soar

Therefore, that "record" fine works out to 1.43 % on a quarter's profits.    What may be making excutives at Enbrridge cringe is the bad publicity resulting from the fine just as they are hoping to get approval for the Northern Gateway pipline  through British Columbia.  For example: 

"The evidence includes testimony from a senior Enbridge employee who suggests the energy company is ....  years away from achieving "world-class" safety standards." http://www.vancouversun.com/Enbridge+control+room+confusion+spurred+2010+spill+probe+alleges/6886497/story.html

Do we really want this pipleline through BC?  Do we really huge oil tankers on BC's coast?  If you don't,  please let your MP and your MLA know that you oppose oil tankers navigating BC's coastlines.

And please consider donating to the Dogwood Initiative at:
http://dogwoodinitiative.org/no-tankers/learn-more