june 29, 2012

w w w . p g f r e e p r e s s . c o m

The Northern REPORTServing Northern British Columbia

JUNE 2012JUNE 2012

The Northern Gateway pipelineWhat you need to know about the project

2 Prince George Free Press - JUNE 2012 Special Edition: The Northern Report

CARRIER SEKANI TRIBAL COUNCILwww.carriersekani.ca/

STOP THE ENBRIDGE PIPELINE!Photos: NOAA; Index Open; Greenpeace / Eamon Mac Mahon

PIPELINE!ENBRIDGESTOP

The Harper Conservatives are pulling out all of the stops to approve the Enbridge Northern Gateway Oil Pipeline. The disastrous Bill C-38 threatens to dilute both the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and the Fisheries Act -- and allow speedy approval of the $5.5 billion oil pipeline.

Changes in these important Acts would remove public input and streamline approval of this massive pipeline project that will put over

Columbia which First Nations and the public depend on.

Take back Democracy, Say No to the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline!

Say No To Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline for our Future Generations!

ee38ct n oilil

er

Prince George Free Press - JUNE 2012 3 Special Edition: The Northern Report

The Enbridge Northern Gate-way Project involves the con-struction of two pipelines and the construction and opera-

tion of the Kitimat Marine Terminal.The two pipelines are each approxi-

mately 1,170 kilometres in length, from Bruderheim, Alberta to Kitimat, British Columbia.

One 914 mm (36-inch) outside diam-eter line would carry on average 525,000 barrels per day of petroleum products west to Kitimat. The other line, a 508 mm (20-inch) outside diameter pipeline, would carry on average 193,000 barrels of condensate per day east to Bruder-heim. Condensate is used to thin petro-leum products for pipeline transport.

The Kitimat Marine Terminal would have two ship berths and storage for three condensate tanks and 11 petro-

What is it all about?■ THE PROJECT

leum tanks. It would also include a radar monitoring station and first response capabilities.

Enbridge estimates that about 5,500 person-years of on-site employment will be created during the construction phase in B.C. and Alberta. In addition, about 1,150 long-term jobs will

be created to operate the pipelines and marine terminal.Total local, provincial and federal government tax revenues

during 30 years of operations will be approximately $2.6 bil-lion; this includes about $36 million per year estimated to be paid by Northern Gateway as local property taxes.

When a project may cause significant adverse environmental effects or there is a high degree of public concern, a project can be referred to a joint review panel process.

The Minister of the Environment decided that the Enbridge Northern Gate-way Project would be assessed using a joint review panel.

Panel members will conduct a public process where they will receive and con-sider all the information on the record. The record will include information submitted by the project proponent and other participants. The review process will include a formal information request

process on the application and oral hear-ing sessions. Further details about the review process will be provided in the Hearing Order to be issued by the Panel.

Based on the record, the Panel will issue an environmental assessment report which contains its conclusions and rec-ommendations.

The report will include the Panel’s rationale for its conclusions and recom-mendations. The report will also include any mitigation measures, follow-up programs and a summary of comments received from participants. The environ-mental assessment report will be submit-ted to the Minister of the Environment

for a government response.Once the government has responded

to the report, the Panel will make a final decision on whether or not to approve the project under the National Energy Board Act. The Panel’s decision will include its reasons and any terms or con-ditions to be included in an approval if granted.

The panel will resume hearings in July with its first stop in Prince George.

Hearings will be held at the Prince George Civic Centre starting at 1 p.m. on July 9.

Hearings will continue July 10-12 in Prince George, getting underway at 9

a.m. each day. And, if necessary, the panel will sit in Prince George on July 13 as well.

On July 17, the panel is slated to be in Burns Lake at the Island Gospel Fellow-ship Church, starting at 9 a.m.

July 19 it will be in Fort St. James at David Hoy Elementary School, also start-ing at 9 a.m.

The panel will then hold two days of hearings in Bella Cella on July 26 and 28, staring at 9 a.m. and July 27, staring at 1 p.m. at a location yet to be determined.

On July 30-31 it will be in New Hazel-ton at the New Hazelton Elementary School.

What is the Joint Review Panel process?

SHEILA LEGGETTSheila Leggett has extensive regulatory

experience, as well as a background in envi-ronmental issues and research. She has been a member of the National Energy Board since 2006 and is currently the vice-chair of the National Energy Board.Before joining the National Energy Board, Leggett was a board member with the Natural Resources Conservation Board, which conducts hearings into natural resource development projects in Alberta. Prior to this, Leggett was a vice-pres-ident and senior consultant with an environ-mental consulting firm and a founding board member for Alberta Ecotrust.

She has served on numerous NEB regula-tory panels, nine of which she has chaired. One of those included serving as the chair for the Emera Brunswick Pipeline Project, the first National Energy Board hearing substitution for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency joint review panel process. Leggett is also the chair of the NEB’s Governance Com-mittee.

Leggett has a Bachelor’s degree in Biology from McGill University and a Master’s degree in Biology from the University of Calgary.

KENNETH BATEMANKenneth Bateman is a Canadian energy

lawyer and former senior executive in the Canadian energy sector. He has been a mem-ber of the National Energy Board since 2006. In addition to expertise in the energy sector, Bateman has extensive experience with major sustainable energy projects including wind farms and biowaste facilities.

As a member of the National Energy Board, Bateman has been involved in numerous land and off-shore pipeline hearings such as the Brunswick Pipeline Project, Deep Panuke and Keystone XL. He is chair of the NEB’s Regula-tory Policy Committee.

Prior to appointment as a National Energy

Board member, Bateman was the vice-presi-dent of Legal Affairs for Enmax, a large energy distribution, supply and service company. At Enmax, Bateman served as head of the legal department and oversaw corporate gover-nance, the regulatory affairs, environment and compliance departments.

Bateman holds a Bachelor of Law degree from the University of Alberta and a Master’s degree of International Business Manage-ment from the American Graduate School of International Management. Bateman resides in Calgary, Alberta.

HANS MATTHEWSHans Matthews is a professional geolo-

gist with more than 25 years experience in the mining, minerals and resource manage-ment industries. He has a Bachelor of Science in Geology from Brock University and has completed course work towards a Masters of Science at the University of Western Ontario. Matthews has held executive positions focused on natural resource and environmen-tal management, economic development and strategic policy and planning.

Matthews has extensive experience in Aboriginal community development and con-sultation within the mineral exploration indus-try in Canada and abroad. He has worked since 1991 with Aboriginal communities in supporting economic development initiatives as a leader, advisor and negotiator. Part of this has been to aid Aboriginal communities to use and understand aspects of the natural resources sector to promote community devel-opment through his role as President of the Canadian Aboriginal Minerals Association for more than 18 years.

Moreover, he was an advisor of Natural Resources with Indian and Northern Affairs Canada where he developed employment strategies through the Aboriginal Workforce Participation Initiative.

Who’s on the panel?


PATRICK DANIELEnbridge

With the second-largest proven petroleum reserves in the world, Canada may like to flatter itself that it is a global energy superpower, but it’s not true.

It could be. One day it might be. But it is not an energy superpower yet.There is no doubt Canada’s energy reserves are a tremendous strategic advantage,

but they will only deliver true value if we choose to develop them and make them available to the world.

Millions of dollars in benefitsThe Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline project,

which will run from Edmonton, Alberta, to Kitimat, Brit-ish Columbia, is one step on the road to Canada becom-ing an energy superpower. With Northern Gateway we will be able to safely move energy to the West Coast, open new markets for Canadian petroleum and create thousands of construction and supplier jobs as well as significant permanent employment right across Canada.

Completion of the pipeline will also generate millions of dollars in direct, lasting and meaningful benefits for First Nations and other communities and hundreds of billions of dollars in employment income and tax rev-enue for a generation of Canadians.

But to become an economic superpower, that is a country with influence and stand-ing on the world stage, we have to be able to deliver our products to markets around the globe. Right now we don’t – and can’t – do that with Canadian energy.

While our proximity to the world’s largest energy consumer is a unique advantage, one all our competitors would love to have, our unparalleled integration with the U.S. market creates a number of problems:

1) It makes us complacent.2) We only have one customer for our energy, never a good position to be in.3) American markets are projected to remain flat for the foreseeable future, which

could spell trouble for Canada’s economy as well.Make no mistake, the U.S. is, and will remain, Canada’s most important market and

our closest trading partner. The interdependence of our economies is a huge perma-nent advantage for Canadians and Americans.

