British Columbians debate proposed Northern Gateway pipeline

Re: The pipeline hearings must separate fact from fiction, Guest Editorial, Jan. 18

Much is made of foreign contributions to the fight against this proposed pipeline. But, again, no mention of the foreign investments in the pipeline application or the billions of foreign dollars that will finance both the pipeline and associated infrastructure.

It is completely legitimate that those who share this planet’s atmosphere have a place at the hearings. That includes 73- year- old women from Quebec and foreigners, rich and poor alike. RON VAN DER EERDEN Vancouver

Speakers have taken their time to open their hearts and tell their stories. Please invest some of your own time to listening to the amazingly respectful and patient and honest words that are being spoken at the Gateway hearings by our first nations elders and chiefs. If we forget how to listen with our souls we will never be able to speak from the heart. RYAN MILLER Vancouver

Re: Enbridge subsidiaries in the U. S. report more than 170 pipeline leaks, Jan. 13

The statistics highlighted by the writer do not tell a complete story.

As Enbridge discloses annually in its Corporate Social Responsibility Report, the vast majority of the spills that Enbridge experiences are small, they occur within Enbridge facilities ( and never leave the site), and are discovered very soon after they occur — allowing for rapid response and cleanup and resulting in low, or no environmental impact.

In three of the past 10 years, Enbridge had no significant off- property releases on our liquids pipeline system in Canada and the United States. In the other seven years, we experienced one significant release each in 2003, 2009 and 2011, two each in 2002 and 2004, three in 2010, and four in 2007.

Contrary to the impression left by this story, spills are rare relative to the volume of liquids products that Enbridge transports. As the story correctly points out, Enbridge safely delivered over 99.99 per cent of the volume we transported in 2010, when we shipped almost a billion barrels of petroleum products through our system.

Having said that, no spill is acceptable to Enbridge because our goal is zero incidents. Our number 1 priority is the safety and integrity of our operations and to prevent all spills, leaks and releases. Since 2002, we have spent approximately $ 1 billion on our safety and maintenance programs for our liquids pipelines systems across North America.

The proposed Northern Gateway pipelines will be designed according to exacting Canadian standards guidelines. No pipeline ruptures have been reported on pipeline systems built to these standards in the last 25 years.

Just as Enbridge does for all its pipelines, Northern Gateway will implement mitigation measures during design, construction and operation of the pipelines to prevent releases and to quickly respond should an event occur. These measures include, among others, avoidance of environmentally sensitive areas and special design requirements for areas such as road, river and creek crossings.

Although pipelines have long been proven to be the safest way of transporting oil and gas, Enbridge is working constantly to ensure safety by increasing the reliability of our pipelines and facilities. Our number 1 social responsibility is to deliver energy reliably and safely and we will always live up to that standard. PAUL STANWAY Communications manager, Northern Gateway Pipelines

The Conservatives denounce environmental groups opposed to the pipeline as foreign- funded radicals. And yet the Harper government has welcomed several billion dollars of investment by China in the oilsands in the last two years.

There is or will be Chinese management and employees in some areas. Thus completes a direct line from Alberta, through the proposed pipeline, to oil tankers bound for Asia. So I’m getting confused.

Who exactly are the foreign- funded radicals here? HOWARD ABEL North Vancouver

After the first week of the Gateway hearings by the Joint Review Panel ( JRP), Canadians have learnt that oil and pipeline corporations, not foreign environmental charities:

1. Have intervener status at the JRP hearings with the greatest opportunity to hijack the process;

2. Have spent hundreds of millions of foreign dollars on public relations in advance of the hearings compared to minor amounts of foreign money spent by environmental charities; and,

3. Have coordinated with federal cabinet ministers a PR blitzkrieg on the Canadian public through the pipeline booster Ethical Oil.

I believe that Canadian citizens see these extreme tactics on the part of corporations and the Harper government for what they are: hijacking of democracy.

On the other hand, the conduct of environmental charities comes across as being responsibly concerned for Canada’s best interests. ANTHONY BRITNEFF Victoria

A recent APTN news report on the proposed Gateway pipeline featured Mr. Art Sterrit of the Coastal First Nations Alliance. His group opposes the pipeline. He said that Alberta will reap huge benefits from the pipeline, while B. C. benefits little and risks significant environmental damage. He was wrong.

Existing oilsands plants in Alberta annually ship product that is worth about $ 50 billion.

That is a non- renewable resource. In spite of that, the government of Alberta expects to have a deficit this year of about $ 3.4 billion. And former Premier Ed Stelmach said that Alberta’s economy cannot afford higher payments to the Canada Pension Plan.

The new pipeline will not benefit the people of Alberta. It will just help the oil industry to fleece them faster. BILL MCCONNELL Surrey

The Northern Gateway pipeline controversy is framed incorrectly, as the economy versus the environment.

The argument is between the longterm view, assessing the damage to our planet and the broader human community, and the short- term approach, concerned with local selfinterest.

Most of us are aware that we need to reduce our use of fossil fuels, in order to provide our children and grandchildren, and other creatures, with viable, decent lives.

The oilsands project is an extraordinarily destructive product of old- style, short- term thinking.

Our dislike of change, and our inability to imagine a different world, contribute to our clinging to the status quo and ignoring the warning signs. Unfortunately, we know from the examples of the Mayans, the Greenland Norse and Easter Island, that our species does not have a good record of understanding consequences and thinking clearly about the future.

We are the generation that must face reality and begin, at this critical point in our history, to see beyond the old patterns that have landed us at this crossroads. We need long- term thinking. MARLYN HORSDAL Saltspring Island

If the Northern Gateway project is worth doing, then it is worth doing right the first time and that means addressing all the concerns of those affected.

The federal government’s priority should be the long- term protection of Canadian interests, not the shortterm profits of a few influential multinational companies. LLOYD ATKINS Vernon

Re: Demonization of environmentalists stifles debate, Opinion, Jan. 16

George Heyman of the Sierra Club decries criticism of environmental groups by federal ministers, claiming that such criticism stifles debate on environmental issues.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Environmental groups have carried out numerous campaigns in which they have stacked meetings with their members, drowned out those opposing their views, and carried out letterwriting campaigns, all in an attempt to create the impression that the general public opposes this project or that.

Environmental groups urged their members to sign up to speak at the Enbridge pipeline public hearings, and the results of that campaign alert is illustrated in the views of those attending the hearings to date.

There have been any number of cases, Clayoquot Sound and Eagle Ridge Bluffs for example, where a decision hasn’t gone in favour of the activists. The result was roadblocks, contempt of court proceedings and jail time. Among those before the courts have been members of the Sierra Club.

So please, Mr. Heyman, if you want an honest all- inclusive debate, let’s have it.

But don’t play the victim when so very clearly the actions of environmentalists have been those of a very critical aggressor. ROB KYLE Anmore