Robin Rowland | Northwest Coast Energy News

Shell’s go slow approach to Kitimat LNG project means little action before 2015

Energy Environment

When Royal Dutch Shell Canada purchased the Methanex/ Cenovus Energy plant and marine terminal in Kitimat Wednesday, company spokesman Paul Doolan told the media that Shell “is now exploring the potential for an LNG export terminal on the site,” but refused to give any time line for the project.

Now sources have confirmed to Northwest Coast Energy News that at this time it looks as if there will be no major developments in the Shell project until 2015.

Employees of Cenovus were told after the sale announcement that the plant’s condensate operations would be “business as usual” until sometime in 2015.

(After the sale, Cenovus told the media it doesn’t expect changes in
the regular shipments of condensate to change “for the foreseeable
future.” )

As anyone who has gone through a takeover or similar management transition knows, a company’s new management may have ideas that they haven’t discussed with the old regime.

The 2015 date is logical, however, since 2015 is the projected launch date for the first project, KM LNG partners’ Kitimat LNG project.

There are already two projects in the “pipeline” so to speak, the Kitimat LNG and BC LNG projects. As discussions during the June National Energy Board hearings that led to the approval of the KM LNG export licence last week showed, the two companies must come to an agreement on some of the pipeline capacity coming into Kitimat, sharing “the molecules,” that favourite phrase of natural gas analysts.

Shell will also have to go through the National Energy Board process for granting an export licence.

With energy companies rushing to exploit the shale gas resources in northeastern BC and in Alberta. and growing demand for the natural gas in Asia, transportation of the natural gas is a big question, since it appears Shell and its partners will have to build new pipelines since the existing pipelines into the Kitimat region will be at full capacity.

Where will that new pipeline be built? How will that new pipeline be built? That question is already being widely debated in Kitimat. Ever since Enbridge has announced that it too is interested in joining the natural gas export boom, the question has been: could a natural gas pipeline replace the proposed Northern Gateway bitumen pipeline or does Enbridge intend to build two pipelines? If it is the latter, Enbridge, and possibly Shell, can expect years of hearings, protests and delays because while people in northwestern BC are generally accepting of natural gas projects, there is fierce and still growing opposition to the bitumen pipeline.

Chinese agri giant tours Kitimat harbour, evaluating facilities

Kitimat

A delegation from the giant Chinese state owned agribusiness, Heilongjiang Beidahuang Nongken Group Co. (Beidahuang Group) toured Kitimat and Kitimat harbour Thursday, to evaluate the harbour for possible expansion beyond the current facilities owned by Rio Tinto Alcan and the Methanex/ Cenovus Energy terminal purchased Wednesday by Shell Canada.

Accompanying the delegation from the Beidahuang Group were executives from Hangfeng Evergeen, one of the world’s major producers of fertilizer, with headquarters in Toronto, but with most of its business in China and Southeast Asia.

Kitimat Mayor Joanne Monaghan said the delegation is on a tour of British Columbia ports looking for the best place to ship agricultural products to and from China. Monaghan said that when the delegation met with BC premier Christy Clark earlier, Clark suggested that they include Kitimat on their itinerary.

In China, Beidahuang operates 104 state-owned farms, supplying crops to Beijing, Shanghai, and the military, using about 1,400,000 tonnes of fertilizer a year.

As an exporter, Beidahuang sells kidney beans, green mung beans, small red beans, cow peas, and soybeans to Canada, South America, South Africa, North Africa, the Middle East, South Asia, and Europe.

Beidahuang has been aggressively expanding its holdings around the world in the past few years, purchasing or developing agricultural holdings in Canada, Russia, the Philippines, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, Zimbabwe and Venezuela. As an importer, Beidahuang deals in wheat, corn, soybeans, fruit and vegetables and wine. The company also has holdings in oil and mining.

In 2010, Hanfeng Evergreen signed a joint venture agreement with Beidahuang to establish a fertilizer factory in northern Heilongjiang province

Monaghan said the delegation was looking at possibly either new or expanded port facilities in Kitimat to handle the import and export of the agricultural products and fertilizers. It will be some time before any decision is made, since the delegation will return to China and evaluate its tour before making any decision.