But Canada’s energy relationship with the U.S. should more accurately be described as ‘dependent’ not ‘interdependent’. Today, virtually all of Canada’s oil exports (95 per cent) go to the United States. No competitor can trump our advantage of geogra-phy, capacity and a trading partnership built on shared values on the environment, human rights, the rule of law and democracy.

We might be their most important energy supplier, but the United States has other options available for energy trade partners. At this time, Canada doesn’t, but North-ern Gateway can change that.

For too long, Canada has been a price taker rather than a price maker in North American oil markets. Gateway liberates Canada from that straitjacket. Independent estimates of the project’s impact say it will deliver to all Canadians an additional $270 billion increase in Canada’s GDP over 30 years.

Can Canada be a leader in the world energy market? Of course it can. But only if we make smart, strategic moves, and take the sustainable steps to make it happen, now.

Northern Gateway – currently under review by regulators to determine if it is in our nation’s best interest and if it meets Canada’s world-class environmental and safety standards – is one such smart, strategic move. Its completion will connect Canada’s most important and valuable export commodity to the markets that need it.

Building a stronger CanadaAs Canadians, we need to better understand the connection between what the

energy industry does and the lives we all lead. There is a direct connection between your car’s gas pedal, your house thermostat and Canadian oil and gas.

Of course, we could choose to keep Canada’s vast supply of oil, which we have developed ethically and responsibly, landlocked in North America. We could continue to sell it at a discount, while other nations create the energy supply lines and energy market access for the rest of the world.

Or we can take the steps required to bring Canadian oil to markets around the planet. We can responsibly, sustainably and safely construct and operate nation-build-ing projects like Northern Gateway. We can make the most of the opportunities avail-able to us and build on our strategic advantages as a responsible, democratic trading nation. We can build an even stronger Canada for future generations.

Patrick Daniel is President and CEO of Enbridge Inc.www.troymedia.com

■ THE DEBATE

An opportunityfor Canada

Patrick Daniel

Remember the Exxon Valdez. What makes Northern Gateway any different?The safety record of the shipping industry has improved dramatically since that tragic

incident in large part due to the significant advances in technology along with interna-tional regulatory controls. We are confident that by putting in place world-class marine safety protocols, we can move these vessels safely in and out of Kitimat, just as they have in the Port of Vancouver, the east coast of Canada, and elsewhere in the world.

With 20,000 annual Canadian tanker movements on both the east and west coasts, we believe that Canada has the regulatory system and pilot experience necessary to ensure safe movement in and out of Kitimat.

Pipeline Q&A

Delivered to 35,436 homes and businesses in 36 communities!

Big NorthFREE PRESS

Barkerville

Bear Lake

Burns Lake

Chetwynd

Dome Creek

Francois Lake

Hazelton

Hixon

Houston

Mackenzie

Manson Creek

McLeod Lake

New Hazelton

Penny

Prince George

Quesnel

Smithers

Southbank

Summit Lake

Takla Landing

Telegraph Creek

Terrace

Topley

Upper Fraser

Willow River

Stuart Nechako Advertiser Fort St. James, Fort Fraser, Fraser Lake, Endako, Telkwa, Germanson Landing,

Vanderhoof

Valley Sentinel Valemont, McBride, Blue River, Dunster

Total 35,436** based on Canada Post count Jan. 2011

Northern British Columbia’s biggest circulated

NEWSPAPER covering the North from Terrace to the

Alberta border . . . and everywhere in between!!

All the features of a newspaper now in the Big North Free PressNews • Events • Classifi eds

Covering these communities every month through Canada Post!!

PUBLISH BOOKING DEADLINEJanuary 18, 2012 .................................January 10February 8, 2012 ..................................January 31March 7, 2012 .................................... February 28April 4, 2012 ........................................... March 27May 9, 2012 ................................................ May 1June 6, 2012 ............................................. May 29July 4, 2012 ............................................. June 26August 8, 2012 ...........................................July 31September 5, 2012 ................................ August 28October 10, 2012 ....................................October 2November 7, 2012 ................................October 30December 5, 2012 ............................ November 27

WILLIAMS LAKE

16

16

16

GrandePrairie

16

PRINCE RUPERT

Dawson Creek

PRINCE GEORGE

A L B

Barkerville

WellsQuesnel

Vanderhoof

Fraser Lake Fort Fraser

Mackenzie

Tumbler Ridge

Anahim LakeBella Coola

Houston

Smithers

Bella Bella

Sandspit

QueenCharlotteCity

QUEEN

CHARLOTTE

ISLANDS

37

2

93A

20

Blue

McBride

River

Valemount

MountRobson

Chetwynd

Fort St. James

Burns Lake

WellsGrayPark

MountRobson

Park

CaribooMountains

Park

BowronLakePark

KakwaRA

SouthTweedsmuir

Park

NaikoonPark

NorthTweedsmuir

Park

waii Haanas

National

Park

Jasper

National

Park

GitnadoixRiver RA

FiordlandRA

ItchaIlgachuzPark

Reserve

LAKE

LAKE

FR

AS

ER

QUESNEL

Fraser

R

R I V

E RC

Bear Lake

Hixon

Terrace

Vanderhoof

Full Distribution to Prince George Businesses.

Ph: 250-564-0005 • Fax: 250-562-00251773 S. Lyon St. Prince George, BC V2N 1T3

Email: [email protected] • www.pgfreepress.com

local & regional newsprint advertising • special features / supplementsfl yers • on-line / video advertising

Free PrFree PressessPrince George

PROUDLY SERVING 63,000 READERS IN BC’S NORTHERN CAPITAL


BILL PHILLIPSNorthern Report

The Northern Gateway pipe-line project is one that many politicians are hesitant to throw their full support behind.

Most famously in B.C. is Premier Christy Clark who has stated she wants to wait until the Joint Review Panel process determines whether the project can proceed before voicing sup-port.

That sentiment has been echoed by Prince George MLAs Pat Bell and Shirley Bond. For-mer Prince George Mayor Dan Rogers was on record as sup-porting the project, however, current mayor Shari Green has followed the premier’s lead saying, in a Sea to Sands ques-tionnaire during the election campaign, that she supports the Joint Review Panel process add-ing that should first determine whether the pipeline can be built and operated safely.

Given that the Joint Review Panel process is a federal one, the most senior level of politi-cians have been more vocal.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said the pipeline is in the country’s national inter-est and several of his ministers, including Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver who com-

plained that environmental groups opposing the pipeline are foreign-funded, have done likewise.

And with the passage of Bill C-38, the Conservative govern-ment cabinet may approve the project regardless of what the Joint Review Panel recommends.

Conservative Prince George-Peace River MP Bob Zimmer, however, says the government supports responsible resource development.

“I’ve had a lot of conversa-tions with (Environment Minis-ter Peter) Kent and Oliver, and they want to acknowledge the process,” said Zimmer. “They want to see it through. They want to see it pass those envi-ronmental stringencies that we expect it to.”

Natural resource projects are good for the province and the country, he said.

“As long as it’s done in an environmentally sound way,”

he said. “We want to breathe the fresh and drink the fresh water like all Canadians do.”

Zimmer said he feels he always wants the Joint Review Process to run its course and if it passes that, he will be support-ive of it.

NDP House Leader Nathan Cullen, however, has been steadfast in his opposition of the pipeline.

According to Cullen, there were between four and six thou-

sand screenings and environ-mental assessments done of proposed projects every year. With the changes the Conser-vatives are putting forward, the number would go to 20 or 30 total.

“How that makes for a healthier economy and envi-ronment is beyond me, I don’t understand,” he told Black Press before passage of the budget bill.

“If they were proud of the changes they were making to the Fisheries Act, trust me, it would be a standing bill, it would have all sorts of balloons and champagne celebrating how smart they are, but they buried it in 425 pages for a reason.”

The changes also concern Cullen because he sees them as long-lasting.

“These changes will hit home,” he said. “They’re not

just going to last a year, by the way. Most budgets, the changes that happen, you c an sometimes fix the following year, these ones may go for a generation or more, they’re profound.”

At the local level, the Smith-ers, Terrace, Prince Rupert councils and the Skeena-Queen Charlotte Regional District board of directors have all passed motions opposing the pipeline.

