|
Canada to tighten marine spill regs, establish area spill plans
The Canadian government said it will introduce the world’s “most robust and comprehensive liability and compensation system” for oil spills from tankers, Transport Minister Lisa Raitt announced May 13.
“We want to make sure if there is a spill that it is not the Canadian taxpayer that is the polluter who pays at the end of the day,” she said.
To achieve that objective the government will move the existing liability limit for ship-sourced pollution costs from the existing C$161 million to C$400 million and that would be paid from an industry fund, she said.
In the event that a company exhausted domestic and international pollution-related funds, the government would pay costs to eligible claimants and recover the money through an industry levy, Raitt said.
The announcement is one the government’s last hopes of tilting the balance in the raging public debate over pipeline plans to deliver an additional 1.1 million barrels per day of oil sands bitumen to the British Columbia coast, mostly for export to Asian markets.
One decision within the month If Enbridge’s Northern Gateway and Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain expansion do get the go-ahead from the federal cabinet - with a landmark decision on Enbridge’s project expected within about a month - the additional volumes are expected to being another 600 tankers a year through British Columbia waters, at the same time that an indefinite number of LNG tankers could ply the Pacific waters.
The two pipelines would contribute an estimated US$131 billion to Canada’s gross domestic product from 2016 to 2030, a University of Calgary study has calculated.
Many local governments, First Nations and environmental groups are pledged to carry their fight against the threat posed by bitumen tankers to Canada’s highest courts, while engaging in civil disobedience to disrupt and stop construction work.
The government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper is widely expected to approve the 525,000 bpd Northern Gateway project based on the findings of a federal review panel last year that the pipeline and resulting tanker traffic would not pose undue environmental risks. The Trans Mountain proposal is about to face its own regulatory hearings.
In addition to the safety measures, the government plans to establish four area-specific response plans, including southern British Columbia’s and, in preparation for TransCanada’s planned 1.1 million bpd Energy East project, for New Brunswick’s Bay of Fundy, the Gulf of Saint Lawrence and Port Hawkesbury, Nova Scotia.
A spokeswoman for Raitt said the four designated areas are already heavily used by shipping, while the Kitimat area on the northern British Columbia coast will face “expedited area-response planning, so that a risk-based regime is in place” if the Douglas Channel to Kitimat faces increased tanker traffic.
British Columbia Environment Minister Mary Polak said the new tanker regulations represent a “significant step” by the federal government, but she needs more time to decide if they will meet per province’s demand for a “world-class” oil response system - one of five conditions British Columbia has said must be met before it will endorse any heavy oil pipelines to tidewater.
Although the province does not have the final authority over pipeline approvals, it has said that construction could be blocked if it denies environmental certificates until risks are adequately mitigated.
Opponents not mollified Nathan Cullen, a northern British Columbia Member of Parliament, welcomed the safety announcement but said the conditions do not address the concerns of people in his region regarding Northern Gateway. “There are some places tankers should not go at all,” he said.
Art Sterritt, executive director of Coastal First Nations, one of the most outspoken opponents of Northern Gateway, said the new regulations offer no comfort to those concerned about the increased tanker traffic that would be spawned by Northern Gateway and Trans Mountain, arguing taxpayers would still be on the hook for cleanup costs.
He also said the government’s move to allow the use of chemical dispersants to break down any crude bitumen that escaped from tankers was a failure, describing that measure as “more of a cover-up than a clean-up because dispersant cleans up nothing.”
- Gary Park
| 