Increased tanker traffic through the shared border waters of Washington and British Columbia could rise further if Alberta succeeds in building a new crude export pipeline to the West Coast. Here, an oil/chemical tanker steers through Boundary Pass on the way to the Port of Vancouver in late June. (Photo credit by Tom Banse)
A proposed Canadian oil pipeline to a supertanker terminal at the Port of Vancouver in British Columbia is raising hackles among Washington state’s political leaders.Â
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney on Thursday designated the West Coast Oil Pipeline, now known as the Pacific Link, as a project of national interest. That enables a speedier regulatory review that could see pipeline design and construction under way by next fall.
In response, Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson on Friday sounded alarms about increased oil spill risk to the Salish Sea in his first public comments on the massive project.
The Carney announcement wasnât a surprise. In July, the prime minister and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith talked of fast-tracking the proposed 775-mile pipeline capable of carrying one million barrels of crude oil a day.Â
It would run from the Edmonton region to a new export terminal capable of handling supertankers proposed for Port of Vancouverâs Roberts Bank in British Columbia just north of the U.S. border. Oil could flow through by the early 2030s.
Once operating, many more oil-filled vessels traveling from the port would pass by the San Juan Islands and Olympic Peninsula on their way to Asia. Project critics fear a spill could easily reach north Puget Sound, the Strait of Juan de Fuca and Washingtonâs outer coast, threatening sensitive ecosystems and killer whale habitat.Â
Ferguson said Friday that he was “disappointed” at the decision because resources needed to respond to a major spill are insufficient today.
âIf a project of this scale is going to proceed, it needs to come with a corresponding commitment to also increase our regionâs capacity to prevent and respond to a catastrophic spill,â he said in a joint statement with Casey Sixkiller, director of the state Department of Ecology.
Ferguson said the size of the oil supertankers envisioned for the route are unprecedented, and have been barred from Washington ports since the 1970s. Their capacity of 92 million gallons of oil is eight times the volume of oil spilled by the Exxon Valdez, he noted.
“If this project proceeds, it is critical that the Canadian government make detailed commitments to safeguard our shared marine waters and fill these gaps in our response capabilities,â he and Sixkiller said in the statement.
San Juan County council members, northern Washington tribal representatives and others have been pushing Ferguson since July to speak out and engage with the Canadian provincial and federal governments about the crude pipeline and tanker traffic.
On Tuesday, Ferguson met with Mark Wiseman, Canadaâs ambassador to the U.S. in Seattle. It is not known if the two discussed the pipeline and Fergusonâs office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the meeting.
Sixkiller dispatched a lengthy letter to Canadian Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc in mid-September in a vain bid to forestall the fast-tracking of the Alberta pipeline permitting.
U.S. Rep. Rick Larsen of Everett, whose 2nd Congressional District includes the state waters through which the supertankers would travel, was equally vexed. Many questions about the project and oil spill response need answers, he said.
âThis project is not ready for prime time, and speeding up the review process will only make that worse,” he said in an email. âCanada’s plan to fast track this new oil pipeline project puts sensitive marine habitats at risk and raises the chance of a devastating spill occurring before the U.S. and Canada can put updated plans in place.”
The project comes as Canada looks to strengthen its economic ties beyond the U.S. and as Carney has said the nation is seeking to become an âenergy superpower.â
Smith has said the province chose a southern pipeline route that ends on the shores of the Salish Sea because it can take advantage of the existing Trans Mountain Pipeline corridor as well as established relationships with First Nations.
Northern Washington tribes, including the Lummi, Samish, Swinomish and Makah, strongly opposed a previous Canadian pipeline expansion. The tribes argue that the large increase in vessel traffic endangers their treaty rights and threatens vital fisheries.
Maithili Devadas of the Georgia Strait Alliance, an environmental group in British Columbia fighting the export terminal proposed at Roberts Bank, panned Carneyâs announcement.
âIt would be reasonable to expect that a project with the potential to shape the environmental, economic, and social future of a region for decades to come would face an especially rigorous level of scrutiny. Instead, this project is being fast-tracked without any concern for its long-term impacts on ecosystems, communities and the people who depend on them,â she wrote in an update to supporters Friday.
Source: Washington State Standard
This article was originally published by Washington State Standard.
