Northern Gateway

During the past few months there has been a steady flow of news (pun sort of intended) about the proposed Keystone XL pipeline from the oil or bitumen sands of Alberta to Texas. The opposition is loud and vociferous with a fair number of celebrity spokespersons naming the concerns for the environment, both in the perceived perils of transmission and the damage resulting from the  processing of this "dirtier" form of crude. Our Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, made his way to New York to promote the pipeline and the economic benefits to the United States, no doubt out of concern that the project may fail. The pressure on President Obama's administration to kill the project has been intense.

Underneath all of this attention was the decision of the government of British Columbia not to support what some think is the "Plan B" pipeline called Northern Gateway. It would transport oil to the B.C. coast, with China as one as the significant purchasers of the same bitumen. One media report described it this way:

In its 99-page submission tabled Friday, the province questioned Enbridge's claims that it could mitigate spills in its remote mountain wilderness and off its rugged coastline.                      

Enbridge, the province wrote, "presented little evidence about how it will respond in the event of a spill." The submission said that from the company's evidence, it was not clear that it "will, in fact, be able to respond effectively to spills either from the pipeline itself or from tankers" and added, " 'Trust me' is not good enough in this case."

 

Many groups opposed this pipeline, including the British Columbia Conference of the United Church, and the General Council which met last August. Of course we were criticized for being ill-informed, anti-business, confused about our true purpose as Christ's church -- the list goes on and on. Yet here is a government which would benefit from the pipeline in many respects choosing not to support it because of the environmental risks. Maybe we're not so stupid after all.

 

I don't think we should be embarrassed about being vocal with our concerns about the protection of God's good Earth. I don't think it is anti-business to want to safeguard the land across which the pipeline would travel and the waters the tankers would traverse. We have scores of examples of terrible environmental accidents perpetrated by companies which insisted they would never occur.  

 

I actually think that it is a sin to not demonstrate precaution and prudence when it comes to protecting all the stakeholders in these situations. I applaud the B.C. government for its diligence.

 

Do you know much about Keystone and Northern Gateway? What do you think about the B.C. decision? Are we are just a bunch of earnest tree-huggers in the United Church?