By Sheila Pratt, Edmonton Journal September 28, 2012

EDMONTON – Enbridge Inc. rejects a report that concludes there is enough pipeline capacity to handle increased oilsand production until 2020, a federal hearing heard Friday.

In the final day of hearings in Edmonton into the proposed $6-billion Northern Gateway project, Enbridge lawyer Jack Nufeld squared off with Thomas Gunton, former deputy minister in the B.C. government and now director of resource and environmental planning at University of British Columbia.

Gunton concluded in his report for the Haisla Nation that the project won’t be needed until 2020 because of other major pipeline projects already in the works, including Enbridge’s Alberta Clipper that will take an additional 350,000 — and up to to 800,000 — barrels per day to the U.S.

Building Northern Gateway in the next couple of years to carry 525,000 barrels of bitumen to the West Coast for shipment to Asia would create excess pipeline capacity for exports that is costly to the shippers who use the pipeline and is not in the public interest, said Gunton.

Pipelines involve “very high fixed costs” and the cost to shippers would be high if the line was not fully utilized. That in turn could affect profits and revenues to governments, he said.

“So there is a concern we don’t overbuild,” said Gunton, who noted that Enbridge voiced the same concerns about the high costs — $348 million — of overcapacity at public hearings into the proposed Keystone pipeline from Canada to the U.S. gulf coast.

Nufeld said no oil company looking to use Northern Gateway has come to the panel with concerns about excess pipeline capacity.

Also, any potential cost from over- building has to be balanced with benefits that come from opening new markets, he said. That includes billions of dollars for oil producers from increased oil prices and revenues for governments over the 30 year life of the project.

Nufeld also noted that the growing market for bitumen is in Asia rather than the U.S, where demand for heavy crude will decline, according to forecasts from the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

For that reason, Northern Gateway is needed to open new markets and avoid a slowdown of expansion in the oilsands and to ensure there no shut- in bitumen, the panel heard.

Nufeld also noted that the National Energy Board recognizes the importance of competition among pipeline companies in considering the public interest aspect of the Northern Gateway.

Gunton also said he has “strong reservations”about the company’s cost- benefit analysis which is based on a two-to three dollar price increase on a barrel of oil sent to Asia until 2048.

“You should have strong reservations about that forecast over a long period of time,’ he told the Joint Review Panel, consisting of the National Energy Board and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.

In response to questions, Gunton told the panel he personally supports plans for a liquid natural gas terminal in Kitimat, to be constructed about 2.5 kilometres from the proposed terminus of the Northern Gateway pipeline and the proposed marine terminal for oil tankers.

The Haisla Nation supports the LNG terminal and the pipeline from northeast B.C. but it is opposed to the Northern Gateway fearing a spill of bitumen on the fragile coast would be too damaging.

The pipeline hearings resume in Prince George, B.C. in October and move to Prince Rupert in late November.

[email protected]

© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal

Edmonton Journal September 28, 2012

© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal

The Heartland Appeal (Appeal of the first Bill 50 Transmission Line) is quickly approaching and this email is intended to remind you of the date, and to give you some details.  The Hearing will be heard, October 12, 2012, at the Alberta Court of Appeal,  Calgary  (TransCanada Pipelines Tower 2600).  More location details below.

The Heartland Appeal (Shaw, Stuart, et al v. Alberta Utilities Commission, et al.) will be the second hearing of the day, and considering that the Court of Appeal starts at 9:00 am, we estimate that the Heartland Hearing will begin later in the morning, or possibly early afternoon.  The exact times are not posted by the Court of Appeal, so you will have to plan accordingly.  If you plan on attending the Hearing, please recognize that it is a Courtroom, and quiet and good manners must be practised by all.  Please consider those directly involved in the hearing, and their need to reflect and gather their thoughts prior to the Hearing.  There will be opportunities to discuss the hearing and other matters after it is done.  The Hearing is expected to last for 2 3/4 hours.

We will inform everyone by email when a decision has been made by the Court of Appeal.  We do not expect that a decision will be rendered immediately, however, we will let you know as soon as we know.

Details

Shaw, Stuart, et al v. Alberta Utilities Commission, et al.

Calgary, October 12, 2012

Alberta Court of Appeal

TransCanada Pipelines Tower 2600

450-1st Street, S.W., Calgary

Courtroom 1, 26th Floor

Again, we want to extend a sincere “thank you” to all of you who have helped by giving us your support and your generous donations.  This Appeal could not have happened without you, and we are sincerely grateful that you stepped up to the plate to help all Albertans.  Our special thanks for the hard work, long hours and constant pursuit of justice by Lawyer Keith Wilson.  We all wish him the very best with the Appeal.

Colleen Boddez

Alberta Landowners Council

By Darcy Henton, Calgary Herald September 24, 2012 6:18 AM

EDMONTON — Alberta’s past two premiers have campaigned on bringing more transparency to government, but the province still earned a ‘D’ for its record of disclosure in the latest survey of how governments apply freedom of information legislation.

Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland were found to be the most transparent in a National Freedom of Information Audit released Monday by Newspapers Canada.

