On October 13, just after 1 a.m, and only eight months after British Columbia signed the Great Bear Rainforest Agreements — set in place to protect the world’s largest coastal temperate rainforest — the Nathan E. Stewart tugboat ran aground near Bella Bella.

Even though the 10,000-tonne fuel barge the tugboat was pushing was empty, the wreck managed to release more than 100,000 litres of diesel into the heart of the Heiltsuk First Nation’s traditional territory.

Now, six months after the American tug-barge on route from Alaska ran aground, the Heiltsuk First Nation has released a 75-page report on the Nathan E. Stewart oil spill that exposes the failures of Canada’s oil spill response system and a refusal from both the government and the company to share information with those affected by the spill.

“The first 48 hours were critical for mitigation,” Heiltsuk First Nation Chief Marilyn Slett told DeSmog Canada. “What the crew reported to us during interviews was that there was confusion about who was taking charge at the incident site.”

The First Nation’s integrated resource manager learned about the spill when he received a telephone call from the B.C. Ministry of Environment around 4:30 a.m. on October 13th. Vessels were on their way to Gale Passage by 6:30 that morning.

The report highlights delays in equipment arriving to the site, delays in deploying booms and an insufficient number of booms being made available.

Heiltsuk members who acted as first responders were not provided with any safety equipment or briefing on the health impacts related to the exposure to diesel, which is highly toxic.

The area most affected by the diesel leak, Gale Passage, is an important harvesting and ceremonial site and is considered a “breadbasket” of the Heiltsuk community. Since the spill the Heiltsuk has been forced to close its clam fishery.

It took responders over 30 days to remove the sunken tugboat from the water. By then the federal government had announced the “Oceans Protection Plan,”  which pledged $1.5 billion over five years to increase marine safety, marine oil spill cleanup research and restore marine ecosystems across Canada.

But according to Slett, the plan doesn’t amount to the world-class oil spill response regime British Columbians have been promised for years (a promise Premier Christy Clark reiterated in the wake of the Nathan E. Stewart spill).

“Nothing has changed since this spill,” Slett said.

“As it stands today, if something was to happen, we’re still under the same spill response regime.”

Slett added that, according to the Heiltsuk experience, “a real spill-response regime does not exist.”

One of the key-findings from the investigation was that the tugboat had been waived from requiring an onboard local pilot. And it appears that the tug replacing the Nathan E. Stewart is operating with the same waiver. Even though the tugboat repeatedly travelled through their territory, the Heiltsuk didn’t know about the waiver system until after the incident.

The proposed federal ban on oil tankers on the North Coast of B.C. also wouldn’t have prevented a vessel like the Nathan E. Stewart from traversing Heiltsuk water, because it falls just below the capacity limit proposed by the feds.

Since the Nathan E. Stewart spill, B.C. has approved the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline, which would greatly increase the amount of oil tanker traffic in B.C. waters.

One of the conditions of approval — “world class oil spill response” — is something the province also failed to demonstrate in the wake of the 2015 Marathassa bunker fuel spill in Vancouver’s English Bay.

A report by West Coast Environmental Law in 2016 found the province’s oil response “overhaul” was seriously lacking.

“Changes that we recommend include that the policy level planning needs to be taken out of the hand of industry and led by both the provincial government and First Nations, with the opportunity for community input,” explained Gavin Smith, staff counsel at West Coast Environmental Law.

The report also recommended a citizens advisory council to allow for public input from people with localized knowledge.

Given that First Nations are often the first responders, Slett says First Nations and communities should be included in all decisions related to the movement of oil products through their land, especially oil spill response systems.

“We live on the coast. These are our traditional territories, we know the areas, we know the tides, we know the weather patterns, and we’re the first ones out there,” she said.

“What we can take from this and what we would like to see happen in conversations with B.C. and Canada is a recognized role for First Nations as first responders.”