■ THE POLITICS

A political hot potato

Prince George-Peace River MP Bob Zimmer Skeena-Bulkley Valley MP Nathan Cullen

We Proudly Serve:

…diverse and sustainable industrial solutions and services providers.

phone: 250.596.9292 – fax: 250.596.9293 – www.niraresources.com


There’s a reason whyWe say NONO to ENBRIDGEENBRIDGE

NAK’AZDLI HEALTH CENTRE

OUR WATERWAYS MEAN LIFE TO OUR LANDS AND PEOPLE

Economics prof. questions numbers■ THE ECONOMICS

ALLAN WISHARTNorthern Report

For Al Idiens, the numbers on the Northern Gateway project don’t add up.

“There are still more questions than answers,” the economics and business instructor at the College of New Caledonia says. “Enbridge isn’t giving us a lot of numbers to work with.”

Idiens did a small study on the potential job impact the Northern Gateway would have on the Prince George region and says, quite simply, there prob-ably won’t be much of one.

“They’re still saying 4,000 to 5,000 jobs will be created, but most of those are short-term during the construction of the pipeline. Most of them would be things like brush clearing, where they would probably hire people in each region.”

When it comes to the actual construction of the pipeline, though, “it wouldn’t make sense for them to hire different people in each region for laying the pipe.”

“They’ll probably have one crew who will move from spot to spot during construction.”

He does see the potential for some jobs in Prince George after completion of the pipeline.

“There would be some jobs on the technical end afterwards,

and Prince George is probably where they would have people available to maintain and repair the pipeline.”

That, he says, could tie in nicely with the local post-sec-ondary institutions.

“It would give us an opportu-nity to have people training on site.”

However, Idiens also sees other problems, which could have economic impacts on the region.

“Enbridge has never really addressed the impact of a spill, such as what the likelihood is what the extent of damage could be.”

In the backcountry much of the pipeline is planned to tra-verse, he sees major economic impacts possible.

“There could be a loss of fish-ing and hunting opportunities in the event of a spill.”

As time goes by, the chances of a problem increase, Idiens says.

“A study in the New York Times on pipeline spills in the United States showed that 22 per cent of them were caused primarily by corrosion. They have a lot of older pipelines in the U.S., but that is still some-thing that needs to be looked at.”

He feels Enbridge would have the opportunity to help other industries and itself with one

advance.“If they could be required to

develop a corrosion-free pipe-line, something that would last at least 30 years, the benefits for other industries would also be phenomenal.”

That 30-year figure is one that comes up frequently in looking at the Northern Gateway proj-ect, since it’s the length of many of the agreements Enbridge is signing, both in Canada and overseas.

“There are revenue-sharing agreements being signed with First Nations, but they’re equity-based, depending on what the pipeline will bring on over the next 30 years.

“I can’t find out how valid the projections the company is put-ting forward are. I think over the first 10 years or so, there would be good value, but after that, there’s no way of knowing.”

Idiens feels the overseas agreements Enbridge is sign-ing with producers in China and other countries are on more solid footing.

“Canada is recognized world-wide as a supplier of staples, such as oil. We’re not good at being cost-competitive, which is why there is such a risk look-ing at the price of oil over the 30 years.”

For instance, he says, the Cau-casus region in Eurasia has vast supplies of oil, but unstable gov-

ernments make it risky for coun-tries like China to look there for supplies.

“Where we (Canada) are good is being known for peace, order and good government. Other countries know our long-term promises will be made good on.”

Again, though, Idiens says

it comes down to one simple problem when assessing the economic impact the Northern Gateway would have on the Prince George region.

“There are more questions than answers. It would be nice to see something done, but these questions need to be dealt with.”

Al Idiens


■ THE ECONOMICS

What the think-tanks thinkAs might be expected, presentations from a

couple of think-tank researchers looking at the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline raised more questions than answers.

An economist from the Canada West Founda-tion and a policy analyst from the Pembina Insti-tute analyzed the project at a symposium orga-nized by the Northern Economics Student Society.

The proposed Enbridge pipeline would ship oilsands production from northern Alberta some 1,170 kilometres west to Kitimat for export over-seas. The project has run into stiff criticism from environmentalists and at least 70 First Nations.

Michael Holden from Canada West said his non-partisan, Calgary-based think-tank has no formal position on the proposal and could pro-vide “no answer” on whether it makes economic sense.

As Holden pointed out, Enbridge’s stated intention to send the oil to Asia seems to make sense, with demand in China alone expected to double to nine million barrels per day by 2035, according to statistics he showed.

He also said Canada currently sells almost all of its oil and gas into the U.S., and “most people would say that’s not necessarily a good thing to be devoted to a single market.”

But from a purely economic standpoint, Holden continued, it’s impossible to accurately measure all of the benefits of the pipeline and determine if they outweigh all of the unknown costs to the company and the public.

And he added that environmentalists, govern-ment and industry are all following their own agendas, so, “it’s difficult to know who to believe in some cases.”

That’s why Holden and Canada West are advo-cating for a national energy strategy that will hear from absolutely everyone with a stake in the mat-ter and hopefully result in “some sort of clearer purpose and direction.”

A “decision on pipeline investment (could then) be made in that context, rather than on political ebbs and flows of the day.”

He allowed that such a plan would take years to develop, but the Pembina Institute’s Nathan Lem-phers said Enbridge has lots of time.

According to Lemphers’ analysis, there is still excess capacity in North America’s existing oil pipe-line infrastructure, and there won’t be an acute short-age for at least a decade.

Pembina is in favour of responsible oilsands devel-opment with conditions, like science-based environ-mental limits and a requirement to invest govern-ment proceeds in developing clean energy.

Lemphers, who has dissected the Northern Gate-way application package currently before a federal review panel, said the information provided is sorely lacking.

Among the faults, he singled out the lack of pub-licly announced shipper agreements to demonstrate a need for the pipeline, and no analysis of demand for oilsands crude from Chinese refineries.

What’s more, he said it’s wrong for Enbridge to keep secret the identities of 10 firms that have backed the project with $10 million each.

“It puts private interests ahead of public interests,” said Lemphers, adding that $100 million is peanuts on a $5.5 billion project.

As well, he is skeptical of the assumption that the Chinese appetite for oil is insatiable. Lemphers said Chinese cities are not following the North American model built around the automobile, so predicting unbridled demand for oil is “very pre-sumptuous.”

Lemphers will address the federal review panel on behalf of some environmental groups this fall, and will urge it to more closely examine alterna-tives to the Northern Gateway, such as expand-ing capacity of the Kinder Morgan pipeline from Edmonton to Burnaby, currently the only direct route for oil onto B.C’s coast.

Economist Michael Holden and policy analyst Nathan Lemphers

8 Prince George Free Press - JUNE 2012 Special Edition: The Northern Report Prince George Free Press - JUNE 2012 9 Special Edition: The Northern Report

BILL PHILLIPSNorthern Report

Enbridge will establish regional offices in Prince George and Burns Lake, should the controversial Northern Gateway pipeline be approved.

Michele Perret, senior manager of munici-pal relations for Enbridge, told a Chamber of Commerce gath-ering in Prince George earlier this year that 12 people would work out of the Prince George office and seven in Burns Lake. Those will be among the 500 full-time jobs created by the pipeline, about 200 of those being at the marine terminal in Kitimat.

“That regional manager would employ a manager and office staff,” she said, add-ing other workers such as electricians would work out of the local office.

As for construction, however, British Columbia is the big winner. Should the proj-ect to built a pipeline from Edmonton to Kiti-mat proceed, there will be more than 5,000 person-years of employment, 4,100 of those will be in B.C., the remainder in Alberta.

At $5.5 billion, it is a huge project and there will be spin-offs for the local economy during construction, she said (see graphic).

Perret said the project will contribute $270 billion to the country’s gross domestic prod-uct over 30 years.

“The analogy we use is that $270 billion is about the size of Ontario’s economy today,” she said.

However, approval must first be granted to the project and the approval process is now underway.

The National Energy Board (www.neb.gc.ca) and the Canadian Environmental

Assessment Agency (www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/default.asp?lang= En&n=D75FB358-1) are leading a joint review panel for the Northern Gate-way project, which will ulti-mately decide on whether the project will proceed. And, as for all the public debate sur-rounding the pipeline project, the panel looks at the informa-tion presented to it.

“They will make an indepen-dent decision on the project,”

Perret said. “The joint review panel must make their decision based on what’s on the record.”

Community hearings on the project began in January. Final hearings on the project will be held this summer and a decision is expected by the fall or perhaps early 2013.

Should the project obtain approval, Perret said the company will then begin detailed engineering plans of the proposed pipeline, and construction, expected to take two-and-a-half to three years, will begin.

