THE PRIME MINISTER MUST NOW DECIDE..

The recent NEB listening panels ,  confirmed  that communities  will not ‘grant permission’ to locate  the ill-conceived Kinder Morgan  dilbit infrastructure  in our busy ,environmentally  related, rich, business income and tax revenue waters .This result  basically confirms PM Trudeau’s recent comment …that “after due deliberation… governments grant permits…and ultimately communities grant  permission”.

Subject to the Panel recommendartion to the NEB…our government now must ‘deliberate’ until they come up with a publically acceptable plan to export Alberta oil . Our PM did offer to mediate   in the pipeline in review… While climate change matters are decided…we must  export dilbit…in the National Interest !

Where is the location that offers the  least likelihood of a dilbit spill ? Once that location is determined  the PM can make his decision…

 

The simpler the better. Some have suggested to build just ONE PIPELINE system from Alberta to a loading terminal location that provides more open access to the Pacific .

WHISTLE PAST THE GRAVEYARD…

 

Attachment shows how a citizen responded to a bunker spill on Ambleside Beach(West Vancouver)…Sep 26,1973…in case you’ve forgotten…People in Victoria can visit the NEB ‘listening’ panel Tuesday…take this along and ask Kinder Morgan …….how  THEY will to clean up that inevitable dilbit spill…along Victoria and Gulf Islands beaches…the folks in Puget Sound likely are not happy with this TMX crazy plan…At least the Washington people(George Washington University) had  an extensive risk assessment produced (2010/2014, EPA funded) that attempted to show the probability of an oil leak  In the Salish Sea…What has our  Provincial and Federal Government have done ? Ask them !….

For those interested….here’s the risk assessment link..

https://www.seas.gwu.edu/~dorpjr/VTRA/PSP/FINAL%20REPORT/PSP%20FINAL%20REPORT%20-%20DRAFT%20012214%20-%20HQ.pdf

Of course…it’s easier to whistle  past  the graveyard, !!…    So much for our Prime Minister’s promise to use science when deciding….or will he ,this time, live up to his latest quip…that ‘governments grant permits…and communities grant permission..”.. before it’s too late….

 

The message I heard when attending the North Shore listening panel meeting ,Aug19,2016…’offered little “community  permission”…??

Looks to me like he’s given the public a chance to chat in these panel gatherings…and therefore will claim that I have lived up to the promise to let the public have their say…but now watch for the decision to agree to KM’s nutty plan…come December.

Hope I’m wrong…!

NEB PANEL AUG 19,NVD HALL

Following are my speaking notes ..p/a system ??…my effort overall , C- .

My name is….

Thanks for this opportunity to address this audience and the panel…

Imagine this ‘hypothetical ‘ scenario….Great Pipelines  Inc.( call them GPI), today ,  presents a proposal to Lower Mainland group council session, to build a dilbit loading terminal, in Burnaby,…just east of second Narrows CN rail bridge…an accompanying 1100 km transmountain pipeline…terminating  at a  mountainside tank farm in a Burnaby residential neighbourhood, all for export via comparatively large  Aframax size  dilbit tankers….
Can anyone guess at the reception for GPI..…after hearing about this   ill-conceived scheme !

Forget it !!

Now fast forward …what went so wrong. Did Kinder Morgan, ever  have  courtesy meeting to advise local communities of their plans…This would  slow down the process…we(KM)  know how to deal with public hearings process…and we expect  approval of our proposal ,since it will likely be declared a project of ‘National Interest’…and therefore can receive prompt government approval..

As local folks started to hear about the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline(NGP)…and the skeptical northern BC  response…because of concerns about dilbit spills in Douglas Channel…and the tricky exit channels ,as the dilbit laden tankers worked their way out to the open Pacific.

Similar concerns soon were expressed by the southern BC public…during the local Trans Mountain NEB public hearings…but no one heard…and few were allowed to express their concerns. The hearings dragged on and on…oops ,there’s a federal election…in sight.

Guess what, suddenly we had a new government with a leader …that has  learned on the job ..he has  offered some promising  counsel …relative to the BC   two  pipelines saga..

Most recently the PM told the public that ‘government grants  permits…but the local community grants permission…”What a relief…We think he’s got it !

What’s left now is to find a way to gain BC approval for a pipeline plan that makes sense…and minimizes the probability of a dilbit spill , which could adversely affect our tourism industry….which brings in $ mullti-billions for our business and tax revenues.

Transport Canada handles matters related to our coastal waters…assign them to deliver a plan that would outline where tankers could travel our coast with relatively minimum probability of creating a dilbit spill situation…Burrard Inlet,the Salish Sea, Douglas Channel and the Great Bear rain forest areas would be excluded…and  the obvious choice that several have suggested…is an open port location ,north of Prince Rupert…which offers open access to the Pacific…and also minimize land spills by building just one combined pipelines system…in a common corridor….simple as that..

