Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I agree with the proposal, the benefits outweigh the risks.

3 (5.9%)

I disagree with the proposal, the risks are too great.

44 (86.3%)

Undecided / don't have enough information to form an opinion

4 (7.8%)

Total Members Voted: 51

[chris gadsden]

http://thetyee.ca/News/2012/08/27/Kalamazoo-Disaster-Files/?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=270812

[Bassonator]

http://www.gatewayisdead.ca/

[Blue_Fox]

I'm damn right against the Northern Gateway Project.

It's not like Alberta's economy is in some serious trouble. I do understand that the money generated from the Northern Gateway Project will help Canada's economy overall, but the risk is far too high since the planned pipeline route cuts across pristine BC wilderness.

Lastly, Enbridge's track record and response to their spills has been a complete JOKE!

[BladeKid]

The federal government's Joint Review Panel of the Northern Gateway Pipeline is coming to Vancouver tomorrow, Monday January 14.

People from across British Columbia have formed an unbroken wall of opposition against this dangerous tarsands pipeline to protect our coast and climate. However, many believe the JRP could still rubber-stamp this project unless we keep up the pressure.

What are you doing at 5pm tomorrow? Over 1,400 people have already signed up on Facebook to join the protest, and this will be a key moment to say "no!" to the Northern Gateway Pipeline. Can you join in?

It begins at Victory Square, Cambie & Hastings Street!

[Matt]

Read how Enbridge witness John Thompson makes the case that an oil could bolster the local economy.  If reading this doesn't change the minds of the 4 people who replied they were in favor of Northern Gateway...

http://www.princegeorgecitizen.com/article/20130227/PRINCEGEORGE0101/302279982/-1/princegeorge/oil-spills-can-benefit-economy-panel-told


Oil spills can benefit economy, panel told
            Comments 
FEBRUARY 27, 2013

PETER JAMES
CITIZEN STAFF
PJAMES@PGCITIZEN.CA
Some businesses in northern B.C. could benefit from an oil spill, according to testimony this week into the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline.

Northern Gateway witness John Thompson told the Joint Review Panel that given what happened after the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska in 1989, clean up crews attending a spill could generate economic spin-offs.

"Part of the evidence in the spill recovery document is, in fact, a lot of those companies in the Alaska communities made more money catering to the clean-up of the spill than they would of under normal circumstances," Thompson said under questioning from the United Fishermen and Allied Workers' Union.

Northern Gateway is seeking approval to build a $6.5 billion pipeline to connect Alberta's oilsands with Asian markets. The proposal includes a terminal at Kitimat and Thompson was answering questions as a witness on the marine emergency preparedness and response panel.

Thompson said in the event of a spill, socio-economic impacts will range from the impact on resources, like the fishery, the introduction of spill response workers into the community and financial compensation until things get back to normal.

He said it's important for the company to talk with communities about spill preparedness well before any pipelines are built.

"It may mean that some communities simply say we don’t want any external workers coming into this community because it would be disruptive," Thompson said. "Well then the spill response approach would be based on precluding workers from those areas."

Although a spill could have a big impact on the fishery, Thompson said compensation and other opportunities - such as working on clean up crews - will ensure people don't lose any income. He said the compensation packages would not just go to those catching the fish but also people working in processing industries.

"The net result of these whole compensation schemes is the idea that at the end of the day, nobody is any worse off than they were beforehand," he said. "So what you would see is that the income levels would remain the same, the source of the income would differ. Instead of getting it directly from sales of product, it would be through the income compensation."

The fishermen's union was the final intervener to address the the marine effects witness panel, but members of the Joint Review Panel did have a chance to ask questions as well. Hans Matthews got straight to the point with his first question - is Northern Gateway confident in its own scientific evidence?

"I think we’ve seen over the course of the last several weeks, there’s a a difference in views about certain effects on certain valued environmental components and social components and that’s quite typical of science for different scientists to debate different theories," consultant Jeffrey Green replied. "Rather than say one is right and one is wrong, the approach that we’ve taken is to say that we do think there are effects, and that we need to take those effects seriously and plan accordingly for that."

Earlier in the hearing the witness panel spent a lot of time talking about the nature of diluted bitumen in water and what conditions could cause it to sink. Matthews asked how confident Northern Gateway was in that evidence as well.

"I won’t get into the philosophical side of things here, but I’ll basically just state that the 30 years experience I have in dealing with oils in general, knowledge of how these oils behave, the work we did in the lab, I have the confidence that the way we’ve described the behaviour of

these oils and modelled the behaviour of these oils, I’m very confident in the

results that we presented," Randy Belore replied.