Alberta Accepts B.C’s 5 Conditions for Pipeline
Premier Christy Clark and Alberta Premier Alison Redford on energy policy. video courtesy Government of British Columbia
Prince George, B.C.- Premier Christy Clark says B.C. and Alberta have reached agreement on two matters on energy policy.
Clark says Alberta’s taxes and royalties are not up for discussion, and that Alberta has agreed B.C.’s 5 conditions for a pipeline are important and that Alberta now has a “broader understanding and acceptance ” of those 5 conditions.
B.C. has agreed to join Canada’s energy strategy discussions.
While none of the 5 conditions have been met, Clark says “We have to agree that they should be met.”
The 5 conditions remain:
- Successful completion of the environmental review process. In the case of the Northern Gateway Pipeline, that means a recommendation by the National Energy Board Joint Review Panel that the project proceed.
- World-leading marine oil-spill response, prevention and recovery systems for B.C.’s coastline and ocean to manage and mitigate the risks and costs of heavy-oil pipelines and shipments.
- World-leading practices for land oil-spill prevention, response and recovery systems to manage and mitigate the risks and costs of heavy-oil pipelines.
- Legal requirements regarding Aboriginal and treaty rights are addressed, and First Nations are provided with the opportunities, information and resources necessary to participate in and benefit from a heavy-oil project.
- British Columbia receives a fair share of the fiscal and economic benefits of a proposed heavy-oil project that reflects the level, degree and nature of the risk borne by the government, the environment and taxpayers.
It has been condition number 5 that caused concern with Alberta, but Clark has made it clear “Alberta’s taxes and royalties are not part of the discussion.”
Instead, Clark says the working group set up in July , could develop any of a number of recommendations to satisfy that 5th condition, “So for example, people are talking about a refinery in British Columbia, that couldbe three thousand jobs and a lot of potential tax revenue for the province. The federal Government is going to garner a huge revenue as a result of this, the companies themselves will generate huge profits, so there are lots of different forms economic benefits.”
“We are making incredible progress on the Canadian Energy Strategy” says Alberta Premier Alison Redford “We have always believed the five conditions were important conditions. “Of course there needs to be economic benefit for a jurisdiction that is involved in any of these issues” says Redford. “We know this isn’t about quid pro quo, or gotcha politics, it’s about putting in place economic models that are going to work for Canada for each of our economies and allow for productivity and that’s the most important thing.” She says at the end of the day “it will be up to each company that is putting that infrastructure in place, to make the decision on whether or not they can move forward based on the economics of the project.”
The working group that is looking at the shared goals of the two provinces on responsible development of energy resources and diversifying markets continues to work with a report and recommendations due at the end of December.
Comments
I guess that is what floated down the river.
Good first start. Now keep at it so we can get this project completed.
good on you parnelli. a lot of upside for PG on the way
mmm how about just $1 per barrel to BC…
Thank goodness the majority of British Columbians are against this proposed pipeline! Nice to know our environment and our children’s future won’t be sold out for the short term gain of multi-national oil corporations!
I guess your children can find employment with an enrivonmental lobby group.
People#1: “Thank goodness the majority of British Columbians are against this proposed pipeline!”
Polls also showed that the NDP were going to win the last provincial election in a landslide. Lesson learned, if you poll in certain areas (i.e. Metro Vancouver), you will get the answer you want. I don’t recall anyone asking me.
Let’s get it built.
“Nice to know our environment and our children’s future won’t be sold out for the short term gain of multi-national oil corporations!”
I Want you to think about this statement and everytime your fill your tank up, use public transit or consume anything that was hauled by rail or truck.. The reality is we are all “selling out” to some degree.
We have consumed resources at will that have came from someone elses home and country now its time for us to step up to the plate and take some of the risk as others have burdened to feed our consumption.
If people want to stop oil flowing through BC.. People need to check every label on every product they buy and avoid “Made In China”..
JB wrote: “I don’t recall anyone asking me.”
Remove your phone number from the “do not call list” and they will ask you. ;-)
If this pipeline goes through there will be little benefit for Prince George.
Most of the workers will be travelling with the pipeline and working in sections, so how many jobs will actually be generated in Prince George.
Some logistic work, some supply work, etc; but not much over all.
In fact it will pass through around Summit Lake and carry on through the bush, and most people will not even know that it took place,.
gus: “Remove your phone number from the “do not call list” and they will ask you. ;-)”
The national Do Not Call list doesn’t stop survey companies from calling. :-)
Christy really had to join in and accept this pipeline, as the Province has no power to stop a Federal Project, nor can they expect to reap benefits from an adjacent Province.
She used the issue to get re-elected, and has now sold out those who supported her.
uppercanadian states; “I guess your children can find employment with an enrivonmental lobby group.”
Golly gee, do you think my kid will be one of the luck 50 who will have full-time jobs operating this pipeline after it is completed in Kitimat? Wow 50 jobs, if that, what a boom to BC’s economy!!!
JB states; “Polls also showed that the NDP were going to win the last provincial election in a landslide. Lesson learned, if you poll in certain areas (i.e. Metro Vancouver), you will get the answer you want. I don’t recall anyone asking me.”
What on earth are you yammering about, what does the elections have to do with this proposed pipeline? For all we know the elections results could have been BC’s tacit approval of BC’s future LNG economy Christy’s and her government have been promoting.
Try thinking a bit more linear JB, we voted for a government in the last election, a government that on election day have just “rejected” the proposed pipeline. Do your research please!
Hey I would vote for a provincial government that publicly proposed this:
âWe have set five conditions for the movement of heavy oil through our province and I will not bend,â she said. In the same speech, she disparaged Alberta oil as dirty â not an encouraging sign for Enbridge. She said B.C.âs natural-gas reserves hold as much energy as Albertaâs oil sands, but âthe difference, though, is this: Itâs clean. A clean fuel, to wean Asia off dirtier sources of energy.â
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/northern-gateway-appears-likely-to-be-rejected-by-next-bc-government/article11194353/
Sounds right up my alley, hey I will vote for her based on what she said in April. (After the Election)… hey whats going on Christy? Just the Liberals lying and being “two-faced” again! LOL
“I Want you to think about this statement and everytime your fill your tank up, use public transit or consume anything that was hauled by rail or truck..”
I see nothman has fallen back on to his same old repetitive BIG OIL talking points again. So again I say in response:
If we want to reduce our dependance on global killing fossil fuels and “gradually” move towards cleaner energy… Don’t vote for a Conservative Government in the next election. Simple as that… don not vote for the Conservative Party of Canada, vote for any other party, the Liberals, The Greens, the NDP, it doesn’t matter who, just don’t vote for BIG OIL’s Conservative Party of Canada!
It’s coming even if it a bad idea.
1) The Federal government in Harper Land will approve it as a national interest.
2) We all need and use oil products so unless you leave you bike and home made with oil energy and products and stop using plastic and gas transportation then you have no real base to your fight.
3) The big companies left foreign investors like China buy in to much so we owe them.
“Repetitive BIG OIL talking points”
When was the last time i said anything about big oil? Typical left wing jibbersih.. Cant quote me on anyting else so you have to make something up..
By the way People#1 “Doing research”does not mean going through media publications and picking the points that align with your beleif system. You are in for a rude awakening if you ever get into the position where you are called on to be a professional. At the rate you are going you dont have to worry about being in a “professional’ position anyhow..
People#1: “I see nothman has fallen back on to his same old repetitive BIG OIL talking points again. So again I say in response:
Don’t vote for a Conservative Government in the next election. Simple as that… “
Speaking of repetitive talking points…
JB states; “Polls also showed that the NDP were going to win the last provincial election in a landslide. Lesson learned, if you poll in certain areas (i.e. Metro Vancouver), you will get the answer you want. I don’t recall anyone asking me.”
People: “What on earth are you yammering about, what does the elections have to do with this proposed pipeline? For all we know the elections results could have been BC’s tacit approval of BC’s future LNG economy Christy’s and her government have been promoting.”
Lol. Weren’t you the one yammering about how ‘the majority’ of BC was against the pipeline? Sorry about your lack of reading comprehension.
We live in the new era of Harper politics.
Say what ever needs to be said to get elected and then once elected do what ever they damn well please regardless of what they campaigned on. Its all about spin and has little to do with trust anymore.
Wow… I am at a loss for words here JB, anyone else want to try? Good luck…
{url]http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http://bitstrategist.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/empty_brain.jpg&imgrefurl=http://bitstrategist.com/2011/12/five-strategies-to-keep-high-octane-in-your-brain/&h=362&w=320&sz=21&tbnid=dBaRZhaoNTTH7M:&tbnh=91&tbnw=80&zoom=1&usg=__fPFnwFDLWh2kniM0d-CIFcoe1KE=&docid=HIWK4an-bRZTjM&sa=X&ei=L4Z5UrWoNoS6iwKjp4CgAg&sqi=2&ved=0CDkQ9QEwAA[/url]
http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http://bitstrategist.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/empty_brain.jpg&imgrefurl=http://bitstrategist.com/2011/12/five-strategies-to-keep-high-octane-in-your-brain/&h=362&w=320&sz=21&tbnid=dBaRZhaoNTTH7M:&tbnh=91&tbnw=80&zoom=1&usg=__fPFnwFDLWh2kniM0d-CIFcoe1KE=&docid=HIWK4an-bRZTjM&sa=X&ei=L4Z5UrWoNoS6iwKjp4CgAg&sqi=2&ved=0CDkQ9QEwAA
Faulty logic says we should have to park our cars at home if we don’t support exporting oil off our coast. What a dim wit argument that is. I’m sure our future generations will not agree with that when they have no oil left for them to drive their cars and heat their homes.
News flash China this week openly discussed their nuclear strategy to kill as many Americans as they can in a nuclear first strike… hitting mostly the cities on the west coast so the radiation will spread out enough to get everyone in the sparsely populated heartland. They unveiled four new nuclear power ballistic missile submarines that are now at sea and can do just that.
So lets see out our childrens future so they can drive cars and have cell phones in China… Canada’s national energy strategy under Harper… meanwhile we continue to rely on despot regimes in Africa and South America for oil in Eastern Canada.
The risk to our coast is the real issue here. The money brought into BC in royalties will never cover the cost of a spill, much less the damage it would do to existing sustainable industries when it happens.
If Gateway had to fully fund the risk for their project they would not be able to make it economically viable. So in effect this is about corporate welfare for off shore investors. This is why the project is done with a throw away subsidiary corporation designed to limit liability. Its a revenue center and thats it for them.
Eagleone; “Faulty logic says we should have to park our cars at home if we don’t support exporting oil off our coast. What a dim wit argument that is. I’m sure our future generations will not agree with that when they have no oil left for them to drive their cars and heat their homes.”
Nowhere in Northman’s post did I read an argument for what you suggest, rather we all are a little (or alot) hypocritical if we say no out of one side of our mouths but continue to support consuming out of the other.
People#1; What are you using to send these posts? If it’s not some form of nano technology computer from the future you are as guilty as those you belittle in your posts. News flash, until we have a major revolution, big money rules the world no matter what political party you vote for.
detoe43- if we use computers and drive cars, we have to accept Northern Gateway? Is that really your argument?
To all the nay sayers, the Danish use computers just like us, they also use Internal Combustion Engines just like us (although to a much lesser extent)… but does this stop them from doing this???
“Here at Inhabitat, we are big fans of Denmark â not only did the country give the world LEGO bricks, but it has also fostered innovative green designers and major renewable energy projects. This week, the Danish government once again threw down the green energy gauntlet by pledging to generate 35% of its total energy from renewable sources by 2020 and 100% by 2050.”
Read more: Denmark Announces Plans to Produce 100% of its Energy From Renewable Sources By 2050 Danish Wind Farm – Gallery Page 1 â Inhabitat – Sustainable Design Innovation, Eco Architecture, Green Building
Wow talk about a forward thinking and responsible country and government!!! Yet here we are actually EXPANDING the largest carbon emitting project on this planet (Alberta Tar Sands). Time to heave Steve and get in step with the rest of the world’s responsible countries!!
