The Economist says Vancouver is liveable, but boring. Clearly they haven’t read its latest evidence against Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.

As part of its final package of evidence in the NEB’s review of the proposed Trans Mountain pipeline and tanker expansion, the City of Vancouver solicited expert testimony on how air quality would be impacted by a spill in Burrard Inlet.

The 53-page report prepared by Richmond-based Levelton Consultants has the same underlying thread of doom featured in much of Vancouver’s other evidence. The key difference? This time there’s a possible human body count.

Benzene, Bitumen and the Human Body

In order to make bitumen transportable it is diluted with a mix of natural gas condensates. This mixture often includes toxic impurities like hydrogen sulphide, cyclohexane and aromatics like benzene, toluene and xylene.

These chemicals are liquid at room temperature, but evaporate quickly when exposed to air, and are extremely toxic to humans. Benzene in particular can cause major, permanent and irreversible damage to immune system cellular function. Possible health impacts of exposure include drowsiness, dizziness, irregular heartbeat, headaches, tremors, confusion, unconsciousness and death. It also adheres to mucous membranes like those in the eyes, nose, lungs and skin, causing irritation.

Air quality experts measure potential impacts by PAC (Proactive Action Criteria) exposure levels, with 1 being the lowest and 3 the highest.

According to Levelton Consultants modelling of a possible major bitumen spill at the Lion’s Gate Bridge:

“There are predicted benzene PAC-2 exceedances over water and land areas, however, not in areas where people live according to the Statistics Canada census data (2011). The exceedances of the benzene PAC-2 levels have been predicted for areas where people may be present including Stanley Park, Lions Gate Bridge, Second Narrows Bridge and over water.”

In simpler terms: If people were overcome by the effects of the benzene and were unable to leave the contaminated area and seek medical help — for example, drivers on the Lions Gate bridge stuck in traffic or pedestrians and cyclists on the Seawall — there is a risk of severe permanent health impacts, including death.

Two other figures in the report are worthy of concern.

The first is 31,400 – the number of potential people living within the 42 square kms around the spill area who would be exposed to benzene levels above PAC 1 and may require hospitalization. Side fact: The Vancouver Coastal Health region has only 1,384 beds available in their 'acute care' department. How they would accommodate the sudden possible influx of 31,400 patients is unclear.

The second figure is 133,100 to 1,077,700 — the range of people living in Vancouver who would be exposed to levels of benzene that exceed acute exposure limits (or the maximum safe amount a person can be exposed to without adverse health impacts). The estimates are based on 2011 Census data, and do not account for tourists or visitors who may be in the exposed area at the time of a spill.

While the maximum predicted one-hour concentrations of benzene decrease below PAC level 1 threshold six hours after an oil spill, its levels still remain above the maximum safe amount.

"The Risks and Costs Outweigh the Benefits"

This new research is coupled with information released earlier this month including spill modelling, impacts on wildlife, negative impacts on real estate values, etc. In short, city staff concluded that the pipeline was ‘not needed in a carbon-constrained world’ and that the Kinder Morgan’s assessment has fundamental flaws that ‘systematically underestimates’ the very real risks to Vancouver.

In their opinion, a major oil spill would be a disaster for Vancouver’s environment, economy, health and reputation, with even a less than ‘worse case’ spill being disastrous. And since the pipeline project was designed with an oil price of $94/barrel in mind, there is a real risk of the expanded pipeline becoming a stranded asset if oil prices remain where they are.

Vancouver City Council will reconvene in two weeks to decide on Mayor Gregor Robertson’s motion to accept the evidence and formally recommit its stance against Kinder Morgan.

These revelations come a day after the Tsleil-Waututh Nation revealed its independent assessment of the Kinder Morgan proposal. The massive report commissioned by the Tsleil-Waututh Sacred Trust, concludes:

“That the proposal does not represent the best use of Tsleil-Waututh territory and its water, land, air, and resources to satisfy the needs of our ancestors, and the needs of present and future generations. It has the potential to deprive past, current, and future generations of our community control and benefit of the water, land, air, and resources in our territory. The assessment recommends that Chief and Council continue to withhold Tsleil-Waututh Nation’s support.”

Oral hearings for the Kinder Morgan TransMountain proposal are scheduled to begin in September with a final recommendation from the National Energy Board expected on Jan 25, 2016.

Image Credit: Rob Sinclair 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.

Economist and former ICBC president  Robyn Allan withdrew from the National Energy Board’s (NEB) review of the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project Tuesday, saying she can no longer “endorse a process that is not working.”

