National Energy Board | Northwest Coast Energy News

Haisla voices at the Joint Review: Rod Bolton

This story presents the unfiltered voices of Haisla chiefs when they testified at the Northern Gateway Pipeline Joint Review hearings on January 10, 2011, at Kitamaat Village, based on the official transcript. There have been minor edits for clarity.

My name is Rod Bolton. I was born here in Kitamaat Village in 1940. My late father’s name was also “Rod Bolton”. My Chief’s name is “Ligeiff” and also was a spokesperson for the late Tony Robinson and also Sammy Robinson now as one of the chiefs of the Beaver Clan.

I can remember as a very young child with my late cousins, Chris Wilson, Yvan Woods, going over the boat on the other side where there was no industries. There was just a beautiful place to go to; to go hunt and to go fish. There’s nothing around us.

I want to show you the area, the bagwaiyas and the wa’wais that I own. It’s a place where we harvest and where we fish for fish and hunt for food. That person up there is my late — John Bolton — that’s the one Sammy was talking about — Chief to see — and right around that area, the Kitimat River, that’s right by Sand Hill – – it’s right by Sand Hill, all the way down. That’s north of — south of Sand Hill, all the way down to Peace Creek — north of Peace Creek. That’s my wa’wais. That’s my trap line, registered under the government.

On June 7th, 1993, I was able to get the name of my late dad passed on, and the chief that’s sitting beside me was the one who put that name on le gare . Like I remember that time where — it was quite an experience for me. I was on the council for the period of probably 14 years or more, though it could be less, and one of the reasons why I didn’t run again was because of health reasons, I wasn’t very well at that time.

While I was in the council I worked, I worked on the trap lines, there was some trap lines that wasn’t registered and I worked on it until we got — we got them trap lines was registered. So I know the areas, I know the names of the area. The area that I have is called the Axta ; Anderson Creek, that’s where my trap line is.

The reason why I brought this up is the pipeline, if it was to be put in place it would run over all the streams that my trap line is on. I’m not an expert at oil but I watch the news of what’s going on. So that’s what I fear, if they ever get that pipeline in there it will do damage to our environment.
Eurocan just packed up and left, what they have that’s a pulp and paper, woods damaged our river, now they talk about this. That is a big concern of mine.

I don’t mind oil, not the oil we talk about but the eulachon oil. That’s what they want, eulachon oil.

I was on the Treaty team pretty near all my time with the council and I knew some of the areas that they were working on. Environmental departments got a lot to do with it, you know, we got the provincial government, we got the federal government.

As we speak, we don’t have any representatives here from the federal government. They are back east, they’re in Ottawa area. If they have environmental department then we haven’t seen them; they haven’t approached us.

We don’t want surprises; it happened in the past. When they issued out permits in our area we weren’t involved. We are the stewards of our land, we look after the land. If it’s gone it’s not going to come back again. We seen it in places like Alaska, Mexico, Russia, like what our Chief here said, we’re not — we’re peaceful people, we like to deal with it, to deal with our concerns.
I worked in Alcan for 32 years and I retired in 1998, it doesn’t mean that I stopped fishing, I still go out. Every chance that I get I like going out and bringing my grandchildren along with me and try and teach them.

One of my experiences, when my late father was — was going out with him getting trees; I can remember the cedar shakes that we made to make a smokehouse. So we still use that, we use that to our benefit to our people.

I think one of the things that we look at of where we get our information or wisdom or knowledge is how they trained us because we didn’t have anything and that’s experience and that’s what it brings to the table and that’s what we try to pass on to the younger ones, so they’ll be able to survive in this land, in this day of age.

We used to go to my wa’wais every chance we get, my dad and I, and there’s still fish that goes up there, there’s still some coho and there’s still some kinks that goes up there, trouts.

