CBC News Posted: Dec 19, 2013 1:08 PM MT Last Updated: Dec 19, 2013 10:56 PM MT

A joint review panel has recommended the federal government approve Enbridge’s Northern Gateway pipeline project.

The approval hinges on 209 required conditions, including developing a marine mammal protection plan, researching heavy oil cleanup and conducting emergency response exercises.

“After weighing the evidence, we concluded that Canada and Canadians would be better off with the Enbridge Northern Gateway project,” said the panel in its roughly 500-page report.

• Northern Gateway pipeline recommendation draws mixed reaction
• Northern Gateway pipeline project: 6 things to know
• Northern Gateway pipeline by the numbers
• On mobile? Click here to view interactive

The recommendation comes after 180 days of hearings in 21 communities in B.C. and Alberta.

The final decision, however, rests with the federal government, which has 180 days to decide. The government can approve or deny the application, but cannot change the conditions put forward by the panel. However, it can request the National Energy Board (NEB) to change the conditions.

Enbridge president and CEO Al Monaco welcomed what he called a tough review.

“Based on our preliminary look at the conditions of the recommendation, they’re tough,” he said. “But they should be, given everybody’s goal to make sure we deliver a safe project and we protect the environment.”

Enbridge said that if the project is approved that construction could start in 2014 and be completed by 2018.

‘Science-based assessment,’ says minister

The $7.9-billion pipeline would take bitumen from Alberta’s oilsands to the B.C. coast for tanker export to Asia. But the controversial proposal has pitted Calgary-based Enbridge against environmental groups and several First Nations.

The pipeline has also been a lightning rod in the debate over climate change and has raised concerns about the effects an oil spill would have on environmentally sensitive areas along the B.C. coast.

Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver’s office issued a statement after the approval, saying the project would not be approved by the government unless it is safe for Canadians and the environment.

• VIDEO: CBC’s Kirk Williams reports on panel

“The panel’s report represents a rigorous, open and comprehensive science-based assessment,” reads the statement.

“Now that we have received the report, we will thoroughly review it … and then make our decision. We also encourage everyone with an interest to take the time and review the report.”

The three-person panel was established in December 2009 by the NEB and the federal environment minister. Its task was to assess the environmental, social and economic effects from construction and operation of the pipeline.

In the past approval has come directly from the NEB, but controversial Bill C-38 gave that power to cabinet.

B.C. sought 5 conditions

The B.C. government had told the panel it did not support the pipeline as proposed and it had five conditions that needed to be addressed.

B.C.’s 5 conditions

• Environmental review needs to be passed.
• World-leading marine oil spill prevention, response.
• World-leading practices for land oil spill prevention, response.
• First Nations opportunities, treaty rights respected.
• Fair share of the fiscal and economic benefits for B.C.

George Hoberg, a University of British Columbia professor of forestry and ethics, said the panel’s decision is positive for the federal government, but it will be interesting to see where the B.C. government offers its support.

While interprovincial pipelines are federal jurisdiction, Hoberg said, B.C. could launch a legal challenge.

He said the Conservatives need B.C. seats to form a government after the 2015 election, so the question is whether there will be political war.

“It could go badly for [Prime Minister Stephen Harper] in the next federal election if they do,” he said.

But there is still some support in the province as some British Columbia stakeholders celebrated the long-awaited announcement.

Aboriginal opposition still a factor

More than 130 aboriginal bands have signed a declaration against the project.

NDP Leader Tom Mulcair has said the vehement opposition from First Nations along the proposed route will eventually kill the project.

“This is not going to be allowed to go through without a peep,” Mulcair said Wednesday, faulting the Conservative government for ignoring the rights and concerns of aboriginal communities.

“You can no longer impose these things from the top down. This is another era. You need social adhesion, you need to work with people. You can’t just bark at them and say, ‘This is going through.'”

The opposition remains despite the fact that Enbridge started consultations with First Nations in 2005, well before it filed an application for the pipeline in May 2010.

The federal government says it will consult with aboriginal groups now that the panel’s report has been issued.

Spill risk and wildlife impact

The report issued today said that although impacts of a large oil spill would be huge, the panel believes the conditions put on the project will help implement appropriate and effective spill prevention measures.

Enbridge has been directed to develop liability coverage of $950 million, but it would have to include many components — such as having $100 million ready in cash to address the initial costs of a spill.

The panel’s report also highlighted the risks posed to certain woodland caribou and grizzly bear populations.

Enbridge has put forth substantial mitigation plans, but the panel is not certain of the effectiveness of that mitigation.

One of the conditions for approval is a caribou habitat restoration plan.

The panel did not address concerns about the Northern Pacific humpback whale because reports on the matter were not submitted as evidence during its proceedings.

Political reaction

Reaction to the decision has been mixed.

Alberta Premier Alison Redford had said she hoped the panel would endorse the proposed pipeline as her province strives to diversify market access for the oilsands.

The panel also found that “opening Pacific basin markets is important to the Canadian economy and society.”

Diana McQueen, Alberta’s energy minister, said the decision is an important step to reaching that goal and that she is confident Enbridge can meet the needs of communities and First Nations in both provinces.

The Wildrose Party, Alberta’s official opposition, said meeting all of the 209 conditions in the report will ensure the province’s resources can be developed safely and protect the environment in B.C. and Alberta.

But the Pembina Institute is calling today’s decision disappointing. In a release, the organization said the panel’s report is out of step with Canadians’ concerns about the oilsands and pipeline development.

It says the review panel excluded the environment impacts of further oilsands development and that the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from filling the pipeline will be the same as adding three million cars a year to Canadian roads.

Both the federal NDP and Liberals have voiced opposition to the project.

Premier Alison Redford expects conditional approval of the Northern Gateway oil pipeline Thursday, likely setting the stage for a new round of wrangling about the controversial project.

The National Energy Board’s joint review panel will release its decision on Enbridge’s $6.5-billion project, which is intended to transport Alberta oilsands crude to the British Columbia coast for shipment to Asia.

“Our sense — we don’t know until the decision comes — but what we’re hoping to see is a decision where the NEB will approve the project,” Redford told reporters in Airdrie on Wednesday after announcing a new school for the city.

“We expect that along with that approval will come a number of conditions that probably reflect a lot of input from communities in British Columbia and perhaps in other parts of the country . . . and that’s exactly how the process is supposed to work.”

The Gateway project has been a flashpoint issue, arousing fierce opposition particularly from environmental organizations and First Nations over concerns about a potential spill in the territory it runs through, as well as the growing carbon footprint of the oilsands.

B.C.’s Liberal government under Christy Clark has set five conditions for the approval of any oilsands pipeline project and told the NEB that Gateway should not be approved as currently constituted.

B.C.’s position — especially its demand for a “fair share” of the economic benefit of the pipeline — set it at odds with the Redford government, which has made opening new markets for Alberta energy a priority.

However, the two governments have since smoothed over their differences with a framework agreement around energy transportation projects.

Redford said she believes Northern Gateway is turning a corner.

“There’s really good discussion going on right now between First Nations and industry that is very different than it was six months ago,” Redford added. “This is that moment in time where everything is starting to converge.”

But Mike Hudema, an Edmonton-based campaigner with Greenpeace Canada, said Gateway should be rejected on its merits by the NEB given what he says is majority opposition to the project.

“If you see a decision to push this pipeline forward despite those wishes, you’re going to see a lot of court cases move forward,” he predicted.

“And then I think you’re going to see lots of people engaging in more protests and civil disobedience.”

Ivan Giesbrecht, spokesman for Northern Gateway, said the hearings into the energy project were the most thorough in history and he felt confident the decision would be based on solid science.

“We put a lot of hard work and effort into this process and we have confidence in the joint review panel, that they have reviewed it thoroughly and done it to the highest standards possible,” he said.

Bob Schulz, a professor at the University of Calgary’s Haskayne School of Business, expects approval by the NEB with conditions.

Those stipulations will likely attempt to address some of the environmental and First Nations issues that have been raised — and could lead to rerouting of the line, he said.

That would likely lead to increased costs for the project — he estimates $2.5-billion to $3-billion more — that would have to be addressed by Enbridge and petroleum producers who want to ship oil on the line, he said.

Schulz said there are major unanswered questions about whether there is political will in the B.C. government to get behind the project and how Clark’s demand for increased economic benefit will play out.

He expects no group will be completely happy with Thursday’s pivotal decision.

“I think there’s going to be some pencil-sharpening here,” he said.

With file from The Canadian Press

[email protected]

EDMONTON — A survey showing Calgary residents pay among the highest power bills in North America has renewed opposition calls to put an end the province’s experiment with a deregulated electricity market.

