From here, incidentally.
Showing posts with label Kinder Morgan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kinder Morgan. Show all posts
Thursday, May 01, 2014
Kinder Morgan On The Upside To An Oilspill
From here, incidentally.
Friday, January 24, 2014
Justin Trudeau On Pipelines
From his interview with Calgary Metro News:
“Because of that I have been a strong promoter of the Keystone XL pipeline and also a harsh critic on the way the prime minister has approached pushing the Keystone XL pipeline. To my mind, the only thing that has prevented Keystone XL from getting approved already in the United States – and what has allowed it become such a polarizing issue, with celebrities weighing in and all sorts of people having very strong opinions even though there is not necessarily all that many facts going around in many of the conversations – is that the prime minister hasn’t done a good enough job of demonstrating a level of commitment to doing it right and upholding environmental protections and regulations. That’s what President Obama has said many times – that he needs to see concrete action from Canada – and what we get is all words. So I’m very much a proponent of Keystone XL.
“For similar reasons, I’m not a proponent of the Northern Gateway Pipeline … which runs through the Great Bear Rainforest, which has spectacularly failed at getting community buy-in from First Nations communities and from local communities that could be potentially affected by it. And it’s not just an environmental argument, it’s also an economic argument. There are 20,000 British Columbians who make their living on the sea around Haida Gwaii and on the Pacific Coast. They would all be in peril – those jobs, those livelihoods – with a catastrophic accident, which, unfortunately, is all too capable.
"So, my intent is to make sure we send Enbridge back to the drawing board for that. I am, however, very interested in the Kinder Morgan pipeline, the Trans Mountain pipeline that is making its way through. I certainly hope that we’re going to be able to get that pipeline approved. And I hope that Kinder Morgan learns from Enbridge’s experience of short-cutting or going too light on community buy-in. Ultimately governments grant permits, but only communities grant permission.”
This is substantive, and pretty good positioning. Of course I would prefer than none of these pipelines go through, but I don't have to campaign for Prime Minister in Alberta.
Lets talk about them one by one
1) Northern Gateway. Should this actually come to the point where somone tries laying pipe, we will have national unity issues on our hands--ie BCers going apeshit. That would be bad for everyone involved. Remember, in B.C. the hippies kick you. So good on Justin for opposing it.
2) Keystone XL. Naturally, I am against this project and think everyone else should be as well. That said: what I think, and what Justin Trudeau thinks, and really even what Prime Minister Harper thinks, doesn't mean a thing. The Obama administration will do what it will on the basic of domestic political considerations. I suspect they will reject the line, or punt until after the 2014 mid-terms, but who knows? Which is why Canadian politicians favororing or disfavouring the line are engaging in empty theatrics: Mulcair opposes a line he can do nothing about, Trudeau favours one he can do nothing about. They might as well be for or against the sunrise. It will happen, or not, in spite of them. So, bottom line: I don't really care what their position is.
Although of course Justin is right about Harper's government fumbling the issue.
3) Kinder Morgan (Trans Mountain). This is the most interesting of the three cases. Opinion doesn't appear to have hardened on the West Cost for or against the line in the way it has in the case of Northern Gateway. And while I personally would like to see it halted, should the First Nations in its path, and property owners around Vancouver, become amenable, I would defer to them. And this appears to be the Trudeau position. Now, should local opinion turn against the line, I would hope he will reconsider.
“Because of that I have been a strong promoter of the Keystone XL pipeline and also a harsh critic on the way the prime minister has approached pushing the Keystone XL pipeline. To my mind, the only thing that has prevented Keystone XL from getting approved already in the United States – and what has allowed it become such a polarizing issue, with celebrities weighing in and all sorts of people having very strong opinions even though there is not necessarily all that many facts going around in many of the conversations – is that the prime minister hasn’t done a good enough job of demonstrating a level of commitment to doing it right and upholding environmental protections and regulations. That’s what President Obama has said many times – that he needs to see concrete action from Canada – and what we get is all words. So I’m very much a proponent of Keystone XL.
“For similar reasons, I’m not a proponent of the Northern Gateway Pipeline … which runs through the Great Bear Rainforest, which has spectacularly failed at getting community buy-in from First Nations communities and from local communities that could be potentially affected by it. And it’s not just an environmental argument, it’s also an economic argument. There are 20,000 British Columbians who make their living on the sea around Haida Gwaii and on the Pacific Coast. They would all be in peril – those jobs, those livelihoods – with a catastrophic accident, which, unfortunately, is all too capable.