According to Enbridge, the benefits of the project for British Columbians are huge:

• 4,100 person-years of direct on-site employment in BC• 35,000 person-years of total employment (on-site, purchases, indirect,

induced) in BCNortheast BC region:• 1,150 person years for construction employment; 675 from within the

region• Peak pipeline construction will require up to 818 people• Peak pump station construction will require 56 people• 15 jobs for operational employment• $112 million in goods and services, Northeast BC:• Equipment rentals - $26 million• Camps / Accommodations / Catering - $30 million• Clearing / logging / salvaging - $16 million• Fuel - $12 million• Stockpiling Pipe - $5 million• Trucking - $5 million• Equipment Parts - $5 million• Surveying - $2 million• Access Roads - $4 million• Other Items and Services $6 millionBC Central region:• 5,160 person years of total construction employment; 3,675 from within

region• 1,805 person years of direct construction employment; 500 from within

region• Peak pipeline construction will require 1,322 people• Operational employment will create 19 jobs• Purchase of goods and services will create 65 jobs• $401 million in goods and services, BC Central region:• Equipment rentals - $102 million• Construction Camps / Catering - $94 million• Clearing / logging / salvaging - $61 million• Fuel - $42 million• Stockpiling Pipe - $15 million• Equipment Parts - $20 million• Surveying - $7 million• Access Roads - $23 million• Trucking - $18 million• Other Items and Services - $18 millionCoastal BC region:• 4,025 person years of total construction employment; 2,235 within

region• 1,715 person years of direct construction employment; 515 from within

region• Peak terminal construction will require 419 people• Peak tunnel and pipeline construction will require 765 people• $318 million in goods and services, Coastal BC:

Enbridge putsoffice in P.G.

Michelle Perret

TERESA MALLAMNorthern Report

The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipe-line plan is a golden opportunity with huge economic benefits not only for Brit-ish Columbians, including northerners – but for all Canadians, says Colin Kinsley.

The former Prince George mayor is chair of the Northern Gateway Alliance, a coalition of community leaders who support the regulatory review process in connection with the Enbridge project and who encourage members of the commu-nity to help shape the outcome.

Membership in the Alliance has grown considerably.

“[Just over] three years ago at the local government convention in Dawson Creek we launched the Alliance and [we] had about 50 members – they signed up mayors and other elected officials. That number is now approaching 1,600 and they tend to be community leaders, small business operators, contractors – just reg-ular folks, a cross-section of people from labour, business and commerce.”

Kinsley said he’s seen “huge interest” from people in their own communities wanting to see the project move forward. He’s also heard from the critics.

But for him, it’s about the big picture. Enbridge’s plan to build 1,177 km-long

twin pipelines from Bruderheim, Alberta to Kitimat, B.C. with an eastbound pipe-line importing natural gas condensate and westbound pipeline exporting crude oil and bitumen to Asian markets via tankers, is not just big in scope, says Kin-

sley, it will provide far-reaching, future economic gains.

“Building this pipeline to the coast is akin to the St. Lawrence Seaway coming in and opening up the interior of eastern Canada because this opens up a new market. Right now we’re price takers, we’re not price makers. We get what the Americans will pay us because 99 per cent of our oil goes to the United States.”

Benefits from the proposed pipeline will flow to us all, he says.

“Another thing that’s important to know – because I hear the criticism, ‘This is Alberta’s oil.’ Well, it’s Canada’s oil and there’s a huge amount of royalties and taxes paid that goes to the provincial and federal governments, particularly the federal government which is then distributed throughout the nation to pay for services. So this is in the Canadian interest.”

This province will reap the rewards, says Kinsley.

“For British Columbians, there’s going to be – literally – millions and millions of dollars of taxes that will be paid because Enbridge, like any pipeline [company] – pays one of the highest rates of taxes, under the Utilities classification.”

Kinsley acknowledges several groups, particularly environmental organizations and individuals, oppose the plan. Many of them have made valid points and he believes they have “sincere” environmen-tal concerns.

“I understand their fear... [they think} if there is no pipeline, there is no fear of oil spills. I empathize with that.”

But he points to others, “fear mon-gers” and “merchants of misery,” as crit-ics who may be clouding the issues and misrepresenting the facts.

“The more radical environmental peo-ple say ‘it’s not a matter of if but when,’ he notes. However, having spent 30 years in the natural gas industry in northern B.C., Kinsley says people’s fears are often based on wrong information.

“I’ve worked on all sizes of pipelines, including the size that’s being comtem-plated here. I’ve worked in rough terrain. I’ve put in 36-inch pipe. A lot of people don’t realize there are three pipelines in Prince George, there is a 36-inch gas, 30-inch gas and a 12-inch oil [pipes]. They flow every day and they pay taxes. They’re not a drain on the municipalities [and] they don’t require services.”

Why is it the Enbridge plan attracting so much ‘heat’?

“There’s a very well-funded, sophis-ticated opposition, a lot of which in my opinion is directed at halting oil sands production. The oil sands are targeted because they’re a great fundraiser but people often don’t look at the facts. Eighty per cent is ‘in situ’ so it’s extracted right there. There is a lot of misinforma-tion out there on oil sands extraction, the techniques they use and the harmful effects.”

Pipelines are believed to be the safest way to transport liquids and they are very plentiful in Canada, Kinsley said.

“There’s a criss-cross of pipelines all over the country. If you Google a map of it, there’s red pipelines everywhere...

We’re only 35 million people. We can’t consume all the oil we produce and if we didn’t export it, we wouldn’t have all the services that we do.”

Enbridge has spent the money to reduce the risks, he said.

“The Enbridge pipeline will have more shut-off valves than any other pipeline of this length, strategically placed. electroni-cally and automatically controlled.”

Consequences from any oil spills – and the risks of that ever happening – have been dramatically reduced, says Kinsley,

“Humankind has learned from our mistakes. Scientists, engineers, they try to eliminate the risk as best they an. If we miss something, and there’s an incident, we fix it. But the big thing is in the tech-nology. There’s all kinds of new technol-ogy Every piece of pipe is now x-rayed in the factory, a hard epoxy is put on it,” he said, noting that moisture (and bacteria) is a “killer of steel.”

Support is strong, however and Kinsley is pleased with what he’s seen so far.

“What we’re finding is there is strong leadership supporting this process. They believe the Canada Environmental Assessment Agency and the National Energy Board will conduct a rigourous and transparent review. The role of the Alliance is to support that process and inform the membership on issues, good and bad and that offices will soon be established in Prince George, Burns Lake and Kitimat, he said.

For more information on Northern Gateway Alliance, visit www.northern-gateway.ca.

■ THE SUPPORT

Gateway Alliance keeps growing


Bob Zimmer, Member of Parliament for Prince George-Peace River 1-855-767-4567 • [email protected] • www.bobzimmer.ca

All of us use natural resources. Whether it’s the gas that fuels our cars, the natural gas that heats our homes, or the Tupperware containers filled with leftovers—it all comes from natural resource products.

In order to function in today’s modern society, the responsible development of our natural resources is crucial and global demand for natural resources is continuing to grow.

Our natural resource industries, including energy, mining and mineral processing, and forestry, account for more than 10 per cent of our gross domestic product and provide close to 800,000 jobs in Canada.

In fact, most jobs in our region, from serving coffee at Starbucks to working at a sawmill, rely either directly or indirectly on developing of our natural resources.

In the next 10 years, more than 500 new projects representing over $500 billion in new investments will be proposed for Canada in the natural resource sector. In British Columbia, companies are looking at investing $83.9 billion in the next ten years. The potential for job growth in our region is enormous.

As we all know, the Northern Gateway Pipeline is currently going through a process to ensure it is safe and environmentally sound. Our Conservative Government has also been a part of ongoing

consultations and discussions with Aboriginal and other organizations since 2008.

The Northern Gateway Pipeline would represent an investment of $5.5 billion, creating thousands of jobs here in British Columbia during construction and additional long-term jobs to operate it.

I believe reviews for major projects, like this one, can be accomplished more efficiently, without lacking in environmental stringency. As the Member of Parliament for Prince George-Peace River, I want to see projects proceed provided they are environmentally sound, generate thousands of new jobs for the region, open up new export markets, and provide for many of the services that we enjoy and rely on.

We want to identify safety issues before they occur. So, as part of our Responsible Resource Development plan, our Conservative Government will provide $13.5 million over two years to improve pipeline safety across Canada by enabling the National Energy Board to increase the number of inspections for oil and gas pipelines by 50 per cent from about 100 to 150 per year and double, from three to six, the number of annual comprehensive audits.

