Supertanker ban full of holes

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 08/07/2010 (5858 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Differing political views about the transport of crude off B.C.’s coast will have profound implications for a massive Western pipeline project.

While the Harper Conservatives insist no moratorium exists on tanker traffic in B.C. waters, Liberals announced last month — if they form a government — they’ll nix supertankers in northern waters, including Kitimat, site of a proposed marine terminal that would carry oilsands petroleum to Asian markets by 2016.

The $5.5-billion Enbridge Inc. Northern Gateway Pipeline Project, being reviewed by a joint national energy-environmental assessment board, aims to carry 525,000 barrels of crude daily from Alberta’s oilsands across 1,170 kilometres to Kitimat. From there, the crude would be shipped by supertanker to Asian markets.

Enbridge spokesman Alan Roth confirmed this week that the Liberal restriction would indeed jeopardize the project.

Ignatieff, travelling this week in China, clearly is hoping to buff his green cred in B.C., a hotly contested province politically, by tapping into fears of a BP-style spill on Canada’s West Coast.

New Democrats also are against north-coast tanker traffic.

Ignatieff stated: “Canadians cannot watch what is happening in the Gulf of Mexico without fearing for our own coastal areas. Yet Stephen Harper refuses to act.”

The Harper government, in response, finally is clarifying its position on a supposed moratorium on crude oil tanker traffic off B.C.’s coast, which Grits assert has been in place since 1972.

There is no moratorium, says James Kusie, spokesman for Transport Minister John Baird.

“Oil tankers have been trading safely and regularly along the B.C. coast for years.”

The only restriction on traffic, contends the Conservative government, applies to “U. S. tanker ships (visiting Alaska) that do not come within 25 to 70 miles of the B.C. coast.”

Ignatieff begs to differ. But the Liberal position is risky.

The party stand to lose as many votes as it attracts, as Northern Gateway pits environmentalists and aboriginal groups — generally opposed — against those wanting economic development.

The pipeline project is mammoth, promising 62,700 person-years of employment during three years of construction, and 1,150 long-term jobs in maintenance and operations.

“Michael Ignatieff has no regard for the people of northern B.C. or their best interests,” huffs Colin Kinsley, chair of a pro-pipeline group of community leaders calling itself the Northern Gateway Alliance.

“He has effectively closed the door on much-needed economic diversification and growth opportunities for this region.”

The Liberal position also is inconsistent.

It’s not as though the party has laid down the law about protecting Canada’s coastline from supertanker traffic.

It is singling out one region, northern B.C., and one type of transport — supertankers.

If Canadians care about their coastlines, why would Liberals tolerate supertankers in southern B.C. waters or the St. Lawrence River and just about every major port in the country?

Liberals contend that their plan would be to formalize an existing moratorium in northern B.C. waters, and note supertankers do not visit Kitimat.

That said, Liberals would tolerate small tankers transporting the crude from Kitimat to Vancouver where, presumably, it then would have to be transferred to supertankers for further shipment.

Are spills from small tankers OK? And wouldn’t a requirement to transfer oil from the small tankers into supertankers in Vancouver in itself carry hazards?

While Ignatieff says: “A Liberal government will not accept the risk of opening the entire B.C. coast to crude oil supertankers,” his statement invites people to ask: “Well then, why would it open any of B.C.’s coast to supertanker traffic?”

Enbridge has begun advertising against the Liberal policy, which has prompted Ignatieff to remark: “It is unfortunate, though hardly surprising, that a large, profitable energy company has chosen to launch an expensive advertising campaign against our proposal.”

But the Enbridge campaign suggests the pipeline company recognizes the Liberals are on shaky ground in pitching a plan that’s as likely to generate controversy as support.

Barbara Yaffe is a national affairs columnist for the Vancouver Sun.

She can be reached at:

» byaffe@png.canwest.com