Chamber’s view flawed
Dear Editor: In Thursday’s paper you reported that the Kelowna Chamber of Commerce, following the Canadian Chamber, supports the TransMountain pipeline expansion, citing anticipated economic benefits to the region (Daily Courier, May 24). This is no surprise, given the pro-business focus of Chambers of Commerce.
But, what is the analysis supporting these anticipated benefits? The Chamber refers to a report of the Conference Board of Canada, “Who Benefits: a Summary of the Economic Impacts that Result from the Trans Mountain Expansion Project”.
In keeping with the conference board’s conservative mindset, this is a narrowly-focused economic analysis of benefits that may derive from the pipeline over the next two decades. These benefits come largely from higher prices for diluted bitumen that Kinder Morgan projects it will receive from offshore buyers.
The conference board does not question Kinder Morgan’s prices but others have. The Canada Centre for Policy Alternatives has debunked any expectation of better prices for dilbit from offshore buyers , but the CCPA has its own biases.
Other independent analysis of the Trans Mountain Expansion, however, also seriously question the economic viability of the new pipeline. If the economics of the project can be questioned in the narrow sense that they were examined by the conference board, how much more questionable do they become when examined in a broader context?
Nowhere in the conference board report do you find critical terms like “First Nations’ support”, “environmental impact”, “climate change”, “The Paris Accord”, “greenhouse gas emissions”. No doubt the conference board would argue that any costs associated with these issues were not relevant because they were external to their analysis, which is true.
But, these issues are very relevant to Canadians and they should be to our Chambers of Commerce as well. Consider climate change. In 2011, the Round Table on Environment and Economy estimated that by 2050 the costs of climate change to Canada would be $21 - 43 billion a year (compared with the conference board’s estimate of $2.33 billion a year revenues from Trans Mountain).
Things have only gotten worse since the round table made its estimate. The Fort McMurray fire alone is estimated to have cost almost $9 billion.
Consider renewable energy. Alberta has Canada’s greatest potential for power generation from renewable sources; wind, solar, and geothermal. It is developing these sources of power, but very slowly.
With an aggressive program of renewable energy development, working with the oil industry, which is already invested in such projects, Alberta could be the powerhouse of North America. It is time for Alberta, Canada, and our Chambers of Commerce to turn away from climate destroying hydrocarbons and embrace renewable energy. Let’s build transmission lines, not pipelines.
Michael Healey Professor emeritus, UBC
Peachland