Kent attacks foreign “mischief” in opposition to Gateway:Sunmedia

Politics Environment

Environment minister Peter Kent  has attacked critics of the Northern Gateway pipeline while speaking to reporters at the climate conference in Durban, South Africa,  Sunmedia/Quebecor reports.

Foreigners funding ‘mischief’ against Canada’s oilsands: Kent

Environment Minister Peter Kent has warned that some of the opposition to the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline, which would run from Alberta’s oilsands to a new marine terminal in Kitimat, B.C., is not genuine.

“Our government is concerned about some outside finances that have come in to interfere and obstruct what is a legitimate development of … responsibly developed and sustainably developed Canadian resources,” Kent said from a climate conference in Durban, South Africa.

First Nations support Northern Gateway pipeline, Enbridge CEO says: Edmonton Journal

Energy Politics 

Peter O’Neill writing in The Edmonton Journal reports First Nations support Northern Gateway pipeline, Enbridge CEO says

Daniel, in an exclusive interview with The Edmonton Journal, said critics have seriously underestimated his company’s support among First Nations anxious to take advantage of economic development opportunities in northern B.C.

Enbridge, faced with an aggressive public assault this week from B.C. environmental and aboriginal groups, countered Friday with the Gitxsan First Nation announcement that it is taking an equity stake in the pipeline….

Daniel boldly predicted in the interview that at least 30 of the 45 First Nations along the 1,170-kilometre pipeline route from Bruderheim, near Edmonton, to Kitimat on the B.C. coast, will have deals with Enbridge by next June.

And he said he hopes all 45 will be onside by 2013, when Enbridge hopes to get regulatory approval to start a project that is set to be completed by late 2017.

The article also reports that Prime Minister Stephen Harper once again defended the importance of Canada finding a way to get oilsands bitumen to Asian market.

It concludes with Daniel’s response on the problem of tanker traffic:

I’ve been saying as much as I can publicly that if we can’t do this as Canadians, who can? About 70 to 80 per cent of the world moves by tanker right now, and it moves safely and soundly from countries where you wouldn’t expect them to have standards nearly as good as Canadian standards,” he said.

“Can I give an absolute guarantee? No. But if we can’t do it as Canadians, who can?

Alberta premier says Northern Gateway critical to Canadian economy

Updated below with transcript of Alison Redford’s speech.

 Bill Graveland of Canadian Press reports in  Alberta premier says Northern Gateway pipeline critical for Canadian economic development.

In an address to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce, which CP says was her first major address in Calgary since becoming premier, Alison Redford said that the Northern Gateway pipeline project is of national importance and is critical to Canada’s future economic strength.

“We need to be able to talk about why the success of this pipeline becomes critical to our economic success in the next two years. But we are going to have to separate the wheat from the chaff because we know there are going to be a number of interveners who have very particular political agendas,” said Redford in a question and answer session following a lunch-hour address to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce.

Redford was referring to the large number of people who have registered either as intervenors or to give comments at the Joint Review hearings. She added:

The agenda that I think matters to most Canadians is the agenda for economic growth at a time when the rest of the world is in very uncertain circumstances and we just don’t have to be.”

CP says Redford called on other Canadians to lobby on behalf of the Keystone and Northern Gateway pipelines.

“I don’t think it’s appropriate or even necessary for only Alberta or only Alberta interests to be out lobbying with respect to this pipeline. We’re trying to ensure it succeeds. This is an issue that takes on national importance and my expectation with people in Ottawa including the prime minister is they understand that,” she said.

Update one

A few hours later, columnist Don Braid writing in the Calgary Herald in It’s sinking in that Redford is different notes how the powerful of the Alberta oil patch were eager to hear the premier’s speech, as compared to former premier Ed Stelmach.

Braid notes that:

It’s just beginning to sink in that Redford is radical in the Alberta context, a national diplomat of an entirely new order.