Image: Diesel spill from the Nathan E. Stewart. Photo: Heiltsuk Tribal Council

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Between the Site C dam, Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline and the Pacific NorthWest liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facility, it’s hard to keep track of all the projects that have been approved in B.C. But for First Nations that will be affected by the Pacific NorthWest LNG terminal and pipelines, the environmental and cultural impacts are impossible to escape.

In what is now the fourth federal lawsuit filed against the federal government’s approval of the $36 billion LNG project, two Gitxsan Nation hereditary chiefs have filed a judicial review arguing that Pacific NorthWest LNG infringes on their Aboriginal fishing rights.

In October of last year, judicial reviews were also filed in federal court by the Gitanyow and Gitwilgyoots First Nations, as well as the SkeenaWild Conservation Trust.

The main concern? Salmon. Specifically, salmon stocks in the Skeena watershed, which supports Canada's second-largest salmon run. The LNG export terminal is planned for Lelu Island, near Prince Rupert, a site the federal government studied 40 years ago and found unsuitable or port development.  

“Lelu Island is an area that is very, very unique,” explained Yvonne Lattie, hereditary chief of the Gwininitxw house group in the Gitxsan First Nation and one of the plaintiffs in the judicial review.

“It has a pre-glacial shelf where the eelgrass grow, which is vital for the survival of the little smolts (a smolt is a salmon that is getting ready to go out to sea).”

Salmon need to get used to the salt water before they make their way out to sea, in a process that can take up to six weeks. This means they’re susceptible to changes on the Flora Bank, where Petronas — a Malaysian based company that holds a 62-per-cent interest in Pacific NorthWest LNG — is hoping to build off-loading terminals.

“If we do not have Lelu island, if we do not have the eelgrass, our salmon will not survive. Lelu island is vital in the survival of the salmon and in the survival of the aboriginal people that live on the Skeena,” Lattie added.

The Gitxsan First Nation has fished salmon on the Skeena for generations, but Lattie explained that since Lelu Island is not technically their territory, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency decided the Gitxsan wouldn’t be impacted by the LNG terminal. Studies conducted by both the Gwininitxw house and Simon Fraser University contradict that assessment.

A study conducted by Simon Fraser University professor Jonathan Moore found that salmon on the Skeena River originate from 40 different populations, spanning more First Nations territories than those consulted by the government.

The First Nations have partnered with RAVEN Trust to raise funds to see the lawsuits through. Last week they held a fundraiser in East Vancouver where hereditary chiefs and environmental activists were joined onstage by Grand Chief Stewart Philip from the Union of BC Indian Chiefs.

Communities Divided by 'Secretive Deals'

Richard Wright, spokesperson for uncle Charlie Wright — hereditary chief of the Luutkudziiwus house group and second plaintiff in the federal lawsuit against Ottawa and Petronas — says the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency chose to consult with the Gitxsan Development Corporation, who Wright said have no aboriginal land rights or a mandate to represent the Gitxsan First Nation.

“Premier Clark’s secretive deals foster corruption and divide our communities but it will not avail her when our case gets to court,” Wright said.

The tensions sown within the Gitxsan Nation by the B.C. government’s push for LNG have been well documented by Discourse Media.

“They (CEAA) stopped talking to us and continued negotiating with this corporation,” explained Wright. “Afterwards [CEAA] says their study says that there will be little to no impact on the salmon, therefore little to no impacts on our rights. And that the depth of consultation will be very shallow. I said that was inadequate and that it was not up to them to determine to what extent the consultation process will go to.”

That’s when Wright decided to “shut down” his territory. He placed a large industrial gate on the only road coming in and out of the Suskwa valley, and built a large permanent camp.

“Since we've done that, we've been running youth programs out there, primarily focused on cultural revitalization and connecting youth to the land,” added Wright. He says he also started kicking surveyors out.

When contacted about these claims, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) reiterated that the Government of Canada stands behind its decision on the Pacific NorthWest LNG Project. They added that the decision to approve the project “was made following a rigorous federal environmental assessment with over 190 conditions in place to protect the environment.”