"So, my intent is to make sure we send Enbridge back to the drawing board for that. I am, however, very interested in the Kinder Morgan pipeline, the Trans Mountain pipeline that is making its way through. I certainly hope that we’re going to be able to get that pipeline approved. And I hope that Kinder Morgan learns from Enbridge’s experience of short-cutting or going too light on community buy-in. Ultimately governments grant permits, but only communities grant permission.”
This is substantive, and pretty good positioning. Of course I would prefer than none of these pipelines go through, but I don't have to campaign for Prime Minister in Alberta.
Lets talk about them one by one
1) Northern Gateway. Should this actually come to the point where somone tries laying pipe, we will have national unity issues on our hands--ie BCers going apeshit. That would be bad for everyone involved. Remember, in B.C. the hippies kick you. So good on Justin for opposing it.
2) Keystone XL. Naturally, I am against this project and think everyone else should be as well. That said: what I think, and what Justin Trudeau thinks, and really even what Prime Minister Harper thinks, doesn't mean a thing. The Obama administration will do what it will on the basic of domestic political considerations. I suspect they will reject the line, or punt until after the 2014 mid-terms, but who knows? Which is why Canadian politicians favororing or disfavouring the line are engaging in empty theatrics: Mulcair opposes a line he can do nothing about, Trudeau favours one he can do nothing about. They might as well be for or against the sunrise. It will happen, or not, in spite of them. So, bottom line: I don't really care what their position is.
Although of course Justin is right about Harper's government fumbling the issue.
3) Kinder Morgan (Trans Mountain). This is the most interesting of the three cases. Opinion doesn't appear to have hardened on the West Cost for or against the line in the way it has in the case of Northern Gateway. And while I personally would like to see it halted, should the First Nations in its path, and property owners around Vancouver, become amenable, I would defer to them. And this appears to be the Trudeau position. Now, should local opinion turn against the line, I would hope he will reconsider.
Monday, December 16, 2013
Kinder Morgan Pipeline: Might Be A Little Problem With That
Seventy-three per cent of the proposed new routing will follow existing rights-of-way. About 980 kilometres of new pipe would need to be constructed.
According to my calculations, Kinder Morgan will have to buy or otherwise gain access to a strip of land 311 klicks long (about 186 miles) and probably about 25/50 meters wide, if Keystone XL is any guide. I've written earlier that the chances of this project happening vary inversely with the amount of new right-of-way Kinder Morgan needs to get hold of. I would suggest that those chances have fallen somewhat.
Thursday, June 13, 2013
Kinder Morgan Oil Pipe Spills
CALGARY - The National Energy Board (NEB or Board) is responding to a crude oil release on the TransMountain Pipeline southwest of Merritt, BC owned and operated by Kinder Morgan Canada. The size of the spill has yet to be determined by the NEB. There is no immediate safety concern for local residents and precautions are being taken to ensure continued public safety.
This is, of course, the other pipeline slated to be built through Beautiful British Columbia.
Update:
This is, of course, the other pipeline slated to be built through Beautiful British Columbia.
Update:
Bad timing award: there's been an oil spill on the Kinder Morgan pipeline, one day before Clark and Redford meet to talk pipelines. #bcpoli
— Keith Baldrey (@keithbaldrey) June 13, 2013
Monday, March 04, 2013
Martha Hall Findlay Flip Flops On Northern Gateway
I haven't heard this mentioned in any of the coverage of yesterday's LPoC leadership debate, but on February 26th MHF was for Northern Gateway Pipeline; as of yesterday's debate, she's sudddenly agin it. That's what you call a policy reversal...a waffle...a dither...a flip flop, even.
Worth noting too that among the contenders only Joyce Murray has come out against Kinder Morgan in addition to the NGP. Joyce is a B.C. gal, and I'm assuming her opposition is a sign of which way the winds are blowing out on the left coast over that project.
Worth noting too that among the contenders only Joyce Murray has come out against Kinder Morgan in addition to the NGP. Joyce is a B.C. gal, and I'm assuming her opposition is a sign of which way the winds are blowing out on the left coast over that project.
Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Emissions From Northern Gateway And Kinder Morgan
I think these graphs speak for themselves:
But if they don't. Simon Donner of UBC says:
...the pipeline expansion would completely undermine not just B.C.'s emissions reduction policy, but the entire country's emissions reduction policy.
The second graph shows the estimated gap (i.e. necessary reductions) between the most recent national emissions estimate (2010, 692 Mt) and the policy goal for 2020 (17% reduction, ~607 Mt). The emissions embedded in the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline (82.5 Mt) is alone almost as great as the Canadian 2020 emissions gap (85.3 Mt). Add in the original Kinder Morgan proposal, the recent proposed bump in capacity, and the emissions embedded in oil exports of the pipeline would be 1.6 times the national emissions gap.