There’s one other issue that will be addressed ..that is security…there are scenarios that would not come to mind…so to waken your awareness…see Jack Gin’s paper…which was filed with NEB Aug 18,2015Filing id A583229….or see link

https://docs.neb-one.gc.ca/ll-eng/llisapi.dll/Open/2810973

Thank you for this opportunity to participate in this panel presentation

Carl Shalansky, P. Eng. (Retired)

Blog: https://redfern3359.wordpress.com/

(604) 986-4657

 

Comment…not likely to change anything…the panel will present ‘their take’ on what was presented .…In fairness, the panel was offered little new to work with…we’ll wait and see…I’m guessing that PM will argue that he gave the public a chance to speak(therefore vindicated)…they spoke…a well behaved bunch…and now it’s Alberta’s time for the reward…??? Hope I’m wrong…bets ??

C.

science + COMMON SENSE = SOLUTION

The  BC ‘issues’ are ..…marine spills of dilbit….. Burnaby storage ’tank farm’  location…. the 63 year old pipeline.

The ‘oil sands’ industry yielded $ billions for the Canadian economy (jobs, taxes). Sadly, that industry has not been able to demonstrate effective  , cleanup and recovery procedure of  that inevitable ,real life situation, dilbit spill .. The industry’s  goal must be to ‘more safely’  manage  dilbit infrastructure(pipelines,etc.) and  dilbit tanker routing …

The fact is…that pipelines and tankers are still the best choice for transport of petroleum products .

The Prime Minister’s  promises to listen and use  science …offers a common sense plan.

The PM ,as the ultimate ‘decider’, could instruct the NEB ,In the public interest, to contract  ,NOW, for an expert, independent RISK assessment that identifies  a  pipeline location, showing   the least probability of a dilbit  ‘land’ or a ‘marine’ spill . Without an independent, expert risk assessment ,in hand, the NEB is in no position to offer a scientifically based recommendation to government .

I believe that such a  study would confirm that a ‘single’ pipeline ,terminating at an  open ocean terminal…somewhere near Prince Rupert…would provide us with  a practicable solution to our pipelines dilemma.. ……

 

MEDIATE ,THEN BUILD IT !

Let our LEADERS fly the BC coast…and with shipping traffic/historical  data in hand , challenge themselves  to make their  recommendation about ‘where’ to allow the diluted bitumen (dilbit) tanker facilities/sailings …. Can you guess where dilbit infrastructure and tanker routes would NOT BE RECOMMENDED ??? Try Douglas Channel, Burrard Inlet and the International Salish Sea waters.. How many think an area ‘somewhere north of Prince Rupert ‘ would be chosen to  build one dilbit export facility ??

Billions have been  spent to develop the ‘tar sands’…but sadly little independent science is available about  spilled bitumen in water… Ask our Canadian pipeline industry .Recall the Enbridge , 2010 , ‘Keystone Kops’ Kalamazoo, Michigan,incident and the recent Husky Energy ,North Saskatchewan River ‘boo-boo’  !).

Like it or not , pipelines and tankers are about ‘as safe as it can be’…The BC public MUST BE  offered  the least-risk option !

The BC public sees the need and value of exporting our resources…via our  coastal waters..
OK , Mr.  Prime Minister ,it’s time now to offer your promised ,science supported, ‘pipeline mediation ’ counsel…..and let a West Coast ,bitumen pipeline, be born !

THE B.C. 5 CONDITIONS….

The BC  ‘5 conditions ’ were ‘sort of ‘ dealt with ?………The industry persisted  with its  ill-conceived plan  to build more dilbit infrastructure and increase 7 fold the number of diluted bitumen  laden tankers  in  Burrard Inlet and the Salish Sea…..

 

Let our DECISION MAKERS  fly the BC coast…and with some shipping traffic data in hand (weather, relative traffic volumes, list of historical incidents, etc. ) then be challenged to make a recommendation about ‘where’ to allow the dilbit tanker sailings …recognizing that a dilbit spill could happen…. Can you guess where bitumen infrastructure and tanker routes would NOT BE RECOMMENDED  ???Try Douglas Channel, Burrard Inlet and the International  Salish Sea waters.. Now ,how many think an area somewhere north of Prince Rupert would be chosen ??

 

Governments and industry has devoted billions to development of the ‘tar sands’…but sadly they have shown little evidence about behavior  of spilled bitumen in water…just ask our Canadian pipeline industry (Enbridge and Husky).

 

Like it or not , pipelines and tankers are about as safe as it can be…BUT remember….pipelines don’t fail…PEOPLE FAIL PIPELINES !

 

Yes ,BC sees the need and value of exporting our resources…via BC coastal waters..

Let the ‘modern NEB’ sit down and with some independent , expert, comparative risk reports….and  invite our Prime Minister to offer  his ‘pipeline mediation ’ counsel…

Voila..a pipeline is born !

Carl Shalansky,P.Eng. (retired)

https://redfern3359.wordpress.com/wp-admin/

604 986 4657

 

 

 

MODERN NEB

The new government plans to deliver on  its earlier   promises to use ‘science’ and ‘listen’…..during  the upcoming  Ministerial Review panel, local community , meetings.

As stated in recent correspondence(May 17,2016) with Minister Natural Resources ,The Honourable Minister Natural Resources, Jim Carr… states ”The Government recognizes the importance of infrastructure development…. to move resources to market…..the Government has developed a transition strategy…to enhance engagement of Indigenous Peoples, provide opportunities for Canadians to express their views and to ensure that decisions are based on science and facts.”

Canadians hope that the ‘modernized’ NEB will succeed in recommending  a bitumen export plan, after   listening  to  BC’ citizens’ concerns…and independent, expert , scientists.

After NEB  review…we should expect a publically acceptable bitumen export plan…with  ONE   bitumen pipeline system, storage terminal…and marine route in an open ocean access location…Not Burrard Inlet, Salish Sea…or Douglas  Channel.

The Enbridge and Kinder Morgan proposals are both unacceptable to BC citizens ..and a new better result is anticipated from the modernized, citizen and  science based  NEB recommendation. Let the new government decide…then move quickly to regain our vital export revenues ..

Carl Shalansky, P. Eng. (retired}

604 9864657

 

 

 

 

 

KINDER MORGAN PIPELINE,NOT REQUIRED–AS PROPOSED

Kinder Morgan handy pipeline scheme not necessary ,as proposed !

Everyone acknowledges that a  bitumen spill could ‘happen’ …so why increase that probability…by allowing  the 7 fold increase in the busy  Burrard Inlet …Build one bitumen transport infrastructure system… for bitumen export .Let the scientists study the risks and select where the  likelihood of a tanker spill is least likely to occur. Not perfect..but the BC public would understand …if the NEB openly discussed their recommendation publically. Why not  include ,the seemingly defunct, Northern Gateway volumes also…Alberta waits !

That least-cost KM, bean counter, design should be scrapped. Let the new   ‘modernized’  NEB ,after expert, INDEPENDENT scientific risk-assessment, determine where and who should build the bitumen export infrastructure.

Or do we worry that   some fanatic  ,with a small vessel, loaded with explosives, takes out a bitumen laden tanker under the CN rail bridge… Do we need to have the Canadian Navy escort the bitumen tankers….just in case ??

ARMS LENGTH STUDIES PREFERRED

 

 

Two contractors have been hired by the state(Michigan) to assess the spill risk of … aging oil pipelines (Line 5)…under the Mackinac Straits.

Enbridge agreed to pay $3.58 million to fund an independent risk analysis and alternative analysis ..

(Michigan Attorney General)…Schuette said “We are now taking the next step forward to formally define the environmental and financial risks we face.” …???

see..

http://www.metrotimes.com/Blogs/archives/2016/07/12/enbridge-pipeline-under-the-mackinac-straits-to-be-assessed-for-spill-risk

 

Surely the State can spring for a ‘few mil’ to protect the public from a potential multibillion dollar Straits/Lakes oil  spill..?

Some of us in British Columbia (BC) have argued similarly for an independent risk assessment of proposed Enbridge and Kinder Morgan pipelines proposals in BC.. Our new Prime Minister  talked repeatedly about the need for ‘science’ to help us decide..We’ve  not seen any  expert,independent science ….to assess potential economic and environmental  damages when/if spills occur in our  waters !

Hopefully your study will help you to decide on a course of action…Meanwhile we’d suggest  our leaders initiate studies  be are held more  ‘at arms length’…

WHY WAS ‘MUST ISSUE’ EXCLUDED ?

..my comments focus on issues NOT COVERED in “Playbook’
Discussion 4: After reviewing the full suite of proposed legislation, regulation and policy in the intentions paper, do you have anything to add or comments about gaps, additions or what be done differently and why?
In my opinion ,
1.these new regulations should include a requirement for any wannabe proponent of  new oil transport  facilities to include an  introductory  report explaining how many potentially affected  communities  were consulted, to show that they have  communicated and gained some idea as to the likelihood of public acceptance of the proposed location of facilities…The entire exercise of a hearing is to bring something forward that is in the public/national interest..Enbridge and Kinder Morgan ‘conveniently ‘’ ignored the public input before filing their applications ..and look where that ‘got us!’ One government thrown out   and ..the new Federal government has done little ..except make a few hollow promises ,so far with no results…..
The NEB,were offered these shallow proposals and  had no option but to issue recommendations to government with hundreds of CONDITIONS..
These proposed BC government amendments should include some direction about searching for the best(scientifically) evaluated  facilities (pipelines,tankers)LOCATIONS to ensure that ,with the best science, the proposed  location  will minimize the probability,and the potential of a product spill…and then these ‘nuts and bolts details’ of this proposed ‘amendment ‘ then fit nicely ..
If the ‘’ ‘best’  location issue is dealt with elsewhere..then at least direct the proponents to the appropriate legislation/regulation ! But be sure to include this location evaluation as a must…that must preclude any wannabe pipeline,tankers facilities proposals !
2. I did not see ‘bitumen’ or ‘dilbit’ included in list ?
The proposed amendments in the bill would replace existing spill response provisions in EMA with new requirements for preparing for, responding to and recovering from environmental emergencies.
… the framework for the Province to develop and implement new rules for a comprehensive spill preparedness, response and recovery regulatory regime.