Our Responsible Resource Development plan will create good, skilled, well-paying jobs in cities and communities across Canada by streamlining the

Developing Our Natural Resources Responsibly

review process for major economic projects, while maintaining the highest possible standards for protecting the environment.

We need to ensure timely, efficient and effective project reviews, while at the same time act as good stewards of our environment as we continue to develop our natural resource. We CAN do both!

ROBYN ALLANEconomics

There is a chorus singing the praises of the oil industry and its vast economic benefits – from the boardroom of pipeline company Enbridge to the office of the Prime Minister.

They advocate rapid expansion and export of crude oil resources as a panacea for our economic future. They cite big numbers from numerous studies.

The reports are used like quantitative billy-clubs to beat back public inquiry and drive the discussion away from a thorough examination of macroeconomic implications. Instead, we have a forced narrative – industry financial gain must take precedence over environmen-tal risk and First Nations’ rights. This is a false dichotomy.

The reports include Enbridge’s Application to the National Energy Board in support of Northern Gateway pipeline; Canadian Energy Research Institute’s (CERI) studies No. 122, 124, 125 and 128; the School of Public Policy at the University of Calgary:Catching the Brass Ring; and the Wood Mackenzie Report pre-pared for the Government of Alberta.

The benefits range from hundreds of thou-sands of jobs and trillions of dollars in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in CERI’s studies, $270 billion from Enbridge, $132 billion from the University of Calgary, and $72 billion from the government of Alberta.

These studies suffer from serious weak-nesses which render the results not only unre-liable, but unusable. The main ones are:

1. Input-Output Model: All the studies calculate a benefit without sensitivity analysis and develop a single long-term scenario. No board of directors would accept this approach

when making an important investment deci-sion, particularly when the rosy picture is forecast to continue for decades. All but Wood Mackenzie use this information as input into an Input Output (IO) model to further expand their case.

An IO model presents results as GDP, per-son years of employment, labour income and government revenues. Using these indicators of economic well being gives the illusion that the model has measured macroeconomic impact, when the model has not – because it cannot. IO models have severe limitations, over-estimate benefits and ignore economic costs. They do not perform a cost-benefit anal-ysis. The underlying math constrains the mod-els – they are static, linear, partial equilibrium representations of a sector of the economy at a point in time.

The models have no feedback mechanism so do not incorporate price, exchange rate, interest rate, or other input cost changes on the oil industry or the broader Canadian economy.

All the studies assume higher oil prices – ris-ing to as much as $200 per barrel – but do not consider their impact on consumers as they cut back spending and saving, or businesses as they postpone investment, cut wages, and layoff employees.

IO models tell us the Vancouver Canuck riot was a wealth generating opportunity as would be spilling oil rather than safely trans-porting it.

2. Exchange Rate: It is generally understood rising oil prices put upward pressure on the Canadian dollar. The studies ignore this. They assume a fixed and relatively low dollar over the long forecast period which inflates the benefit. Enbridge, Wood Mackenzie and the University of Calgary assume an 85 cent

Canadian dollar. Their U.S. dollar revenues automatically receive an 18 per cent increase when translated to Canadian dollars.

An appreciating dollar hurts the Canadian economy. When the Canadian dollar goes up, the price of exports increase, foreign demand falls, and slower growth with job losses, follow. This phenomenon – when due to the expansion of the resource sector – is symptomatic of the Dutch disease. By holding the exchange rate fixed, the studies pretend a continued hollowing of our manufacturing sector does not occur. Mention the Dutch dis-ease and the oil industry and its proponents get defensive. However, even the oil sands are not immune to petro-fever. A rising dollar fundamentally affects profit performance of oil producers.

Crude oil sales are denominated in U.S. dollars while production costs are paid in Canadian. An increasing dollar squeezes prof-itability. For example, if the dollar is at par and oil sells for $100 U.S. per barrel, gross revenue is $100 Canadian. If the dollar rises to $1.05, that same barrel is worth $95.24 Canadian – a decline in gross revenue of 4.76 per cent.

Unless this relationship is included, esti-mates of financial returns, investment, and future supply, will be exaggerated. These unrealistic supply forecasts are then used to support the need for new pipelines to service the U.S. and China.

3. Oil Prices: Not only do the studies depend on rapidly rising oil prices, a number also require higher oil prices in Canada with new pipelines than without them. This per-verse market outcome occurs because access to the higher priced markets in the U.S. Gulf Coast and Asia will allow producers to charge higher prices for the oil they sell in Canada.

Enbridge assumes the price lift with North-ern Gateway is $2 to $3 U.S. per barrel, on every barrel – conventional to bitumen – every year for 30 years. The Brass Ring assumes $7.20 U.S. to $13.60 U.S. from 2016 to 2030 while the Wood Mackenzie Report assumes an $8 U.S. per barrel price increase on heavy oil sands production from 2017 to 2025. These price increases are on top of the studies’ anticipated doubling of oil prices over the next 30 years.

Refineries pass higher prices on and if they can’t suffer reduced margins and may shut down. When refineries close, the price on petroleum products rises anyway because of lost production.

Either way, Canadian consumers and busi-nesses pay more because of new pipelines, and this needs to be incorporated into a mac-roeconomic discussion of their impact.

These deficiencies render the studies unus-able. Their benefits should not be cited to expedite environmental review as they were in the Federal Budget 2012, demonize concerned citizens as Minister of Natural Resources Joe Oliver has done on numerous occasions, or silence discussion of economic development challenges facing Canada as Alberta Premier Alison Redford recently succeeded in doing in an open conversation with Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty. Economic growth in all parts of Canada is needed to ensure national progress. To realize this progress requires a courageous look at economic reality along with sound analysis – not a reliance on studies that enable the economics of deception

Robyn Allan has had a lengthy and successful professional career in senior executive positions in the public and private sector with an emphasis on insurance, finance and real estate.

www.troymedia.com

■ THE ECONOMICS

Holes shot in economic model


Is this the path to our future?

www.coastal rstnations.ca

GERRY ANGEVINESenior Economist The Fraser Institute

The public debate surrounding Enbridge’s proposed Northern Gateway oil pipeline has suddenly veered off in a new direction, powered by economic nationalists and the suggestion that rather than exporting oil to China, we should be refining it here at home.

The latest entry in this unfolding dis-cussion comes courtesy of the Alberta Federation of Labour, which earlier this month released a report by B.C. economist Robyn Allan claiming the Northern Gate-way project will damage the Canadian economy and hurt consumers because it will lead to markedly higher gasoline and other fuel prices.

Meaningless claimsBut a critical look at economic data

convincingly shows that Allan’s assump-tions pertaining to the impact of Northern Gateway on domestic crude oil prices are unrealistic and therefore, her claims and conclusions are essentially meaningless.

To begin with, Allan mistakenly assumes that exporting 525,000 barrels of crude oil and bitumen (both raw and upgraded) per day via the Northern Gate-way pipeline (as Enbridge is proposing) would increase the price of every barrel of oil produced in Canada by $2 to $3 per barrel over a 30-year period.

The United States currently absorbs virtually all of Canada’s crude oil exports and Enbridge suggest that, based on cur-rent and anticipated differentials between crude oil prices in Asia and the U.S., netbacks to Alberta could be $2 to $3 per barrel greater on oil marketed in China.

But there is no guarantee that the existing price differentials will be maintained. In fact, they almost certainly will not be.

The high crude oil prices in Asia, where oil demand is growing more rapidly than in most other parts of the world, will undoubtedly attract incremental sup-plies from Canada, the Middle East and other world regions until world regional oil price differen-tials mainly reflect transportation costs from one region to the next.

Further, the Northern Gateway Project will facilitate the shipment of a relatively small por-tion of Canada’s conventional crude oil and bitumen pro-duction to the Asia Pacific. According to the National Energy Board’s most recent projections, at full capacity the North-ern Gateway oil pipeline will only be capable of transport-ing 17 per cent of Canadian oil production in 2020.

With further growth in production (mainly from the oil sands), the per cent-age of Canadian oil shipped to Asia via Northern Gateway will slip to under 10

per cent.The United States currently absorbs

virtually all of Canada’s crude oil exports. Enbridge suggests that, based on current and anticipated differentials between

crude oil prices in Asia and the U.S., oil sold in China could be worth $2 to $3 per barrel more in terms of gross sales revenue less the cost of transportation from Alberta.