In a letter addressed to Sherri Young, secretary of the NEB, Allan said the “review is not conducted on a level playing field” and that because the panel is “not an impartial referee…the game is rigged.”

Allan said she began to seriously question the process when oral cross-examination was removed from the process.

“I had concerns with what that would do to the overall calibre of the process,” she said.

Allan said she wanted to “participate in good faith through the process of information requests” but now that it has been completed “it’s very clear it has been an exercise in futility.”

“I wanted to see the process through enough to unequivocally conclude that it’s broken,” she said. “ Now I see it’s beyond repair.”

Allan said the limited scope of the board’s review of the process is an “unconscionable betrayal of Canadians.” 

“The board does not include the very serious issues the Canadian public expects the scope to include. And that’s not just the absence of greenhouse gasses in the review and the very serious implications of those for climate change — we don’t even have a classical economic scope of issues,” Allan said.

Allan said the review does not give full consideration to the impact the added Trans Mountain pipeline will have on the whole system, including the increase of tanker traffic in the Burrard Inlet.

Concerns are running high in the Vancouver area after the accidental release of bunker fuel from a cargo vessel in English Bay called the city’s oil spill response capabilities into question.

“You’ve see even just from the bunker C fuel spill in the Burrard Inlet that they were totally incompetent in their ability to deal with [a spill],” she said, adding that the board will only consider the incremental rise in tanker traffic in Vancouver’s waters resulting from the Trans Mountain expansion, but not the impact on tanker traffic as a whole.

“They’re not looking at the whole system,” she said. “This is a deception being perpetrated on the public.”

Allan also said the board relies too heavily on Kinder Morgan’s assessment of risk. Recently the City of Vancouver, City of Burnaby and Tsleil-Waututh Nation commissioned an oil spill assessment by modelling experts Genwest Systems that found two key faults with Kinder Morgan’s oil spill assessment.

Allan said she expects the board to support Kinder Morgan’s risk assessment over those submitted by third parties and downplay the significance of spill risks for the project as a whole.

“The board will say — because Kinder Morgan says — that a spill is ‘not likely’ and therefore we don’t have to consider the cost or the implications.”

Recently NEB chair and CEO Peter Watson addressed public concern over the review process in British Columbia where opposition parties, several major environmental organizations and municipal leaders are calling on the provincial government to pull out of the federal process.   

Allan called the public outreach “duplicitous.”

“The public relations activities that Mr. Watson has been involved in are media spin,” she said. “It’s part of a strategy to lull the Canadian public into a sense of safety when none exists.”

Allan said intelligent Canadians don’t necessarily have the time to investigate the federal government’s review process. She felt she might be able to help: “from the beginning with my expertise and ability and concern I felt that was an effective role I could play.”

Now, after a year of pro bono engagement with the process, Allan says she can no longer participate in good faith.

“What I’ve concluded is the game is rigged, the National Energy Board is a captured regulator and their actions are putting the healthy and safety of the economy, society and environment at risk.” 

Robyn Allan Withdrawal Letter NEB May 19, 2015

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.

With the May 27 deadline for evidence submission to the National Energy Board’s review of the Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion project fast approaching, the cities of Burnaby and Vancouver are stepping up.

Last Wednesday, the City of Burnaby quietly released a report [PDF] outlining the risks and possible implications of a fire at the Burnaby tanker terminal. The results, to quote Mayor Derek Corrigan, are “comprehensive and jarring.”

“It is remarkable that Kinder Morgan is even asking the citizens of Burnaby to assume such risks, but even moreso that the National Energy Board is willing to consider expanding this storage site in this location — on a hillside near thousands of residents and a busy university, and adjacent to an urban conservation area. This report clearly demonstrates that questions about the safety of this proposed tank farm expansion should be answered prior to any decisions being made by the NEB and that the Board should consider this an essential priority.”

Encompassing 60 pages, the report explores several scenarios where oil could spill and ignite at Kinder Morgan’s tank storage facility off Hastings Street, including a tank fire, explosion and a major earthquake.

Too Many Tanks, Too Little Space

According to the report, the largest potential risk to Burnaby lies in the addition of a large number of new tanks to the existing farm. In order to accommodate the increased output of the twinned pipeline, Kinder Morgan would need to increase the number of tanks at its storage facility from 12 to 26, adding 14 new larger tanks (one of which is a replacement). 

Adding in the proposed new storage tanks on the existing site greatly reduces the buffer zone between the tanks, and moves them significantly closer to the public. 

When a fire occurs at the tank farm — and the report makes it clear that no company can make a 100 per cent guarantee they won't — it will have the potential to be more severe in magnitude, and pose a much greater risk to the public. The closer the tanks are, the more likely it is that nearby storage tanks could to catch fire as well. The report notes that “the distance between storage tanks is a key design and engineering feature provided to allow firefighters to effectively isolate an active tank fire, preventing a multiple tank fire event” and that many of the potential tank fire scenarios within the Trans Mountain Tank Farm facility would be inextinguishable due to lack of safe firefighting positions.

"In order to extinguish a tank fire within the Trans Mountain Tank Farm, emergency responders could be forced to significantly risk their personal safety in order to overcome the design inadequacies of the facility. Specifically, the configuration of the tank farm on a hillside in such a tight footprint would require firefighting personnel to operate in elevated positions above the tank, exposing them to potentially excessive heat and smoke outfalls. In these instances emergency responders would likely be forced to allow the tank fire to burn out while adjacent tanks are protected." – Burnaby Fire Department

A worst case scenario tank farm fire, as set out in the report, is legitimately terrifying: a fire breaks out in one or more of the tanks. It spreads quickly through the close-set tanks, as flames burst across the tops of nearby trees and into the Burnaby Mountain Conservation Area. This cuts off road access to Simon Fraser University, exposing the thousands of people living, studying and working there to noxious burning bitumen fumes, including extremely toxic hydrogen sulfide.

The possible impact of an earthquake dumps even more fuel on the nightmare pyre. According to the report: “The potential liquid product release scenario stemming from an expected regional area seismic event would be catastrophic in nature, and has potential to release the contents of several if not all of the storage tanks simultaneously, overwhelming the facilities' retention provisions and flowing unrestricted to highly populated residential areas and sensitive environmental habitats.”

A Bitumen-coated Shoreline in Less than 72 Hours

On Friday morning, the City of Vancouver released their first new piece of evidence — a 2D computer spill model encompassing four scenarios of how oil might spread if spilled in Burrard Inlet. The City of Vancouver, City of Burnaby and Tsleil-Waututh Nation commissioned the report by spill modelling experts Genwest Systems.

The new report finds two key faults with the oil spill models submitted by Kinder Morgan as part of their application to the National Energy Board. Firstly, that Kinder Morgan’s models do not account for beached oil refloating after an initial spill, and secondly, that the supplied modelling of a spill at the Westridge Marine Terminal was ‘unrealistic’ and relied too much on the assumption that containment booms are always properly placed and always work.

The time-lapse video below shows how bitumen and condensate would spread if one of Kinder Morgan’s Aframax-sized tankers spilled 1/5th of its bitumen cargo into Burrard Inlet near the Lion’s Gate Bridge.

In all of its scenarios, Genwest Systems noted how quickly oil spreads in the confined space of Burrard Inlet. Within 72 hours, spilled oil would spread throughout Burrard Inlet to Indian Arm, the Port Moody Arms and to the outer harbour and beyond, with winds and tides spreading them even further. 

100,000 Seabirds and the Pacific Orca Pod at Risk

An additional study on the impact of a Kinder Morgan bitumen spill on local wildlife was released on Monday. Titled “Fate and Effect of Oil Spills from the Trans Mountain Expansion Project in Burrard Inlet and the Fraser River Estuary,” the report finds that the “extraordinarily high densities and numbers of sea‐ and shorebirds, marine mammals, and fish make them especially vulnerable to potentially devastating mortalities should a major oil spill occur in Burrard Inlet or the Fraser River estuary.” 

With 90 per cent of spilled oil likely to reach shorelines within 48 hours, the intertidal zones of beaches and shorelines become “effective killing zones” for sea and shorebirds. In particular, a large diluted bitumen spill near the Fraser River estuary, could potentially kill more than 100,000 birds, plus other nearby mammals. At the same time, large numbers of marine mammals including Harbour seals and porpoises — plus the southern resident Orca population — could perish. The orca pod, if affected, may risk extinction altogether. 

Kinder Morgan Responds

As media began to cover the release of the reports, Kinder Morgan forwarded an email comment to Burnaby Now. It reads: 

"The terminal in Burnaby has been operating safely for 60 years and through our maintenance, prevention and emergency preparedness programs, we are confident in our ability to prevent and respond to all kinds of incidents,” said Michael Davies, a senior director with the company. “Trans Mountain filed a preliminary risk assessment for Burnaby terminal as part of the National Energy Board review of our proposed expansion. It concludes that through design and good management practices the risk of a fire at the terminal is low. We encourage feedback on our proposed expansion and will be reviewing the report from the Burnaby Fire Department in more detail and would welcome a discussion with them to better understand and address their concerns and questions."

It is worth noting that while Kinder Morgan’s preliminary risk assessment is available online, their accident/spill preparedness plans cannot be compared against the reports from the Burnaby Fire Department or the City of Vancouver as the company has filed legal documents to prevent the public from seeing them.

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.

The mayors of Vancouver, Burnaby, New Westminster, City of North Vancouver, Victoria, Squamish and Bowen Island have declared their “non-confidence” in the National Energy Board’s (NEB) review of Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain pipeline and are calling on the federal government to put the current process on hold until a full public hearing process is re-instated.

“It has become apparent that the NEB process does not constitute a ‘public hearing’ and is completely inadequate to assess the health and safety risks of a proposed pipeline through major metropolitan areas, and the potential risks of shipping bitumen oil to Burnaby and through Burrard Inlet, the Salish Sea, and along the coastline of British Columbia,” the mayors write in their declaration.

The mayors also call upon the Government of British Columbia to re-assert its role in environmental assessment and to establish a provincial process, including public hearings, to assess the Trans Mountain proposal.

If built, the Trans Mountain pipeline system would transport more than 890,000 barrels a day of primarily diluted bitumen from the Alberta oilsands to B.C.’s west coast. Most of this heavy oil is destined for Westridge dock in Burnaby, where it would be loaded onto 400 oil tankers per year — a six-fold increase from current oil tanker traffic.

“The current hearing process does not allow for consideration of some of the most damaging aspects of the proposal — the inadequacy of emergency plans; the potential for marine oil spills; the effects of the project on climate change, and the threat it poses to our local economy,” says Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson. “We want to demonstrate to our residents and businesses that we are taking the potential risks seriously, and we want to work together with other municipalities in the region to protect our economy, our environment and our people.”

The mayors say the elimination of oral cross-examination from the hearing process has rendered the process inadequate. Without oral cross-examination, the municipalities have been forced to submit their questions in writing and wait on written responses back from Kinder Morgan. 

“The proponent has failed to answer the majority of questions submitted by municipalities and other intervenors,” the mayors write in their declaration. “Because of the inadequacies inherent to the review process, hundreds of questions critical to public safety and environmental impacts remain unanswered.”

The declaration continues: “We have serious concerns that the current NEB panel is neither independent from the oil industry proponents nor ready or able to assess the ‘public interest’ of British Columbians. It is no longer a credible process from either a scientific evidentiary basis, nor from a public policy and public interest perspective.”

 “We know that our concerns are shared by communities throughout the province,” says Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan. “This flawed hearing process disallows review of aspects of the proposal that could cause the most significant damage. It is critical for this project — and for all projects that can harm communities and the environment — that we have federal review processes that are rigorous and transparent.”

"The City of Victoria is concerned about the impact of increased tanker traffic on our ecology and our economy,” says Victoria Mayor Lisa Helps. “We're happy to stand with other municipalities to request a fair and rigorous process to ensure that both are safeguarded for the long term.”

Resolutions calling National Energy Board's review process of Kinder Morgan’s proposal inadequate have already been passed by the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (September 2014) and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (March 2015).

The province of British Columbia has also taken issue with the NEB process, particularly with regard to its failure to compel Kinder Morgan to release its oil spill response plans in B.C. — while the company releases those very same plans across the border in Washington State.

Photo: Mark Klotz 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.

The way tensions between pipeline opponents and Kinder Morgan contractors have escalated during the last week should come as a surprise to no one.

The mishandling of the National Energy Board review of Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain pipeline and tanker proposal has created the conditions for the situation now unfolding on the mountainside.

And with the continuing loss of faith in these federal reviews — which even before being refigured to “expedite” energy proposals were already ill-equipped to grapple with the larger societal issues, such as climate change, related to energy proposals — we can expect to see more controversy across B.C. and likely along the route of TransCanada’s Energy East.

How did it come to this?

In 2012, the federal government passed omnibus budget bill C-38 — despite significant upheaval in Parliament — which overhauled Canada’s environmental assessment process.

The changes contained in that bill condensed project review timelines, seriously restricted public participation in the assessment process and limited what environmental concerns are deemed relevant to projects such as pipelines.

Now, during the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline review process, these changes are coming into effect.

It began with climate change impacts being overlooked in the terms of reference for the review — just as they had been in the Enbridge Northern Gateway review. But then it got worse. 