But in Alberta and several other provinces, as well as the federal government, openness is “just a slogan,” the report says.

“On paper it looks great — a right upheld coast to coast to peer into the dark corners of government filing cabinets and shine a light on the inner workings of our public institutions,” says the 69-page report.

“Actually getting into those filing cabinets can mean long waits, large portions of documents blacked out and creative interpretations of what seem to be straightforward access provisions.”

While Alberta earned a ‘B’ for its speed at responding to information requests, it earned a D along with Manitoba and Ontario for failing to disclose all information requested.

Quebec and New Brunswick fared even worse, receiving an ‘F’ for being the most secretive.

Alberta also was cited in the report for charging fees over $50 in 25 per cent of the information requests, second only to Ontario, which charged fees on nearly half of the requests for information.

The report found a request for briefing notes from the Alberta Solicitor General regarding the capacity of the province’s jails to be a futile exercise.

“(It) took 60 days to release records that were so severely severed as to have no useful information in them,” it stated.

Alberta also refused to release any briefing materials prepared for the premier regarding the new federal health-care funding formula.

Municipal governments in Calgary and Edmonton fared much better than the provincial government in the survey, prepared by University of King’s College assistant professor of journalism Fred Vallance-Jones.

Both received an ‘A’ for prompt processing of requests and a ‘B’ for completeness of disclosure.

However, the report notes the City of Calgary refused a request for information on the mayor’s most recent trip on the basis the information would be published online within 60 days, but only a summary of expenses, without receipts, was ever posted.

“Refusing requests for detailed records because summaries are posted online has the effect of making government more, not less, opaque, under the guise of being open and transparent,” the report states.

The City of Edmonton was singled out for an excessive charge to respond to an information request.

When asked for police reports on the use of Tasers dating back to the beginning of 2010, Edmonton wanted more than $10,000 for the full investigation reports of the incidents.

The Newspapers Canada audit involved sending 10 information requests to municipal governments, 16 requests to each provincial government and 55 requests to the federal government — a total of 410 requests to 11 federal departments, five departments in each province and 20 municipalities across Canada.

© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald

By Colette Derworiz, Calgary Herald September 19, 2012

In the spring, Shell applied to the Energy Resources Conservation Board for a licence to construct a short production pipeline to tie a sour gas well into its existing system.

Mike Judd, who lives near the hamlet of Beaver Mines, has requested a public hearing on the merits of a pipeline in the area.

“Shell is trying to suggest that I don’t have standing,” he said. “I find that quite ridiculous.”

His lawyer, Shaun Fluker, filed a letter this week with the ERCB to object to the move.

“Mike is the closest resident to the sour gas facility,” he said. “His residence, among others, is surrounded by Shell sour gas wells and pipelines. They live inside a continual emergency response zone.

“It’s quite amazing that Shell Canada is taking the position that Mike Judd is not entitled to any due process before it proceeds with yet another pipeline.”

Shell spokesman Stephen Doolan said it’s up to the ERCB whether there’s a hearing.

“Issues raised by the community are important to Shell,” he said, noting the company does its best to consult with residents affected by an application.

Doolan said only one party has filed an objection to the proposed pipeline.

“The ERCB is reviewing this objection in relation to Shell’s application,” he said. “During its review, the ERCB will determine whether to hold a public hearing as a result of the objection.

“Shell respects the decisions made by the ERCB.”

Bob Curran, spokesman for the ERCB, said the decision will be made after reviewing all of the correspondence.

“We will assess the information we have received from both parties and then make a decision,” he said, noting public hearings aren’t held for every application.

But Judd, who has lived in the area for his entire life, said he’d like to raise some of his concerns — including the integrity of a pipeline that has had problems in the area, the degradation of habitat for the endangered species in the Castle wilderness area, and his own health and safety.

It’s not the first time Judd has sparred with Shell over its work in the area.

He also took the company to court in 2010 when the sour gas project was approved less than two kilometres from his home.

Judd and his lawyer argued the ERCB failed to properly consider the province’s dwindling grizzly bear population when it approved the project.

The bid was denied.

A judge ruled that the ERCB did not err when it refused to hear Judd’s evidence, suggesting he missed a deadline to file a report authored by a grizzly bear expert and he denied Shell an opportunity to rebut his claim that the den would be harmed.

[email protected]

© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald

By Bob Weber, The Canadian Press September 20, 2012 5:56 AM

Enbridge hasn’t done enough research to properly estimate the environmental cost of its proposed $6-billion Northern Gateway pipeline and has even worked to block studies from being done, hearings into the proposed project heard Wednesday.

“They haven’t done the studies that are necessary to truly understand the impacts of these projects on coastal First Nations and the ecosystems they rely upon, not only for salmon, but for all the resources along the whole of their territories,” said Brenda Gartner, who represents aboriginal groups along the British Columbia coast.

“When work is being done, they lobby against that work proceeding,” she said outside the hearing.

