My Comments to the Enbridge Northern Gateway Joint Review Panel
The official transcript is at:https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/ll-eng/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=914749&objAction=Open
I have made small edits for clarity.
I have made small edits for clarity.
Good morning, everyone. Thank you for
listening.
In 1827, over 180 years ago, a French
scientist, Jean Baptiste Joseph Fourier, wrote a paper that helped us
understand how our planet works. It was based on earlier experiments
by a Swiss scientist, deSaussure. In 1896, Svante Arrhenius, a
Swedish scientist, building on that paper developed a formula that
allowed him to calculate exactly how much temperatures would rise
based on the CO2 that we put into our atmosphere.
That was 117 years ago. We’ve had 117
years of experiments, data collection, research, measurement and even
more precise calculations and yet, from what I understand, this
Panel is not even going to fully consider the impact of that science
and this project.
Anthropogenic global warming has been
called the most peer-reviewed project in the history of science.
Every scientific body of national and international standing has
taken a position in favour of it and yet we’re not allowed to fully
consider the impact that this project will have based on that
science.
The Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline
will pump about 525,000 barrels per day of petroleum. That works out
to 225 million kilograms of CO2 warming potential each day, or about
225,000 tonnes per day. That’s 82 million tonnes per year, or at
least I thought it was when I did those calculations. Then I realized
I was using the factor for conventional oil to do those
calculations, and since this is coming from the tar sands, the factor
should be higher. So it works out to be about 99 million tonnes per
year of CO2 warming potential that will be going through this
pipeline.
As you probably know, just this month the National Resource Defence Council in the United States released some information showing that we’ve actually been underestimating the CO2 warming potential from tar sands fossil fuels.
So again we have these numbers, 99
million tonnes per year, and yet, from what I understand, we’re not
even supposed to be considering those numbers when it comes to the
impact of this project.
Nicholas Stern, who wrote this very
damming report about how climate change would affect our economies,
recently admitted that he was wrong, That in fact he’d
underestimated the impact. He said, I quote, “It’s far worse.
This is potentially so dangerous that we have to act strongly.”
I don’t want to diminish the other
concerns about this pipeline. There certainly are very valid concerns
about the spills that will happen on land and on water.
My family has lived for generations
here in B.C. along the coast. My family was some of the original
settlers up in the area that’s shown on the map here [referring to
the map on the screen] along the pipeline route. And we’ve also
lived in Alberta. I actually worked in the tar sands for a brief
period of time. So again, I don’t want to diminish the very serious
effects that this could have on the ecosystem.
But the truth that we don’t want to
talk about too much is the fact that even if we had quadruple-hulled
tankers and even if we had triple- walled pipelines, even if we had
no spills on land or in water, almost all of this product would still
be spilled. It would be spilled into the atmosphere through
combustion at the end use. To me, that seems insane that we aren’t
even allowed to consider that impact in this process.
We are allowed to consider the impact
that it will have on communities and, of course, climate change will
affect communities, not only here in B.C. but around the world. So I
guess, if we think about it that way we are allowed to consider the
impact that climate change will have.
The science is pretty clear that we
need to have an 80 to 90 percent reduction in fossil fuel use. What
that means is that even the existing pipelines that we have are
carrying too much fossil fuels and that we need to be decommissioning
existing pipelines in order to meet the targets that the science
says we need to meet.
To me, it just seems insane that we are
building new pipelines under these conditions. With all this evidence
of the harm that it will be doing to future generations, it seems to
me almost sociopathic to go ahead with a project like this.
Anyone who cares about our children and
future generations must work to stop this pipeline.
In April my first daughter will be
arriving, which means that I will continue to work to stop this
pipeline.
Thank you
Comments