# 14 Vancouver tries to stay green by rejecting 2 oil pipelines

Four major oil companies demand a global carbon tax because it would force power generation plants to switch from coal to natural gas, which emits only half the amount of CO_2. Cathay Pacific, the world’s third largest airline, demands the tax because it would bring in a lot of extra cash until other airlines are as fuel efficient as they are. These are examples how a universal carbon tax will reduce the world’s greenhouse gas emissions without having to resort to subsidies and complicated duty arrangements.  A global carbon tax would make green energy cheaper than that from fossil fuel. That price differential would  force Alberta’s  oil companies to go green with the large amount of energy required to extract the oil. That would enable Canada to meet its Copenhagen commitment. At present many countries believe we will not be able to meet that commitment. Until a global agreement has been reached, demand for oil will keep rising, no matter who supplies it. If Canada would renege on its export commitments that oil would soon be replaced by Venezuela or Saudi Arabia oil and there will be no difference in the world’s GHG emissions.  This fact is overlooked by more than a few environmentalists and politicians. In  http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/vancouver-s-green-brand-be-blackened-oil-pipelines-says-mayor#comment-260670  you can see that Vancouver’s mayor Robertson and councilor Reimer both make statements suggesting that the amount of oil we ship has an impact on the world’s greenhouse gas emission. Mayor Robertson rejects the Kinder Morgan and Enbridge pipelines partly on that basis. Carbon tax, which is the most powerful greening tool we have, is not even mentioned . He talks about creating more green jobs and rising energy prices do that.

Objection to pipelines based on fear of spills is a valid one. The technical and regulatory details of oil transport are not  discussed in the main media and as a result many people believe that the new pipelines will be just as bad as the old ones and that nothing has changed since Exxon Valdez. The Vancouver Observer invites reader’s comments. I left one under the heading “Oil spills”. Those familiar with this blog will not find anything new but for those who only see this post, please look at the previous one as well. It gives a summary of each post.

The”Oil spills” comment has been shown for two days and so far 13 people agreed while only 2 disagreed. That is encouraging. Here is the comment:

Oil spills

One of the problems with oil pipelines is that until recently their leak detection systems could not detect spills smaller than 1 ½ % of the flow. Even for larger flows signals are sometimes misinterpreted because there are many false alarms. That happened in the Kalamazoo spill where operators thought the alarm was caused by a bubble in the line or a blockage and shut-off was delayed by 17 hours. In the US only 5% of the spills between 2002 and 2012 were detected by instruments. The investigation of the Kalamazoo disaster also revealed that there is virtually no oversight nor strict regulations how to deal with cracks in pipelines. Enbridge used inadequate crack detection equipment, knew for 5 years that there were 15000 cracks in the line and only repaired them by trying to prioritize them. Nobody ordered a shutdown and some of those cracks grew in size and linked together to cause the rupture.

On September 1 ^st 2013 I sent Enbridge an email which contains my observations  with the following note: “Having seen how much opposition there is based on past problems I have included at the end of my article a number of questions which may change opponents  minds if you can once in a while point out how things have improved on specific points”. While Enbridge thanked me for my support, few of those important matters are discussed in the media. They also include questions about the marine transport. A lot has changed since Exxon Valdez and it is important to know what the real concerns are. Hardly anybody has the time to read the Termpol report but people want to know where the safe hiding places are awaiting storms, who gives approval to proceed when bad weather is forecasted or whales have been spotted, how have the concerns raised at the enquiry been resolved, how do the additional navigation aids work, are ships traced constantly from shore to avoid a Queen of the North disaster, how do modern tankers differ from first generation double hull tankers. Please write to the government, Enbridge and Kinder Morgan to obtain answers about their instrumentation, maintenance procedures and regulations to be followed. When enough people do that we may get a more open discussion about these matters and press for guarantees  before it is too late

Since the existing pipelines are full, Alberta’s landlocked oil has to be sold at bargain prices, costing the Alberta economy $20-$30 billion per year. Obviously this causes Ottawa to lose billions of dollars in tax revenue which could be used to help the provinces with infrastructure, services for remote communities, healthcare and education. The push for new pipelines is therefore understandable but it has to be done the right way. For those who are concerned about the global greenhouse gas emission, please campaign for a global carbon tax because that is the only way to reduce the oil flow. Until that has been achieved demand for oil keeps rising and it makes little difference who supplies it. Sure extraction from the oil sands uses a lot of energy but so do some of the newer techniques elsewhere. That is why green energy has to become more competitive by taxing all fossil fuels. 4 Major oil companies and one major airline demand a global carbon tax. They are well ahead of politicians who still believe that carbon tax hurts the economy while most studies show the opposite.