Enbridge and the black spots of the leopard – part 1
Monday, July 23, 2012 @ 3:45 AM
Can a leopard change its spots? Enbridge Inc. wants us to believe that it can indeed. On July 12, 2012, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board released a report that harshly criticized Enbridge for its role in the catastrophic Kalamazoo River bitumen spill back in 2010 which resulted in the contamination of over 35 miles of the river in southern Michigan and of hundreds of acres of wetlands.
In the wake of this withering criticism, Enbridge is now claiming far and wide that it is bringing in “extra measures” to improve the safety of its proposed Northern Gateway pipeline (across northern British Columbia) to the “highest” standards, making an “already safe project even safer.” The measures apparently include increasing the pipeline wall thickness, the number of valves and dual leak detection systems, and the frequency of inspection surveys, all of which it claims will cost an additional $400 to $500 million.
An obvious question arises from these “improvements” that Enbridge is now announcing. And that is why weren’t they part of the company’s original proposal which was put forward several years ago, given the fact that back then, the corporation, like today, was also claiming that the pipeline would be built to the “highest safety standards”?
But there is another deeper issue – a serious disconnect between what Enbridge Inc. says and what it actually does. When caught in this disconnect – which has happened repeatedly in regards to numerous oil spills and safety violations – Enbridge Inc. promises to improve its behaviour. But it quickly falls back into old patterns. Like the leopard, it can’t seem to get away from its black spots, no matter how much its CEOs and spin doctors claim otherwise and how much it spends on slick advertising and public relations campaigning.
For example, in 2009 just one year before the Kalamazoo River incident, Enbridge spilled 176,000 gallons of oil in the state of Wisconsin, contaminating the local water supply. The state also cited Enbridge for 545 environmental violations in the construction of another pipeline and launched a lawsuit which eventually resulted in Enbridge paying $1.1 million in fines. Wisconsin’s Attorney General noted that Enbridge’s incidents of violation “were numerous and widespread, and resulted in impacts to the streams and wetlands throughout the various watersheds.”
At that time, Enbridge promised to improve its practices, yet within a year the catastrophic Kalamazoo River spill unfolded, which is expected to result in not only a number of civil suits being brought against the corporation, but also various criminal charges.
The fact is that Enbridge was well aware of serious defects in its 6B pipeline (Kalamazoo River) before the spill actually happened, as well as that certain of these defects could very well lead to rupture of the line. Chairman Deborah Hersman of the U.S. Transportation Safety Board pointed out: “In 2005, Enbridge detected the very defect that led to this failure [Kalamazoo River spill] … Yet for five years, they did nothing to address the corrosion or cracking at the rupture site – and the problem festered” (1).
Furthermore, in 2007, a Canadian Transportation Safety Board investigation in Saskatchewan had revealed that nine spills on a single Enbridge pipeline happened as a result of “stress corrosion cracking and metal fatigue from cyclic stress on seam welds” (2). This, as it turned out, was precisely the same problem that caused the later Kalamazoo spill.
Despite the clear warnings (Enbridge received two other warnings from federal regulators just a few months prior to the spill), the company never seriously acted upon them. Yes, it once again claimed that it would change its ways and establish a more stringent model for addressing the problem and making sure it didn’t happen again. But what was said and what was done were two very different things.
As Hersman further remarked, “There have been a lot of opportunities for Enbridge to learn lessons over the years that stem from, specifically, accident investigations here in the U.S. and in Canada, and what we saw in this accident investigation [i.e. Kalamazoo River] was that they had not learned those lessons well.”
Another member of the National Transportation Safety Board, Robert Sumwalt, added that “It’s evident that this accident did not just occur because of corrosion in a pipeline. What this investigation has shown is that this accident was the result of corrosion throughout many vital safety aspects of the Enbridge organization.”
Forthcoming articles in this series will discuss further the gap that exists between what Enbridge claims and what it actually practices, and what is the origin of this disconnect, all of which has vital importance for the people of Northern British Columbia and the Pacific Coast, across whose territory the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline is proposed to run.
1. Spangler, Todd. “Feds: Enbridge detected defect years before massive Kalamazoo River oil spill.” Lansing State Journal. July 10, 2012. http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/article/20120710/NEWS01/307100028/Feds-Enbridge-detected-defect-years-before-massive-Kalamazoo-River-oil-spill
2. Swift, Anthony. “Dysfunction at Enbridge goes far beyond Kalamazoo tar sands pipeline spill.” NRDC Switchboard. July 13, 2012. http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/aswift/governments_investigation_of_e.html
Peter Ewart is a columnist and writer based in Prince George, British Columbia. He can be reached at: peter.ewart@shaw.ca
Comments
The whole debate about the pipeline aside, I still have questions about the financial penalties if there were ever to be a spill. It just seems like the penalties are so low that the oil companies don’t even have to worry. Why not bring the financial penalties, in the case of any type of spill, to the financial ball park that oil companies operate in: is it that out of the question to ask for a one billion dollar penalty per barrel of oil spilled?
Enbridge has hundreds of spills, they lied, hid oil spills with sand, with grass and canvas, they bully and intimidate, they are criminals against nature and mankind..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gXaYZVGw44&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gXaYZVGw44&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=fvwp&v=dOKmeV-sBEU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxrC7akwGsI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9N-VR7QOQc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKVRuelvJ-s&feature=player_embedded#!