She does not say, like the old Reform party, that the West Wants In. She assumes that Alberta already is in, and offers to lead without the resentment born of grievances from the old National Energy Program to current attacks on the oilsands.

Although Braid’s column goes over Alberta’s old grievances with the federal government, and how perhaps the premier is diplomatically working to overcome them,  he closes with an ominous threat to British Columbia:

Redford might someday have to show a brass knuckle inside her velvet glove.

She might even suggest, along with former minister Lloyd Snelgrove, that B.C. has a lot of nerve rejecting Alberta oil, when B.C.’s natural gas is routinely shipped through Alberta pipelines to the United States.

Snelgrove isn’t recommending a ban, oh no, but he says: “Maybe people need to think about that when they say they won’t take our oil.”

Maybe they do; or maybe Alison Redford’s olive branch will bring peace and prosperity to the land.

There is widespread support for the LNG projects in Kitimat and across the northwest and the KM LNG partners project has much better relations with First Nations than Enbridge.

However, last week’s blockade by members of Wet’suwet’en First Nation clans of a Pacific Trails Pipeline survey crew at Gosnell River, over fears that the PTP project could open the gates, so to speak, for the Northern Gateway pipeline, means that nothing is certain.

Perhaps Don Braid and Lloyd Snelgrove should be careful what they wish for.


Update 2 Transcript of Premier Redford’s speech.

Premier Redford does not mention Northern Gateway in the actual speech ( the news reports are from a question and answer session).

She does say, however:

“The world will need fossil fuels for a long time to come. The oil sands, as one of the few energy-rich areas outside the unstable Middle East poised for growth, will be essential, as the International Energy Agency publicly recognized this month. The second is that there is no Canadian Energy Strategy without our partners.
The infrastructure we need to get our oil and gas to market must cross other provinces’ lands. And the federal and provincial regulations that will inevitably shape how Canada’s environment is protected, how our energy is extracted and how it is transported will require input from everybody to have the greatest net positive effect.

We must rise together. There is no other way.

Alberta’s success depends on partnership with the province.”

Thank you for that introduction, Nancy (Southern). Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished guests, it is a pleasure to be here with you. Thanks to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce for asking me to be here today.

I am pleased to have the chance to speak to you today about the province’s economy and our place in uncertain times.

The global population is growing, and its needs and wants are expanding too. We have 7 billion people on this planet, and many of them aspire to a higher standard of living.

And those who already enjoy it want to do so more responsibly. They want to mitigate the impact of their consumption, and they expect producers to respond.

The world needs food and energy, in greater quantities with fewer consequences for the environment.

Alberta is uniquely placed to meet this demand and excel, despite the short-term negative impact of our neighbours’ woes on our finances.

We can become preferred suppliers on a global scale.

The mechanisms we need to achieve this are already in place.

Our agricultural sector maintains a sterling reputation. And our energy industry is at the leading edge in production, innovation, technology and compliance, all areas this government is working to improve even further.

In both areas, we have a skilled workforce capable of expanding production in an environmentally and socially responsible, and economically sustainably manner. Our resources are therefore not just profitable, but strategic.

Simply put, Alberta is opportunity. And so long as we begin laying the foundations now to establish this province as an international hub for commodities and expertise, this will remain true for a long time come.

But we can’t forget why we are doing this.

Our search for new markets can never overshadow our highest priority: improving the quality of life for all Albertans.

It is our responsibility to ensure that every Albertan shares in the benefits our capabilities afford us.

The wider we spread prosperity, the more we gain.

You understand this as well as I do, which is why I have been saying “we” all along.

Quality of life is not purely a matter for government. In a place as independent-minded as Alberta, the private sector plays a major role.

Many of the individuals in this room have achievements that go far beyond the professional sphere. You sit on the boards of non-profits, generously provide them with financial support and tap your personal networks to find still more.

You devote a significant part of your lives to giving back, strengthening the bonds that hold Calgary together by reaching out to the less fortunate in love and compassion, in the hope of making a positive change in their lives. You make a difference in this city every single day.

