Gateway pipeline in the spotlight

Environmentalists are making the case for the government and Enbridge Energy to give up on the idea of a controversial pipeline from Alberta’s tar sands, through Northern British Columbia to Kitimat.

With Enbridge delaying the project due to “market considerations”, the opponents suggest this is the time for them to cancel it outright

The original plan called for construction to begin in 2007, but since then Enbridge has gone on to other projects and doesn’t expect the Gateway initiative to get under way until 2009 or maybe even 2014.

The Daily news covered the story as its headline grabber in the Wednesday edition of the paper.

ENVIROS CALL FOR AN END TO $4BN OIL PIPELINE PROJECT
By James Vassallo
The Daily News
Wednesday, December 6, 2006
Pages one and three

Environmentalists claim it was pressure from them and First Nations that pushed back a $4 billion project for the Northwest. Construction on the Enbridge Gateway Pipeline from Alberta’s tar sands to Kitimat was supposed to start in late 2007 and begin operation in 2009, but now may not see the light of day until 2014.

“The Gateway proposal is very controversial in B.C.,” said Margot McMillan, West Coast Environmental Law staff counsel. “It’s a huge and risky project with very uncertain benefits.
“First Nations and local communities are right to question whether this is the kind of energy development we want in B.C.”

The Calgary-based company made public its decision to delay in early November, saying that instead of focusing on markets in Asia, it would concentrate on the north-south Alberta Clipper project in response to announcements by BP and ConocoPhillips-Encana that they would be expanding their refining capacity in the U.S. Midwest.

However, in a Nov. 27 letter to the National Energy Board (NEB) and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, the company said it remained committed to the project in the future, when market conditions warrant it.

“Support for the project from Western Canada producers and Southeast Asian refiners continues to be strong,” the company said.

“However, Enbridge projects are driven by market priorities and customer needs and Gateway represents one of many pipeline projects that Enbridge gas has under development.”
In light of the company’s confidence that the Gateway project will eventually be required, Enbridge has asked that the joint review process be delayed until further notice.

“Gateway suggests that the environmental assessment process for the Gateway project be delayed until the former pace of activity resumes,” the company writes.

“At that time, we suggest that a decision can be made as to whether to process on the basis of the work done to date, including the issuance of a draft Joint Review Panel Agreement for public comment, or whether some additional work is required,” wrote the company.

However, the desire by the company to approach the project in a manner that would allow market responsiveness going forward, does not sit well with environmental groups.
“Enbridge is essentially asking for a free pass to make sure they keep their place in line in the regulatory queue if and when they decide to proceed,” said McMillan.

“The NEB and CEAA should not allow this type of special treatment. Not only does it raise issues of fair process, it also causes undue stress and uncertainty for communities potentially affected by the project.”

Both West Coast Environmental Law and the Living Oceans Society are now calling on Enbridge to cancel — rather than just delay — the Gateway project.

To find out how to subscribe to the Daily News (we can mail the paper anywhere), please give us a call at (250) 624-6785 or call toll free 1-800-343-0022.