The annual Hydro-Québec survey, which compared power prices on April 1 in 22 cities, rated Calgary residential power bills the third highest in Canada and the seventh highest in North America.

Edmonton fared only marginally better at fourth and eighth place respectively.

Only Charlottetown and Halifax were higher in Canada for residences using 1,000 kilowatt-hours a month while Detroit, Boston, New York and San Francisco were higher in the U.S.

While the government says the free market electricity system is functioning fine, critics argue deregulation has come at the expense of Alberta consumers.

“We’ve maintained all along the intention of electricity deregulation was to help power companies make more money at the consumer’s expense and that’s why they pushed for it,” charged NDP Leader Brian Mason. “The PC government has turned its back on Alberta families who are struggling to make ends meet.”

Both the NDP and Liberal parties say it is time for Albertans to tell the Tory government to kill the ill-fated experiment. Alberta was the only province to move to a fully deregulated electricity system that provides for prices to be set by the free market.

Liberal Kent Hehr said he plans to draft and present a policy paper advocating to return to an electricity system that pays generators a set fee to produce electricity so the price reflects the cost of producing electricity and is not influenced by dramatic supply and demand fluctuations.

But outgoing Energy Minister Ken Hughes maintained Thursday that volatility in the market is receding as a result of changes he introduced and that prices are reasonable, given Alberta’s limited access to cheap hydroelectricity.

“The evidence I have seen is Alberta is in the middle of the pack among those Canadian jurisdictions that don’t have hydroelectricity,” he said in an interview. “What we do have is a free market system that is functioning well in Alberta.”

Alberta Energy points to a Manitoba Hydro study that ranks Calgary and Edmonton residential electricity bills as the eighth and ninth highest among 14 Canadian cities. The monthly power bills in that survey are provided by the participating utilities while Hydro-Québec independently calculated the monthly bills for each city in its survey.

It isn’t clear if the Manitoba Hydro survey includes the franchise fees charged to the utilities by Calgary and Edmonton and passed onto consumers in their power bills.

Hughes was questioned about the “massive price spikes” in the electricity market in the legislature last week by PC colleague Wayne Cao, who expressed concern that businesses risk being “held hostage by the volatility of electricity prices.”

He told Cao Alberta has “a system that works and delivers cost effective electricity to all Albertans.”

“We have a very good system that is functioning well to make sure we have enough electricity that’s available at the right amount at the right time,” he told the Herald Thursday. “The competitive nature of the retail market continues to improve and we continue to have increased competition among the retailers and increased interest among the retailers to provide products — and that’s healthy.”

Wildrose electricity critic Joe Anglin said Hughes and his successor can claim everything is fine, but Albertans see that’s definitely not the case every month when they receive their power bills.

“Albertans keep getting gouged, but we can’t fix the problem unless we acknowledge the problem,” he said. “What we don’t have is reliable cheap electricity. It’s just not there. It is spiking all over the place.”

Anglin said Albertas’s coal-fired plants produced very cheap, reliable electricity before electrical deregulation, but now the price is set by supply and demand rather than the cost of generation.

He said the volatility of the market is hampering the province’s ability to diversify from oil and gas.

“A lot more industry would look at Alberta if we had our electricity prices under control,” he said.

Alberta Consumers Coalition lawyer Jim Wachowich said conditions granted to retail electricity providers when the market was restructured more than a decade ago pushed electricity prices higher than they should be.

“Prices are high, unfortunately, and people will point to a number of different reasons, but my client’s position is Alberta prices have tended to be higher ever since we embarked on restructuring this industry in 1996,” he said. “This continues even in times when the wholesale price is low.”

With files from Chris Varcoe

[email protected]

Hydro-Québec Survey

based on prices April 1*

Highest Power Bills**

Canadian Cities

Halifax, NS $154.46

Charlottetown, PE $148.67

Calgary, AB $148.11

Edmonton, AB $139.00

Regina, SK $131.52

Lowest Power Bills

Montreal, PQ $68.66

Winnipeg, MB $76.25

Vancouver, B.C. $89.07

* based on 1,000 kWh

** excluding taxes

SOURCE: Hydro-Québec

© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald

CBC News Posted: Dec 06, 2013 5:04 PM MT Last Updated: Dec 07, 2013 10:27 AM MT

By Leslie McLaren, CBC News Posted: Oct 30, 2013 4:00 AM CT Last Updated: Oct 29, 2013 4:02 PM CT