pipeline

Concerned citizens blocked a highway in Ontario on May 6th to raise the alarm about Enbridge's controversial plans to ship tar sands bitumen through the 37-year old Line 9 pipeline.

The “90-for-90” blockade caused a temporary traffic delay where Line 9 intersects Highway 6 between Guelph and Hamilton. Forty people held the space for ninety minutes to represent the “ninety significant spills” Enbridge pipelines had in both 2009 and 2010.

Participants gave out homemade muffins to drivers held up by the blockade to apologize for the inconvenience.

“The blockade was a necessary step because the Canadian government has gone to extreme lengths to ensure that there is no public debate on Line 9,” says Elysia Petrone, media liaison and participant of the 90-for-90 blockade.

According to a new study to be released today the risks associated with the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline are significantly higher than presented by the company in its project reporting. The study, conducted by Simon Fraser University's School of Resource and Environmental Management, found that in three categories - tanker transport, marine terminal facilities, and pipelines - oil spill predictions based on an international oil spill model (the US Oil Spill Risk Analysis, OSRA) are vastly greater than those based on Enbridge estimates.

In the category of tanker transport, the analysis predicted British Columbians can expect to see one oil spill every 10 years. Enbridge estimated such spills would only occur once every 250 years.

According to Enbridge, pipeline spills are only expected to occur 25 times over a 50-year span. The new analysis predicts 776 pipeline spills over the same period - 31 times more frequently.

Canadians you will need to brush up on those resume writing skills and sharpen your pencils because it is time to fill out your 10-page applications to get permission to send in your comments about another oil pipeline.

And as of Monday, April 15^th, you have less than five days left of the 14 days the National Energy Board (NEB) allows to do it. The deadline is noon on April 19^th.

The permission-to-comment application consists of 10 pages of essay-style questions that should be submitted with a resume and references to backup your claim that you have a right to participate in the Line 9 pipeline public hearings.

Enbridge's 37-old Line 9 is being reversed to pump 300,000 bpd (barrels per day) of oil and bitumen from Alberta's tar sands through southern Ontario and Quebec.

“Since when does someone’s resume determine if they have the right to be concerned about what’s happening in their home community?” asked Keith Stewart of Greenpeace Canada.

The depth of the Canadian government’s tar sands PR strategy was further revealed yesterday in a collection of nearly 1,000 pages of emails between Canadian diplomats in the United States. The correspondence dates back to August 2011 when protests movements focused on the Alberta tar sands began to spread across the continent. Toronto-based conservation group Environmental Defence obtained the documents through access to information legislation.

In an effort specifically designed to promote the Keystone XL pipeline south of the border, the government has been targeting journalists from major American news outlets, including the New York Times, Los Angeles Time and prominent trade publication E & E Daily, in order to “develop Canada’s network of reporters covering energy issues.” Canadian diplomats took reporters to lunch and then filed reports about strengthening the relationship between diplomats and journalists.

Chris Plunkett, a spokesperson for Canada’s Washington embassy, indicated these efforts were just par for the course when it comes to activities that have an impact on the Canadian economy. He said the Canadian government “strongly supports the expansion of the Keystone pipeline and the embassy continues to advocate for its approval which will contribute to energy security and economic growth for both Canada and the U.S.”

Adding emphasis to apparent intentions to sway American media, a series of emails going all the way up to Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird shows the extent of the Conservatives’ response to negative media attention. An editorial in the New York Times that maligned the Keystone project prompted the department to draft a letter to the editor signed by Canadian Ambassador Gary Doer.