Gartner pointed to testimony from environmental economists hired by Calgary-based Enbridge, who acknowledged they were unable to directly estimate environmental costs outside the immediate pipeline corridor.

They also said they hadn’t specifically determined if there would be impacts on salmon habitat.

“I’m relying on Enbridge’s information and I do my analysis based on that,” said Mark Anielski, one of the consultants.

Enbridge official John Car-ruthers said the company had filed 20,000 pages of information.

“I believe that there is sufficient amount of information for the panel to make a decision,” he said.

Gartner pointed to En-bridge’s involvement in the cancelling of an agreement between the federal and provincial governments, First Nations and conservationists that was to balance environmental concerns with economic development along the B.C. coast.

“Why was it that Enbridge lobbied the federal government to cancel the (Pacific North Coast Integrated Management Area)?” she asked.

Carruthers denied Enbridge wanted the effort blocked. However, he acknowledged the company lobbied the federal government.

“We had concerns about where some of the money was coming from.”

Ottawa ended the agreement it had with the other parties and returned an $8-million grant from Tides Canada, a non-profit group that would have funded the effort.

The federal government is now handling the coastal management effort on its own.

© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald

By Bryce Forbes, Calgary Herald September 20, 2012 7:36 AM

Two men walked away injury-free after a fiery helicopter crash near Cowley, Alta.

RCMP say two Calgary friends took off from a field and made it about 500 metres before they struck a power line and crashed back into a pasture west of Lethbridge.

The downed power lines started a fire in the field.

The Pincher Creek fire department extinguished the fire quickly with the help of local residents and farmers.

The 60-year-old pilot was experienced, and was flying back to Calgary.

RCMP and Transport Canada continue to investigate.

© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald

By Karen Kleiss, Edmonton Journal September 19, 2012

© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal

Original source article: Ministers won’t comment on questions raised at Gateway hearings

By Dave Cooper, Edmonton Journal September 18, 2012

© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal

By Sheila Pratt, Edmonton Journal September 18, 2012

EDMONTON – Enbridge is overstating the economic benefits — and underestimating costs — associated with the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline project to take Alberta bitumen to the west coast for shipment to Asia, said a lawyer for British Columbia’s Haisla First Nation.

Enbridge gives a much rosier picture of growth in oil production in Canada in its pitch for the pipeline than it gave to its investors at a shareholder meeting last fall, Hana Boye told the Joint Review Panel conducting hearings in Edmonton Tuesday.

The higher growth forecast, in public documents filed with the National Energy Board, results in a higher calculation of benefits to the oil industry from the proposed $6 billion pipeline, said Boye.

Boye said the lower growth forecast given to investors at a meeting in Toronto means as much as 500,000 fewer barrels per day by 2020 and therefore much less benefit to the oil industry from the pipeline that aims to carry 525,000 barrels a day of bitumen from the Edmonton area to Kitimat, B.C.

If Enbridge had used the internal, lower forecast it gave to investors, the much touted “price lift” for bitumen that gives oil companies their benefit would not be as robust, said Boye. Enbridge argues the proposed pipeline will secure higher prices for bitumen by opening up new markets in Asia.

Enbridge officials dismissed the difference in the two forecasts as not substantial. The higher forecast comes from the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

The numbers will vary depending on when the forecast is done but the difference is too small to have an impact on whether the project is economically viable, said John Carruthers, top manager of the separate company building the Northern Gateway pipeline.

“There could be differences as forecasts change over time, but they all show substantial growth in oil supply from the western Canadian basin,” said Carruthers.

At the October 2011 investors meeting, an Enbridge executive described that forecast as “bullish” and told investors the company’s growth forecast is lower at 4.4 per cent growth in oil production over 20 years.

Boye also said the company has ignored another major cost that comes with the project — the cost of importing large amounts of condensate needed to dilute the thick, sticky bitumen so it will flow in the pipeline.

Until 2008, Canada produced enough condensate to meet demand in this country, said Boye. But it now imports 60,000 barrels a day and that will increase significantly to support the increase in bitumen exports in the Northern Gateway pipeline.

Each barrel of bitumen shipped in the pipeline must be diluted by about 30 per cent. Some producers may also use light crude oil to blend with bitumen, says an Enbridge report.

In its cost-benefit analysis, Enbridge did not calculate the cost of importing condensate because that is a cost borne by companies that ship the bitumen, said Paul Fisher, Enbridge executive.

“We anticipate a need to import condensate but that decision will be made by shippers,” said Fisher.

Enbridge also confirmed it did not do a separate study on the impact of Canada’s growing dependence on condensate imports from the U.S.

Meanwhile, Enbridge told the panel that the company has reversed a pipeline that in the past carried crude oil into the U.S. The Southern Light pipeline will now ship 180,000 barrels a day of condensate to Canada.

Enbridge also confirmed it is applying for two separate permits at the hearing, the export pipeline to ship bitumen and the import pipeline to import condensate into Canada. Each pipeline could go ahead separately depending on what the review panel board rules.

The $6 billion price tag includes construction and operation of both pipelines.

The hearings continue until Sept 28.

[email protected]

© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal