Know when to say yes
Five years after acquiring licences to explore for hydrocarbons in the Scotian Basin, 330 kilometres offshore from Halifax, BP Canada got approval from the federal-provincial regulator Saturday to sink its first exploration well.
The drill rig West Aquarius is on its way to begin the Aspy D-11 well, 2,777 metres below the sea surface. If results are promising, BP may sink up to seven exploration wells — though every one would involve another trip to the regulator for a go-ahead.
The initial approval isn’t shared by everyone. Opponents include those who want no new fossil-fuel developments — in keeping with their version of mitigating climate change — and those who think no offshore drilling is safe enough for the environment, marine life and the livelihoods of those who work in industries like fishing and tourism.
For others, after BP’S disastrous 2010 Deepwater Horizon blowout in the Gulf of Mexico — the largest marine spill in history — the British energy giant is a symbol of everything that can go badly and fatally wrong offshore.
Yet approval for the Scotian Basin project hasn’t been hasty, nor lacking in rigour or extensive consultation. BP filed its application to the offshore board in 2017. But its environmental assessment began in 2015 and seismic work was in 2014. It all comes with a lengthy list of conditions.
The regulator must ensure BP complies with its rules and with conditions attached to the federal minister’s approval in January of the environmental assessment. These bind BP to commitments on communicating with Indigenous people, fishing groups and other stakeholders, on protecting marine life and migratory birds and on preventing accidents and malfunctions. There are mandatory, detailed multi-layered plans on cleaning up spills and on regaining control of a well if there is a blowout, everyone’s greatest concern after Deepwater Horizon.
The blowout response plan for the Scotian Basin includes prior planning for relief wells and a requirement for BP to immediately fly in a capping stack — the ultimate capping device — in a blowout situation, even while other control methods are still being attempted. In respect to environmental and economic damage, it must provide compensation on terms defined by regulator guidelines.
None of this guarantees there will never be a problem.
No regulator, in any industry, can do that. But successive provincial governments have worked hard to attract an offshore oil industry, to obtain a fair share of revenues from Ottawa, to support research, safety and competent regulation and risk mitigation. All this is aimed at having a valuable and well-run industry. That means approving projects on responsible terms, not saying no to everything because an accident is always possible.
No government, provincial or federal, has been elected on a mandate to shut down the oil industry or offshore exploration. The public consensus, we believe, is still to have a well-regulated industry that can support many kinds of employment and produce important public revenues. So, yes, we should demand regulatory and operating . excellence in the offshore. That isn’t achieved by refusing to try.