Humble Dogs

That they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts. Matthew 13:15b

Archive for the tag “Gateway”

First Nations vs Enbridge

Justice Scales on Maple Leaf

Justice is a Canadian Right

Without doubt, the Supreme Court will hear many a case of First Nations vs Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline, Canada, Alberta, BC. I have been conducting a search of Supreme Court rulings Aboriginals/First Nations vs. Crown/Industry. It appears that the court has a very sympathetic judicial ear toward First Nations claims and rights.
See: Aboriginal Rights and Title

When considering; the First Nations land entitlements, the UN Declaration on Aboriginal Rights, The Moratorium on tankers in the BC North Coast and the Coastal Reconciliation Protocol, all seems a done deal in favor of preventing the pipeline project from going through. However:

Given that PM Stephen Harper has this pipeline as a pet project and has all but assured approval to both Enbridge and the Chinese Government along with his disdain for NGOs and his basic denial that the UN declaration has sway under Canadian Law or that the tanker moratorium even exists, should there be suspicion that PM Harper will enact legislation to squelch any decisions, protocols or laws that stand in the way? Since the Supreme Court is appointed, is there a likelihood that he appoints a judiciary more favorable to the Enbridge pipeline position?

In reviewing the decisions of the Courts and the ‘Delgamuukw’ rulings which compel all parties to reaffirm the treaty process through negotiation, and since the British Columbia Treaty Commission has yet to make final rulings on Wet’suwet’en, Gitxsan, and Tsimshian land claims, it seems probable that the settlements with First Nations should precede the final ruling on the Northern Gateway Project. If that be the case, the Supreme Court will definitely become involved and the process could take up to 20 years before its all over.

Two Supreme Court (1997) statements bear special consideration:

1. Aboriginal title lands must not be used in a way that is irreconcilable with the nature of the group’s attachment to the land.

2. In order for the Crown to justify an infringement of Aboriginal title, it must demonstrate a compelling and substantive legislative objective, it must have consulted with the Aboriginal group prior to acting, and in some cases, compensation may be required.

The clause; “and in some cases, compensation may be required.” Could this be interpreted; The Government may infringe on rights and grant compensation regardless of the First Nations opposition?

Advertisements

Panda Pipeline

Panda Pipeline.

Stop the Northern Gateway Pipeline

I will admit that I am not against pipelines. Canada has thousands of kilometers of pipelines criss-crossing this great country of ours. I am against this Northern Gateway Pipeline. Not the pipeline as a means to deliver crude oil, but to the tanker traffic it would bring to the BC North Coast and the ecological, environmental and economical tragedy that will inevitably happen.

British Columbia would absorb all the risks involved with virtually no benefits. 40 permanent jobs, that’s it. Billions in ecological damage, millions in environmental clean-up. Enbridge states that when an oil spill does occur, it is not the oil companies liability. Canada would have to sue the shipping company for causing it. That is copping out.

Help put a Stop to the Northern Gateway Pipeline!

First:
The proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline requires overturning the current federal-provincial moratorium on oil tanker traffic along the coast of British Columbia, and will threaten fragile ecosystems, wilderness and landscapes, including the Great Bear Rainforest.

The Green Party of Canada has a petition to help stop the pipeline from going ahead. Download this petition, have as many people as possible to sign it, and mail it – postage free – to either her Ottawa or Sidney offices. With as few as 25 signatures, Elizabeth can present your petition to the government in the House of Commons.

Please return all signed petitions, postage free, to:

Hill Office
Confederation Building, Room 518
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
Tel: 613.996.1119
Fax: 613.996.0850
Riding Office
1 – 9711 Fourth Street
Sidney, British Columbia
V8L 2Y8
Tel: 250.657.2000
Fax: 250.657.2004

Please email elizabeth.may@parl.gc.ca or call 613-996-1119 if you have any questions.

Axis of Oil

“Axis of Oil” Poses Significant Problems and Questions for Canada

Prime Minister’s Focus on Money and Markets Ignores Issues of Energy and National Security, Human Rights, Syria, and More

“Canadians simply cannot and should not make the dramatic economic and social shifts Harper is aggressively orchestrating without more information.”