One of the comments — one of the — our people said was on the lower Axta area it was very important progress for people, everyone used to go there and get their coho for smoking. Every time there was a flood in the river the cohos would get washed down and they go up them small streams and our people knew that, so we were prepared for that.

When I got my wa’wais, my name, it was passed on to me by my late father from his mother and from his father; so that’s how it works. That’s how our system works. So when the name goes to a person like Sammy and I, the trap line goes with them, the wa’wais goes with them and there it becomes stewards of the land; that’s how it works.

Like what Sammy said, the oldest sister is the one that inherits the name and if it doesn’t take it then it goes to the next, it goes on like that.

One of the things that I learned from my father — late father was — and late Tommy, that you cannot wear the blanket or sit in his chair until the feast is over and it is done with. And there’s different places for seating in our feast hall; it’s all arranged depending on who hosted.

We’re not allowed to be part of the feast when we’re young; it was very serious business and fear that someone would knock somebody over with the soup or trip somebody. They had to either put up a feast or pay a person for that accident.
My sister, Ann Phillips, she lives in Vancouver Island. She’s the one that we call kikilfle , the woman that goes and supports the man, getting the game and buys all the dry goods. That’s her role and that’s her responsibility. The Haisla word for that is kikilfle or moodis (ph) and the people that was there at that time was there to witness what took on.

One of the things that were learned as I was growing up is the stewardship of east wa’wais. In order for me to go to Sammy’s wa’wais, if we want to harvest anything, we had to go to the person and ask permission. That’s how they could monitor it and be good stewardship and make sure that things are not overfished or people go there and clean it out. So that’s our culture.

We want to get back to the river. We take a look at what was brought up
— what Sammy brought up, the eulachons. They was — I’ve seen that eulachons. I know what Sammy’s talking about. It was plentiful. We still had a system how we harvest the eulachons.

I can relate to my late father speaking to me about the sea, sea to sea. He’d be the first one to drive piles, to harvest the eulachons. Nobody would drive piles, just him. And after he gets eulachons, he’d invite everybody to have that feast. And when they’re ready 24 hours later, they would say “Go; go harvest,” and everybody would go.

We talked about this in our group. That’s part of conservation, to let some escape so they can come back year after year. That’s how we conserve our fish, our clams, our cockles. We were taught that.

I think one of the points in all our areas, all our progress, everything is written down. On the book that we have it’s called Haisla Land, Nuyem Stories. There’s a lot of people who worked on this. We worked on it, and all the names are on the back of it. So we understand and know what it’s all about. It’s education for the younger generation and how it had — how it passes on to names.

I have before me the — the cycle of fish that goes up these streams. We have sprint salmon. We have coho. We got pink salmon. We have deer. We have black bear. We have geese. We have ducks. We have cedar bark, crab apples, marten, beaver and berries. All those we harvest.

That’s what I do in summertime; I go out and prepare for that and my daughter is the one that picks wild crab apples for me. So that’s what we do when we prepare.

One of the things we talked about, as Jennifer was — the trap lines and how I worked on it and when my late father passed away, I was able to get some of his stuff from a box where he kept all his papers and that’s where I found an old trap line registration. And it wasn’t like paper like this. It was like a skin and how thick it was and I showed it to J. Powell. Passing on down names, that’s how far back it
goes.

One of the things that I address is that if we see a spill of oil in our area, it’ll never recover. There’s no way of cleaning it up. I seen it. I got a friend in Alaska who’s going through all this. It still hasn’t recovered. That is our concern here, why we gather here.

And with that, I’d like to thank you for the time. Thank you very much.

Environmental groups re-issue poll, showing BC worried about US, Chinese control of natural resources

A coalition of BC environmental groups have re-released a poll from last spring showing that almost 75 per cent of British Columbians are worried about foreign investment in Canadian natural resources. The poll also shows that only a small minority of British Columbians (15%) are concerned about charitable funding provided by US philanthropic foundations to Canadian environmental groups.