But there is no guarantee that the existing price dif-ferentials will be maintained. In fact, they almost cer-tainly will not be.

To argue that once the Northern Gateway oil pipe-line is operational every barrel of oil produced in Can-ada will cost Cana-dian refiners from $2 to $3 more, and that this will push up fuel prices and accelerate inflation, makes no sense.

The National Energy Board predicts fur-ther oil sands development will increase Canadian oil production by 3.3 million barrels per day from 2010 to 2035. But rather than driving up oil prices, this will help keep world oil prices from increas-

ing as much as they might otherwise. The International Energy Agency’s 2011 World Energy Outlook predicts that world oil demand will increase to 99 million barrels per day by 2035 from 87 million barrels per day in 2010. Increased oil supplies to meet those additional needs must come from somewhere.

If oil sands production growth is con-strained and the shortfall is not made up by increased production from other parts of the world, the world oil price will inevi-tably increase beyond the levels the IEA suggests.

U.S. oil needs to dropSince Canadian oil requirements are not

anticipated to increase much in coming years, apart from possible replacement of the relatively small supplies currently being imported, virtually all of our incre-mental production will be available for export. But the most recent long-term projections by the U.S. Energy Informa-tion Administration indicate that U.S. oil import requirements are likely to diminish in coming years as domestic production of crude oil and equivalent products grows and demand for transportation fuels decreases.

This underscores the need for Canada to seek out and develop new markets.

Contrary to what Allan and the Alberta Federation of Labour would have us believe, shipping a portion of the antici-pated increase in Canada’s oil production to markets in the Asia Pacific will put nei-ther Canadian consumers nor the Cana-dian economy at risk.

Gerry Angevine is a senior economist in the Fraser Institute’s Global Resource Centre.

www.troymedia.com

Holes shot in Allan’s economic analysis■ THE ECONOMICS

A critical look at eco-nomic data convinc-ingly shows that Allan’s assumptions pertain-ing to the impact of Northern Gateway on domestic crude oil pric-es are unrealistic and therefore, her claims and conclusions are essentially meaning-less.

-- Gerry Angevine

‘‘


“

”

ASTTBC-registered technology professionals are truly committed to sustainable

economic and community development in the North. ASTTBC encourages our applied

science and engineering technologists, technicians and technical specialists to fully

examine all energy proposals and form their own considered positions.

Technology professionals have the practical education, skills and experience

to serve the public, and are committed to maintaining excellence through

continual professional development.

John Leech, AScT, CAEExecutive Director, ASTTBC

About ASTTBC…ASTTBC is a self-governing professional association with 10,000+ registrantsincluding technologists, technicians and technical specialists.

Our mission… to serve the public by regulating and supporting technology professionals’commitment to a safe, healthy and sustainable society and environment.

To learn more about the Association and ASTTBC-registered technologists,technicians and technical specialists, please visit our website.

A S T T B C T E C H N O L O G Y P R O F E S S I O N A L S … Q U A L I F I E D . R E G I S T E R E D . A C C O U N T A B L E .

WWW.ASTTBC.ORG

Technology ProfessionalsCommitted to the North

JOHN WINTERPresident B.C. Chamber of Commerce

British Columbia was built on natural resource wealth. Northern British Columbians understand that better than anyone. Most everything that makes B.C. a great place to live -- from quality public health care to good schools for our children -- can be traced back to the wealth you helped create.

It’s also true that all British Columbians value our environment and want to protect it for future genera-tions - that’s just as true in northern B.C. as it is in the Lower Mainland. And time and again, British Colum-bians have led the way, showing the world that we can grow our economy, create jobs and preserve our envi-ronmental heritage.

That’s why the B.C. Chamber of Commerce, repre-senting over 32,000 B.C. businesses, is proud to support the Northern Gateway Pipeline. Because it represents what’s best about economic development in B.C.: thou-sands of new jobs and economic growth combined with world-class safety standards to protect our environment.

Just step back for a moment and consider the benefits of the Northern Gateway Pipeline.

First: The pipeline will employ 3,000 jobs at peak construction and 560 new permanent jobs here in B.C. -- good jobs that help bring economic stability and secu-rity to families right across northern B.C. In today’s economy, we need those jobs. The project will also bring with it much-needed skills training opportunities and long-term meaningful benefits to First Nations com-munities.

Second: Over 30 years, the Northern Gateway Pipe-line will generate more than $1.2 billion in tax revenue. That’s $1.2 billion! That means more hospital beds, new schools, and better roads all across B.C. Just like our for-est industry supports every British Columbian’s quality of life, and has for generations, so too will the Northern

Gateway Pipeline.Third: The direct economic impact of the pipe-

line in coastal and northern B.C. will approach $1 billion spent on local goods and services. Small business owners understand how important that kind of local spending is to the bottom line and the jobs they create. It will also contribute millions of dollars a year to property taxes for local communi-ties - money that can go right back into better local services, from policing to parks.

Fourth: The Northern Gateway Pipeline will open up new markets for our energy exports all across Asia. Canada is a trading nation. It’s how we compete and are winning in the global economy. The Northern Gateway pipeline will give us a huge economic advantage in the global economy as we increase trade with the Pacific Rim. B.C. will lead the way.

And fifth: The Northern Gateway Pipeline will show, once again, that when it comes to combining economic growth with environmental protection, no one does it better than we do in B.C.

The pipeline will be constructed to the highest world-class standards, feature the latest in safety technology and be monitored 24/7, 365 days a year. It will also bring new investments in navigational technology on the ocean and first-class emergency response capabilities at sea and on land. Tankers and vessels have transported oil along our coast for decades. These investments will help ensure we build on that record of safety - making our coast even safer for all marine traffic.

Taken together the long-term benefits of the Northern Gateway pipeline are enormous: good jobs, better pub-lic services, local economic growth, new trading oppor-tunities, and investments in world class environmental safety standards.

That’s why the BC Chamber of Commerce is not only supporting this project, but doing what we can to see

that it goes forward, including making a submission to the Northern Gateway Joint Review Panel earlier this month.

At the chamber we feel it’s time for all British Colum-bians who want to grow our economy, create new jobs and protect our environment stand up and be counted. It’s how we built this province. And it’s how we will move forward.

■ THE DEBATE

B.C. Chamber supports pipeline

John Winter


The BC Chamber is the largest and most broadly based business organization in the province. Representing over 120 Chambers of Commerce and 32,000 businesses of every size, sector and region of the province, the BC Chamber of Commerce is “The Voice of Business in BC”.

The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline represents substantial economic and community benefits for British Columbia. The pipeline will create:

will support education, health care and

reserves and global markets.

The Northern Gateway Pipeline: an opportunity BC cannot afford to miss.

Northern Gateway Pipeline . . . . an agenda for Shared Prosperity

Enbridge Norman Wells Pipeline right-of-way between Norman Wells and Fort Simpson. The pipeline right-of way is the wide flat indentation to the left of the road.

w w w. b cch a m b e r .o r g

■ OCEAN SAFETY

DELYNDA PILONNorthern Report

The Enbridge pipeline issue is complex, involving miles of pipeline, a myriad of stakeholders as well as proponents and protesters of the project speaking out.

One major issue is the oil tankers that will traverse the B.C. coastline, carrying the crude bitumen to foreign soils. Some, if upended, would span about three football fields in length.

Many say the danger of them navigating the coast of B.C. is just too great.

However, Chris Anderson, marine advi-sor at Enbridge, said though any coastline in the world that experiences gale-force winds must be contended with, B.C.’s coast is no worse than others.

“It is no more difficult than the North Sea in the winter, no more than the North Atlantic in the winter, no more than the coast of Japan, all of these places where tankers are trading on a regular basis.”

Many have been operating for 30 years, and Anderson said the combination of applying new technologies with the expe-riences of others who have been in the business for so long can help Enbridge make the project as foolproof as possible.

He added it has been said B.C. does not have confined channels, which is not true.

“The fact of the matter is we do. Ours are longer but also deeper and wider.”

He said they are used so ships can keep in the shelter. However, before navigat-ing them, a pilot must come aboard ship. This means if there is a storm and a pilot cannot get to the ship, it must wait before proceeding. Often, when a storm is fore-

cast, the speed of the ship is adjusted so it arrives when the storm ends and the pilot can be procured.

Anderson added not only is the com-pany working diligently so safeguards are put in place to ensure there is no spill in the first place, but also to mitigate any damage if something happens.

