Case Study 1: Energy East

Case Notes:

We are going to look at a current issues that impacts North Bay, Ontario and Canada and look at how the different levels of government, legislation and society are all affected, or effect the decision.

To start. Let's look at Energy East.

Energy East is a multi-billion dollar, 4,600 km pipeline project proposed by TransCanada. The project would convert the one pipe in TransCanada's existing mainline that now transports natural gas, but is not running at capacity to oil. It would move diluted bitumen from the Oil Sands in Alberta, to refineries in Quebec and New Brunswick. The mainline only runs to Quebec, so a new pipeline would be built from Quebec to the New Brunswick Coast. Eastern Canada could use as much oil as required. The excess would be exported. Some proponents have touted this line as an important national-building endeavor. Critics? Well the critics have lots to say.

Here is the details on the project from TransCanada: TransCanada Energy East Pipeline

Here is a site created by opponents called Stop Energy East:

Braid: Is Notley handing Quebec a veto over Energy East Pipeline?

North Bay has concerns

In 2012, a truck carrying formaldehyde crashed in to Trout Lake near Silver Lady Lane in North Bay. The incident showed the citizens of North Bay how their main source of drinking water could be at risk. The proposed pipeline crosses Trout Lake.

Some northern municipalities like Kapuskasing support the pipeline because they see the risk in other forms of transportation either rail or truck, But North Bay, and Mayor Al McDonald are against the line.

Here is a Toronto Star story from 2012 about the project and North Bay:

North Bay residents up in arms over TransCanada plan to switch crude oil for gas in local pipeline

Since that time, the City of North Bay has voted to appear at the National Energy Board hearings in to the project as an intervenor. That means they have standing, or valid reasons to be heard at the public hearings into the project.

The National Energy Board is tasked by the Federal Government with determining which projects are in the public interest and which should go forward based on a risk/reward analysis. Of course, there are always risks to pipelines, but there are also rewards. In the case of Energy East, the benefit is oil security for Eastern Canada, less oil moving my train and truck, and a renewed use of existing infrastructure.

North Bay also has some power to stop or alter the pipeline. Any city must issue permits for construction and work within their jurisdiction. AS well, the North Bay Mattawa Conservation Authority Watershed Planning, Developments & Permits has responsibilities to project ecosystems and watersheds in the area. They have the ability to halt projects as well.

See how Burnaby has halted work on KinderMorgan expansion:

Burnabynow UPDATE: City issues stop work order

Other Projects? Which one makes the most sense?

There are also three other oil or bitumen pipeline projects currently under consideration.

Northern Gateway, a 1,200 KM pipeline through pristine wilderness from Edmonton to a new port in Kitimat BC. The line is being proposed by Enbridge. The environmentally responsible way to build a pipeline

Keystone XL: A pipeline from Alberta to Nebraska that would export oil to the Gulf Coast. Most of the line, from Nebraska to the Gulf Coast has already been built. The part that crosses the border required Presidential approval, that has been more than 5 years coming. It's not clear that it will ever be built. TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline Project

TransMountain Expansion: Kinder Morgan is proposing to expand its existing TransMountain pipeline system that runs from the Oilsands to the coast in Burnaby. It wants to double the capacity along the existing route by twinning the pipeline. TransMoutntain Proposed Expansion

So, when you look at the projects as a whole, is there one that makes more sense for Canada? Does it make sense to use an existing right of way, or create a completely new right of way in the middle of nowhere? Does it make sense to move a lot of oil through a major urban centre, like Vancouver, or does it make more sense to go through more remote areas?

One thing to consider is how pipelines manage risk. Where there are people, pipeline companies spend a lot more money managing their integrity programs. Most of the pipeline incidents that have happened in Canada have been in remote areas, when companies have less risk. (The rules set by the NEB also change depending on how close people like to the line.)

So, we live in North Bay. Should we just think about ourselves? Or do we have a role to think of the bigger picture of what is best for Canada?

Dirty Oil

The biggest critique of Keystone XL is the fact that the line would be moving bitumen, or Tar Sands crude oil. Oil that is considered the dirtiest in the world because its production is really energy intensive. It takes more than 2 barrels of water to mine one barrel of oil. And they use a pile of natural gas in the process as well. It's expensive too. Oil has to be very expensive some suggest $80 per barrel- to make this form of oil extraction worthwhile for companies.

For a range of reasons, oil prices have plummeted in 2015. It's hovering around $40 per barrel. Which means many Tar Sands projects have been put on hold.

The simple truth is that Greenhouse Gas emissions in the tar sands are expanding rapidly. That if it were a country, Alberta would have the highest per capita greenhouse gas emission rates in the world. Plus, the oil sands have created huge tailings ponds and other environmental waste that will be left for generations. The Alberta Government has allowed expansion of the oil sands with no focus at all on the environment. This was a key issue in the most recent provincial election, and a new NDP government promised to bring in more stringent environmental regulations. Here is a link to more information:

Pembina Institute Climate Impacts

Take some time to read all sides of this issue. There are lots of links here to help you understand the issue. Be prepared for a great discussion.

Case Assessment

Discussion:

Energy East is the best of the proposed pipeline projects in Canada because . . .. North Bay should stop Energy Easy by. The real problem in Canada isn't the pipeline projects per se, but the lack of regulation in the Oil Sands. I would propose