The poll was conducted by Strategic Communications in April 2011 and commissioned by the following groups: BC Sustainable Energy Association; Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society – BC Chapter; Conservation Northwest; Dogwood Initiative; Ecojustice; ForestEthics; Georgia Strait Alliance; Greenpeace; Pembina Institute; Sierra Club BC; West Coast Environmental Law; Wildsight.

The re-release of this poll is aimed at countering a poll last week, commissioned by Enbridge showing wide spread support in BC for the pipeline and an attack ad campaign by the pro-bitumen sands group Ethical Oil, which has been saying that there is too much foreign interference in the Canadian energy regulatory process.

Based on a random online sample of 830 adult British Columbians, the results are considered accurate to within plus or minus 3.4 percent 19 times out of 20.

This poll shows that 47.1% of respondents were very worried and 32.1% somewhat worried about “Americans controlling our natural resources.” Asking if people were worried about China, 39.0 % were very worried and 33.8% were somewhat worried about “China investing in our natural resources.” It shows that 38.3% were “very worried” and 34.2% “somewhat worried” about “China taking or controlling our natural resources.”

The news release from the groups says

“These poll results suggest that the oil lobby’s attacks against environmental groups are out of touch with the true values of British Columbians. The real issue is the unacceptable risk of a foreign-funded pipeline-oil tanker project that would ram pipe through unceded First Nations lands to ship some of the world’s dirtiest oil across thousands of fragile salmon-bearing rivers and streams,” said Will Horter, Executive Director of the Dogwood Initiative. “225 Supertankers a year, many larger than the Exxon Valdez, would need to transit the treacherous fjords of the Great Bear Rainforest, on route to China. This pipeline is all risk and no reward for British Columbians.”

According to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), over the three-year period from 2007-2010 alone, foreign companies poured nearly $20 billion dollars into the tar sands. In contrast, according to blogger Vivian Krause, US charitable foundations have given Canadian environmental groups less than 1.5% of that amount over a ten year period, accounting for all charitable funding on Canadian environmental issues ranging from forest protection to fisheries conservation.

“Funding for environmental charities helps to right the imbalance between ordinary citizens and the financial and political influence of multinational companies in Canada,” said Jessica Clogg of West Coast Environmental Law. “Since 1974, our environmental legal aid services have enabled citizens and community groups throughout BC to participate in resource decisions – like the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline – that would profoundly affect their lives.”

“Canadians value the importance of environmental advocates speaking up for economic development that sustains our communities without destroying the ecology that supports us,” said Sierra Club BC Executive Director George Heyman. “We represent a legitimate Canadian viewpoint that is critical to sound policy-making, particularly when facing the influential, China-backed Enbridge pipeline lobby.”

As with many polls in a polarized situation, there are problems. As Northwest Coast Energy News showed last week, the numbers in the Enbridge-sponsored poll are unreliable for northern British Columbia. The environmental groups’ poll could also be considered suspect by the way the questions were phrased and the order in which they were asked.

Foreign Funding Poll Backgrounder (Data figures from the groups who commissioned the poll)

Oliver releases open letter, attacking “radicals” for stifling Canadian economy

The Minister of Natural Resources, Joe Oliver, released a stinging open letter on Monday, January 9, 2012, accusing what he called “enviromentaists and other radical groups” of blocking Canada’s opportunity to diversify trade and hijacking the regulatory system.

The release of the letter and an interview with Oliver came day before Joint Review Panel hearings on the Northern Gateway pipeline open in Kitamaat Village.

Text of Oliver’s letter (as posted on the Natural Resources Canada site)

Canada is on the edge of an historic choice: to diversify our energy markets away from our traditional trading partner in the United States or to continue with the status quo.

Virtually all our energy exports go to the US. As a country, we must seek new markets for our products and services and the booming Asia-Pacific economies have shown great interest in our oil, gas, metals and minerals. For our government, the choice is clear: we need to diversify our markets in order to create jobs and economic growth for Canadians across this country. We must expand our trade with the fast growing Asian economies. We know that increasing trade will help ensure the financial security of Canadians and their families.