There are already numerous regulations in place governing tankers, he said. Some are implemented by the Canada Shipping Act, others by the International Maritime Organization. Enbridge, he said, plans to not only strictly adhere to those measures but hopes to improve on them, meaning they intend to be more cautious and safety conscious than what is required.

However the studies, simulations and promises made by Enbridge lend little comfort to some of those concerned who believe people should be cynical about the information Enbridge is sharing since the company has a vested interest in the out-come of such studies.

“We are not the fox guarding the hen house,” Anderson said. “That is not cor-rect. Shipping is governed.”

If the pipeline goes through, the oil that arrives in Kitimat will be shipped overseas via a northern and southern route. Twenty-five per cent of the ships going through the coastal passages will be smaller tankers, Aframax, about 180 to 200 metres long capable of shipping 100,000 tonnes of cargo. The Suezmax, which will make up about 50 per cent of traffic, are about 280 metres long and carry 160,000 to 180,000 tonnes. The Very Large Crude Car-rier (VLCC) are 830 metres long, about the length of three football fields, and carry

300,000 tonnes of cargo. They will carry about 25 per cent of the cargo.

Although all the ships have electronic navigation, nighttime watch keepers and built-in radar, at this time there is no inde-pendent radar system in Kitimat. Ander-son said Enbridge intends to install radar and communication systems, and augment those available in Prince Rupert.

Other safety measures include a sys-tem that changes ballast water in deep sea so no contaminants from other shores are brought to Canada. With safety and design measures, the focus will be on the escort tugs which will have built-in sus-penders, capable of acting as an indepen-dent entity to steer.

Anderson said each ship must list all of

its particulars including every port it has entered, whether it has been inspected and its deficiencies. All cer-tifications must be up-to-date.

Questions regarding whether or not the crew speaks English and can com-municate with the pilot will be asked.

“Currently there are no speed restrictions in place,” Anderson said.

They will institute some so the escort tug can always control the ship.

The tugs are designed with first-response capabilities if there ever is a spill. They are able to skim oil, deal with fire suppression and monitor the situation.

“We can’t close our eyes and say there will never be a spill,” Anderson said. “The worst case is a collision risk.”

Having the gear, equipment and manpower on-hand to accommodate if a spill occurs not only through

properly outfitting tugs as first responders but positioning everything needed at three primary centres is part of the plan.

“We will have the whole coast covered for a 12-hour response,” he said.

Theyíve also promised they will main-tain or contract a RO capable, under the planning standards, of containing, and recovering within 10 days or the shortest possible time, up to 32,000 tonnes of on-water oil, which is more than three times the Canadian Standard.

Currently response comes via Vancou-ver or Victoria and takes up to 72 hours.

“We believe all the safety measures put in place are going to make this project a viable one,” Anderson said.

Many safety measures in place

Chris Anderson


42457300-93384AA1CCKK2IA

EREED NHOJ KROW ROF NI YALP RO

YNA !NOSAES

.DTL SROTOM RN EUNEVA TS1 508

4Y2 L2V CB ,EGROEG ECNIRP 1988-365 )052(

ac.srotomrn.www

WON 999,11$ †

055 VUX rotaG weN llA • enignE niwt-V,PH61,enignE saG cc075 • noissmsnarT TVC,DW4,hpm82 deepS poT • stleB taeS ,yticapaC leuF L5.81

We have a COMPLETE LINE of John Deere products to meet any need. Plus, a knowledgeable sales

staff that can help you at every turn.

www.nrmotors.ca


The Coastal First Nations will go to the wall to stop the Enbridge pipeline proj-ect, and according to Art Sterritt, execu-tive director, about 80 per cent of British Columbians stand behind them.

Sterritt said they were asked about their position on the pipeline some time ago.

“Quite a while ago Northern Gateway was proposed and Coastal First Nations had no position on it,” he said.

Understanding the pros and cons of the proposal became their first challenge.

“We engaged in a consultation process. We looked at the results of the Exxon Val-dez oil spill in Alaska, looked at shipping around the world and hired a bunch of scientists. Then we conducted a consulta-tion process with the community, all of which took about three years before we came up with a final conclusion,” he said.

Before the Coastal First Nations fin-ished their consultations, Enbridge stood the project down for a time. Sterritt said they went at it for a couple years, then backed off for a year.

By the time Enbridge re-engaged in the process, Coastal First Nations came out with a position stating no good could come from the project.

“The dangers presented to the coast for this project were so monumental we had no choice but to oppose it,” Sterritt said. “The area we come from is considered to be the fourth most dangerous body of water in the world. There are 24-foot tides and narrow rocky shores. And, we

depend on the ocean. Everything we get comes out of the ocean. We live on sea food and plants. Ninety per cent of our work comes out of ocean, with 30,000 jobs on the coast of B.C. that depend on a healthy environment. It generates $2.5 billion in revenue, not counting the tourism industry. When we were done with consulting with the community, we all gathered up as a group and declared a ban on tanker traffic in the Great Bear Rainforest, which is our home.”

Enbridge did not agree with the posi-tion taken by the Coastal First Nations.

Sterritt said during their initial meet-ings Enbridge said if the community was against the project, they would discon-tinue it.

“When we first met with them they said to us if the community is against the project, they would stop the project, and that they didn’t want to do a project if the community didn’t want it. We said that’s fair, and that’s why it took so long for us to make sure we had the right decision.”

Sterritt said they met with Enbridge and shared their position with them, and were told the company intends to do business with many other communi-ties out along the pipeline, not just the Coastal First Nation. So the Coastal First Nation began an engagement process with all the other communities along the pipeline. Out of all of them, only two supported the project.

“So it’s looking like less than 10 per cent of communities on the pipeline sup-port it,” Sterritt said.

They went back to Enbridge and shared the results of what they’d found

only to be told the company was also consulting non-First Nations groups.

So the Coastal First Nations spoke with the Union of B.C. Municipalities.

“We engaged in a conversation with the UBCM and they actually passed a motion a couple of years ago opposing the Northern Gateway project,” Sterritt said.

And although the decision wasn’t unanimous, the vote passed easily, Ster-ritt said, by a large percentage.

Several polls throughout the process conducted by the Coastal First Nations has Sterritt convinced that the citizens of the province do not see any benefit of the project.

“Basically we are hoping Enbridge will respect the wishes of British Columbi-ans,” he said.

However he believes Enbridge is push-ing forward with the hope the federal government will back them.

“It would appear the ace up their sleeves is they’ve got in bed pretty good with the feds. The feds are going to try to do everything they can to shove this

down our throats. We have done poles through the years and 80 percent of Brit-ish Columbians are against this. If the federal government wants to make an issue of it British Columbians are ready to go to the wall on this one. This time the autonomy of this province is going to be shown to Canada. We’re not going to allow a project here that benefits Alberta and the federal government, but jeopar-dizes the sustainability of B.C.

Sterritt pointed out the province is rife with plenty of natural resources, includ-ing natural gas on the coast, and argues that any type of incident with these mate-rials wouldn’t even come close to having the same consequences as a spill if the bitumen were shipped as wished and something happened.

“It would not be catastrophic like the bitumen that comes out of Alberta. If it gets into the environment, it never comes out.

What Coastal First Nations is saying is pretty clear. We’re going to the wall on this, and we have the support of 80 per cent of British Columbians.”

■ THE OPPOSITION

Coastal First Nations say ‘no’

B.C. First Nations members are pre-pared to use whatever measures neces-sary, including blockades, to prevent the development of the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline Project, according to Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs Grand Chief Stewart Phillip.

Phillip said the B.C. Union of Indian Chiefs passed a motion opposing the project in solidarity with the Coast First Nations and Carrier Sekani Tribal Coun-cil which has also opposed the project. Blockades are a certainty if the project goes ahead, Phillip said.

“What options do we have? We have the courts and assertion measures on the land and water,” he said. “We’ll get arrested if it comes to that. We are gravely concerned about the implications and ramifications as it relates to the trans-port of petroleum projects on the north coast.”

Enbridge is expected to file its pro-posal to a federal joint review panel this spring.

“I don’t think you’ll find a First Nation in B.C. that does not oppose the (joint review) process. It does not recognize our aboriginal title interests,” Phillip said. “In our view, the (joint review) process is merely rubber stamping these grandiose resource projects.”

First Nations, environmental, fishing and recreational interests are coming together in opposition to the Northern Gateway Pipeline Project, he said.

“It’s a huge issue and we are very much in opposition,” Phillip said.