Hilites:

  • Canada becoming a colony of China.
  • Shipping jobs off-shore.
  • Compromises Canada’s foreign Policy.
  • During the 2008 federal election campaign, Stephen Harper promised he wouldn’t export raw crude to countries with weaker environmental standards than Canada, protecting Canadian jobs.
  • The oil and gas sector already has nearly two times the amount of foreign investment compared to the average in other areas of our economy with twice the percentage of profits leaving Canada.
  • Concerning Chinese oil sands investments, estimates vary because of the lack of transparency, but it’s at least $12 billion and as much as $20 billion.
  • Not only jobs will be lost, but energy security and even national sovereignty are at stake. As Anthony Campbell, former head of the Intelligence Assessment Secretariat of the Privy Council Office, has pointed out: “We are sitting ducks.” We are losing our ability to control the oil sands and our energy future.
  • Even Enbridge has admitted that its pipeline will be of no benefit to Canada if it doesn’t secure the so-called “Asian Premium” – a higher crude price.
  • Canada will slowly become a petro state with all the negatives we’ve witnessed around the world.
  • The absurdity of so-called “Ethical Oil” is made transparent when you consider our increased, unquestioning partnership with China. After all, China is also working closely with Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. This fact also makes a mockery of any government concerns about “foreign” influence among opponents of the Enbridge/China pipeline.

Axis of oil?
February 9, 2012 15:38
John Robson looks at Elizabeth May’s alarmist language when it comes to the oilsands.

Wildrose reaction to May’s comments
February 9, 2012 15:49
Krista Erickson speaks with Alberta Wildrose leader Danielle Smith about the Alberta budget and Green Party leader Elizabeth May’s latest oil comments.
Says May’s agenda is to shut down the oil sands and tankers must be allowed to travel in BC waters.

Open Question

How can the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project continue, and continue spending millions of taxpayers dollars on a Joint Review Panel, while:

1. There is a moratorium on crude oil tankers in the BC North Coast in place. This moratorium must be set aside first both by the BC Legislature and the Government of Canada.

2. BC has pledged to uphold the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2007 and endorsed by the Harper government in 2010 which says; states should obtain from indigenous peoples “their free and informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other resources, particularly in connection with the development, utilization or exploitation of mineral, water or other resources.” Without First Nations consent, there can be no approval of the pipeline project.

3. The BC Government and the Premier of BC have an obligation to act accordingly on the First Nations behalf under the Coastal Reconciliation Protocol signed Dec. 10, 2009. Unless the BC Government and Premier Christy Clark abandone this Protocol, they are committed to act on behalf of the Coastal First Nations who are also signatories of this bill.

4. The transport of Alberta crude by tanker through the Port of Kitamat has been “dis-allowed” by all 9 of the Coastal First Nations who need to give consent to the project first before it can go ahead. The declaration to not allow the pipeline through their lands has been ratified 100% by all Coastal First Nations involved.

By Law then, the conclusion must be:
In respect to First Nations Rights and Law, in respect of the BC Governments obligation to First Nations people, and to uphold the Laws of Canada, our Prime Minister and the Government of Alberta must abandon their governments position that the Pipeline is “Beneficial for Canada” and put an end to Enbridge pipeline and export ambitions via the Gateway project.

To allow this project to continue is inviting 5 to 10 years of lawsuits and litigation costing several billion. Or is this what the law community wants?

Therefore the Enbridge Gateway Pipeline project is effectively dead. Shut down the Joint Review Panel and save the millions of dollars it is costing. Unless of couse the PM has been taking lessons from Chinese politics and is about to disregard Canadian Law and trample on peoples rights.

Gateway Pipeline a NO-GO

The Enbridge Gateway Pipeline project is dead.

Stop all proceedings trying to ram this project through, it is over. The pipe dream of the Chinese to export Alberta crude through the Port of Kitamat has been “dis-allowed” by all 9 of the Coastal First Nations who need to give consent to the project first before it can go ahead. The declaration to not allow the pipeline through their lands has been ratified 100% by all Coastal First Nations involved.

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2007 and endorsed by the Harper government in 2010 says; states should obtain from indigenous peoples “their free and informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other resources, particularly in connection with the development, utilization or exploitation of mineral, water or other resources.”

To respect First Nations Rights and Law, our Prime Minister must uphold Canadian Law and abandon his governments position that Enbridge is “Beneficial for Canada” and put an end to their pipeline and export ambitions via the Gateway project.

The BC Government and the Premier of BC have an obligation to act accordingly on the First Nations behalf under the Coastal Reconciliation Protocol. Several First Nations, including the Gitga’at First Nation, Heiltsuk Nation, Kitasoo Indian Band, Metlakatla First Nation, Wuikinuxv Nation and the Nuxalk Nation, and Premier Gordon Campbell originally signed the Coastal Reconciliation Protocol on Dec. 10, 2009. The Coastal Reconciliation Protocol provides First Nations people with an additional venue to implement decisions within their respective Territories and negotiate to manage lands and resources within Ancestral Territory to accommodate shared cultural, social, environmental and economic interests.

From: Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chief (Chief Na’Moks, Tsayu, Beaver Clan, Head Chief of Tsayu)

“We stand firm in our opposition to this (Enbridge Gateway Pipeline) proposed project. Our law states that if and when the high Chiefs of our Nation (encompassing the entire 22,000 square Kilometers of unceded, undefeated, non Treaty Lands) make a declaration of opposition, then this is final law and cannot be broken.” “The Wet’suwet’en have said no! This is the final word that our people will say on this. My wish is that Government/Industry would learn about the Wet’suwet’en, and understand that they have no right to go against the Decree of the Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs/Clan/Members.”

Enbridge is a corporation who is trying to buy off the Chiefs and First Nation people instead of respecting their rights and traditions.

From: Sierra Club of BC Foundation

In March, 2010, Coastal First Nations issued a declaration banning tar sands crude oil tanker traffic from their territories. In making the declaration, the Haida, Heiltsuk, Kitasoo, Haisla, Gitga’at and other First Nations exercised their ancestral laws, rights and responsibilities over the waters and lands of their traditional territories.

“As Nations of the Central and North Pacific Coast and Haida Gwaii, it is our custom to share our wealth and live in harmony with the broader human community,” said the declaration. “However, we will not bear the risk to these lands and waters caused by the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline and crude oil tanker traffic.”

Gitga’at Nation spokesman Cameron Hill says,

“The Gitga’at are of the sea and we have always known that oil & gas tankers in these waters were a horrible and frightening idea.” “It’s all about risks and benefits. For the Gitga’at it’s all risk and no benefits, and for Enbridge it’s all benefits and no risk”.

Haida declaration reads:

“Our culture, our heritage is the child of respect and intimacy with the land and sea. Like the forests, the roots of our people are intertwined such that the greatest troubles cannot overcome us. We owe our existence to Haida Gwaii … the living generation accepts the responsibility to ensure that our heritage is passed on to following generations.”

Haisla Nation chief councilor Ellis Ross explains,

“We don’t feel the benefits of the Northern Gateway pipeline project outweigh the risks to land and sea.”

Heiltsuk Nation Marilyn Slett, elected Chief Councillor, stated;

“We stand behind our coastal First Nation neighbors and the declaration that we all signed that ban oil tankers on our coast.” “We will never support the Enbridge project and we will never support a project that has the potential to destroy our way of life.”

March 23, 2010
First Nations stood as a unified block this week – on the 21st anniversary of the Exxon Valdez oil spill – to announce their opposition to a proposed Tar Sands pipeline.

“We will protect ourselves and the interests of future generations with everything we have because one major oil spill on the coast of British Columbia would wipe us out,” said Gerald Amos, Director, Coastal First Nations, an alliance of nine First Nations. “This bountiful and globally significant coastline cannot bear an oil spill. This is where Enbridge hits a wall.” Read more..

Coastal First Nations from Vancouver Island to the BC/Alaska border are unanimous in their opposition and are joined by the vast majority of First Nations affected along the pipeline route from Kitamaat to Alberta. For more information read the full Coastal First Nations Great Bear Initiative press release. Download Declaration (pdf)

The First Nations call on the Federal Government to protect BC coastal waters and formally legislate the oil tanker traffic moratorium.

Coastal First Nations – Who We Are
Coastal First Nations is an alliance of First Nations on British Columbia’s North and Central Coast and Haida Gwaii. Coastal First Nations includes the Wuikinuxv Nation, Heiltsuk Nation, Kitasoo/Xaixais First Nation, Gitga’at First Nation, Haisla, Metlakatla First Nation, Homalco First Nation, Old Massett Village Council, Skidegate Band Council, and Council of the Haida Nation.