Unfortunately, there are environmental and other radical groups that would seek to block this opportunity to diversify our trade. Their goal is to stop any major project no matter what the cost to Canadian families in lost jobs and economic growth. No forestry. No mining. No oil. No gas. No more hydro-electric dams.

These groups threaten to hijack our regulatory system to achieve their radical ideological agenda. They seek to exploit any loophole they can find, stacking public hearings with bodies to ensure that delays kill good projects. They use funding from foreign special interest groups to undermine Canada’s national economic interest. They attract jet-setting celebrities with some of the largest personal carbon footprints in the world to lecture Canadians not to develop our natural resources. Finally, if all other avenues have failed, they will take a quintessential American approach: sue everyone and anyone to delay the project even further. They do this because they know it can work. It works because it helps them to achieve their ultimate objective: delay a project to the point it becomes economically unviable.

Anyone looking at the record of approvals for certain major projects across Canada cannot help but come to the conclusion that many of these projects have been delayed too long. In many cases, these projects would create thousands upon thousands of jobs for Canadians, yet they can take years to get started due to the slow, complex and cumbersome regulatory process.

For example, the Mackenzie Valley Gas Pipeline review took more than nine years to complete. In comparison, the western expansion of the nation-building Canadian Pacific Railway under Sir John A. Macdonald took four years. Under our current system, building a temporary ice arena on a frozen pond in Banff required the approval of the federal government. This delayed a decision by two months. Two valuable months to assess something that thousands of Canadians have been doing for over a century.

Our regulatory system must be fair, independent, consider different viewpoints including those of Aboriginal communities, review the evidence dispassionately and then make an objective determination. It must be based on science and the facts. We believe reviews for major projects can be accomplished in a quicker and more streamlined fashion. We do not want projects that are safe, generate thousands of new jobs and open up new export markets, to die in the approval phase due to unnecessary delays.

Unfortunately, the system seems to have lost sight of this balance over the past years. It is broken. It is time to take a look at it.

It is an urgent matter of Canada’s national interest.

In an interview with CBC News, Oliver expanded his comments, saying there was a marked difference between foreign investors and the radicals.

Oliver said radicals are “a group of people who don’t take into account the facts but are driven by an ideological imperative.”

Not all groups are radical, he says, but some are opposed to any use of hydrocarbons.

While Oliver took aim at foreign funding for environment groups, foreign investment is a major part of the oilsands. American, British, Chinese, French and Norwegian companies have all invested in the oilsands.

The difference, Oliver says, is that Canada needs the foreign capital.

“We don’t have enough capital in Canada to finance it and that’s why there’s a lot of investment from the United States, the U.K., France, and Norway, and other countries, and so we welcome that because we need it,” he said.

Editorial: Just asking: why didn’t anyone object to the Americans at the NEB LNG hearings in Kitimat?

The Joint Review Panel hearings on the Northern Gateway pipeline are less than 48 hours from now. The media are packing their bags and coming to Kitimat (or perhaps Terrace since this town is booked solid).

The propaganda war, and it can only be called a propaganda war, is in full force, driven mostly by right wing columnist Ezra Levant and his Ethical Oil organization, objecting to “foreign intervenors in the pipeline hearings at another site OurDecision.ca

This now seems to have widespread support, in a Twitter debate last night, many even moderate conservatives and even moderate Albertans were saying there is too much foreign influence in the JRP hearings.

I have one question for these people. Where were you in June? On a beach?

It was in June that the National Energy Board held hearings on the first of the three proposed Liquified Natural Gas projects in Kitimat. No media hordes descended on Kitimat. At those hearings only local reporters showed up and I was the only one that stuck through the entire proceedings. (The NEB did approve the export application)

So when the media quote Levant and his spokesperson Kathryn Marshall, the widespread stories about this malevolent foreign influence are inaccurate because they weren’t in Kitimat in June so they didn’t hear all those deep Texas drawls in the hearing room at the Riverlodge Recreation Centre.

Although a lot of good reporters are coming into town this week, they’ll all be gone by Thursday morning when the JRP hearings move on to Terrace.

So in today’s Sun Media papers Levant says:

Who should decide whether Canada should build an oil pipeline to our west coast — Canadian citizens or foreign interests?
That’s what the fight over the Northern Gateway pipeline is about. Sure, it’s also about $20 billion a year for the Canadian economy and thousands of jobs. It’s about opening up export markets in Asia. It’s about enough new tax dollars to pay for countless hospitals and schools.
But it’s really about Canadian sovereignty. Do we get to make our own national decisions, or will we let foreign interests interfere?
The answer should be obvious to any self-respecting Canadian: This is a Canadian matter, and Canadians should decide it.

Why weren’t Levant and the rest of the blue-eyed sheikh crowd (OK they don’t all have blue yes but you know what I mean) across the Rockies here in June objecting to those Americans interfering in Canadian affairs with their plans to export liquefied natural gas to Asia?

Who is behind the Kitimat LNG project? Well, the KMLNG partners are Houston, Texas based Apache Corporation, Houston, Texas based EOG Resources and Encana, a company that originated in Canada but now has extensive operations in the United States and around the world.

The second LNG project, which is now before the National Energy Board, is BC LNG, a partnership between a Houston, Texas-based energy company and the Haisla First Nation here in Kitimat.

The third LNG project is coming from energy giant Royal Dutch Shell.

When are we going to see Ethical Oil and all those conservative columnists objecting to American participation when the NEB holds hearings on the second and third LNG projects?

This goes all the way to the centre of power. Stephen Harper objects to the Northern Gateway hearings being “hijacked by foreign money.” I notice the Prime Minister didn’t object to the hearings in June with American companies Apache and EOG investing in a natural gas pipeline. Cabinet ministers Joe Oliver and Peter Kent are also concerned about foreign influence on pipeline projects. That is they are only worried about possible foreign influence when it comes to the environment. Foreign influences that are building natural gas pipelines and LNG terminal facilities are perfectly fine, thank you.

Blaming “foreign influence”, of course, is one of the oldest dirty tricks in the political playbook. In recent days Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has blamed foreign influence for the demonstrations against the rigged election in that country. In Syria, Bashir al-Assad is still blaming “foreign agitators” for the revolt against his regime. Before they were ousted, both Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and Mohamar Gaddafi of Libya blamed “foreign agitators” for the Arab Spring. Go to Google News and type in “foreign influence” or “foreign agitators” and now that Google News also searches news archives, you can find stories of politicians all over the world blaming foreigners for their troubles going back to the turn of the last century.

It’s just sad to see Canada’s leading politicians and the major media joining that sorry tradition.

Note Natural Gas is not bitumen

Some in the media seems to be puzzled that most of the people in northern British Columbia are not objecting to the liquified natural gas projects. The media seem puzzled that KM LNG has been able to reach agreements with First Nations along the natural gas pipeline routes when Enbridge can’t.

(One factor is that Enbridge got off on the wrong foot with First Nations and things have generally gone downhill from there, leading people in northwest BC to question the general competence of Enbridge management.)

The answer is that natural gas is not bitumen. Natural gas is known factor. Bitumen, despite the thousands of pages of documents field by Enbridge with the JRP, is an unknown factor since there has never been a major bitumen disaster.

The worst case scenario, a catastrophic LNG ship explosion, could cause a huge forest fire. A natural gas pipeline breach under the right conditions could start a big forest fire. The environment of northwestern British Columbia has evolved to deal with fires. After such an incident, nature would take over and the forest would eventually come back. It is likely that the forest would take longer to recover than it would from a lightning strike fire, but the forest would recover. Bitumen leaking into salmon spawning rivers would kill the rivers. Bitumen stuck at the deep and rocky bottom of Douglas Channel would contaminate the region, probably for centuries.