Beidahuang’s world wide expansion has been somewhat controversial.

Bloomberg reported that Beidahuang’s $1.5 billion investment in Argentina’s Patagonia, which would include upgrading unused land and expanding port facilities there, brought objections from local farmers and activists because the agreement with government of Rio Negro province means farmers “will be kept captive by the Chinese for 20 years” since the agreement would force farmers to sell their produce to Beidahuang.

Beidahuang is also heavily investing in palm oil plantations across Southeast Asia, which brings objections from environmental activists who say vulnerable and valuable tropical rainforest is destroyed so the palm oil plantations can be established.

Shell confirms purchase of Methanex site, marine terminal, in Kitimat for LNG project

Energy

The former Methanex site is seen the red square in this map of the Kitimat service centre prepared by Enbridge as part of its Northern Gateway pipeline proposal and filed with the Joint Review panel. The yellow line is the proposed Enbridge bitumen pipeline. The dark red line is the proposed pipeline that would feed the Kitimat LNG and likely the BC LNG projects, where the red pipeline route has white, that is the Pacific Trails Pipeline. See How Kitimat harbour will look if both Northern Gateway and KM LNG go ahead.

Updated Oct. 20, 2011, 0955

Kitimat mayor Joanne Monaghan has confirmed that Royal Dutch Shell has purchased the former Methanex site in town, “as a first step toward a proposed Liquified Natural Gas facility in Kitimat.”

Monaghan said she met with Shell executives on Wednesday afternoon, when the long rumoured purchase of the Methanex site was confirmed.

Thursday morning, Shell spokesman Stephen Doolan said that the company and its partners
also acquired the Kitimat Marine Terminal. Shell’s partners include Korea Gas Corp, Mitsubishi Corp and China National Petroleum Corp, Doolan said.

Both sites were owned by Cenovus Energy which purchased them in 2010 from Methanex for a reported $40 million.

Monaghan also said that the Shell officials said the company will not be making an announcement of the details of their plans for another few weeks.

If the Shell project goes ahead, it will be the third liquified natural gas project in Kitimat.
The others are KM LNG partners’ (Apache, Encana and EOG) Kitimat LNG plant at Bish Cove and the smaller project from BC LNG.

The Methanex plant on the Kitimat river permanently ceased methanol production November 1, 2005. Methanex currently uses the Cenovus terminal in Kitimat to import
methanol to supply customers in western Canada. Cenovus uses the terminal and site to process condensate, used to dilute bitumen, that arrives by ocean tanker and then is shipped by rail to Alberta.

The future of condensate operation has been in doubt since the announcement of the Enbridge Northern Gateway project, since it was expected that the Cenovus condensate operation would have been absorbed into the Enbridge operation.

If the Methanex/Cenovus site is converted to a full LNG facility, current operations will have to be decommissioned first, Monaghan said.

Multiple sources in Kitimat have been saying for the past month that Shell had purchased the Methanex site, but official conformation only came from the mayor late Wednesday.

Scrutiny of Enbridge Northern Gateway plans: II Landslides

Energy Enviroment

This photograph from the geomorphology report shows how bedrock spread lead to catastrophic landslides along a 2.5 kilometre scarp (photo lower centre to upper right) and a 1.3 km scarp (photo distance) on the ridge above Parrott Creek. The yellow dashed line delineates the landslides’ headscarp. The arrow shows the direction of movement.

A retired geomorphologist for the BC Forest Service, who lives in Smithers, says a break in the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline, triggered by a landslide, is “inevitable” given the highly complex terrain that the pipeline will cross.

James Schwab bases his peer-reviewed paper on his 30 years experience in northwestern British Columbia.

“The unstable mountainous terrain across west-central BC is not a safe location for pipelines. Eventually a landslide will sever a pipeline,” he says. He calls for investigation of a safer, alternative route for the pipeline.

The report was funded by the Bulkley Valley Research Centre. It examines three areas, the Nechako Plateau, the Hazelton Mountains and the Kitimat Ranges.