Hundreds of concerned citizens who considered themselves directly affected by the project were denied intervener status by the National Energy Board, the federal body overseeing the pipeline review process.

A group of 27 climate experts, including economists, scientists and political and social scientists, were rejected from participating in the hearings because they wanted to discuss the project’s significance to Canada’s climate targets.

In total, 468 citizens had their application for intervenor status rejected, leading stultified onlookers to call the process “Kafkaesque.”

To add insult to injury, the National Energy Board then quietly removed oral hearings from the review process, meaning oral cross-examination — during which live witnesses are questioned under oath — will play no role in the Trans Mountain pipeline review.

This step reduced the Kinder Morgan “review” to a mere paperwork exercise.

Participants are allowed to pose questions via writing to Kinder Morgan about the impacts of its proposal to triple the amount of oilsands bitumen it ships via pipeline to Burnaby — but the company has failed to treat these questions seriously.

For instance, Ecojustice lawyers asked the company to explain the potential effect of an oil spill on marine fish.

Kinder Morgan’s response? “Harm to marine fish populations seems to be the exception, rather than the rule, following marine oil spills.”

That was one of the better answers compared to the 20 Ecojustice questions Kinder Morgan refused to answer on the basis they were “not relevant” or the company simply didn’t know the answer.

Even the Province of British Columbia had to ask the National Energy Board to compel Kinder Morgan to answer dozens of questions the company had skirted — including failing to provide emergency response documents.

The review process has been so incomplete the Tsleil-Waututh Nation, whose territory overlooks the Burrard Inlet and Kinder Morgan tanker facilities, launched a legal action to challenge the review process on the basis of failed consultation and a fundamental mischaracterization of the project, which includes not just an expanded pipeline but terminals, storage facilities and increased tanker traffic.

Energy executive Marc Eliesen quit the review process amongst much fanfare earlier this month, saying it was “fraudulent” and an act of “public deception.” He accused the NEB of jury-rigging the process with a “pre-determined outcome.” (Read more about Eliesen’s crippling reasons for leaving.)

What’s more, a new report from SFU and The Goodman Group Ltd. shows Kinder Morgan exaggerated the jobs associated with the pipeline construction while seriously underplaying the risk of a potential pipeline rupture. And remember, this pipeline has already ruptured on several occasions, including once in 2007, sending 250,000 litres of crude into the community and 70,000 into the Burrard Inlet.

So with a community on edge and unconvinced of the benefits of the pipeline, and with the local municipality officially opposed to the project, Kinder Morgan perhaps made a critical error sending survey crews to conservation areas on Burnaby Mountain with chainsaws in September.

The city of Burnaby responded with issuing a stop work order claiming the company did not have the right to damage property protected by city bylaws. The National Energy Board, however, told the company to continue on with its legally allowable work, even if that meant cutting down trees on the mountainside.

It’s within the minutia of that legal interpretation — the tension between community self-determination and the energy board’s ruling on allowable survey work — that the Burnaby Mountain protest movement was born.

And for all the reasons above — not to mention the upstream impacts of oilsands development on climate, local ecosystems and First Nations’ territorial rights — this fight should surprise no one.

There has been no credible and democratic way for residents of Burnaby, or citizens in B.C. for that matter, to weigh in on the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. There has been no legitimate forum for the concerns of the community, of local First Nations and of a variety of climate and environmental experts.

Although Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan has promised to fight the pipeline by every available legal means, the federal government has made it virtually impossible for citizens to register their opposition to this project in any way other than protest.

And that’s a problem. Because with similar opposition foreseeable for TransCanada’s Energy East pipeline (especially after the company’s downright dirty PR tactics were leaked in documents from Edelman last week), Canada can expect more of these conflicts in our future.

And we should not have to stand for that.

This set of circumstances is fair to no one: not to locally elected municipal leaders looking to represent their constituents, not to communities looking to protect their environments and personal well-being and not to companies looking for stable operating conditions.

The act of proposing a pipeline is a legitimate thing to do in our society. Businesses should have the opportunity to pursue economic opportunities just as communities should have the opportunity to say no if a proposal doesn’t fit in with their long-term plans.

But with a government working in the interests of industry, citizens have been left out of the decision-making process, where the only way to register their voice is from behind the blockade line where they are marginalized, or worse, criminalized as radicals.

Our federal government is failing to lead on one of the biggest issues of our time. What Canada really needs is a grownup national conversation about an energy strategy that meets Canada’s international climate commitments. Until that happens, these debates will continue to play out dysfunctionally during technical review processes that were never designed to answer such large societal questions.