It’s that simple.

Related Terrace Daily No Apology Forthcoming by Gerald Amos

New headquarters for National Energy Board is Shanghai, newspaper says

Energy Politics

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Sunday that moving Canadian oil (really unrefined bitumen from the bitumen sands) from Alberta to China is a priority for his government.

Now, according to the local Black Press giveaway weekly, the Northern Connector, it appears that the Prime Minister has already taken the first step by moving the headquarters of the National Energy Board from Calgary to Shanghai.

Here is the story that appeared in the Nov. 11 edition of the Northern Connector.

Actually, of course, the NEB remains in Calgary and will be holding hearings across the north in early 2012.

Koch owned Flint Hills Resources is intervenor in Northern Gateway Joint Review

Energy Politics

Flint Hills Resources Canada LP, the energy and resources company owned by the controversial American brothers, David and Charles Koch, is one of the intervenors in the Northern Gateway Joint Review process, a check of the JR website shows.

Flint Hills Resources LP Canada registration at NGJR

The two men own Koch Industries, the second largest privately held company in the United States. According to a Forbes article quoted by Wikipedia, Koch Industries has a world wide annual revenue estimated at $98 billion.

Koch Industries website

Northwest Coast Energy News checked the JRP website after an article published online today by Columbia Journalism Review outlined the Koch brothers and their company’s involvement in the Keystone XL pipeline and their extensive holdings in Canada through Flint Hills Resources.

The Koch brothers are active in conservative American politics and numerous media reports say they are chief financial backers of the Tea Party.

Wikipedia says David and Charles have funded and libertarian policy and advocacy groups in the United States.

Since the 1980s the Koch foundations have given more than $100 million to such organizations, among these think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute, as well as more recently Americans for Prosperity.Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks are Koch-linked organizations that have been linked to the Tea Party movement

On Nov. 7, 2011, The Guardian reported that the Koch brothers plan to launch a giant database listing all Americans with conservative leanings in an attempt to influence the 2012 elections, including the presidential race. See Koch brothers: secretive billionaires to launch vast database with 2012 in mind

An interactive from The Guardian lists all the Koch connections.

Koch replies to its critics on the KochFacts site.

NEB approves KM LNG export licence

Energy

The National Energy Board has approved KM LNG’s (also known as Kitimat LNG) application for an natural gas export licence.

A NEB news release says:

The National Energy Board (NEB or the Board) today approved an application by KM LNG Operating General Partnership (KM LNG) for a licence to export liquefied natural gas (LNG) from Kitimat, British Columbia to markets in the Asia Pacific region.

The export licence authorizes KM LNG to export 200 million tonnes of LNG (equivalent to approximately 265 million 10³m³ or 9,360 Bcf of natural gas) over a 20 year period. The maximum annual quantity allowed for export will be 10 million tonnes of LNG (equivalent to approximately 13 million 10³m³ or 468 Bcf of natural gas).

The supply of gas will be sourced from producers located in the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin. Once the natural gas has reached Kitimat by way of the Pacific Trail Pipeline, the gas would then be liquefied at a terminal to be built in Bish Cove, near the Port of Kitimat.

The construction and operation of the pipeline and the terminal will require provincial regulatory decisions.

This is the first application for an LNG export licence that the Board has considered since the de-regulation of the natural gas market in 1985.

In approving the application, the Board satisfied itself that the quantity of gas to be exported does not exceed the amount required to meet foreseeable Canadian demand. The exported LNG will not only open new markets for Canadian gas production, but the Board believes that ongoing development of shale gas resources will ultimately further increase the availability of natural gas for Canadians.