Government must support your efforts by making things easier for you, so you can do the same for others, and complement the public sector’s work.

There is one way to go about this: growing Alberta’s economy.

Expanding industry, investing in innovation and tuning our tax structures to support business ? these are the methods we use to fund our public services and deliver community supports.

These are also the tools we need to build Alberta’s wealth and create opportunities, for philanthropy, for personal fulfillment and for nurturing the community relationships that make Calgary a city worth living in.

Despite the tenuous world economy, we can still protect and preserve these aspirations.

Alberta has incredible natural advantages that allow us to accomplish things that no other province can hope to achieve. We can use them to build even as others struggle to stay afloat and that’s exactly what this government will do.

We have the ability and the will to sow the seeds of a brighter future, the one Albertans have told us they want.

During our recent public roundtables on the budget, Albertans overwhelmingly indicated that health and education remain their highest priorities.

They expect high-quality public services, a comfortable standard of living and fiscal responsibility, without deep cuts.

We can deliver, without soaring expenditures and long-term debt.

Alberta has the distinction of being the most economically free jurisdiction in North America.

We have low unemployment, strong job growth and a reliable economic engine, positioning us to lead Canada.

Our tax regime is one of the most competitive in the developed world.

Even as other economies flounder, we are attracting investment and skilled workers.

Our small businesses are second to none, accounting for almost a third of provincial GDP and over three-quarters of all enterprises with employees.

And our large businesses continue to thrive and invest in innovation.

Of course, not everything is coming up roses. We have a tough budget ahead of us.

The costs of core services like health care and education continue to grow.

And our largest trading partners are weighed down with unsustainable debt loads, anaemic growth and high unemployment. Alberta can’t help being affected to some degree.

In the current fiscal year, provincial revenues will be $1.2 billion more than predicted, thanks mostly to increased land lease sales. However, our forecasted deficit will be $3.1 billion, $1.8 billion higher than first quarter projections.

This is largely due to international factors beyond our control. The US, our main customer, remains weak. American debt now exceeds $15 trillion and cross-party efforts to find mutually acceptable spending cuts have led only to more acrimony. Unemployment remains stubbornly high and growth stubbornly low, while a solution seems farther away than ever.

I was in Washington last week and let me tell you, the despair was palpable.

Europe’s troubles add to the mix. Despite the international bailout package the European Union has put together, there is still a strong expectation that Greece will default on its debts. Other EU members such as Italy and Portugal are struggling to avoid the same situation.

And from a provincial perspective, government has seen increased outlays due to disaster relief, especially from the wildfires around Slave Lake, and our renewed commitment to primary education.

We are not living in the best of times, but neither are we mired in the worst. And however grim are partners’ economic struggles, they do not define our destiny.

The Alberta Advantage will ensure we stay in an enviable position of strength.

We will make the most of the province’s unique characteristics to deliver what Albertans want.

We will keep taxes low while maintaining strong public service and a wealth of opportunity.

Our plans for stable, multi-year budgets for these services will bring unprecedented discipline to public spending. Other governments have talked about doing it. We will make it happen.

Hard decisions on the part of past governments have allowed Alberta to eliminate its long-term debt and build up a savings account, the Sustainability Fund, to see us through rough patches.

We will conduct regular budgetary reviews to search for savings wherever we can, managing our finances to protect future Albertans from debt.

And we remain committed to balancing the budget by 2013-14, without the sharp cuts Albertans fear.

This government will never lose sight of Albertans’ needs, or back away from providing supports to our most vulnerable, and services for all, no matter what the outside world throws our way.

We will keep working for Alberta families.

Their hopes and dreams demand no less.

I know this government can surpass them.

Even if the fog of another recession descends, we have a clear path back.

Diversifying our customer base to focus on hungry developing nations is the key to our long-term success.

We must pursue opportunity wherever we find it, searching for new partners in new markets and promoting Alberta on the global stage.

Even as the western world falters, other economies are thriving.

