From The Economist, January 21, 2012
SOON after Barack Obama chose to delay a decision last year on a proposed Alberta-to-Texas oil pipeline called Keystone XL, Stephen Harper, Canada’s prime minister, warned that his country would not be left at the altar. “This does underscore the necessity of Canada making sure that we’re able to access Asian markets for our energy products,” he said. The threat was clear: if the United States did not want oil from Alberta’s dirty tar sands, Canada would build a pipeline to the Pacific and ship the stuff to Asia. There, says Enbridge, the firm behind the project, each barrel might fetch $20 more (counting shipping) than in America. On January 18th Mr Obama rejected Keystone XL. New calls for Canada to look west will surely follow.
Yet the domestic opponents to the Northern Gateway pipeline, linking Edmonton with the port of Kitimat, seem to be copying the campaign against Keystone XL. In 2010, 55 of Canada’s native tribes (called First Nations) signed a declaration rejecting the project. At the first day of the National Energy Board’s (NEB) hearings on the pipeline, held on January 10th, the chiefs of the Haisla tribe said they feared an oil spill would ruin their fishery. Some 4,300 people have signed up to speak.
The pipeline’s opponents still face an uphill battle. A December poll by Ipsos-Reid found that British Columbians back it by 48% to 32%. And Mr Harper is close to the oil industry. Joe Oliver, the natural-resources minister, recently wrote an open letter accusing “radical groups” with “funding from foreign special-interest groups” of delaying and undermining the debate. Vivian Krause, a blogger in Vancouver, has released documents showing that American foundations have given $300m since 2000 to Canadian green and aboriginal groups for environmental campaigns.
To continue reading, click here
Comments