The Coastal First Nations opposition to the pipeline project has been formally endorsed by most all Northern BC First Nations; See list, and many prominant Canadians and environmental groups.
Download An open message to Enbridge CEO Patrick Daniel
Council of the Haida Nation – Old Massett Village Council – Skidegate Band Council – Gitga’at First Nation – Kitasoo/Xaixais First Nation – Metlakatla First Nation – Haisla Nation – Heiltsuk Nation – Wuikinuxv First Nation – Nuxalk Nation – Lax Kw’alaams First Nation – Gitxaala/Kitkatla First Nation – Carrier Sekani Tribal Council – Wet’suwet’en Nation – Nadleh Whut’en First Nation – Nak’azdli Band – Swan River First Nation – Namgis First Nation – Nanwakolas Council – Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs – Lillooet Tribal Council – St’at’imc Chiefs Council – Canoe Creek Band – Takla First Nation – Siska Indian Band – Kispiox Band Council – Nuu-chah-nulth Tribal Council – Musgamagw Tsawataineuk – Tribal Council

First Nations that have declared opposition to proposed Enbridge tanker & pipeline project British Columbia and Western Canada Current to December 31 2011

Stop tankers from entering Northern BC waters

Say NO to tankers

Some History on China and Oil

Some history which may give some insight to the why and how of China, their industrial and foreign policy.

In order to evaluate the pros and cons of the Gateway Pipeline Project, we must first have an understanding of the players involved.

I am not an historian. I am a Canadian citizen deeply concerned about the ecological, environmental and economical effects the Enbridge Gateway Pipeline will have on our country. This report is taken from what I perceive to be factual information from sources I have been able to research and trust to be authentic and factual.

Since the mid ’50s, China has been developing it’s economy out from primarily an agriculture base to what is now an industrial super power. The 1960s saw rapid change as China sought foreign investment and technology in order to compete in international affairs. Many western corporations were attracted to the economic advantages of conducting business with China, a huge low cost labor pool and a huge market for consumer goods of all types. As industrialization took place, so did the need for energy. China has fairly large oil reserves both onshore and offshore which remained virtually untapped until recently. China sought energy sources mainly from nearby Iran and Russia.

Politics of course, has played a huge roll in Chinese industrial development. China and Russia, although both communist, never saw eye to eye on politics. As long as the Cold war between the US and USSR remained, Russian trade with China continued to increase. Since the end of WW2 western interests in the South Pacific played a huge role influencing the politics of the region. China also kept an eye on the South Asian countries stemming the tides of democracy. China proved it’s military interference capabilities first in North Korea in halting democracy in the peninsula and later in Viet Nam assisting the North Vietnamese communist regime to drive out the American forces.

In the late ’70s, China turned south to the Southern countries around Malaysia to further it’s energy supplies. China required more oil resources and looked to Iran. China had border disagreements though with Afghanistan. China needed to come to terms with Afghan leaders in order to ensure a secure and shorter route to it’s largest energy trade source, Iran. This upset the USSR who was experiencing loss of control and influence over it’s southern states and with it direct control over the oil resources in the area. Russia wanted to build a pipeline through Afghanistan to India. The Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979 which led to a 10 year war in which, with Chinese support and indirect US support, drove out the Russians but left a chaotic fragile regime of warlords to rule over the country. A perfect climate for anti-western culture which the Taliban took advantage of along with support from neighboring Pakistan and Iran.

When the US/USSR cold war ended in 1981, it left a huge area of the North Middle East with instability and further unrest threatening access to precious oil resources for western powers. Every country was seeking the control of oil resources and sales and especially the dollars that came with them. During the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the U.S. acted to prevent the confrontation from widening, largely in order to prevent additional disruption to world oil supplies and to honor U.S. security assurances to Saudi Arabia. As a result, the U.S. reacted to Soviet troop movements on the border of Iran by informing the Soviet Union that they would defend Iran in the event of Soviet invasion. The US supplied armaments to the then weakened Iranian Military to back up this promise.

Relying on western promises and oil revenues, the Shah pursued his goal of developing Iran as a regional power dedicated to social reform and economic development pleasing to western countries. Yet he continually refused to allow any civic and political freedom, remaining unresponsive to public opinion. The Shah’s government collapsed following widespread uprisings in 1978 -1979 and consequently an Islamic Republic was formed bound to uphold Islamic law, condemning Israel and it’s allies especially the USA.

