Monday, January 11, 2016

HUBRIS THY NAME IS KINDER MORGAN 

Why the BC Government Rejected Trans Mountain Pipeline
 in Favour of a Pipeline to Prince Rupert 
"Kinder Morgan is failing British Columbia's test for proceeding with a proposed pipeline expansion, so far unable to prove it will meet key safety requirements or serve the province's best interests, the environment minister says.Mary Polak said the Texas company has not provided enough evidence in its plans for the Trans Mountain pipeline to convince the government it can meet five pre-conditions for approval.The province said in its final written submission to the National Energy Board on Monday that it is unable to support the pipeline expansion from Alberta to the West Coast."    Trans Mountain pipeline project hasn't yetmet B.C.'s 5 conditions: minister
While the protests of the anti-pipeline advocates in the Lower Mainland of BC appear to have succeeded with the BC government's announcement today do not be so sure that this will not mean pipelines will not reach the pacific coast for Supertanker export to Asia. 
This is the pipeline to go from Bruderheim, Alberta, a small town south of Edmonton, to Burnaby BC it is NOT the controversial Northern Gateway Pipeline which is also proposed to go to the Southern Coastal waters of the province, ending up with a deep water port in Kitimat, in the Hecate Strait.
While this pipeline will end up in Burnaby, home of the Left Coast revolutionary hot bed of Simon Fraser University , it is merely an expansion of an existing pipeline, going to an existing refinery. A refinery that is still functioning though it was built in 1938 a year before World War 2.0 the refinery is 80 years old now. It is what they call in business a gravy train, it has already been paid for years ago, even any upgrades have paid themselves off so any money made is pure profit.
Two pipelines were proposed to travel to the Vancouver -Kitimat coastal area, with the idea of building deep water ports in some of the roughest most dangerous water anywhere on the Pacific coast. It appears with this decision and the Federal governments conditions on the Northern Gateway, that pipelines going to Kitimat or Burnaby are now not going anywhere.
So where will a pipeline be built to get Alberta bitumen to market? 
More than likely right here.........

There’s a dumb, dumb, really dumb idea that just won’t go away—that Enbridge could solve all its problems if only, if only, it would send the Northern Gateway Pipeline to Prince Rupert.Enbridge long ago rejected the idea. Before Enbridge updated its website to make  Gateway Facts, to make it slick and more attractive, the old website had an FAQ where Enbridge explained why it wasn’t going to Prince Rupert.


TransCanada was selected by Progress Energy Canada Ltd. to design, build, own and operate an approximately 900-kilometre natural gas pipeline (approximately 780 km terrestrial and 120 km marine) running from Hudson’s Hope to Lelu Island near Prince Rupert. 


TransCanada provides update on Prince Rupert Gas Transmission projectAlthough the start date of the Prince Rupert Gas Transmission Project is largely out of TransCanada's hands, vice-president John Dunn told the Prince Rupert and District Chamber of Commerce the company will be ready to go should the time come."Pacific NorthWest LNG is working to receive their necessary regulatory approvals and it is up to our customer to look at the global and fiscal environment for LNG and make a positive final investment decision. we will be ready to commence construction as soon as that occurs," he said of the Lelu Island terminal that will receive gas from the line, noting construction also depends on regulatory approval from the B.C. Oil and Gas Commission for the pipeline.Dunn said the delay in a final investment decision by the project's lone customer does not mean TransCanada's work on the pipeline has come to a halt. With the company expecting to announce three prime contractors for the approximately 900 kilometre pipeline later this year, Dunn said there is a lot going on in the background."One of the things that the announcement in December mention is that both Pacific NorthWest LNG in terms of their terminal at Lelu Island and PRGT in terms of its pipeline are working very diligently with major constructors to drive the cost down. We are taking the opportunity with this pause in the decision to basically look at realigning the costs across the project, whether it be materials or whether it be suppliers," he said.
Not only is BC planning on building a LNG gas line along the Yellowhead they also plan on building deep sea ports for Tankers off the coast of Prince Rupert which could accommodate raw bitumen from Fort McMurray or upgraded petroleum distillates from Edmonton . The Yellowhead already has a major highway, railway and existing pipelines so the environmental damage in comparison to the southern routes is not as significant, the community disruption is less and the potential for long term jobs in this region make it an attractive proposition that should have been considered in the first place.
It also fits in with the provinces plan of expanding its hydro dam operations in the Northern Peace region that it share with Alberta.
  The third dam – "Site C" – was also proposed at the time for a site 83 km downriver of the Peace Canyon dam, or approximately 7 km southwest of Fort St. John
Currently the Site C dam proposal is facing protests as well. But if I were of a conspiracy frame of mind, I would say that with this rejection of Kinder Morgan and the delays over North Gateway, despite the protests against the Site C Dam the BC government could not have planned it better if they had adhered to central planning. 
Will the Northern Gateway be built further North, along Highway 16, the infamous Trail of Tears where hundreds of First Nations women and girls have disappeared. 
It appears that if any pipeline is going to come from Alberta to the BC coast it may be along  the Trail Tears giving more poignancy to the appropriateness of that name. 

January 11, 2016

2 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete