Keystone guarantees should be made for B. C. pipelines

Re: Pipeline decision time for U. S., Editorial, Jan. 10

After reading the editorial I became confused. The Keystone XL oil pipeline is part of a 2,700- km system stretching from Alberta to Texas. The article says, “According to a new study ... TransCanada found an alternative route that avoids Nebraska’s ... crucial aquifer ... and numerous ecologically sensitive areas in the state ...”

The article states that “the company ( TransCanada) ... addressed most every concern raised ... agreeing to dozens of special conditions ... during the construction, operation and maintenance phases ... Finally, TransCanada has committed itself to taking responsibility, technical and financial, for any spills.”

We hear no firm commitment from Enbridge or Kinder Morgan to take financial responsibility for any spills. If there’s a spill, we’ll likely see a lot of finger pointing, in the end leaving B. C. citizens to pay for clean up.

That’s what confuses me, no clarity about a commitment to pay, and little apparent interest in reducing the probability and consequences of a spill ( for instance, unbelievably sticking to Douglas Channel and Burrard Inlet routing).

Unless we hear soon how the proponents for B. C. pipelines will protect us from the inevitable screw up, maybe we should look at inviting new proposals.

The oil will keep in the ground while we find the right proponent.

We’re happy to assist our cousin provinces to transport their resources to market— so please, cousins, support us by telling the pipeline proponents to come up with some sensible schemes— that do not encumber B. C. residents unfairly.

Seems fair. CARL SHALANSKY North Vancouver