Prior to approving the licence, the Board considered environmental and related socio-economic effects of KM LNG’s application. These effects included matters related to marine shipping, and the proposed LNG terminal and Pacific Trail Pipeline.

The Board also acknowledges the potential economic benefits associated with KM LNG’s project. These benefits include employment opportunities due to the development of the LNG terminal and the Pacific Trail pipeline.

Kitimat mayor Joanne Monaghan said, “I am glad they got it, because now the project can move forward.”

KM LNG is owned by Apache Canada Ltd. (40 per cent), EOG Resources Canada Inc. (20 per cent) and Encana Corp. (20 pre cent). The Front End Engineering for the LNG terminal at Bish Cove is now underway. The companies say a final investment decision will be made in early 2012.

A news release from Apache said:

“The Kitimat LNG project represents a remarkable opportunity to open up Asia-Pacific markets to Canadian natural gas and we’re leading the way in being able to deliver a long-term, stable and secure supply to the region,” said Janine McArdle, Kitimat LNG President. “This export licence approval is another major milestone for Kitimat LNG as we move forward and market our LNG supply. LNG customers can have even more confidence in a new source of supply.”

“Today marks a historic day for Canada’s natural gas industry and this is fantastic news for our project and the communities where we operate. Kitimat LNG will bring revenues and jobs and the associated benefits to Canada,” said Tim Wall, Apache Canada President. “The Kitimat LNG partners are very pleased with the NEB’s approval of our export licence and we’d like to thank them for their support and confidence in the project.”

Text of NEB Decision on KM LNG(pdf)

Shell considering giant floating LNG platform off BC Coast: Alberta Oil

Energy LNG Link

Alberta Oil is reporting that Shell’s plans for a liquified natural gas export facility somewhere on the northern British Columbia coast will likely be a giant floating platform, similar to the platform planned for the coast of Western Australia.

Shell Canada sizes up LNG options offshore B.C.

Although costs, production volumes and timelines haven’t been worked out, industry observers like FirstEnergy Capital are speculating that Shell and its partners are considering building a floating LNG structure off B.C.’s coast. The Anglo-Dutch super-major knows a thing or two about floating LNG projects. In May, Shell received approval from the Australian government for its Prelude floating LNG project. Scheduled to start production in 2016, the Prelude structure will be located in the Browse basin off the coast of Western Australia

The length of the floating prelude platform, at 488 metres according to a diagram released by Shell and reprinted by Alberta Oil, would be longer than the height of the 446.5 metre Skypod/ Space Deck on the CN Tower and longer than the hieght of Kuala Lumpur’s Petronas Tower at 452 metres. (The proportions in the Shell diagram of the CN Tower are not entirely accurate when compared to the information in the Wikipedia entry on the CN Tower)
As reported in April by Alberta Oil Kitimat LNG faces Australian rivals the Western Australian development could rival Kitimat, a point that took up a lot of testimony at the June National Energy Board hearings into KM LNG’s application for an export licence.

NEB gets ready for BC LNG hearings, first step for second Kitimat project

Energy

The National Energy Board has announced it will hold hearings on the second proposed liquified natural gas project, saying, the hearings will “consider an application submitted by BC LNG Export Co-operative LLC (BC LNG) for a 20-year licence to export liquefied natural gas (LNG)
from Canada to Pacific Rim markets.”

Once again under the NEB’s rules of procedure, the hearings will be limited to granting the export licence, with or without conditions and will follow the so-called “market-based procedure” set up for the NEB after deregulation of the oil and gas industry in the late 1980s.

This application is based on projections that the demand for natural gas in Pacific Rim markets will continue to increase substantially over the next 20 years. In its application, BC LNG is requesting authorization to export up to 1.8 million tonnes of LNG annually.

The Board will consider, among other issues, the export markets and natural gas supply, the transportation arrangements, and the status of regulatory authorizations.

