Enbridge letter a whitewash

Re Line 9 letter not reassuring, Letter April 15 Graham White’s statement that the nearly 40-year-old Line 9 pipeline, which crosses Toronto, will carry “predominantly” light crude oil has no basis in fact. There have never been any assurances that only light crude will be carried.

The purpose of the Line 9 reversal of flow in an easterly direction is to carry diluted bitumen (dilbit) from the Alberta tarsands that must be diluted with toxic, explosive solvents called distillates that have required the immediate evacuation of residents following burst Enbridge pipelines in places like Kalamazoo, Mich., in 2010.

There are also no assurances that Line 9 will not carry Bakken crude from North Dakota, the same explosive crude that killed 47 residents of Lac-Mégantic in July 2013 and has been exploding and burning following several subsequent oil tanker derailments in various parts of this continent. In fact, a leak of one of these dangerous materials at the Finch subway station would still be a human disaster despite the so-called catchment area.

Mr. Graham’s comments regarding the October 2013 National Energy Board (NEB) hearings also leaves out major truths. The city wanted several changes, including insurance and disaster response teams, that Enbridge refused and was not required to make by the NEB. Murray Lumley, East York Enbridge’s letter to the editor is, once again, whitewashing its intentions for Line 9. We now have the additional warning from the Vancouver oil spill of what can and, no doubt, will happen when disaster strikes.

Let’s wake up and take seriously the danger that our city and others face if Enbridge is allowed to have its way. Irene Wintersinger, Toronto