Time to wake up sheeple!!!
herbster; Reread my post. I never implied nor endorsed Enbridge or the idea of a pipeline. I am saying that it is hypocritical to bash “big oil” yet enjoy the benefits of what comes from their production.
On record I am against Enbridge & their shoddy record. In principle I am for a well thought out & designed way of transporting oil. Whether we want it or not, it is going to happen one way or the other regardless of who is the ruling political parties on every level.
Actually we here should not feel very guilty that we are using a small part of what comes from the production of big oil. What we (B.C. or Canada) is consuming is a drop in the bucket compared to the global consumption. The oil that comes from here and gets pumped through the proposed pipe line is NOT for our consumption – it is for consumption elsewhere, in Asia.
There they want to put more cars and trucks on the road, tens of millions more or hundreds of millions eventually. They need fuel! Already they are choking on the pollution, perhaps soon they will realize that burning all these (imported fossil fuels) may not be such a good idea after all and go to alternatives!
What is our problem? It is a fact that we are propping up our living standard mostly with the export of raw materials. Once they are gone, they are gone for good! What other choices do we have? Where are the Canadian factories that produce consumer goods like cameras, computers, coolers and coffee makers and export them globally in sufficient quantities to enjoy the present standard of living without exporting raw materials?
Got a sheeple! Everyone drink. And could someone repost the picture of people#2 on the computer while typing sheeple.
The natives will hold this up for a very long time. Enbridge has applied for a flow reversal on their pipeline going east because they know BC will stop the sludge from going through their province.
In the meantime Enbridge is still trying to clean up their Kalamazoo incompetance.
Let’s ban tanker traffic on the east coast too. Only fair.
People#1..that works just fine for Denmark but they dont have left wing nut bars haulting projects!! by the way the northen European countriries also have significant oil and gas industries. Canada and BC have lots of alternative energy projects.. They are stuck in the environmental review and First Nations constation process!! This reason alone is why it’s almost impossible to get alternative energy projects off the ground.
A look at this might open an eye or two.
http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/pipeline-incidents/
Get,er built.
Christy did not reject the pipeline, just placed conditions.
Over 500 permanent jobs once built.
People#1 go down to the enbridge office and have a discussion or are you scared of face to face. I have been there and they are quite open.
I am in Australia right now and they have swallowed the cagw hook line and sinker but opinion is changing. The new government is dumping the so calling climate change programs and the carbon tax that the privious government brought even they said they would not.
By the way demark generates half it’s energy from coal and depends on Norway plus other countries to back up it’s variable and very expensive bird mashers. Wind energy needs to be backed up and only is feasable with large subsidies which makes danish electricity the most expensive in the world and for what?
northman states: “Canada and BC have lots of alternative energy projects.. They are stuck in the environmental review and First Nations constation process!! This reason alone is why it’s almost impossible to get alternative energy projects off the ground.”
What baseless, unfounded and unsubstantiated opinion northman!
Here is the truth and the facts; by far the majority of projects opposed by First Nations in Canada are fossil fuel projects. Albeit a small number of hydro – electric projects, mostly over flooding of traditional hunting, trapping territories and revenue sharing.
Yet the overwhelming evidence is First Nations do NOT hold up or get in the way of clean energy projects, in fact they are leading the way for Canada!
http://www.pembina.org/re/work/first-nations
http://www.mwpr.ca/go9677a/BC_GOVERNMENT_FUNDS_NUMEROUS_FIRST_NATION_ENERGY_PROJECTS
http://www.afn.ca/uploads/files/env/07-03-31_health_canada_climate_change_report-_final.pdf
Our First Nations are not just telling us where our future is in clean renewable energy, they are actually SHOWING US!!!
Seamut or Seamutt; BIG OIL shill who is the lead lemming telling everyone to follow him over the climate change cliff.
All the while myself, and the most notable and respected scientists on this planet, are all saying we must reduce our dependance on fossil fuels and move towards clean energy!