Schwab’s report says the Nechako Plateau appears relatively benign, but, he says, large landslides have occurred in volcanic rock overlying other older volcanic and sedimentary rock.

Along the Morice River, the report says sediments have historically experienced landslides. Road construction and wildfires have reactivated these landslides. The proposed pipeline corridor crosses an historic earth flow west of Owen Creek, moving sediment along Owen Creek and moving sediments near Fenton Creek and Lamprey Creek

At Gosnell Creek, Schwab says, shifting channels on active alluvial fans pose road maintenance challenges at present and, he says, pipelines will likely bring similar challenges crossing these fans. The report says the creek banks are unstable at Crystal Creek and Gosnell Creek pipeline crossing points.

The report says the volcanic bedrock of the Hazelton Mountains is “inherently unstable” and geological surveys show there were many landslides in prehistoric times. Three more recent documented large landslides within the Bulkley Range of the Hazelton Mountains have severed the natural gas pipeline since its construction in the early 1970s; large landslides have also impacted forest roads and highways.

He says that gravity is deforming the slopes in the volcanic bedrock found in the Kitnayakwa, Clore and Bernie watersheds and the report calls for a thorough geotechnical investigation to determine the stability of the bedrock and hill slope in areas before the pipeline is built. “Avoidance of these unstable hill slopes is generally the preferred engineering development option,” the report says.

The report examines where the pipeline corridor crosses through a mountainside to the southeast of the Clore Canyon.

The highly fractured bedrock in the canyon is undergoing active mass erosion. unstable rock reaches up to about 1200 m above sea level and extends around the mountain into an adjacent tributary valley. This bedrock along the north and west side of the mountain is extensively gullied and contains many landslide scarps and an actively moving landslide.

The active instability of the eastern mountain slope places major constraints on development, Schwab says.

Schwab says the Kitimat Ranges are characterized by steep narrow valleys, which create “colluvial-fluvial fans … at the base of most steep gully channels in the Hoult Creek and Upper Kitimat watershed.” The steep gullies extend from the mountains in to the valley or directly into Hoult Creek or the Kitimat River.

Many of these high-energy systems in the Kitimat Ranges experienced debris flows during extreme rainstorms in the fall of 1978 and the fall of 1992. Debris flows commonly occur under seemingly normal storm events during summer convective storms and fall frontal rainstorms.

Debris flows are powerful landslides that can damage or rupture pipelines, the report says.

Hunter Creek, a large active alluvial fan, has historically pushed the Kitimat River across the valley, Schwab’s report says. In 1992, road and levée construction caused a catastrophic channel change.

The Kitimat trough, on the road between Terrace and Kitimat, is actually a fjord uplifted by ancient geological forces. The valley has deep deposits of sediments both from ocean and land, left by glaciers, which have produced landslides from prehistoric times to the present day.

Recent large flow slides occurred at Mink Creek (winter 1992-93) and Lakelse Lake in May and June 1962. A large submarine flow slide occurred in sensitive marine muds at the front of the fiord-head delta at Kitimat Arm in April 1975.

These recent landslides serve to show the continuing sensitivity of the glaciomarine sediments in the Kitimat Trough and the marine sediments on the fan-delta at the fiord-head of Kitimat Arm. Natural and human caused factors such as increases in surface load, removal of lateral support by stream bank undercutting or excavation, vibration by heavy equipment, earthquake shock, high water pressures and interruption of intertidal drainage can trigger these landslides. Thus, the potential exists for landslides to occur during pipeline construction and in the future.

This large swampy area on Lakesle Lake is the location of the May 1962 flow slide. Highway 37 crosses the landslide depletion zone. (The highway was closed for several days after the 1962 slide.) The provincial park is in the middle left of this photo from the report.

Schwab says the pipeline will encounter the glacial sediments during construction at Cecil Creek, Deception Creek, Wedeene River, Little Wedeene River, along the west side of Kitimat Arm and along Chist Creek. He says that even minor erosion along those creek banks can expose the glacial sediments, which are then displaced by as the sediments are exposed.
“Pipelines crossing glaciomarine sediments must therefore avoid areas that lie within potential flow slide depletion zones as landslides will break or disrupt pipeline service.”

The executive summary of the report concludes by saying.

Landslides travel long distances and damage linear infrastructure such as pipelines. Six large rock slides occurred in west central B.C. since 1978, five of these since 1999, and four since 2002. Three of the six rock slides severed the natural gas pipeline (Howson landslides in 1978 and 1999, and Zymoetz landslide in 2002). Damage to linear infrastructure commonly occurs in run out zones many kilometres from the initial landslide. This has occurred with recent landslides in west central B.C.; the longest traveled in excess of four kilometres along a slope of 9°. Therefore, the potential for damage to pipelines extends to unstable terrain and potential landslides that start well outside the construction corridor.

The Bulkley Valley Research Centre, based in Smithers, is a not-for-profit organization that aims to improve the knowledge of resource sustainability by facilitating what its website calls “credible research projects.”

Bulkley Valley Research Centre news release: Geomorphology report highlights pipeline concerns

James Schwab’s paper Hillslope and Fluvial Processes along the Proposed Pipeline Corridor (pdf)

This report was corrected on Oct. 25, changing the headline, correcting the main link to the Bulkley Valley Research Centre that was not visible due to a coding error and adding a link to the geomorphology report news release.

Activists ramp up scrutiny of Enbridge Northern Gateway plans. I Western approaches

Energy Environment

Dieter Wagner, of Douglas Channel Watch, briefs District of Kitimat Council on the perils of Wright Sound, Oct. 17, 2011. (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)

Activists in northwestern British Columbia are ramping up their scrutiny of Enbridge’s plans for the Northern Gateway pipeline, including the company’s contingency plans in case something goes wrong.

There is also growing controversy over one part of the pipeline process that is separate from the Joint Review Panel, the TERMPOL process that is supposed to ensure the safety of shipping on the west coast. TERMPOL, which is run by the Canadian Coast Guard on behalf of Transport Canada, has two major flaws, opponents say, first, that unlike the Joint Review Panel, TERMPOL’s proceedings are secret and, second, participation in the process for shipping companies and others is voluntary.

At the regular bi-weekly meeting of the District of Kitimat Council on Monday, Oct. 17, 2011 Dieter Wagner, of the group Douglas Channel Watch gave a detailed analysis of what his group says are the dangers involved in shipping supertankers along the west coast of British Columbia and up the Douglas Channel to Kitimat.

Wagner told the Council that the TERMPOL documents on Northern Gateway shipping are confusing, contradictory and often difficult for the layperson, even those with years of experience in the waters of northwestern British Columbia to follow.

Wagner said that many areas of the coast approaching Douglas Channel are tricky to navigate with shallow water, rocks and shoals and thousands of crab traps, all very close to the proposed tanker routes. Wagner said the TERMPOL study shows that in some of the areas approaching the Channel, the charts show 10 fathoms, (60 feet or 18.28 metres) while the supertankers draw 70 feet.

Wagner said that on some parts of the coast, sailors can see kelp, often growing on gravel beds, and since growing kelp is less than 70 feet high, it is another area that could be damaged if a tanker runs aground.

That means, Wagner said, the smallest mistake would mean that tankers would run aground. He also pointed out the plans for the pilots to board the tankers once the ships are already in shallow water. He cautioned the plans say that under some circumstances, boarding by the pilot could be delayed, probably by bad weather and he doubted whether the companies involved would want to delay their tankers by two or three or more days, as BC Ferries are sometimes delayed in really rough weather.

The most dangerous area, Wagner said, is Wright Sound at the entrance to Douglas Channel, where the tankers would have to make a tight turn to enter the Channel. Ferries and other ships heading south also have to make a turn and it was in Wright Sound that the ferry Queen of the North went off course, struck Gill Island and sunk. Wagner told the District Council what the Gitga’ata First Nation said at last year’s Enbridge rally, the Queen of the North is still leaking oil.

(Other people in the Kitimat region, including the aboriginal people who have sailed the area for thousands of years, also express concern about Wright Sound, not only due to congestion from all the traffic using the Inside Passage but because of tricky winds and currents, especially in bad weather).

Wagner also said he doubted the extra navigational aides that Enbridge has promised to install along the route would stop human error accidents any more than traffic lights do.

He also said the up to 225 supertankers that would be used for the Northern Gateway project, crossing the Pacific to China or going down to California would greatly add to the green house gases going into the atmosphere from what he said was half a billion tons a fuel a year burned by the ships. Tugs, liquified natural gas tankers and other ships would also to the emissions.

He concluded by saying that there are no Canadian regulations governing the use of the escort tugs contemplated by Enbridge’s plans. Wagner also said that everything in the documents from Enbridge are just promises and there is no way at the moment to ensure that the promises are kept.

At the conclusion of the presentation, Councillor Randy Halyk, who is also a candidate for mayor, told his colleagues that one of the biggest problems with the review of the Northern Gateway is the secrecy of the TERMPOL process.

Russian sail training ship tracks Japanese tsunami debris crossing the Pacific

Environment Oceans

The Russian sail training vessel STS Pallada. (Pallada)

Ever since the March 11 earthquake and tsunami that devastated parts of northeastern Japan, scientists have been using computer models to track the debris that was swept out to sea by the waves.

Now a Russian sail training vessel has found the debris in mid-Pacific nearing Midway Island.

The STS Pallada was on a sail training mission when the officers and crew became aware of the computer models created by the International Pacific Research Center at the University of Hawai at Manoa. So on its way home from Honolulu to Vladivostok the ship went looking for the debris.

The IPRC has now posted some excerpts from the Pallada’s log, as transmitted by Natalia Borodina, the Pallada Information and Education mate.

Sept. 22 in position 31.42.21 N and 174.45.21 E we picked up on board the Japanese fishing boat. Radioactivity normal, we’ve checked it with the Geiger counter. At approaches to the mentioned position (maybe 10-15 minutes before) we also sighted a TV set, fridge and a couple of home appliances.

Sept. 27 We keep sighting every day things like wood boards, plastic bottles, buoys from fishing nets (small and big ones). an object resembling a wash basin, other wastes. All these objects are floating by the ship.

With the data provided by the Pallada, the scientists in Hawaii are reviving the computer models of the debris drift. They expect the debris to reach Midway sometime this winter. Some debris will reach the main Hawaiian Islands and eventually the west coast of North America.

A map of the tsunami debris field by Nikolai Maximenko and Jan Hafner of IPRC. The line shows the track of the Pallada where the debris was spotted between Sept. 21 and Sept. 28, 2011. The red rhombus (diamond) marks the location where the Japanese boat was found. The red circle denotes maximum debris density spotted by the Pallada. The purple shows the extent of the debris field from the updated university computer model as of Sept. 25. Click for larger image. (IPRC)

The crew of the Pallada hoists on board a Japanese boat, registered in Fukishima prefecture, and presumably washed out to sea during the March 11, 2011 tsunami. (Pallada)

IPRC/ Pallada news release (pdf)

Analysis: The NEB and LNG, The environment if necessary, but not necessarily the environment

Analysis

If there are any doubts about the confusing nature of National Energy Board hearings, at least for the public, as opposed to energy lawyers, that can be found in the decision relating to the application for the KM LNG limited partnership to export natural gas. The NEB granted a licence that will allow the partners, Apache, Encana and EOG to export natural gas to Asia for the next 20 years.

One of the questions at the hearings, with many people in the northwest also worried about the upcoming Joint Review Panel hearings on the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline, was what about the environmental effects of the natural gas pipeline?

It all depends on the legal terms “necessary connection.”

During the briefings in Kitimat months before the actual June hearings, NEB officials said that the environmental implications of the natural gas project would not be part of the consideration because the board’s mandate in this case was whether or not to grant the export licence. The NEB officials said that since the Kitimat LNG project was almost entirely within the province of British Columbia, the environment was the responsibility of the province, not the board nor the federal government.