The primary concern is about the risk of an oil tanker spill from one of the 225 tankers scheduled to arrive at the Kitimat oil terminal each year, he said. The 1,170 km dual pipeline will also cross over 1,000 streams and rivers, raising concerns about an inland oil spill.

Carrier Sekani vice-chief Terry Teegee spoke at Enbridge’s annual general meet-ing in Calgary last year to take his con-cerns to the company shareholders.

“We don’t support the project. There is strong opposition from the coastal First Nations as well,” Teegee said. “(The gulf spill) is a wake up call to British Colum-bians of the potential disaster if a tanker runs aground. Are British Columbians and First Nations willing to risk that?”

In addition to the risk of a tanker run-ning aground in the Douglas Channel or on the B.C. coast, Teegee said, there is the risk of an inland oil spill.

“Inland spills are more common than people might think,” Teegee said. “Enbridge alone had over 40 spills in the last year.”

Even a small spill could have a devas-tating impact on fish-bearing streams and rivers, he said.

If the project is given environmental approval by the federal government, Tee-gee said, he expects there to be a legal challenge by one or more First Nations groups.

“Even the smallest amount of oil in our lands and waters is unacceptable.

“The risk to our environment is too great.”

Carrier-Sekani opposed

iwithth t thhe f f deds. T Thhe f f deds are gog iing g tto t tryy tttototototototo ddddd d dddoooo ooo eveveveveeveverererererreerr ttytytytytttytytytytytyttyyyyyyy hihihihihiihihhhhihh ngngnngngggngg ttttttt thhheheheheheheeeeeeeeheyyyyyy yy cacacacaccacccaccccaaaaaaaacaaaaannnnnnn n nnnnnnn n tttototottotototooooottotototo sssssssssss s ssshhhohohohohohohohoohohhohohohovevevevevevevevvevveveve tttttt t ttthihihihihiiihhhiihhhhihihihihisssssssssss s

ththiis, andd we h have ththe supppppportt fof 8 800 pepp r ceceeecececececcecccecec tntntntntntnnnntntntntntntnt ooooooo o ooffffffff f BBrBrBrBrrBrBrBBBBrBrBrBrBBritititiititiititititiiisiiisisisisishhhhhhhh h h CCCCoCoCoCoCoCoColllullululuululu bbbbmbmbmbmbmbmbmbiiiaiaiaiaiaiaiansnsnsnnsnsnsn ””””....


Phone 250.561.1556 or Toll Free 1.800.991.4999www.wolftek.ca

ENGINEERING AUTOMATION & CONTROLS

PROJECT MANAGEMENT FABRICATION & WELDING

FIELD SERVICES CNC PLASMA FLAME CUTTING

MACHINE LINE BORING HARD CHROME PLATING

CWB CERTIFIED PARTS & SUPPLIES

TURN KEY SOLUTIONS

Leaders in the Northern Resource Sector


When Vince Prince, executive director of the Aboriginal Business Service Network Society, consid-ers the Enbridge pipeline he wears two hats, that of an economic developer and the other as a First Nations leader, intent on preserving the natural world which sustains him and the culture he loves.

“For me it’s kind of tough. My hat, as an economic developer, says plan to take advantage of what you can. But everything under the hat as a person is con-cerned about the destruction it will bring. It’s not if there is a spill, but when, and how devastating it will be. It will happen. They’ve never proved otherwise. Can they control it if it happens, or fix it? There’s no evidence of that. It is a concern to me with every fibre of my being.”

He added he feels the government is on-board with the construction of the pipeline, no matter what people want.

“The Canadian government is trying to push this project through.”

He compared Prime Minister Stephen Harper to a dictator, slowly removing the rights of First Nations people while trying to push the pipeline project through a province where there remain a number of disputed land claims.

“This is deeply disturbing in a province where title hasn’t been settled to any meaningful degree. That Harper can dictate to what happens to land from the other side of the country is wrong.

“I challenge MPs to raise their voice. No one has the voice or the courage to speak out, to try to protect what they believe in and give a well-placed argument.”

The money to construct the pipeline, he said, is better spent elsewhere.

“The money is better spent on tourism including in Aboriginal communities.”

He added getting in business with the Chinese, who he said have a notorious record for human rights viola-tions as well as an acknowledged disrespect for their own environment, is a mistake.

“Harper and his gang are organized bullies. They should take a look at the environment in China, drink from their rivers and eat off of their land. He is sup-porting a Communist country to forward his Commu-nist regime.”

The pipeline, he said, offers little in terms of long-term employment. And, he said, the community work done by Enbridge of late is little more than propa-ganda.

“They’re trying to develop a name when they need to be taking ownership of oil spills.”

Perhaps, he said, if there were a death penalty for oil spills, things would be different.

“If it was their life on the line it would be a very dif-ferent story. Harper and his bandits and the Enbridge crooks would tell a different story if it was their lives on the line. If the law was an oil spill was punish-able by death it would be a very different story. There would be a very different push and their would be no propaganda,” he said.

Prince said the story that 60 per cent of First Nations are in favour of the pipeline seems a fallacy to him since he’s yet to speak to one person who says they agree.

“They are here to destroy our country, our land. They’ve given no straight answers in terms of employ-ment. They’ve attacked the environmental people. There has been a funding cut across the board for First Nations programs. ... Harper doesn’t need to be in power anymore. He is going to kill us off. He is doing everything in his power to destroy the Aboriginal people of B.C.”

■ THE OPPOSITION

Vince Prince feels Ottawa iseroding First Nations rights

Enbridge has developed a package of environmental and economic commitments for the communities along the route, including coastal communities.

Enbridge has entered into numerous protocol agreements with Aboriginal groups along the proposed pipeline corridor.

Northern Gateway is prepared to make the following safety and economic commitments to make the sustainability objec-tives a reality:

1. Aboriginal Equity Ownership.Northern Gateway is offering Aboriginal people a 10 per cent

share in a $5.5 billion project. The long-term financial benefits for participating Aboriginal shareholders will be significant. Aggregate equity ownership is expected to generate approxi-mately $280 million in net income to neighbouring Aboriginal communities, over the first 30 years.

Becoming an owner in this project means Aboriginal groups are going to see cash flow within the first year of operations. Through equity ownership, Aboriginal people will be able to generate a significant new revenue stream that could help achieve the priorities of their people – such as improved health care, education and housing.

2. Procurement, Employment and Training. Aboriginal people are expected to comprise approximately

15 per cent of regional construction employment. Northern Gateway will work to identify direct and indirect employment opportunities for members of neighbouring Aboriginal com-munities. Northern Gateway anticipates that combined employ-ment, procurement and joint venture opportunities will reach approximately $400 million in value over the three years during construction.

Aboriginal business involvement in construction activities will be dependent upon community capacity and desire to partici-pate. We are currently entering into commercial memorandums of understanding to ensure interested communities are able to fully participate.

3. Community Trust.A Community Trust will be established for Aboriginal and

non-Aboriginal communities with a commitment of 1% pre-tax domestic profit to support the trust, measured on a five year rolling average basis. It’s estimated to exceed $100 million over the 30-year economic life of the Project.

4. Stewardship Programs.Aboriginal communities along the right-of-way will have

access to existing Enbridge stewardship and habitat protection initiatives such as the Neutral Footprint Program, the Natural Legacy Program, the Enbridge School Plus Program, and the Safe Community Program (as applicable).

Benefits for aboriginals

Nak’azdli Band Of ce - Ft. St. James BC, V0J 1P0


Volume Truck Dealerin Canada

1-866-924-47251-866-924-4725

Over $2 MILLION DOLLARS

committed to local health care!

DL#30541

DISCLAIMER: All prices and payments plus taxes and fees ON APPROVED CREDIT. Prices above include $589 Administrative Fee which is mandatory on purchase of New and Used vehicles. Lowest cash prices and

payments using all dealership incentives. All Vehicles available at time of Printing. Vehicles may not be exactly as shown. File photos used on some vehicles when required. 1) 2012 Grand Caravan stk# 12GV9617/

2012 Journey stk# 12DJ9076/ 2012 Ram Q/cab stk# 12Q18191, $17,786 $0 down, $105 bi-weekly, or $228 month x 96 months @ 4.99%. Cost of borrowing, $3890, total obligation: $21,888 before taxes. Factory incentives

subject to change as new Chrysler Retail Incentive Programs are announced. See Dealer for details.

The

june 29, 2012

Documents

enbridge pipeline

northern gateway pipelinewhat

massive pipeline project

pipeline transport

diameter pipeline

public process

review process

enbridge estimates