So the Harper government's policy re Northern Gateway undermines its (stated) policy on emissions.
...the pipeline expansion would completely undermine not just B.C.'s emissions reduction policy, but the entire country's emissions reduction policy.
The second graph shows the estimated gap (i.e. necessary reductions) between the most recent national emissions estimate (2010, 692 Mt) and the policy goal for 2020 (17% reduction, ~607 Mt). The emissions embedded in the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline (82.5 Mt) is alone almost as great as the Canadian 2020 emissions gap (85.3 Mt). Add in the original Kinder Morgan proposal, the recent proposed bump in capacity, and the emissions embedded in oil exports of the pipeline would be 1.6 times the national emissions gap.
So the Harper government's policy re Northern Gateway undermines its (stated) policy on emissions.
Friday, January 11, 2013
Omnibus Bills, Pipelines, First Nations
Chief Justin George of the Tsleil-Waututh Nation connects a few of the dots leading from omnibus budget bills C38 and C45 to Kinder Morgan's expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline. Most interesting bit from the news release:
[Trans Mountain] is a brand new pipeline following a new route; the existing pipeline was built without First Nations consent; and there have been 78 spills since 1951.
My contention has been that the success of the Trans Mountain expansion project will be a function of its ability to keep to the same right-of-way as the old line. Kinder Morgan has said it will do this where possible. However, the Tsleil-Waututh Nation's complaint, when added to similar complaints from other FNs and Burnaby-Douglas MP Kennedy Stewart, suggests that the company may have to expropriate or otherwise acquire more land than its been letting on. That suggests that a heckuva fight is in the offing.
[Trans Mountain] is a brand new pipeline following a new route; the existing pipeline was built without First Nations consent; and there have been 78 spills since 1951.
My contention has been that the success of the Trans Mountain expansion project will be a function of its ability to keep to the same right-of-way as the old line. Kinder Morgan has said it will do this where possible. However, the Tsleil-Waututh Nation's complaint, when added to similar complaints from other FNs and Burnaby-Douglas MP Kennedy Stewart, suggests that the company may have to expropriate or otherwise acquire more land than its been letting on. That suggests that a heckuva fight is in the offing.
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Kinder Morgan Hurls Pipeline Revenue Hot Potato Back To Alberta, Federal Government
B.C. Premier Christy Clark has lain down five conditions for having any new "heavy oil" pipeline traverse provincial territory. These are:
...successful completion of the environmental-review process; world-leading marine and land 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; addressing legal requirements regarding aboriginal and treaty rights, and providing First Nations with the opportunities, information and resources necessary to participate in and benefit from a heavy oil project; and lastly, a fair share of the fiscal and economic benefits, reflecting the level, degree and nature of the risk borne by the province, the environment and taxpayers.
Kinder Morgan, who are trying to expand their Trans Mountain line to Burnaby, have responded to the five conditions with an "OK...but":
“We’ve acknowledged the five conditions and are committed to working with the provincial government to meet them,” Toth said in an interview.
[...]
Toth said the revenue expectations “are beyond our control” but the company is committed to meeting the highest standards.
[...]
[Environment Minister Terry] Lake said Wednesday both Kinder Morgan and Enbridge have committed to meeting the B.C. Liberal government’s conditions, outside the demand for jobs and revenue “which is more to do with Canada and Alberta than the proponent.”
This is important because critics of the Clark government have typically argued that, if it wants extra revenue in exchange for allowing the pipelines to be built, it should extract them from the companies themselves (Enbridge and Kinder Morgan). Kinder Morgan seems to be saying here that no such extra revenues shall be forthcoming from their pockets, and Terry Lake seems to be OK with that response.
Over to you, Alison Redford and Stephen Harper.
...successful completion of the environmental-review process; world-leading marine and land 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; addressing legal requirements regarding aboriginal and treaty rights, and providing First Nations with the opportunities, information and resources necessary to participate in and benefit from a heavy oil project; and lastly, a fair share of the fiscal and economic benefits, reflecting the level, degree and nature of the risk borne by the province, the environment and taxpayers.
Kinder Morgan, who are trying to expand their Trans Mountain line to Burnaby, have responded to the five conditions with an "OK...but":
“We’ve acknowledged the five conditions and are committed to working with the provincial government to meet them,” Toth said in an interview.
[...]
Toth said the revenue expectations “are beyond our control” but the company is committed to meeting the highest standards.
