Here’s a different way to get crude oil from Point A to Point B

Dear editor,

There is much discussion about the Enbridge proposed pipeline and its potential for environmental disaster.

Dear editor,

There is much discussion here on the Wet Coast about the Enbridge proposed pipeline and its potential for environmental disaster.

Much of the rhetoric appears to be that it is too dangerous and should not go forward. Well, good luck with that!

The prime minister has made it pretty clear that he expects it to proceed and the big money in Alberta, along with their provincial government, are determined that it will proceed, with the dual pipeline to the tanker port in Kitimat.

Our provincial government has come out to say they will insist that certain conditions be met before they will agree with it, conditions that do not appear to have clearly quantifiable criteria.

A Mr. Black has said that he would like to build a refinery at Kitimat to increase the Canadian content (and profit) before shipping the oil off to foreign lands. Unfortunately, his proposal fails to overcome the problems of pipeline spills while crossing B.C. or the hazards to tankers using the narrow, winding Douglas Channel.

How about an alternative that will get the oil to market while reducing some of the risks?

For many years, Kinder-Morgan has operated a pipeline from Alberta to the Coast with good success. The one spill in recent memory being a rupture caused by machinery digging in the area of the pipeline in Burnaby.

Kinder-Morgan now wishes to twin its pipeline so it can ship more crude oil out by tanker and the principal objections appear to be the location of the tanker port in Vancouver Harbour with the many hazards that the tankers have to transit to get in and out of the port.

The existing Kinder-Morgan pipeline route has presumably gone through the environmental process, is regularly monitored (we hope) and appears to be working well. Why not have Enbridge use the same route?

The problem of the tanker port being in Vancouver Harbour could be resolved by routing the new lines to Tsawwassen, where Enbridge’s tanker port could be built alongside the existing coal/container port.

The existing pipeline would continue to supply the refinery in Burnaby and the tankers operating from the new facility would then be well clear of the congestion in the harbour. In fact, they would be loading near the well-monitored shipping route from the Strait of Georgia through the Strait of Juan de Fuca to the Pacific.

Instead of having to transit an island-strewn narrow passage with the absolute minimum of spill response resources that Enbridge would be allowed to hold in case of problems, the considerable resources of the Lower Mainland would be available to assist in emergencies.

Mr. Black’s proposal to increase the Canadian content before shipping the oil sands crude out of the country could be at least partially met by processing the crude in an upgrader similar to that used by Husky at Lloydminster.

It upgrades the heavy crude extracted along the Alberta/Saskatchewan border so that it can be shipped in pipelines without having to be thinned using condensate and can be processed in normal refineries. This would eliminate the need for the return pipeline for the condensate that is a part of Enbridge’s proposal.

So how about it, Liberals? If you want to have any hope of winning the next provincial election you are going to have to get out in front of a high profile project and show some real leadership. This is such a project!

Garry Brown,

Comox

Comox Valley Record