Asia’s star is rising and Asian nations are poised to dominate the 21st century. Best of all, they are eager for our resources and our know-how, particularly in energy.

We can deliver, in a safe, secure and environmentally friendly fashion. But we can’t go it alone.

The rest of the provinces can join our efforts and escape the trap of low growth and high debt, into which so many others have fallen.

Canada is an energy-rich nation, blessed with an incredibly array of resources, from the oil sands to hydro, natural gas, nuclear and renewables.

No single source is better than any other or can stand on its own.

Innovation is the key to developing our capacity to produce them all at competitive rates. Collaboration is the key to developing the infrastructure necessary to get our energy to market. The more the provinces work together to harness and transport their respective resources, the greater our shared prosperity will be. We need a Canadian Energy Strategy.

The provinces must begin a dialogue to develop shared outcomes that their energy systems can serve. Collectively, they should use energy to foster national economic growth and competitiveness, seeking out new markets.

Canadians all face similar challenges notwithstanding the different forms of energy under development such as international market uncertainty, fiscal issues, public opinion, environmental protection and regulatory concerns.

Untangling the web of self-interest that divides this great nation will not be easy, but if the provinces are willing to work together, they can transform Canada into a global energy leader, drawing sustainably on multiple sources in a way that benefits the world and our citizens, without compromising anyone’s quality of life. We can become models for countries dealing with similar issues.

It is time to leave old antagonisms behind.

The oil sands have come in for particularly sharp criticism from the rest of Canada. We must be willing to forgive and forget, to work together for our mutual benefit.

We must ally with the other provinces to attain the greatest possible prosperity, but we can’t dictate terms. This must be a genuinely cooperative endeavour, from which everybody gains.

At the end of the day, we must recall two things:

One is that there is no Canadian Energy Strategy without us.

The world will need fossil fuels for a long time to come. The oil sands, as one of the few energy-rich areas outside the unstable Middle East poised for growth, will be essential, as the International Energy Agency publicly recognized this month.

The second is that there is no Canadian Energy Strategy without our partners.

The infrastructure we need to get our oil and gas to market must cross other provinces’ lands. And the federal and provincial regulations that will inevitably shape how Canada’s environment is protected, how our energy is extracted and how it is transported will require input from everybody to have the greatest net positive effect.

We must rise together. There is no other way.

Alberta’s success depends on partnership with the provinces.

And the health of each and every province is inextricably linked to the strength of the global economy.

On every level, we are stronger together than apart, because far more unites us than separates us.

Although Canada can’t entirely escape the downward pull of its long-suffering trading partners, this doesn’t mean the rest of the country is doomed to suffer, any more than Alberta is.

We have a way out, and it’s time we used it. It’s time to stand up and show others how Alberta and Canada can lead globally on all fronts, from the economy to the environment to energy.

Our shared future Canada’s future is worth infinitely more than our quarrels. Together, we can shine.

To ensure Canadians’ prosperity, the provinces must translate this realization into action. I pledge to you: Alberta’s government will.

Thank you.

Little difference between diluted bitumen and conventional crude affect on pipelines, Alberta review says

Energy Environment

    A study by an Alberta provincial government agency has concluded that diluted bitumen (also known in the industry as “dilbit”) is little different in its effects on pipelines than conventional or ‘non-oil sands derived’ crude oil.

A review of existing studies was conducted by Jenny Been, P.Eng for the provincial agency,  Alberta  Innovates – Technology Futures.  A news release on the website describes Been as a “corrosion specialist.”  The study “concludes that the characteristics of dilbit are not unique and are comparable to conventional crude oils during pipeline flow.”

Link News release and study (pdf) 
Comparison of the Corrosivity of Dilbit and Conventional Crude

Been’s study takes on the contention that dilbit has higher acid, sulfur, and chloride salts and higher concentrations of abrasive solids than conventional crude.  As well, the study looks at the belief that dilbit transmission pipelines operate at higher operating temperatures compared with crude, which would make the dilbit more corrosive. Environmentalists and other critics say  this leads to  a higher failure rate than pipelines carrying  crude.