Criminals? really? This comment and the article in fact is yet another shining example of how far reality is really left behind. The references are nice, but I hope the author used more than that, considering NRDC is an activist group that is openly against pipelines (keystone XL and northern gateway) and would like nothing less than to see us have no work at all, while they lounge in New York City. Oh, but I guess NYC is an environmental paradise that runs on pixie dust….. Wake up folks, your cheap WalMart flat screen TV’s and iPads come to you courtesy of oil, and its not income tax from Walmart greeter jobs that pay for schools and hospitals.
http://powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca/2012/01/stephen-harper-assists-in-environmental.html
http://powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca/2012/01/enbridge-northern-gateway-pipeline-will.html
http://powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca/2012/01/enbridge-will-kill-british-columbia.html
http://powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca/2012/01/british-colubias-beautiful-nirthern.html
http://powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca/2011/12/enbridge-attempts-to-hoodwink-british.html
http://powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca/2011/12/climate-pollution-scam-is-overproblem.html
http://powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca/2011/12/enbridge-inc-are-criminals-period.html
If one voices opposition to Enbridge and bitumen pipelines, it does not mean one is opposed to oil.
Process the oil in Alberta and pipe it with a more reputable company, through routes that are already in place.
Is this impossible?
This should be the case with all Canadian resources.
1.-Book value of Enbridge is less than $10 billion.
2- Northern Gateway proposes $1.2 billion of insurance.
3.-Gulf of Mexico has already cost BP in excess of $40 billion.
Do the math- it will be BC taxpayers left holding the bag on any large spill.
Good article Mr. Ewart, your perspective is always thought provoking and appreciated. For me it is clear that Enbridge can and will say one thing regarding safety measures and environmental protection standards and then do something other. The truth is in Enbridgeâs record and I find it disturbing how our governments view Enbridge as the saviour even though community pillars they are not or ever will be. Equally it is appalling how our governments; provincial and federal choose to ignore these truths on Enbridgeâs numerous spills and environmental disasters. As well, I see it as gross negligence when these same levels of governments buy into the Enbridge spin doctoring with conviction only surpassed by that of the bygone snake oil huckster peddling the virtues and values of snake oil. For me it is clear Enbridge cannot be trusted and it is clear our governments cannot be trusts either when it comes to advocating responsibly for our communities. Enbridge will only change its practices (spots) when our governments make them accountable and right now, there is no political will to enforce that change. I for one do not support Enbridgeâs NGP project because it is not about what is best for us rather what is best for them.
Harper has permitted Communist China to buy up huge chunks of the tar sands. They just bought up more recently. China is bringing their own people to work the tar sands, right down to Chinese cooks. China is also bring swarms over to build the Enbridge pipeline, by Harper’s endorsement. The dirty oil isn’t even refined in Canada. Communist China gets those jobs too.
There is not a shred of trust in the Campbell/Clark BC Liberals nor Harper, by the BC people. There has been nothing other than a litany of, lies, deceit, thefts, corruption, dirty tactics, dirty politics, broken promises and cheating to win, by the entire ruddy lot of them. Why in the hell, should BC be used as a conduit, to ship cheap dirty oil to Communist China?
Citizens of BC are supporting the F.N. to keep the atrocities of the Enbridge pipeline and the dirty tar tankers out of our province. We owe, Harper, Enbridge, Alberta and Communist China, squat.
Shaida, the chinese are bringing over employees due to the chronic shortage of workers. There are no Canadians in Ft Mac looking for work and being denied by the Chinese. As far as their own cooks…..would you want Indonesian cuisine in a logging camp?
The media goes to great lengths to qualifying
Opps,
The media goes to great lengths to qualifying any comments from the Fraser Institute as “a right wing” think tank. I suggest the same be applied to Ewart. Before you even read his comments you know where he is going. Perhaps “pro union”, “Pro big government”, “anti corporate” should preceed his predictable skew.
“Wake up folks, your cheap WalMart flat screen TV’s and iPads come to you courtesy of oil, and its not income tax from Walmart greeter jobs that pay for schools and hospitals.”
Turn it to oil in Alberta, I’m sure China will still buy it. Keep all the jobs in Canada.
“Wake up folks, your cheap WalMart flat screen TV’s and iPads come to you courtesy of oil, and its not income tax from Walmart greeter jobs that pay for schools and hospitals”
Per the Department of Finance website, here is the breakdown of federal government revenues for 2010-2011:
– Personal income tax 47.9%
– Non-resident income tax 2.2%
– Other revenue 11.9%
– Other taxes and duties (excluding GST) 6.1%
– GST 12.0%
– EI premium revenues 7.4%
– Corporate income tax 12.6%
So the majority of revenue comes from income tax.
I’m with NoWay, jobs in CANADA
Even if we need foreign workers, at least they increase the income tax revenue.
Globalisation is just corporatespeak for sucking resources out to maximize profits.
Another well-researched article on Enbridge and again it is clear this company is not concerned with environmental impact their project will have. They talk the talk but do not walk the walk. The five-point plan by Christy Clark is nothing but words on paper. It has absolutely no teeth. What does âworld Leadingâ oil spill response even mean. Sounds like a catchy new phrase the BC Liberals want everyone to banter. It would not matter to Enbridge if they had to sign a commitment to provide world leading or third world oil spill response. The truth is Enbridge will not live up to ensuring they take full responsibility for cleanup of a spill. The research is there for all to review. I would go as far to say that even if Enbridge sing the commitment in their own lifeblood â OIL, they still would effectively weasel out of their responsibility to clean up the oil spill. Let us be honest, Enbridge spends millions of dollars ensuring they do not have to. One thing, and probably the most important thing, that Enbridge has learned from the Michigan spill is that they must get further into the governmentsâ back rooms to further deal away the ability for any community, city, and province to make Enbridge liable and responsible for the environmental cleanup of THEIR spills. There is no option but a resounding NO to this project.
Enbridge is over 800 million on the Michigan spill. No greedy corporation wants that bill. Preventing and controlling leeks is much better for the bottom line than not. To think that they would skimp on safety defies capitalist greed.
Comments for this article are closed.