Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline gets green light from JRP


After more than 2 1/2 years of meetings/hearings across BC (including here in Rupert), the Joint Review Panel has given the go-ahead for the Kitimat Northern Gateway pipeline proposed by Enbridge.

theglobeandmail.com/report-o … e16056689/


“Don’t mourn. Organize.”



about time they approved it way to long for the review, but as is always the case let the ultra enviromentalists tell us how bad it would be for the enviroment


I’m more worried about a pipeline than the tankers. The tankers can have BC Pilots on board navigating through BC waters. The pipeline goes through pretty remote areas that could impact the environment if there were to be a leak, and very difficult to clean up.


I don’t like the idea of tankers or a pipeline. It is not a matter of if there will be a spill it is when. There are no guarantees that a spill will not happen. The oil companies do not have a stellar record when it comes to cleaning up a spill. I heard on CBC radio the other day that they are still cleaning up oil from the Exxon Valdez incident. Just my two cents worth.


double hulled tankers are very safe, does anyone know how fast a tanker has to be going to rip into the inner hull if it crashes? I bet it has to be going a good clip. pipeline that is a different story but of all the pipelines built with newer standards how many have ruptured? yes enbridge did have a bad one and the controller opened the flow instead of shutting it down, maybe they can hire the native bands along the route to inspect the pipeline to make sure no problems? but keep in mind no system is safe, probably bigger danger of getting hit in the crosswalk then an oil spill, but you still cross the street.


Despite how much they promise to make the Northern Gateway Pipeline safe and protected from environmental disasters, I have absolute zero faith that Enbridge will do the job.

Only in Rupert where certain people decided to wear black during a rainy night, and expect not to get hit by a car.

Yeah, not all systems are 100% safe, but please don’t make anything more unsafe.


You must not live in this area. Your mental for wanting this. IDIOT


The consequences of a spill will be far reaching and we cannot know if the environment will recover. That is my fear.



You must not live in this area. Your mental for wanting this. IDIOT[/quote]

Please avoid insulting others. Comments like this can escalate a thread into a flame war.
Thank you.


Well, he does have the point that every modern tanker built these days is not going to be like the “Queen of the North”.

So why the insult?


BC Ferries had a great many years of safe travel before an accident, we can only hope that the tankers stay safe, but our cherished beauty of the NW is indeed at great risk


From a strictly selfish point of view I don’t see how any Rupertite could back the Northern Gateway Project. With the background of Enbridge’s record as one of the dirtiest players in one of the dirtiest industries, slides like the one that knocked out our natural gas for more than a week (I think it took 2 days just to locate the break, but I may be wrong.), the Queen of the North & Exxon Valdez (both caused by human error, not equipment error), Enbridge’s dismissal of questions and criticism with “Not our concern,” or “we’ll figure that out later, trust us,” and a government intent on de facto deregulation accomplished through defunding inspectors and regulators, it seems like we are being asked to take on a lot of risk. A major incident happening anywhere from East of Smithers to beyond the Haida Gwaii could devastate employment here. My income would plummet, along with the value of my house, erasing the efforts of years of employment. On the other side of the equation, it doesn’t seem likely that I will gain anything at all from the project. Workers won’t be stationed here, or be hired from here. No business taxes will be collected here. So what’s in it for me? Bupkis.

Let me gaze into my crystal ball for a moment. Christie Clark will use the caveats and “ifs” in the report to drag things out past the 2018 election. There is too much public opposition to the project to head into an election on the heels of the project going ahead. If the Liberals win, the province will cave immediately after to allow maximum time for any benefits to accrue and public amnesia to set in. If the NDP wins the project will never go through and the Liberals will use the words “Northern Gateway” to beat us over our heads with the message that while they struggled indefatigably to cut the best deal for British Columbians, the NDP hates business, money, you, God, and babies. We will still be hearing about in 2028 (Fast Ferries anyone?).


PS: Sorry for the long sentence.


Well said cranky1!


Let me gaze into my crystal ball for a moment. Christie Clark will use the caveats and “ifs” in the report to drag things out past the 2018 election. [/quote]

You mean the 2017 election I hope? I don’t want to put up with Clark for 5 years. Haha. Interesting times ahead. I doubt the pipeline or tankers will get the green light.


first off by going to name calling any point made would be moot, second off hate to burst your bubble but i was born and raised in Rupert and lived here all my life. Didn’t know that because I lived here I couldn’t voice an opinion in favour of the pipeline, silly me. but lets get to the debate, do you know right now there are dbl hull oil tankers just 12 miles off our coast going from alaska to either washington or california states? how many of them have ruptured? to my knowledge none. As I have stated I have no problem with the oil tankers, yes they can run aground but the odds are sooooooooooooo small it probably isn’t even a statistic, and even if they did rupture the odds of the second hull being ruptured again are sooooooo small, am I willing to take that risk yes I am, as for the pipeline again odds are in favour of no rupture, but as with any civilization when a problem happens you fix it and design something better so the odds of it happening gets lower every time, but if something does happen then you make sure you can clean it up as soon as possible. If most ppl worried about what if then you wouldn’t get onto an airplane, drive a car or cross the street.

on a closing note where do you think the plastic that you use everyday comes from? your smartphone, the plastic in your household and appliances?


Guess because I oppose the pipeline I am an “ultra environmentalist”.

Strike one is that II do not think building a pipeline through the Rockies to supply the oil to the coast can be done without a higher risk that I feel is acceptable.

Strike two is the damage that would be done by a oil spill in a tanker accident would be massive, and not worth the risk of a few long term jobs, and so Enbridge can make a huge profit because the governments seems to be willing to give the oil away.

Strike three is the damage to the environment that is caused by extracting the oil in the first place from the tarsands.

Seems to me that LNG has risks as well, but that risk is something I can live with.

Wouldn’t building a pipeline to supply a pretty good amount of oil to Asia kind of go against sending Asia LNG. Of course Asia has a large appetite for energy, but sending them a shwack of oil would seem to lessen their need for LNG.


You do realise most people who oppose the proposed transport of unrefined material through the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline aren’t necessarily against the energy industry.

However, most people in Rupert would welcome the LNG project with wide open arms. Go figure.