The CEAA also maintained that it consulted with Indigenous groups “based on the project’s potential impact on their potential or established Aboriginal rights or title.” Meanwhile, Pacific NorthWest LNG also says that it consulted with First Nations who are located closest to Lelu Island.

Wright and the rest of the plaintiffs hope that the judicial review will reverse the order of approval on the LNG project, and grant them the right to be properly consulted.

“We have the right and ability to manage our own rights and resources, and they're going to have to recognize that,” said Wright.

‘Our Salmon Will Not Survive’: Gitxsan Nation Raising Funds to Fight #PNWLNG in Court https://t.co/5ZdVO4jmAC #bcpoli #cdnpoli #Skeena pic.twitter.com/JbCewoUgU3

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) March 17, 2017

B.C. Subsidizing LNG Industry

Besides the potential harm to the Skeena watershed, some critics of the Pacific NorthWest LNG project think the project makes no sense economically.

“B.C. was late to the LNG race, renewables are cheaper now. But B.C. is subsidizing these companies as our hydro bills go up,” explained Caitlyn Vernon, a campaigner for the Sierra Club BC.

Even though the Sierra Club is not involved with the lawsuit, the environmental non-for-profit has been working to raise awareness about the Petronas project. The organization is about to publish a report about the B.C. government’s reduction of corporate tax rates for LNG.

“Industry is paying less than the cost of producing the power. And then it's hydro rate payers that are making up the difference,” explained Vernon.

“We don't need the Site C dam for existing power needs in British Columbia. We have enough power for our needs, so the only reason that we would build this would be to provide electricity to fracking and LNG facilities or for the tar sands. That's going to take 70 years to pay off and that's gonna mean increases in hydro rates for all B.C. So we're going to be paying for it.”

With a B.C. election coming up on May 9, Vernon thinks these issues will play an important role.

“This is an issue for all British Columbians, not just because of salmon or climate impact but also because we are going to be paying for these industries for generations through our taxes and our hydro rates.”

Photo: Freshwaters Illustrated

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

There just aren’t enough solar training centres in Alberta to keep up with demand from former oilpatch workers, according to Randall Benson, owner of Gridworks Energy Group, an Edmonton-based company that designs, supplies and installs solar panels.

Benson, who has worked in the solar industry since the year 2000, said more capacity is needed to upgrade the skills of the province’s vastly underemployed oil and gas workforce which has lost thousands of jobs in the wake of plummeting oil prices.

“We do a lot of training,” Benson told DeSmog Canada. “The interest in training is unbelievable, it's gone up two or three fold just in the last couple of years. And it continues to grow.”

Benson, who said he’s had to turn people away from full classes, is currently considering opening up another training centre in Calgary to keep up with demand.

But as reports of overburdened solar training centres start to emerge, the biggest question — of who will employ all the newly trained workers — remains unanswered.

Benson estimates 98 per cent of his students are from the energy sector and are either out of work or they're “seeing a switch happening.”

“Something is telling them that it's time to diversify their training and skill set. Worldwide solar and other renewables are going to be the biggest source of jobs soon,” Benson said.

But so far Canada has bucked the worldwide trend, with low to medium demand for solar energy workers, Benson said. The best option for recent grads of solar training programs is independent contracting, installing solar panels on private homes and buildings, he said.

This reality might change in the next couple of years.

Lliam Hildebrand, founder of Iron and Earth, an organization of former oilsands workers committed to renewable energy projects, says utility scale solar projects will go into construction mode in late 2018.

“Over the next two years we have an incredible opportunity to be proactive with our training programs,” Hildebrand said. “If we wait until [2018] to prepare the workforce then we'll be behind the ball and these companies might just hire workers from North Dakota who have a lot more experience than any of our trades people in Alberta.”

The governments of Alberta and Saskatchewan both recently committed to renewables — Alberta to the tune of 30 per cent renewables by 2030 and Saskatchewan to 50 per cent renewable energy by 2030 — and they’ll need to procure that renewable energy from somewhere.