At the LNG hearings, lawyers for the energy companies made similar arguments, as the NEB decision relates, saying that KM LNG’s lawyers maintained that there was no “necessary connection” between the pipeline and the environment and so “noted that the Board is no longer required to conduct environmental assessment for gas export licence applications because those applications, unlike certain facilities applications do not trigger an environmental assessment under the CEA [Canadian Environmental Assessment ] Act and the only environmental side effects, if any, the board could consider would be those not already studied by the province.”

(The January hearings on the Enbridge pipeline are different because that in terms of the NEB mandate is a “facility” hearing, not a simple licence hearing and therefore portions of the federal Environmental Assessment Act come into play.)

In the decision, the board members rejected those arguments:

First, the board said that even if the application does not trigger a CEA Act assessment, “that does not preclude the Board from considering potential environmental effects and directly related social effects of gas exports when assessing the application.”

The NEB went on to to note that the board has found a “necessary connection” in previous gas export applications, therefore: “The Board will consider environmental and related social effects of a proposed export if those effects are necessarily connected to the exportation….”

So the board found that it did have the jurisdiction to examine the environmental effects of marine shipping activities, the natural gas terminal and the Pacific Trails Pipeline that would lead to the terminal at Kitimat.

On the pipeline and the terminal, the board then says: “that no evidence was placed on the record to suggest that there are any environmental effects directly connected to this proposed export that has not already been addressed by the appropriate regulatory agencies.”

As for the effects of marine activities the NEB says the Transport Canada TERMPOL process (which is also looking at the bitumen tankers that will be on the coast if the Enbridge project goes ahead) was sufficient.

The Board is of the view that potential environmental effects and directly related social effects have been considered ….or will be considered through TERMPOL….Based on the foregoing, the Board is of the view that work conducted under the relevant federal and provincial legislation and process is not warranted and the Board has been able to to adequately consider the environmental and related social effects in making a decision on the export licence.

In other words, the National Energy Board ruled that it can maintain its jurisdiction over the environment, if necessary, but not necessarily do anything about it, if someone else is apparently already doing the job.

As was frequently pointed out in the June hearings, the NEB mandate is what is called “Market-Based Procedure” when it comes to natural gas. That policy came into effect in 1987, and was founded “on the premise that the marketplace will generally operate in such a way that Canadian requirements for natural gas will be met a fair market prices.”

The year 1987, of course, was at the height of the political and economic love affair with the marketplace. Now in October 2011, the “Occupy” demonstrations in almost every major city on this planet and many small towns, show that this love affair has gone sour.

While the Enbridge Northern Gateway Joint Review has a wider mandate, the problem remains.

No image of planet Earth shows national boundaries. Nor does an image of planet Earth show the bureaucratic fault lines between the National Energy Board, Transport Canada, the Environmental Assessment Agency, not mention the provincial agencies.

The mandate for the NEB is more than 25 years out of date. National Energy Board hearings are limited by narrow rules of procedure which the energy company lawyers try again and again to use to their advantage.

These problems aren’t going to go away as the natural gas rush accelerates.

No one is looking at the “big picture.” Who knows what will fall through the cracks? No one ever cares about the unexpected consequences until there is 20/20 hindsight.

The problem, of course, is that there is no recourse for this problem. Stephen Harper’s government is cutting staff at Environment Canada, defunding environmental advocacy and watch dog groups (even those supported by industry) and like all conservatives somehow think that more deregulation will somehow bring back the jobs that the deregulated financial sector destroyed.

The NEB notes that the 1985 Western Accord that set up the current rules for the board is also called the “Halloween Agreement.”

Scarey.

National Energy Board decision on KM LNG

RTA to divest “non core” aluminum assets

Aluminum

Rio Tinto Alcan has announced that it is “streamling” its aluminum assets after a “strategic review.”

The company says: “The move will allow Rio Tinto Alcan to concentrate on its strategy to
grow the value of its high quality, tier one assets and improve the
product group’s financial performance.”

Six assets in Australia and New Zealand will be spun off into a new company for sale, while a second group of seven assets in France, Germany, the United States and the United Kingdom will continue to be managed by RTA while the company considers divestment options.