After the Soviets were halted in any expansion of access to the Mid East oil reserves, Iran, with a strengthened military, both from US and China, took to widen control over the area by threatening a then unstable government in neighboring Iraq. In 1980, Saddam Hosien attacked Iran in an attempt to gain the upper hand in what he hoped would reunite the State of Persia under his Sunni leadership. The resulting 8 year Iran-Iraq War permanently altered the course of both Irani and Iraqi history. The USA, realizing an eastern influence and fearing loss of continuing supply from the oil reserves, aided the then befriended Saddam Hosien of Iraq, supplying weapons and technology. The Iranian Republic which formally denounced all religion but Islam, found itself cut off from western trade when a UN sanctioned embargo was introduced. With western alienation, Iran was forced to turn even further to China for trade and alliance.

Back in the late 1990s, China was desperately seeking new resources for crude oil which they could control and have dominant access to. The Canadian tar sands at that time were too costly to invest in for an industrial developing nation such as China. China was turning increasingly toward Iran especially with the US threatening a tighter embargo on Iranian exports. China was deliberating with the Taliban to build a pipeline through Afghanistan. The Bush administration disapproved of this deal outright which would give not only the Taliban a huge source of revenue, but strengthen their ability to create havoc against the USA and would also strengthen China’s ability to become the foremost industrial force in the world overtaking the US.

The Taliban out-thought themselves and fell into the trap of attacking the USA by crashing aircraft into the World Trade Center, and the Pentagon, believing that in the event of retaliation they would be aided by Chinese forces as were North Korea and Viet Nam. The US led Western Alliance struck back as planned but, the Chinese, still needing the western nations as trading partners for their growing industrial products, remained ‘supposedly’ neutral and allowed the Taliban, Pakistan and Iran to face the consequences basically on their own.

China is greatly suspected of introducing and aiding both North Korea and Iran in their efforts to gain nuclear energy and weaponry along with the delivery systems and other advanced technology. US State Dept.: “China is estimated by the Federation of American Scientists to have an arsenal of about 180 active nuclear weapon warheads and 240 total warheads as of 2009, which would make it the second smallest nuclear arsenal amongst the five major nuclear weapon states. According to some estimates, the country could “more than double” the “number of warheads on missiles that could threaten the United States by the mid-2020s”. “China has yet to define what it means by a “minimum deterrent posture”. This, together with the fact that “it is deploying four new nuclear-capable ballistic missiles, invites concern as to the scale and intention of China’s nuclear upgrade” “(US) –has concerns over possible Chinese biological weapon transfers to Iran and other nations…and have received reports regarding transfers of dual-use items from Chinese entities to the Iranian government…”

Over the next 10 years, while western nations did their ‘best’ to sort out the Afghan / Pakistan debacle and also keep Iranian interests in check, China went about their goal of securing oil resources with the huge profits they were receiving selling products to western consumers. They have recently secured a deal to build a pipeline through Afghanistan which will tap into the oil fields of Iran and south Afghanistan. They purchased several large shares of energy companies, many operating in Canada. Not only were the tar sands becoming a viable resource, Liquid Natural Gas is in abundance in Western Canada also and China is bent on securing these resources.

Enbridge Northern Gateway Oil Pipeline

http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1095775–aboriginal-groups-stand-against-canadian-oil-pipeline

“A group of First Nations in British Columbia says it will do “whatever means necessary” to stop exports of crude oil from Alberta’s oilsands through their territories — including the controversial Enbridge Northern Gateway oil pipeline.

Stop tankers from entering Northern BC waters

Say NO to tankers

The $5.5-billion project, which is currently being assessed by a review panel in Ottawa, now faces yet another public relations setback in its quest to open up a new supply route to Asia.”

The pipeline would move 525,000 barrels a day of oilsands crude 1,177 km from Edmonton to the Pacific port of Kitimat, B.C.
“Access to the Asian market, which is growing very quickly, is extremely important,” said Travis Davies, spokesman for the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

I will be the first to admit that I don’t know all the facts about oil production and distribution.  I have thought about energy and environment and these thoughts run through my head.

The Enbridge Northern Gateway oil pipeline could lead to an environment disaster, true. There is a bigger more ominous problem, economic reality. The reality is that Canada imports roughly 60% of its crude oil requirements.

Canada is a net energy exporter, Crude oil, natural gas and coal, 99 percent of its annual oil exports to USA, but, Canada also imports large amounts of these energy products. The fact is its major coal and oil fields are located in Western Canada, mostly in Alberta. The main population and industrial centers are located in Ontario and Quebec. Also many of its oil refineries cannot handle the types of oil produced in Canada.

Canada is being held hostage by the oil industry. Not just Canada – the world. Canada exports near all of Canadian production, money in oil company pockets, and they want to export more, and then import more than half of Canadian needs. Ummm, who does the Tar Sands oil belong to?

If Enbridge can build a pipeline to the Pacific, they can build a pipeline to Ontario. If it means using Tar Sands oil, then update the refineries to do so. They won’t because Canada would become oil independent and would then be in the position to get out of OPEC and have lower crude pricing and energy costs would go down. The oil producing companies would cry.

It is not enough just to extract and export or to extract, refine and export. If the end user is over contributing to global warming, not using the best technology available, the end results will remain the same and the Kyoto Protocol will become of no effect, in actuality it probably already is. Should Canada allow exports to countries with insufficient pollution standards? Canada can no longer play the resource game just for profit. Curbing emissions in Canada is of no account if Canada allows other countries to use Canadian resources and products in environmentally detrimental ways. China and India are the top environment offenders.

Simply put, we cannot allow our environmental obligations to be traded away.

Emphatic NO to exporting oil to Asian countries. Canadian oil for Canadians first. The USA will import all the rest Canada can produce. That is good for Canada, good for the USA. If Canada can help the US in their energy crunch, the global economies will become more stable. That is if the USA has the balls to solving their financial crisis.

Blogs on this topic I am following:
David Suzuki, the Northern Gateway pipeline, and the dollar

The battle lines are drawn, and Northern B.C.’s pristine wilderness is the latest front. With hearings underway into the proposed $5.5-billion, dual 1,172-kilometre Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline project to transport bitumen from the Alberta tar sands to Kitimat and imported condensate to dilute it from the coast back to Alberta, the fossil fuel industry and its supporters have stepped up the rhetoric. Environmentalists and people in towns, rural areas, and First Nations communities in B.C. have lined up in opposition.

SolarIMG – GIC Vulnerability of the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline in Canada

Many Canadians are not happy with the proposed “Northern Gateway” pipeline from Alberta to B.C. and understandably so.[1] Fears of oil leakage, secondary environmental impacts, attacks and other concerns are most definitely reasonable and valid and should be raised. Hats off to all of the people who are expressing their opposition to the plan!

BC Natives fear disastrous oil spill inevitable?

The Gitga’at First Nation has been saying no to the Northern Gateway pipeline project since 2006. The project will bring more than 200 huge tankers annually through the waters next to their tiny community of 160 in Hartley Bay at the entrance to Douglas Channel on B.C.’s northwest coast.
The risks and effects of an oil spill are simply not worth any economic benefits, which the First Nation view as nil, says Marvin Robinson, a spokesman for the community.

Sea to Sands Conservation Alliance

BC Environment Minister admits Gulf of Mexico oil spill raises additional questions about Enbridge Northern Gateway project

Canada’s Faustian Bargain: The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline

Rhetorical mudslinging has dominated Canadian environmental news this week, with conservative politicians and environmental activists coming to verbal blows in the wake of the commencement of the environmental assessment of the Enbridge Inc. Northern Gateway pipeline.
The proposed pipeline will run from the Albertan Tar Sands to a long protected channel in Kitimat, BC, where the harvested oil will be loaded onto ‘super-tankers’ and transported to Asia. The pipeline project is estimated by Enbridge to generate at approximately $5.5 billion dollars, and is set to span a whopping 1,172 km.

Stop the Gateway Pipeline which will bring Mega Tankers to the BC coast. Oil spills are inevitable.
Dogwood Initiative, Petition
The most effective thing Canadians can do right now would be to sign and share the No Tankers petition. The more people who sign the petition the better able we are to exercise the power of Canadians who stand up for their values.

Stop tankers from entering Northern BC waters

Say NO to tankers

Post Navigation