#Oilpatch to Solar Field: #Alberta Oil & Gas Workforce Lines Up for #Solar Training #ableg #cdnpoli https://t.co/JRTugja1lX

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) August 29, 2016

But there's still a lot that has to be done in the form of funding and policy work if Alberta is going to truly harness it’s solar potential. The Alberta government is currently providing up to $5 million to finance the cost of setting up solar power in buildings such as offices, fire halls, community centres and farms.

But, for those on the inside, $5 million is not nearly enough to kickstart the solar industry.

“It’s a great start, but we're gonna need a lot more programs like that in order to help prepare us for this larger boom that's going to be happening in 2018,” Hildebrand said.

Hildebrand hopes to get funding from both the federal and provincial governments to start training programs. Hildebrand wasn't ready to go public on the amount of money he hopes to get — only that he expects 50 per cent to come from Alberta and the other half from the federal government. He recently had an invitation from federal Environment Minister Catherine McKenna to meet with her and discuss a proposal.

“Until then what's going to be creating the most jobs in renewable energy, and the energy sector in general, is smaller operations like small residential projects, because those can happen almost over-night,” Hildebrand said.

That's just funding though — there’s also the issue of policy.

According to Sara Hastings-Simon —the Pembina Institute’s Clean Economy program director — in order to understand what it takes from a policy perspective to further grow jobs, it's important to distinguish between two types of solar: distributed solar, which is where the home owner or business owner put panels up on their roofs, and utility scale solar which would include larger solar farms.

“The first overall point is that there is a lot of potential for jobs in solar in Canada, and in Alberta specifically, we have one of the best solar resources in all of Canada,” Hastings-Simon said.

Unlike B.C., Alberta has a de-regulated market, this means that every hour energy operators bid a certain amount of energy for a certain amount of money. Then it’s up to a grid operator to line them up in order, from the lowest price to the highest, until he has amassed all the energy needed to meet demand that specific hour. This means the most expensive bidders get left out and the remaining energy operators get paid the price of the highest bidder who's power is being used.

“It costs renewable producers less money to create power if their panels are already built, so they will bid less money,” Hastings-Simon said. “If solar had a large enough share they could bring down the price of electricity.”

“In the U.S., states that increased their use of renewables saw the cost for consumers go down by as much as 10 per cent.”

The problem is utility solar only gets cheaper once you deploy it at scale because the maintenance is much cheaper then other forms of energy production. But if businesses aren’t pushed in the direction of renewables, they will just continue with the status quo, Hastings-Simon said. This means another way to provide policy support for renewables is by lowering the cost of financing, like providing loan guarantees.

The federal government does currently provide tax breaks to investors.

In a statement provided to DeSmog Canada, Natural Resources Canada said they encourage investments in specified clean energy generation and energy conservation equipment. This provision allows the capital cost of eligible equipment acquired before 2020 to be deducted at a rate of 50 per cent per year. And certain intangible start-up costs associated with renewable energy projects are eligible for 100 per cent tax deductions.

According to Natural Resources, the 2016 budget is providing $50 million to Sustainable Development Technology Canada to support “the development of new technologies that address climate change, air quality, clean water and clean soil.”

An additional $82.5 million is being provided to support research, development and demonstration of clean energy technologies. Natural Resources did not specify what percentage of that budget is destined for solar.

Unlike utility scale projects, in the case of distributed solar — private home and business owners with solar panels on their roofs — the big policy driver isn’t funding, it’s accounting.

Alberta uses a net billing system which means that, while you’re sending excess energy to your neighbours, you're paid back for the electricity charges but not other variable charges like transmission and distribution.

Changing this policy to more fairly value the energy that is generated on people's roofs is one way the government could make sure the distributed market — which Hastings-Simon says is very good from a jobs perspective — is more attractive.

“Alberta is following the same trend as other jurisdictions: we’re in the transition to clean our energy, both for the environmental and health benefits, but also simply because it makes more and more economic sense.”

Image: A solar technician with Great Canadian Solar inspects a panel at the Leduc solar field. Great Canadian Solar has more than doubled its staff in 2016 already. Photo: David Dodge/Green Energy Futures via Flickr

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.