An RTA news release Sunday says

Rio Tinto’s interests in six Australian and New Zealand assets will transfer into a new business unit, to be called Pacific Aluminium, and be managed and reported separately from the Rio Tinto Alcan product group prior to divestment.
These are:

–

Australia: Gove bauxite mine and alumina refinery, Boyne Smelters and the associated Gladstone Power Station, the Tomago smelter and the Bell Bay smelter
–

New Zealand: New Zealand Aluminium Smelters

A second group of seven non-core assets will continue to be managed by Rio Tinto Alcan while it further investigates divestment options.

These assets include:

–

France and Germany: Three Specialty Alumina plants and the Gardanne refinery
–

United States: Sebree smelter

United Kingdom: Lynemouth smelter and associated power station, for which potential options include closure

The news release quotes Rio Tinto chief executive Tom Albanese as saying: “The assets identified for divestment are sound businesses that are well-managed with productive workforces. But they are no longer aligned with our strategy and we believe they have a bright future under new ownership. The strength of our balance sheet means that we can choose the most opportune method and timing to divest these assets, which may not occur until the economic climate improves. In the meantime, we will continue to run these operations safely and efficiently.

“This move is a further significant step towards achieving our performance targets in the Aluminium product group. We have already made good progress, with plans in place to generate sustainable performance improvement, and we are investing at a number of our core assets.”

Rio Tinto Alcan chief executive Jacynthe Cote said “We are already well on our way to building a truly outstanding aluminum business. Streamlining the product group allows Rio Tinto Alcan to concentrate its efforts even more on driving performance improvements and investing in growth to increase shareholder value.”

Rio Tinto says it has consultations with affected stakeholders and the workforces involved.

Kitimat LNG, Rod and Gun to consult on “legacy” fish and wildlife program at Bish Cove: NEB

Bish Cove, site of the KM LNG (Kitimat LNG) natural gas terminal, photographed on a stormy Sunday, Sept. 18, 2011. (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)

KM LNG (also known as Kitimat LNG) will consult with the Kitimat Rod and Gun club about creating a “legacy” fish and wildlife program at Bish Cove, according to the National Energy Board decision that granted an export licence for liquified natural gas to the partnership.

As part of its consideration of the social, economic and environmental aspects of the project, the NEB noted:

The Kitimat Rod and Gun Association requested that KM LNG and its partners establish a fish and wildlife “legacy” program for the area. In response, KM LNG committed to working with the Kitimat Rod and Gun Association to explore a partnership and stated it and its partners are committed to investing in the communities where KM LNG operates. KM LNG noted it already supported some community initiatives and would set aside funds to support others, after a positive investment decision.

KM LNG has hired the energy services company KBR to do a front end engineering and evaluation study of the project which is expected to be completed in December. The partners will then make the decision whether or not to go ahead with the project.

Mike Langegger of the Kitimat Rod and Gun, who made the presentation to the hearings in June, says the club has had some preliminary talks with the KM LNG public relations staff but so far there have been no formal talks about the legacy program.

In its presentation to the NEB, Kitimat Rod and Gun said it would ask KM LNG for a legacy fund that would be $7.25 million over the twenty-year period of the export licence. The money would be used to preserving fish, wildlife and habitat in the area around the natural gas terminal

Langegger says while it is uncertain if KM LNG will agree to the complete proposal, no matter what the outcome he wants all stake holders to be involved, with they are “consumers” (hunters and anglers) or “non-consumers” (naturalists) so that the habitat is maintained.

NEB decision on KM LNG application(PDF)

Kitimat Rod and Gun submission to NEB (PDF)

B.C. hunting, fishing guides frustrated by lack of government support

Fishery Business

B.C. hunting, fishing guides frustrated by lack of government support: CBC News

By Robin Rowland, CBC News

SPECIAL REPORT: Small business news and features

Along the fjord known as the Douglas Channel in northwestern B.C., the winds are at gale force as Rick Thompson, the owner-operator of a floating fish lodge called the Tookus Inn, sets off from Kitimat harbour to close up for the season. Like many in his industry, he has poured much time and energy into building his outfitting business and he’s frustrated by staffing problems and the fact that guides seem to have fallen off the map when it comes to government support.