The study compared the  properties  of  heavy,  medium,  and  light  conventional Alberta crude oils with three dilbit and one dilsynbit (a mixture of conventional gas diluent and synthetic gas) crude.

The review  concludes “that the characteristics of dilbit are not unique and are comparable to conventional crude oils.”

While two of the four dilbit crudes displayed a slightly higher naphthenic acid and sulfur concentration than the conventional Alberta heavy crudes, the review notes that there are conventional crudes on the market that have displayed higher values.  It says while there have been corrosion problems at refineries where the temperature can exceed  200 C, it says “the  much  lower  pipeline transportation temperatures, the compounds are too stable to be corrosive and some may even decrease the corrosion rate.”

The study also says “sediment  levels  of  the  dilbit  crudes  were  comparable  to  or  lower  than  the conventional crudes, except for a dilsynbit crude, which showed more than double the quantity of solids than most other crudes, but was still well below the limit set by regulatory agencies and industry….Erosion corrosion was found to be improbable and erosion, if present, is expected to be gradual and observed by regular mitigation practices.”

The study’s recommendations note that it is a review and “It has to be understood that this was a high-level review and a focused, peer-reviewed study has not been conducted.   The scope of the work did not include interviews with industry, regulators, or colleagues.”

It calls for the industry to create a database that would further study that differences between dilbit oils and conventional crude oils,  including further study of sludge formation and deposition in the pipeline and the links, if any,  “on sludge chemistry to pipeline sludge formation and sludge   corrosivity,   including   the   ability   of   the   sludge   to   support   microbial populations.”

Been says in the study that Enbridge supports an industry working group on pipeline corrosion management  that is  “addressing these issues by correlating sludge corrosivity with a chemical and microbial geochemical characterization of the sludge.   The work is further considering and optimizing monitoring technologies to enable measurement of the effectiveness of mitigation treatments.  It is recommended that this effort will continue to be supported.”
   
While the study is a review of existing knowledge on diluted bitumen and conventional oil in pipelines,  Been’s introductory remarks clearly show a bias in favour of the bitumen sands, saying, before the Keystone XL project approval was delayed by the U.S. State Department, “TransCanada Pipeline’s (TCPL’s) $13 billion Keystone pipeline system will provide a secure and growing supply of Canadian crude oil to the largest refining markets in the Unites States.”

Been also notes

Environmental  groups  opposed  to  the  pipelines  continue  to  find  material  to  fuel  their concerns: the more than 800,000 gallons of oil spilled into the Kalamazoo River in Michigan last year came from the Cold Lake oil sands region, and the Exxon Mobil spill of 42,000 barrels of oil in the Yellowstone River may have contained dilbit.   Protestors against the Keystone pipeline are gathering in demonstrations across North America leading to mass arrests and drawing widespread attention.

The arguments of these environmental groups don’t go unheard with congressmen and other government officials, who have iterated reported statements and concerns.  The United States Department of States (DOS) has spent the last three years in review with the industry, scientific community, and other interest parties (including numerous public meetings), evaluating the purpose and need for the Project (pipeline), alternatives, and the associated potential environmental impacts.   The result was issued on August 26, 2011 in a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), a comprehensive, detailed volume of work that is available to the public. Public hearings were held and online comments were accepted.

Been notes that as part of the Keystone assessment, the US  Department of Transportation’s  Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued 57
Project-specific Special Conditions above and beyond the requirements of the United States pipeline code for  Keystone XL. Been says TransCanada agreed to the incorporation of the 57 conditions and said would result in a pipeline with a greater degree of safety than typical domestic pipelines.

Environmental groups said the 57 conditions on Keystone were not sufficient, Been noted and the report goes on to say:

Alberta Energy Minister Ron Liepert considers it a challenge of combating emotion with facts, and assures that the facts could be obtained without too much difficulty.  Concerns continue to surface in the media and in the face of few factual studies and a strong confidence in …  tracking statistics that dilbit is not more corrosive than conventional oil, corrosivity claims continue to be used as fuel by certain environmental groups. 

Yet if Enbridge and other energy companies are still working on pipeline corrosion, as Been notes, then there are still problems to be solved.

Given the pro-Keystone statements in the Been’s paper, it is clear that a definitive, independent study is needed on the effects of  diluted bitumen in a pipeline, one that doesn’t come from either a pro-energy industry point of view, nor one conducted by an environmental group that would bring criticism from the energy industry.

Until there is such an independent study, the doubts of the environmental activists must be balanced with assurances coming from the energy industry.

 

TransCanada agrees to reroute Keystone XL around sensitive areas

Energy Environment Politics

TransCanada Corporation announced Monday that it will reroute the controversial bitumen pipeline around environmentally sensitive areas in Nebraska.

At a news conference, in the state capital, Lincoln and in a news release, posted on its website, the company said that it supports proposed Nebraska state legislation that would ensure a pipeline route will be developed in Nebraska that avoids the environmentally sensitive Sandhills region.

Alex Pourbaix, TransCanada president for Energy and Oil Pipelines said, “”I am pleased to tell you that the positive conversations we have had with Nebraska leaders have resulted in legislation that respects the concerns of Nebraskans and supports the development of the Keystone XL pipeline…I can confirm the route will be changed and Nebraskans will play an important role in determining the final route.”

The company says it will work with the US State Department and Nebraska’s Department of Environmental Quality will conduct an environmental assessment to define the best location for Keystone XL in Nebraska. “We will cooperate with these agencies and provide them with the information they need to complete a thorough review that addresses concerns regarding the Sandhills region.”

TransCanada said.

The decision comes just four days after last Thursday’s decision by the State Department to postpone consideration of the pipeline project to allow the agency to look at alternative routes.

The 2013 decision date would also avoid the US presidential election cycle which is beginning to ramp up at this time.

In the news release,

TransCanada emphasized the safety measures it is taking on the project.

Construction of the pipeline in Nebraska would consist of five or six new pump stations and over 275 miles of new pipeline. The project is expected to employ over 2,200 construction workers in the state.

Keystone XL will be safe, built with high strength steel and with the highest safety standards of any pipeline in North America. 21,000 sensors monitor the length of the pipeline by satellite 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, with data refreshed every five seconds. If there is a problem, automatic shut-off valves can be activated in minutes – shutting off the flow of oil.

“The U.S. Department of State announced last Thursday that further assessment of alternative routes for Keystone XL was needed in Nebraska to move forward with the National Interest Determination. Today’s proposed legislation is a critical step in making this happen,” Pourbaix added. “The safe and reliable operation of our pipelines and all of our infrastructure has been TransCanada’s priority for 60 years. This commitment will continue to guide us toward a positive outcome in Nebraska.”

The pipeline would carry bitumen from the Alberta bitumen sands to refineries in Texas.

Editorial: Any one who believes the Northern Gateway can be fast tracked is out of touch with reality

Editorial

In the past few days there has been a lot of  comment from politicians, pundits, columnists and business analysts about “fast tracking” the Northern Gateway pipeline project now that the United States has postponed  approval of the Keystone XL pipeline.

If anyone wanted proof that these people are completely out of touch with reality, the past three days has proven it beyond any reasonable doubt–and it has absolutely nothing to do with politics.

For the purposes of this editorial, let’s assume, just for the sake of argument, that there was no opposition, but one hundred per cent support for Enbridge’s  project to build the pipeline from the Alberta bitumen sands to the port of Kitimat. Let’s assume that the Minister of Natural Resources, Joe Oliver,  was successful, as he is quoted today, in expediting the approval process by the Northern Gateway Joint Review Process. 

After all that, could the Northern Gateway be “fast tracked?”

No.

Let’s ignore, for this argument, any of the objections that the environmental movement has raised against the pipeline.