So as the saga of Burnaby Mountain continues to unfold, we should all be asking: who really is acting in the public interest? 

Image Credit: Zack Embree

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.

The Tsleil-Waututh nation announced it will launch a legal challenge against the Canadian government and the National Energy Board (NEB) Friday over legal compliance and consultation with First Nations in relation to the proposed Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.

At an outdoor press conference on Tsleil-Waututh territory overlooking the Burrard Inlet and Kinder Morgan facilities, Chief Maureen Thomas said her nation has been ignored by the government throughout the Trans Mountain pipeline review process.

“Today with a heavy heart we want to announce we are going to….I don’t want to use those words…but we are going to fight,” she said.

Merle Alexander, aboriginal resource lawyer with Gowlings LLP said there are a number of “procedural errors” affecting the pipeline assessment process. “If these decisions aren’t corrected now they’ll affect the entire review process,” he said.

The Tsleil-Waututh nation will commence a legal action in the federal court of appeal, challenging a number of decisions of the NEB that include failed consultation, improper project assessment and a fundamental mischaracterization of the Trans Mountain project which involves an expanded pipeline, a terminal and increased storage facilities.

“The case is really one about legal compliance,” Alexander said. “Tsleil-Waututh is forcing legal compliance with Canadian legal law as well as enforcing their own legal government.”

Rueben George of the Sacred Trust Initiative and project manager of public engagement for the Tsleil-Waututh says the legal challenge is in the interest of all Canadians.

“The actions we take are to benefit everybody,” he said, “because Canada is making the wrong decision in supporting Kinder Morgan.”

“Since time immemorial we have been stewards of our land and we have a track record of taking care of our people.”

“I’ve had the land and waters feed my spirit. Everything we get out of the water is goodness."

“What that is over there is Kinder Morgan,” he said, gesturing over his shoulder to Kinder Morgan’s storage facilities. “What they put in the water isn’t goodness.”

In 2007 the Trans Mountain pipeline ruptured in a Burnaby neighbourhood after a road crew’s excavator accidentally hit the line. Roughly 250,000 litres of oil spilled into the community with 70,000 litres entering the Burrard Inlet.

The proposed pipeline expansion would increase the line’s capacity from 300,000 to 750,000 barrels of oil per day. The increase in capacity could quadruple the number of oil tankers moving through the inlet, from five to more than 20 each month.

Chief Thomas said the case is ultimately about taking a stand.

“We have to take a stand, stand up for what we believe is truly right. What we really believe is right for us is protecting land and waters to the best of our ability. We have to move forward in a way that we really do become aware of what is going on and not take things for granted. You have to be the one to stand up,” she said.

Thomas recounted the decline of local plants and species in the region, saying local people can no longer harvest shellfish from the once-fertile and clean waters.

“When you look at the future you have to make sure you have water, food for your family. Those are necessities. This land, area has been continually declining in providing our people food. Our people once survived from the food of this land. The animals, the plants, they are declining every day. We have to find a way to stop that decline to the best of our ability.”

The Tsleil-Waututh have worked for years to rehabilitate and lessen their impact on the local area. They’ve introduced wind power, salmon rehabilitation projects and have reintroduced elk to the hillside.

“We’re not people that fight,” Thomas said, “but we want to protect and respect these lands.”

Image Credit: @kingcornevj via Twitter

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.

Tom Mulcair should support both Enbridge and Kinder Morgan's Pacific pipeline proposals, or the NDP leader should oppose them both. To favour one and not the other is simply incoherent.

Northern Gateway and Trans Mountain fulfill exactly the same purpose — except the latter would carry larger volumes of diluted bitumen, with a wider range of risks.

In a year-end interview with Postmedia journalist Peter O'Neil, Mulcair chose to attack the review process for such projects, rather than evaluate what the two companies are proposing.

O'Neil writes: "Mulcair said he’s not going to oppose the Kinder Morgan project, which submitted its National Energy Board application last week. He said the NDP recognizes the importance of getting Canadian oil and gas to the B.C. and Atlantic coasts to avoid dependence on the U.S. market."

It's unclear how that squares with Mulcair's vehement rejection of the Enbridge proposal.

Size matters

Enbridge has applied to pump 525,000 barrels of unrefined bitumen every day — over the Rockies, past BC communities and onto supertankers bound for China. In a news conference last week, Tom Mulcair called that idea "madness" and "a non-starter." But Kinder Morgan's double pipeline would do the same, carrying 890,000 barrels a day.

If Northern Gateway would export refinery jobs, Trans Mountain will export them faster.

If Northern Gateway would increase Canada's carbon emissions, Trans Mountain will increase them faster.

If Northern Gateway would transfer Canada's strategic energy reserves to a foreign superpower, Trans Mountain will do it faster.

And if Northern Gateway would inflate Canada's currency, killing manufacturing jobs in Ontario, Trans Mountain will make this 'Dutch disease' worse.

Northern Gateway would cross the Fraser watershed, home to quite likely the planet's largest remaining population of salmon. Trans Mountain crosses the same system closer to the ocean, where more fish come through.

Northern Gateway is opposed by 130 First Nations that have signed the Save the Fraser Declaration. This Indigenous legislation also covers the new Trans Mountain line.

Enbridge has a history of pipeline spills. So does Kinder Morgan. At least Enbridge is Canadian-owned. Kinder Morgan is from Texas. And Kinder Morgan's project carries risks for Canadian constituents even beyond what Enbridge is proposing.

More to lose

Northern Gateway would end in Kitimat, filling 220 oil tankers a year. Trans Mountain would load 408 tankers — more than one per day — in the heart of Metro Vancouver. A tanker accident in the Douglas Channel would hurt fisheries, wildlife, tourism, BC taxpayers and First Nations communities. A tanker accident in Burrard Inlet would do all that and worse.

Nowhere else in the world is diluted bitumen shipped from an urban harbour surrounded by two million people. A large spill would be a public health hazard, with repercussions for existing industries, real estate values, and the city's international brand.

Unlike Kitimat, Vancouver sits on top of an active subduction zone and seismologists suggest the city is overdue for a magnitude 9 earthquake — with a possible accompanying tsunami.

In 1994 a 6.7-scale earthquake in Los Angeles ripped a pipeline apart at the seams, spilling 200,000 gallons of oil into the Santa Clara river and surrounding waterways. That was a 10-inch diameter pipe. Kinder Morgan's existing pipeline measures 24 inches, carrying more than five times the volume. The company plans to add a 36-inch pipe, which is 13 times the capacity of the pipeline that burst in L.A.

There are other considerations in a crowded city. Given the widespread health impacts and economic disruption that would result, oil tankers in the Vancouver harbour also constitute a potential target for terrorism.

This is not a made-up scenario. In 2002 the double-hulled oil tanker Limburg was rammed by a small boat packed with explosives, spilling 90,000 barrels' worth of crude into the Gulf of Aden. In 2010 an Al Qaeda-linked group claimed responsibility for a similar attack on the Japanese tanker M Star, which thankfully failed.

Over the decades to come, who might be motivated to target oil exports from Vancouver? Perhaps religious extremists with funders in oil-rich Gulf states. Or enemies seeking to dent China's energy supply. Or a doomsday cult, or misguided eco-militants, or just a self-radicalized individual with access to a motorboat. A low-probability event, to be sure — but all terrorist attacks are.

Political fallout

After evaluating the risks versus potential rewards, Vancouver City Council voted unanimously last week to oppose the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain expansion. Mulcair's provincial counterpart, BC NDP leader Adrian Dix, did the same before the last provincial election in April.

Peter O'Neil writes: "Mulcair is not going to get caught making the same mistake as Dix did when he announced in mid-campaign that a provincial NDP government would oppose the $5.4 billion Kinder Morgan pipeline project to the B.C. coast even before it went to regulatory review."

There is a persistent story in BC that Dix lost because of his stance on Kinder Morgan. I think that's more of a convenient excuse, fuelled in part by the people responsible for his otherwise lacklustre campaign — many of whom are back working for Mulcair.

Polling by Justason Market Intelligence in the wake of Dix's Earth Day announcement showed a clear bump for the NDP as a result, drawing new admirers from the Liberals (5%), Greens (4%) and undecided voters (16%). Evidently it was not enough on its own to prop up the collapsing campaign, but the numbers suggest it was a help, not a hindrance.

Since then, local opposition to the Kinder Morgan proposal has only strengthened. If the federal NDP supports the Trans Mountain expansion, the party's Vancouver-area MPs will have until the next election to explain that logic to constituents.

Editor's note: Following the publication of this article, Postmedia reporter Peter O'Neil edited the online version of his story, which the NDP complained was misleading. O'Neil's article now says Mulcair will not be "ruling out support for the Kinder Morgan project in advance of its assessment by the National Energy Board." See Kai and O'Neil's twitter interaction below:

@kainagata (1) Impt line inadvertently removed in editing process cuz story 2long. 2b clear, @ThomasMulcair didn't say he wldn't oppose KM

— Peter O'Neil (@poneilinOttawa) December 25, 2013

@poneilinOttawa @ThomasMulcair Gotcha. You guys covered a lot of ground. I appreciate the clarification.

— Kai Nagata (@kainagata) December 25, 2013

Image Credit: North West Coast Energy News

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.

Kinder Morgan officially submitted a 15,000-page application for the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion to the National Energy Board (NEB) today, triggering what will no doubt be a lengthy and heavily scrutinized review of the controversial project. The submitted file stands over two metres tall and fills 37 binders.

According to a Kinder Morgan press release “the application filing follows over a year and a half of engagements with pipeline and marine communities, a detailed environmental and socio-economic assessment, route assessments, and other various marine and terrestrial analyses and studies.”

Karen Campbell, staff lawyer with Ecojustice, says it is difficult to say what exactly the application documents include. “Now that the application is out, we will be looking at it carefully and we expect to be involved in the process in some way, shape or form,” she said.

If approved, the expansion project will nearly triple the capacity of the 1,147 km Trans Mountain pipeline from 300,000 barrels per day to 890,000 barrels per day. To accommodate the increased oil, Kinder Morgan is proposing to build a new pipeline from Edmonton, Alberta, to the Burrard Inlet in Burnaby, B.C., create new and modified facilities and add three berths at the Westridge Marine Terminal in Burnaby. The pipeline carries a variety of hydrocarbon products including diluted bitumen from the Alberta oilsands.

The expansion project is expected to result in a seven-fold increase in tanker traffic in the Burrard Inlet. Currently the Kinder Morgan terminal services five tankers a month. If the project is approved that number could jump to 34 per month, or more than 400 annually.

“The proposed tanker route is a ‘high risk’ area," says Sierra Club BC's campaigns director Caitlyn Vernon, "and the provincial government has acknowledged that effective oil spill clean-up is impossible under many scenarios on the B.C. coast. Instead of investing in the possibility of toxic jobs in oil-spill clean-up, why not invest in green jobs instead? Building retrofits, renewable energies and low-carbon transportation options provide more jobs than the oil and gas industry.”

More than 130 First Nations have signed the Save the Fraser Declaration opposing oilsands pipelines, and the Union of BC Municipalities passed a motion opposing oil tanker expansion on the B.C. coast in 2012.

According to the National Energy Board, a review of Kinder Morgan’s application will consider the economic need and feasibility of the project as well as potential environmental and socio-economic effects. The federal review will also consider appropriateness of the general route, land requirements, and design of the project.

In addition, First Nations’ interests will be taken into consideration as well as safety, spill response and preparedness.

The National Energy Board will also hear from various intervenors throughout the hearing process. Recent changes to environmental assessment legislation severely limit who can participate in the hearings and what issues those participants can speak to. Environmental group ForestEthics Advocacy recently filed a suit against the federal government for the changes, stating the new rules limit the legitimate participation of the public in the hearing process and prevent participants from discussing critical issues such as climate change or expansion of the Alberta oilsands. 

Vancouver city councillors are considering a motion that would direct city staff to register as intervenors in the hearings. A motion filed in early December by Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson proposes staff seek intervenor status to argue against the “unacceptable risk” the project poses to “Vancouver and the region’s vibrant economy, local environment and parks, infrastructure, financial and legal liability, public health, and our international brand as one of the world’s most livable cities.”

The motion also suggests the City of Vancouver officially disagree with the National Energy Board’s refusal to consider the climate impacts of the project as relevant to the public’s interest. 

Robertson’s motion states “the City of Vancouver views an increase in the extraction of fossil fuels intended for combustion, and the increase in greenhouse gases associated with this extraction and combustion, as posing a direct risk to the city and a result of sea-level rise and extreme weather impacts associated with anthropogenic climate change.”

The motion also voices concerns around the lack of appropriate emergency preparedness and the question of financial loss to local residents and businesses in the event of a spill.

City council is hosting a public hearing on the motion Wednesday December 18th. So far no members of the public have registered to speak at Wednesday’s city council hearing.

In 2007 a construction crew damaged the Trans Mountain pipeline spilling nearly 250,000 litres of oil into a local residential neighbourhood and the Burrard Inlet. At least 50 homes were evacuated. 

Last fall Kinder Morgan held several public information sessions across B.C. in a bid to boost support for the project, although consultations with First Nations will likely emerge as the company’s highest social licence priority moving forward.

If approved, the expansion could be in operation as early as 2017.

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.