It’s an easy sell seamut, especially here in PG, more carbon emissions pumped into our air shed, or cleaner energy and cleaner air! This is not just for us, it’s for our children and their children.
So sad you refuse to read over links I have provided in the past.
Even your eculted IPPC has recognised the lack of warming over the last 17 years. The shrilling of your grant seeking scientists is getting louder because they are worried about their taxpayer incomes do to the decline in public interest in cagw. Lack of interest because after years of catterwalling by the likes of Gore and his ilk and the fortunes they have made nothing is happening in climate that hasn’t happened before.
Tell me how man’s contribution of 3% of total ghg is changing the climate? Oh right you just ignore the scientific method same as your hero’s.
Trying to make this easier to access for those interested.
http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/pipeline-incidents
Canada should keep all it’s oil. Keep burning the other countries oil then when it is all gone we have our reserves to take over the world. That is unless the americans invade us first.
Or sell it for $1 million mwahahaha.
Seamutt, even if there were no global warming (while almost all scientists agree there is-Harper just won’t let them talk) Northern Gateway is a disaster on ecological, economic, and political grounds.
1. Ecological: The pipeline will leak. Just a matter of time. Enbridge will not carry the $40 billion in insurance that BP paid to clean up the Gulf of Mexico.That means the taxpayer will foot the bill for any major cleanup. Enbridge (or anyone else) cannot clean bitumen out of an ice covered river. How far do you think the bitumen and condensate can travel under the ice? All the way to Vancouver? How much would that cost to clean up? How about a tanker cracking up off the coast. Do you think it will ever be cleaned up? Alaska is still dealing with the Exxon Valdez
2. Economic. Despite all the unfunded costs associated with cleanup, Northern Gateway is an economic disaster for Alberta and Canada. First of all, the bitumen that will be exported is barely profitable. Only by the use of massive amounts of cheap natural gas, can we produce the stuff. When LPG plants go in, the price of gas will go up, and the tarsands will not generate any profit. Even today, they do not make their economic rent, Alberta will accumulate $20 billion deficit within the next couple of years, despite exporting 2 million barrels/day. If they can’t make money with that, why are they expanding? Furthermore Northern Gateway will be exporting unrefined bitumen, all the refinery jobs will be created in China.
3.Political. Canada has developed because of east-west transportation links. The country that trades together stays together. Exporting our oil to China when Eastern Canada imports more than Northern Gateways capacity is a recipe for the breakup of Canada. That is why I consider supporters of Northern Gateway as treasonous, and traitors. Steven Harper and Joe Oliver are the worst, telling us that Northern Gateway is actually good for Canada.
Gimme a break People#1, same argument over and over. The choice is rail or pipeline, you keep ‘yammering’ about a third option that only exists in your mind and has no basis in reality.
I for one prefer pipeline over rail option, would be nice if they could use a right of way by a highway but not sure if they can have that many corners without causing stress on the pipes
herbster: they need to reach tidal waters to get full price for a barrel of oil, that is what most of this is about. Losing about 20 dollars a barrel (too lazy to look up the figure right now) due to the trade agreement with the US is killing their profit margins. Shipping it across Canada to the east is being looked at
Poor Slinky… he provides us with the typical current government line of choice between pipelines or rail, not knowing or completely understanding that we are no longer sheeple and desire other choices beyond the two options that a BIG OIL government offers us.
Denmark, and many other countries around the world are making an alternative clean energy choice, and so should we!
Slinky, last time I checked, Harper stated that there is no oil strategy in Ottawa, he prefers to let industry sort it out. Well guess what? The chinese own a quarter of the bitumen in Alberta, and they want it in China. Unless we get a real Canadian leader in Ottawa, the bitumen will go to China. Harper is not only a laissez-faire economist, he is also an intellectually lazy person. Whatever suits the corporate interests is fine with him, even though it won’t be good for Canada.
Time to quit talking about shipping out unrefined resources and start refining our oil here.
If it’s profitable to refine in Kitimat, why not in Alberta? Why ship all of the jobs and profits over seas?
Comments for this article are closed.