Let’s instead take one argument that Enbridge has used to promote the pipeline project, that the Northern Gateway is another  “national dream,” the equivalent of building the Canadian transcontinental railway more than a century ago.

The problem with the majority of economists, as always,  is that they think that they are dealing with  a spreadsheet not the real world. Just move everything from the Keystone column to the Northern Gateway column.  The bitumen goes to China instead of Texas, and the money rolls in.

The problem with cabinet ministers like Joe Oliver and Jim Flaherty,  proponents of fast tracking the pipeline, is that either they are not getting the proper briefing notes or they are ignoring those briefing notes.  (That is scary when it comes to Flaherty since he is supposed to be guiding the Canadian economy).

As noted earlier, the business columnists and analysts don’t even bother to read the technical studies posted by Enbridge on the Northern Gateway Joint Review site.

The bitumen pipeline is planned to cross 1,172 kilometres of challenging terrain from the bitumen sands to Kitimat. The parallel condensate pipeline is planned to cover 1,172 kilometres from Kitimat to the bitumen sands
.
Why does Enbridge call the  pipelines the equivalent of the great railway construction of the nineteenth century?

The pipelines will have to cross some of the most rugged territory on this planet;  mountain ranges, including the Rocky Mountains, The Bulkley Ranges, the Coast Ranges.

 Even the valleys and plateaus the pipeline must cross are considered geologically unstable.

The weather is often terrible.  Rain.  Snow.  More rain.  Wind storms. Lots and lots of rain.  The pipeline will come to close to Lakelse Lake, just east of Kitimat, that has a Canadian record for a one day snowfall, 118 centimetres.

Just ask DriveBC how difficult it is to maintain the highways in this region, highways that have been around for at least 60 years and where the engineering has improved over those decades from the tracks my family drove when I was a kid.  Washouts happen, even in “mild” years.

Then there’s the possibility of earthquakes. As Enbridge, correctly, points out, the tectonic plates where the major quakes can be triggered are far off shore and at least according to the maps, the pipeline is not in  a quake zone. Yet Kitimat was badly shaken by the  magnitude 9.2 1964 Good Friday  earthquake in Anchorage, thousands of kilometres away. 

So terrain, weather (summer or winter) and even earthquakes could hold up construction.  

The building of the Canadian Pacific Railway was held up, not just by the challenging terrain but by the Northwest Rebellion,  financial mismanagement by the CPR, (they ran out of money) and political scandal. That was in the nineteenth century when health and safety regulations were non existent and no environmental precautions were required. 

Some of the first locomotives and rolling stock were not built for crossing some of the biggest mountain ranges on Earth.

Yes the CPR was built. It didn’t come in on time and on budget. The CPR certainly wasn’t “fast tracked.”

In the end one has to wonder if any of the politicians, pundits, columnists and analysts  who are so certain they can  fast track the Northern Gateway pipeline have attempted a home renovation.   Perhaps they should try to finish their basements before pronouncing on building a pipeline fast tracked across the west.
   

   

Harper says oil to Asia “important priority,” Oliver wants to expedite Gateway Joint Review process

Energy Politics

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has told reporters at the APEC summit in Hawaii that pushing Canadian energy products to Asia are an “important priority” for his government given the postponement of the Keystone XL pipeline project.

Reuters reports from Honolulu:

“This does underscore the necessity of Canada making sure
that we are able to access Asia markets for our energy
products,” Harper told reporters on the sidelines of the
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum.


“That will be an important priority of our government going
forward and I indicated that yesterday to the president of
China.”

A couple of hours earlier, the industry newsletter Platts quoted Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver as saying he wanted the Northern Gateway pipeline approval process expedited and limited to just one year.



Platts quoting a CBC interview (the quote, at this point is not on the CBC website story about Oliver) says:

Canadian Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver said November 13 he wants a regulatory decision by early 2013, a year ahead of the current schedule, on Enbridge’s Northern Gateway project to expedite the shipment of Alberta oil sands crude to Asia….

