After much noise, a quiet approval

There’s no debate over the Northern Gateway pipeline.
There’s been plenty of talk – much of it impassioned, some of it belligerent – but in the dictionary sense of the participants in a discussion legitimately considering the different sides of a question, there really isn’t a debate over the oilsands pipeline Ottawa approved Tuesday.
The “noise” is drowning out actual dialogue.
The issue is about getting Alberta’s landlocked oilsands resources to overseas markets so that projected growth to 4.8 million barrels a day production by 2030 occurs. Or, it’s about coming up with ways to stop that scenario from playing out.
Pipelines – Enbridge’s Northern Gateway and TransCanada’s Keystone XL, in particular – have become the focal point of the war of words.
Both sides talk a good game for their supporters – defiance by the environmentalists and First Nations in British Columbia and accommodation by the oil industry and the federal government – but their narratives are all part of well-orchestrated messaging campaigns.
After six months of speculation since a federal environmental review panel approved the 525,000-barrel-a-day-pipeline – subject to Enbridge meeting 209 conditions – Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s cabinet quietly signed off on the decision. It was released with little fanfare after business hours Tuesday.
“Today constitutes another step in the process,” Natural Resources Minister Greg Rickford said in a statement.
“The proponent clearly has more work to do to fulfil the public commitment it has made to engage with Aboriginal groups and local communities along the route.”
Enbridge agreed it has “work to do” before a final investment decision on the $7-billion project. For the pipeline’s proponents, the heavy lifting ramps up as opponents dig in for a long fight. Litigation could hold development up for years.
There was no media availability with Harper or Rickford similar to the prime minister’s widely applauded news conference to explain the government’s decision to halt takeovers of Canadian oilsands producers by state-owned companies after the Chinese company CNOOC’s takeover of Nexen in 2012.
Ottawa contends pipeline bottlenecks cost the economy $20 billion a year and has made export infrastructure a priority in its goal of Canada becoming an energy superpower. Critics contend the risks of a spill – from either a pipeline or an oil tanker – outweigh the projected benefits.
It didn’t take long for the outrage at Ottawa’s widely expected decision to erupt. Nature Canada’s Stephen Hazell compared the potential for a spill from Northern Gateway to “playing Russian roulette.”
The Pembina Institute complained approving pipelines that encourage oilsands expansion “is not in the public interest” without regulations to curb GHG emissions in the sector.
Politicians and First Nations vowed to stop Northern Gateway in its tracks.
Presumably, Harper saw no upside in adding to the politically charged discourse. That’s understandable.
Both sides are deeply entrenched in their positions and that’s not likely to change.
In an era when the industry’s focus on gaining a “social license to operate” has been corrupted to mean everybody believes they are entitled to a veto, there isn’t going to be a consensus on any new pipeline. There is no level of trust nor any sense of common purpose on energy policy.
And deference to authority has largely disappeared among everyday citizens empowered with unprecedented information and the means of communication in an increasingly polarized society.
This isn’t the pipeline debates of parliament in the 1950s. (That being said: want to oppose?? Click on the following link: http://www.greenparty.ca/no-to-enbridge?utm_campaign=C14.ERP&utm_source=massmail&utm_medium=email)
Screen shot 2014-06-18 at 10.48.36 AM
It’s more akin to the endless abortion arguments – two groups diametrically opposed and unwavering. Both sides in the Northern Gateway dispute claim to be speaking on behalf of a greater public good.
The proponents cite its importance to Canada’s economy while opponents point to the threat from GHGs to the environment globally.
Both have expended a lot of effort to win over public opinion to their side.
Doug Eyford, who was appointed Ottawa’s special representative on West Coast energy infrastructure and aboriginal relations in December, has said “it’s never too late to engage,” but that optimism seems like a pipe dream at this point.
For all the talk, it is evident neither Enbridge nor the oil industry is counting on one or two disputed projects to get oil to markets.
The International Energy Agency predicted Tuesday that Canada could ship 300,000 barrels a day of oil to China by 2019 whether there is a West Coast pipeline or not, citing the increase in oil moving by rail and growing re-exports of Canadian oil through the United States.
“These volumes do not depend on the commissioning of new pipelines to … the Pacific coast,” the IEA said.
Whether oilsands opponents can muster the support to block all those routes is debatable.

0 comments on “After much noise, a quiet approval

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *