The City of Surrey stated its position on the proposal to twin the Trans Mountain pipeline at National Energy Board hearings last week. It is not in favour or opposed to the pipeline proposal – it simply doesn’t want the project to cost local taxpayers more money.
In addition, the city has concerns about portions of the proposed new route. It also would like to see the new route accommodate both the twinned pipeline and the original line, thus taking the line built in 1953 through portions of north Surrey out of commission.
Surrey’s position in many ways dovetails with the general attitude of many B.C. residents, and the provincial government. The enthusiasm for the pipeline project is lukewarm at best, and specific benefits are demanded in return for support.
At the same time, many other B.C. residents, including members of virtually all environmental organizations and a large number of First Nations, are completely opposed to the project and will likely never sign on, no matter what accommodations are made.
Surrey and four other Lower Mainland municipalities say that construction of the pipeline will lead to $93 million in additional infrastructure costs over the next 50 years. This is because they will have to adjust design and construction methods to work around pipelines.
Assistant city solicitor Anthony Capuccinello told the NEB that proponent Kinder Morgan should shoulder those additional costs – not taxpayers. This argument is based on the fact that the pipeline is a private, for-profit business and should pay for any costs that accrue.
The city also called for an adjustment to the route. It does not want to see it running through the Surrey Bend regional park, but instead along Golden Ears Way and Highway 17 to the proposed crossing of the Fraser River, just east of the Port Mann bridge.
Perhaps the most interesting point made by the city was its suggestion that the existing pipeline through Surrey be decommissioned, with both pipelines following the new route. This is a very sensible idea and it’s surprising that Kinder Morgan didn’t propose this right from the start.
Clearly, there are potential problems when oil pipelines run through residential neighbourhoods. This was demonstrated in 2007 in Burnaby, when a contractor doing work on a sewer line ruptured the pipeline. The result was a massive oil spill, significant damage to 11 properties, temporary evacuation of more than 250 residents and millions in costs.
In Surrey, the current pipeline runs through the Port Kells industrial area north of 96 Avenue, and into a residential area of Fraser Heights. It crosses Highway 1 and runs beneath the highway for a short distance near 156 Street, and then runs north of Guildford along 108 Avenue, before going down the hill towards the Fraser River between 144 and 140 Streets.
This pipeline route was located in a very rural area when it was built more than 60 years ago. That’s not the case today.
When it announced its plan to twin the pipeline, Kinder Morgan stated it wanted to build the new line away from residential neighbourhoods in the Lower Mainland. Why it did not also propose that it reroute the old line is a mystery, because it would most certainly be easier to operate and deal with problems if there was one pipeline route, not two.
The proposal to build the second pipeline is part of a much bigger national conversation on oil and fossil fuels, their role in the Canadian economy, climate change and other issues.
Whether a second pipeline will ever be built is up in the air. In the meantime, Surrey has made it clear what it would like to see if the new pipeline is built.
Frank Bucholtz writes Wednesdays for Peace Arch News, as well as at frankbucholtz.blogspot.ca – email frank.bucholtz@gmail.com
