McGill Tribune

Why should we, as global citizens, be concerned about a new $5.5-billion pipeline flowing from the Athabasca tar sands in Alberta to Kitimat, a coastal port in north-western British Columbia? First, we are consumers of oil. Second, we need to move from fossil fuels to clean energy in order to prevent global warming. But there are other serious economic, environmental, and social issues at stake.

Enbridge Inc., an energy corporation based in Calgary, Alberta, is the architect behind the Northern Gateway Pipeline. The corporation focuses largely on crude oil and natural gas transportation and distribution.

Enbridge Inc. wants to build two 1,100-kilometre pipelines through which unconventional bituminous crude would flow from Bruderheim, Alberta, to Kitimat, British Columbia; condensate used to dilute bitumen would flow from Kitimat to Bruderheim. At Kitimat the bituminous crude would be loaded onto enormous oil tankers.

These super-sized tankers would then navigate through hazardous, narrow fjords to B.C.’s rocky north coast destined for refineries in China and California.

Besides the powerful oil corporation lobby, the Alberta and federal governments, as well as “Ethical Oil,” the PR booster for oil corporations, are the major actors promoting the Northern Gateway Pipeline. However, their arguments are few, weak, and unconvincing.

Enbridge and the federal government say the Gateway pipeline project would provide new jobs. As great as they make this seem, Gateway would only create approximately 3,000 temporary jobs during construction and approximately 560 permanent jobs in B.C. and Alberta.

B.C.’s coastal seafood and ocean recreation industries currently employ more than 45,000 people. Therefore, for every job the provinces stand to gain, they would be risking 80 existing jobs, a risk that hardly serves as justification for building the Gateway pipeline.

Additionally, pro-pipeline actors have argued that the Gateway pipeline would help alleviate Canada’s reliance on the United States as its only major market for oil. In principle, economic diversification of export markets for energy is a good thing. However, instead of sending the bituminous crude overseas, it makes more economic sense to refine the bituminous crude in Alberta or Eastern Canada and then export the valued-added petroleum products. This way, more permanent jobs and wealth would be created and retained within Canada, and the considerable environmental risks to British Columbia would be avoided.

In addition to the economic and environmental issues raised by the Gateway project, four other key policy issues deserve mention: national interest, national security, fair process, and the rights of indigenous groups

First, why doesn’t Canada have a national energy policy? Oil is a non-renewable resource whose “peak” has passed, which means that new discoveries of oil are insufficient to meet global demand. Therefore, Canada’s national interest would be best served by a national energy policy that will ensure self-sufficiency and measured development of its oil reserves.

Secondly, why has Canada allowed Sinopec—a corrupt state-controlled corporation from China that is directly and indirectly funding the Gateway project—to control Canada’s oil reserves in Alberta? Foreign control of a strategic resource is not in the best interests of national security.

Thirdly, why is the government of Canada waging attacks on environmental charities and citizens who are opposed to the Gateway pipeline and to rapid development of the tar sands by China? These unwarranted attacks are prejudicing the Judicial Review Panel (JRP) of the National Energy Board that is holding environmental hearings on the Gateway project. In the public interest, the JRP needs to act fairly and be unfettered.

Lastly, the federal government seems untroubled by the colossal environmental risks that the Gateway pipeline would impose on the way of life for many First Nations’ communities. The pipeline would cross over 700 fish-bearing rivers in B.C. and endanger the Great Bear Rainforest, a vital sanctuary for wildlife and the world’s last temperate rainforest. Also at risk of pollution are the boreal forest and some of Canada’s most important rivers, an environment in which First Nations have lived sustainably for generations.

The federal government should continue the moratorium on tanker traffic on B.C.’s coastal waters and relegate the Gateway pipeline proposal to the dustbin of ill-conceived ideas.