However in an apparent departure from the KM LNG hearings where energy lawyers challenged environmental and social issues as not included in the mandate for those hearings, these ground rules say they are now”

The Board will also consider the potential environmental effects of the proposed exportation, and any social effects directly related to those environmental effects.

The public has until Sept. 11, 2011 to register with the board for full intervenor status, request to make an oral statement or to submit a letter of comment.

Letter from NEB to BC LNG (pdf)

KM LNG hearings wrap with concerns over conditions

Energy

The National Energy Board hearings into the application from KM LNG for an export licence to ship liquified natural gas to Asia through Kitimat wrapped up in Calgary Thursday, with the main participants expressing concerns over conditions on the licence proposed by the NEB.

The board panel reserved its decision. No date was given for a possible decision. Unlike the earlier hearings in June which were held in Kitimat, the Phase 2 hearings were held in Calgary and only available to residents of Kitimat by audio webcast

On July 6 and July 8, the board panel issued a list of 12 proposed conditions on the export licence. (The concerns of the Kitimat Rod and Gun were not among the 12. See story here)

Among the conditions the NEB wants to impose are a detailed reporting requirement that would include the name of the LNG tankers loading the natural gas, the quantity of gas and the revenue in Canadian dollars as well as the sales contracts KM LNG may sign with its Asian customers.

Those proposed conditions brought strenuous objections from the proponents of the project, voiced by lead counsel Gordon Nettleton and echoed by other lawyers, saying that the conditions could actually scuttle the entire project. That is because Asian buyers, whether private companies or sovereign (government) agencies, place much stricter emphasis on confidentiality of the agreements than in North America. The lawyers warned that the potential Asian customers could walk away from any deals in favour of less regulated vendors in other countries if the NEB insists on full disclosure, especially if the details could be made public either through the Access to Information Act or by NEB procedures and policies.

Nettleton and the other lawyers recommended a compromise where KM LNG would disclose to the board the total exports each quarter, the aggregate value in Canadian dollars for each quarter, the “heating value” of the aggregate and export totals by destination country.

The lawyers also objected strenuously to conditions proposed to cover environmental and social effects of building the Kitimat LNG terminal and the associated Pacific Trails pipeline.

These include filing a Marine Mammal Protection Plan and answer how KM LNG would react to any potential effects on marine mammals of the ships passing up and down Douglas Channel and the BC Coast.

One of the lawyers for the energy companies wondered why the board panel was interested in the shipping issues.”That’s what shps do, they use
existing shipping lanes,” he said. “Ships do not need permisson [now] to go up
Douglas Channel. [This issue] has been examined bythe appropraite
authorites arnd should be accepted by the board without conditions.”

Other conditions wanted reports on potential effects and probable mitigation efforts for marine mammals, birds, fish and fish habitat, “listed fish and wildlife species,” vessel wake, ballast and bilge water management, fisheries and “First Nations traditional use activities.”

The lawyers mainly objected on legal grounds, since under the hearings for an export licence, (unlike a facility hearing like the Enbridge Joint Review panel) the board is not supposed to be concerned about environmental issues. There were also long, legal arguments whether the pipelines from the shale gas fields to Kitimat where “directly connected” under the legal definition used in the Canadian energy industry. The lawyers also argued that the environmental and social issues addressed in the NEB’s proposed conditions would be covered in parallel investigations by other government agencies, such as a Transport Canada review of the shipping plans for Douglas Channel,

At the same time, all parties pledged that they would be “good corporate citizens” in their undertakings to work with the Haisla First Nation and other residents of the Kitimat region and to respect the local environment.

NEB proposed conditions 1 – 9

A33_-_Letter_to_All_Parties_Phase_II_Update_and_Possible_Licence_Conditions_-_A2A2V5.pdf

NEB proposed conditions 10 – 12

A34_-_Letter_-_Possible_Export_Licence_Conditions-Environment_and_Socio-Economic_Matters_-_A2A3T7_.pdf