“The Chinese are ready to buy,” he told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. “The issue is building the infrastructure to get our resources to China.”

To that end, Oliver said he now expects Northern Gateway’s hearings to be completed within a year of starting in January 2012.

While insisting that he will not interfere in the Northern Gateway process, Oliver said it is a “fundamental strategic objective” of the Canadian government to diversify its customer base for oil beyond the United States.

Oliver apparently made his statement before Stephen Harper was scheduled to meet with US President Barack Obama.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Keystone XL decision – more questions than answers: Blog

A blog by Edmonton based, University of Alberta business professor Andrew Leach, Keystone XL decision – more questions than answers, analyzes the Keystone postponement through the rose coloured glasses we see often from Alberta (referring, of course, to the provincial flower, not the political party) and is more intelligent than what we’ve seen from the business press across Canada.

Interestingly Leach says:

It took exactly 3 minutes after I first heard the news for me to hear
someone say, “if they don’t want our oil, we’ll send it to China!”
Surprisingly, it took another 3 hours for me to hear someone make
reference to letting Americans freeze in the dark

And later, Leach goes on to advise Albertans:

If Alberta wants to grow oilsands production beyond about 3 million barrels per day, we are going to need others to accept infrastructure in their backyards to get it to market. In the past, landowners along 1000s of miles of pipeline would have no easy way to come together and oppose the project – that has all changed and if you don’t believe me, ask the 4000 people who have signed up to intervene at the Northern Gateway Joint Review Panel hearings, or the 10000+ people who converged on the White House to oppose Keystone XL.

Editor’s Note: Leach was part of a wide ranging Twitter debate after the Keystone XL was postponed. A key article that sparked the debate was a piece in the New York Times by Michael Levi, that talked about NIMBYism in the Keystone case, A Shortsighted Victory in Delaying the Keystone Pipeline.  That three minute record seems typical of the attitude on Twitter from many Albertans, who assume that the Northern Gateway pipeline  will go ahead.

‘Keystone Cops’ crippling U.S. economy: National Post

Energy Politics

Diane Francis, writing in the National Post, in Keystone Cops’ crippling U.S. economy,  a wide ranging piece attacking the decision to postpone the Keystone XL pipeline, makes her contempt for all the people of northern British Columbia pretty clear in her push to get the Northern Gateway pipeline going

The other priority is to fast-track the proposed pipeline through British Columbia to the West coast to ship oil to Asian markets. The aboriginal claims must be settled financially and generously as quickly as possible before the trans-national non-state players in the environmental movement organize them and stop the pipeline.

Editor’s note: Why do the business columnists across the Canadian media continue to believe that the people of northern British Columbia, aboriginal and non-aboriginal, are so stupid and helpless that they are under the thumb of the so-called “trans-national non-state players in the environmental movement” rather than local residents concerned about the environment where the live, work and play?? (Sounds like an editorial, which will be forthcoming)

Flaherty talks tough with U.S. in wake of Keystone pipeline delay : reports

Energy Politics

Finance minister Jim Flaherty is “talking tough” according to the Globe and Mail’s Steven Chase  and threatening the Americans with the Northern Gateway pipeline in the wake of the postponement of the Keystone XL project.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty [is] warning the postponement could kill the project and accelerate this country’s efforts to ship oil to Asia instead.

“The decision to delay it that long is actually quite a crucial decision. I’m not sure this project would survive that kind of delay,” Mr. Flaherty told Bloomberg News. “It may mean that we may have to move quickly to ensure that we can export our oil to Asia through British Columbia.”

The original Bloomberg article also reports:

Flaherty, 61, will travel later this week to Beijing, where he will discuss increasing energy exports to China and facilitating investment in Canadian natural-resource assets. Enbridge Inc. (ENB) has proposed building a pipeline, called Northern Gateway, that would transport crude from Alberta’s oil sands to Canada’s Pacific coast, while Kinder Morgan Inc. plans to expand its Trans Mountain route to do the same.