Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

alp227

(32,006 posts)
Fri May 31, 2013, 11:43 PM May 2013

B.C. officially opposes Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline

Source: CBC

The B.C. government has officially expressed its opposition to a proposal for the Northern Gateway pipeline project, saying it fails to address the province's environmental concerns.

The province made the announcement in its final written submission to the Northern Gateway Pipeline Joint Review Panel.

"British Columbia thoroughly reviewed all of the evidence and submissions made to the panel and asked substantive questions about the project, including its route, spill response capacity and financial structure to handle any incidents," said Environment Minister Terry Lake.

"Our questions were not satisfactorily answered during these hearings."

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2013/05/31/bc-northern-gateway-rejected.html



found this story from a Mother Jones online article http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2013/05/british-columbia-kills-west-coast-pipeline-plan
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
B.C. officially opposes Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline (Original Post) alp227 May 2013 OP
kick Dawson Leery May 2013 #1
This got lots of action @ Daily Kos today, its an important step FogerRox May 2013 #2
We've had so many massive protests u4ic Jun 2013 #3
Rejected by BC Maynar Jun 2013 #4
Documentary on Current TV or Real TV Hulk Jun 2013 #5
Good to see the gov't of B.C. is on the up-and-up. n/t AverageJoe90 Jun 2013 #6
So in addition to having a line built across the US to pollute our land davidpdx Jun 2013 #7
I heard about this this morning PSPS Jun 2013 #8
Obama says he wants to sign on to the Pipeline now; we knew he wanted to do this all along. blkmusclmachine Jun 2013 #9
AAAAAAAARRRRRGH are you serious? alp227 Jun 2013 #10

u4ic

(17,101 posts)
3. We've had so many massive protests
Sat Jun 1, 2013, 12:09 AM
Jun 2013

it's in almost everyone's consciousness here. There is another proposed 'twinning' (ie new) pipeline, the Kinder Morgan one, that isn't as much in the National/International news.

I hope it isn't politicking on this newly re-elected government's part, ie that Enbridge submits more 'evidence' down the road and it's approved.

Maynar

(769 posts)
4. Rejected by BC
Sat Jun 1, 2013, 12:18 AM
Jun 2013

but it's the Feds who have the final say. And when they ram through the approval, then Clark's BC Liberals can shrug and say, "Well, we tried."

 

Hulk

(6,699 posts)
5. Documentary on Current TV or Real TV
Sat Jun 1, 2013, 01:22 AM
Jun 2013

on this very subject. What the Canadian government is LETTING these HUGE polluters get away with up north, and the population are realizing massive increases in cancer rates, the wild life is being murdered, and the threat to their water system...fish as well as water...is in severe jeopardy of being ruined...so that these corporations can make their profits with oil, etc. It's a sin; and Canada is actually worse that this country, in many respects, as to what they are allowing these powerful conglomerates get away with.

This has GOT TO BE STOPPED!

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
7. So in addition to having a line built across the US to pollute our land
Sat Jun 1, 2013, 02:44 AM
Jun 2013

They are allowing oil companies to do the same across Canada. I didn't know that. Fucking ridiculous.

PSPS

(13,580 posts)
8. I heard about this this morning
Sat Jun 1, 2013, 01:16 PM
Jun 2013

One of the conditions that BC said "weren't satisfactory" was the royalties they would receive from the pipeline's use. That made me wonder what, if any, royalties were part of the XL pipeline proposal. As far as I know, there aren't any at all.

It seems to me one way to hinder the XL deal is that each state it crosses demand a royalty for anything sent through it. Not only would it provide revenue to the states, but it could be used to pay for the eventual damage done by the project (i.e., get away from the "socialize the costs, privatize the profits" business model now common in our U S of Banana Republic.)

Of course, the oil companies don't want anyone taking a cut of their take.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»B.C. officially opposes E...