[...]
[Environment Minister Terry] Lake said Wednesday both Kinder Morgan and Enbridge have committed to meeting the B.C. Liberal government’s conditions, outside the demand for jobs and revenue “which is more to do with Canada and Alberta than the proponent.”
This is important because critics of the Clark government have typically argued that, if it wants extra revenue in exchange for allowing the pipelines to be built, it should extract them from the companies themselves (Enbridge and Kinder Morgan). Kinder Morgan seems to be saying here that no such extra revenues shall be forthcoming from their pockets, and Terry Lake seems to be OK with that response.
Over to you, Alison Redford and Stephen Harper.
Sunday, September 09, 2012
Trans Mountain Vs. Northern Gateway
Generally speaking, the expansion of Kinder-Morgan's Trans Mountain pipeline has been regarded as an easier sell than Northern Gateway. But this is because there has been an assumption that the "twinning" of lines will take place within the current right-of-way. That is to say, Kinder-Morgan has rights to all the property it needs to accommodate the extra pipe necessary to carry the extra tar-sands dilbit. No additional land will need to be purchased, expropriated, or otherwise gained access to. However, in so far as the right-of-way must be broadened, the odds of significant resistance to the expansion increases. folks may be asked to give up property that they are unwilling to part with. And it should be noted that Kinder-Morgan has yet to release a detailed route map.
Even so, several points along the route where the pipeline will breach the existing right-of-way have already been identified. For example, Burnaby-Douglas MP Kennedy Stewart has argued that private land in the Greater Vancouver area may need to be expropriated to accommodate Trans Mountain. And Kinder-Morgan seems to have confirmed his conclusions. From a May 30th story in Burnaby Now:
"In some urban areas, we may not be able to put a pipeline in our existing right-of-way because of urban infill, - but we're not at any level of detail to know at this point," [Kinder Morgan representative Lexa Hobenshield] said. "The pipeline does run through some backyards in some locations."
In addition, several First Nation's bands in the vicinity of Merritt, B.C. have already rejected Kinder-Morgan's proposal for this very reason, among others (see bolded text):
Recently, three First Nations issued a joint statement saying they will not deal with Kinder Morgan. In mid-April, Whispering Pines, Coldwater, and Lower Nicola Indian bands said the company does not have a permit to operate the pipeline on their reserves, has not dealt adequately with past pipeline leaks on their land, and intends to take too much land for the expansion of the right of way and a 65-metre safety zone in addition.
Again, these are just the areas it is possible to identify as problematic without seeing a route map. And its worth noting that, in the case of the stalled Keystone XL pipeline, a line twinned to the existing line (the Keystone Corridor Alternative, by name) was considered and abandoned because TransCanada (the pipe owner) discovered that they could not keep the expansion within the extant right-of-way. They would, in effect, have been forced to construct an entirely new pipeline adjacent to the one already in place. Should anything like this prove to be the case with Kinder Morgan, the odds of the project going through to completion will diminish accordingly.
Even so, several points along the route where the pipeline will breach the existing right-of-way have already been identified. For example, Burnaby-Douglas MP Kennedy Stewart has argued that private land in the Greater Vancouver area may need to be expropriated to accommodate Trans Mountain. And Kinder-Morgan seems to have confirmed his conclusions. From a May 30th story in Burnaby Now:
"In some urban areas, we may not be able to put a pipeline in our existing right-of-way because of urban infill, - but we're not at any level of detail to know at this point," [Kinder Morgan representative Lexa Hobenshield] said. "The pipeline does run through some backyards in some locations."
In addition, several First Nation's bands in the vicinity of Merritt, B.C. have already rejected Kinder-Morgan's proposal for this very reason, among others (see bolded text):
Recently, three First Nations issued a joint statement saying they will not deal with Kinder Morgan. In mid-April, Whispering Pines, Coldwater, and Lower Nicola Indian bands said the company does not have a permit to operate the pipeline on their reserves, has not dealt adequately with past pipeline leaks on their land, and intends to take too much land for the expansion of the right of way and a 65-metre safety zone in addition.
Again, these are just the areas it is possible to identify as problematic without seeing a route map. And its worth noting that, in the case of the stalled Keystone XL pipeline, a line twinned to the existing line (the Keystone Corridor Alternative, by name) was considered and abandoned because TransCanada (the pipe owner) discovered that they could not keep the expansion within the extant right-of-way. They would, in effect, have been forced to construct an entirely new pipeline adjacent to the one already in place. Should anything like this prove to be the case with Kinder Morgan, the odds of the project going through to completion will diminish accordingly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)