Woman Nobel Peace Prize winner tells Harper to “Listen up” — Keep dirty oil out of New England

“I am proud to join this call” — Jody Williams, 1997 Nobel Peace Prize winner

No 668 Posted by fw, January 31, 2013

“We will be united in telling leaders of both nations to stop the madness. Listen up Prime Minister Harper: Canada’s National Energy Board must hear the will of the people and deny approval of this pipeline plan. And our message to President Obama, as he starts his second term, is clear: Become a climate leader. Keep tar sands out of New England by refusing to issue this pipeline a new presidential permit. As a Vermonter, an American, a global citizen, I am proud to join this call.” —Jody Williams

Keep dirty oil out of New England by Jody Williams, Boston Globe, January 29, 2013

From north to south and east to west, people across the United States and Canada are increasingly coming together to fight against the expansion of the Alberta tar sands and efforts to move the highly toxic bitumen — tar sands “oil” — through pipelines to the Atlantic, Pacific and Gulf of Mexico. From US ports the bitumen would be shipped primarily to China.

Why do I care? Even before I learned that ExxonMobile is gearing up to try to send tar sands oil east through Vermont — my home state — and New Hampshire to a shipping port in Portland, Maine through decades old pipelines, I was opposed to tar sands expansion and pipeline projects.

Global warming and the obvious changes to our weather patterns cannot sustain more exploitation of fossil fuels. And tar sands expansion is among the worst threats. After the oil fields of Saudia Arabia, the full development of Alberta tar sands will create the world’s second largest potential source of global warming gases. I saw for myself the impact of the tar sands on the environment and people of Western Canada.

Last October I led a delegation of women from the United States and Canada to the tar sands of Alberta. We began in Ft McMurray, and then traveled along the proposed route of the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline that will carry tar sands oil from Prince George, in beautiful northern British Columbia, all the way to the sea at Kitimat on the Douglas Channel.

While in Canada, I met with and listened to the concerns of over 200 women in 13 communities — women nursing babies, women in wheelchairs, some women representing environmental and community organizations, many from First Nation groups. They spoke passionately about how the massive expansion of the oil sands and pipeline and tanker projects will impact on their communities, forests, rivers, oceans, and air. Some told us of powerful court challenges they are mounting against the tar sands, others described their very real fears about oil spills and what this will do to their livelihoods and way of life. The tar sands oil is the dirty, and they don’t want it their backyard.

And I don’t want it in mine.

Along with most Americans, I am deeply disturbed by the rapid pace of climate change and want our leaders to take meaningful action. Last year I wrote to President Obama, together with nine other Nobel Peace laureates, urging him to lead the transition away from our dependence on oil, coal and gas and instead increase investments in renewable energies and energy efficiency. I also joined tens of thousands in demonstrating at the White House to urge him to reject the Keystone XL pipeline, which will carry tar sands oil from Canada through six states to reach the Gulf of Mexico. But that is still not enough.

What I heard in Western Canada echoes what I am hearing across the continent. Many people are moved to action by changing weather patterns, and their fears for the future of their families. Warmer temperatures are hitting Northern British Columbia’s forestry industry hard. Closer to home, last year was the hottest on record in Vermont, New Hampshire and Massachusetts, by more than one degree — as it was for the entire continental United States. A record 11 wildfires, droughts and storms in 2012 exceeded $1 billion in damages, and of course Superstorm Sandy late last year devastated the lives of many communities in New Jersey and New York.

Yet, through it all, our leaders in the US and Canada continue to collude with the oil industry for a rapid expansion of the tar sands. This kind of leadership is taking us in the opposite direction of where we need to go. Production of tar sands oil needs to be capped, and we need to start investing in other energy sources.

Like thousands resisting the pipelines in Canada and the Keystone XL, we here in New England will say no to tar sands.

We will be united in telling leaders of both nations to stop the madness. Listen up Prime Minister Harper: Canada’s National Energy Board must hear the will of the people and deny approval of this pipeline plan. And our message to President Obama, as he starts his second term, is clear: Become a climate leader. Keep tar sands out of New England by refusing to issue this pipeline a new presidential permit.

As a Vermonter, an American, a global citizen, I am proud to join this call.

Jody Williams won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1997 for her work toward the banning and clearing of anti-personnel mines. Currently, she is the chair of the Nobel Women’s Initiative. The organization uses the prestige of the Nobel Peace Prize and courageous women Peace Laureates to increase the power and visibility of women’s groups working globally for peace, justice and equality.

Fair Use Notice: This blog, Citizen Action Monitor, may contain copyrighted material that may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material, published without profit, is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues. It is published in accordance with the provisions of the 2004 Supreme Court of Canada ruling and its six principle criteria for evaluating fair dealing

Quebec citizen activists gearing up to stop Enbridge tar sands pipeline

This project “is a bad deal for everyone and everything but Enbridge”

No 657 Posted by fw, January 19, 2013

“Three years of organized civil resistance prevented the construction of the Dunham pumping station after the project received the go-ahead from Quebec’s Farmland Protection Commission in 2009. Two-thirds of residents signed a petition opposing the project, and many of the over 300 participants who attended a 2-week climate camp in 2010 pledged to take non-violent direct action if the pumping station was built without community consent. Citizens of Dunham also joined forces with Equiterre in order to win a number of successful court challenges against the pipeline company. Now, Quebec is gearing up to stop the Trailbreaker once again, alongside neighbours in Ontario and the growing opposition across the U.S. border.” —Amara Possian and Shona Watt

Reversing the flow? Quebec says ‘no’ to tar sands pipelines by Amara Possian and Shona Watt, rabble.ca, January 18, 2013

When Enbridge shelved its Trailbreaker project due to the 2009 economic downturn, Quebecers heard right through the company’s talking points.

The Trailbreaker would have reversed the east-to-west flow of the existing Line 9 pipeline that links Sarnia, Ontario’s chemical valley, and Montreal in order to transport 240,000 barrels-per-day of Alberta tar sands oil to Montreal. The oil that wasn’t refined in Shell’s Montreal East refinery, now a distribution terminal, would have been exported to the Northeastern U.S. through the Portland-Montreal pipeline. Interestingly enough, although the reversal was shelved, Montreal Pipe Line Ltd. continued trying to build a pumping station in Dunham, Quebec, a key piece of the project’s infrastructure on the Quebec-Vermont border.

Sound familiar?

That’s because four years later, the Trailbreaker is back. The only difference: Enbridge has changed the name and broken up the project into smaller pieces. And although delegates from Calgary have visited Montreal to discuss exports to Europe and Asia, Enbridge claims the dirty oil flowing through Line 9A and Line 9B isn’t destined for export through the Montreal-Portland pipeline.

The nitty gritty regulatory process

On July 27 2012, the very same day that Enbridge spilled 1,200 barrels of oil in Wisconsin and two years after Enbridge spilled 20,000 barrels of tar sands crude into Michigan’s Kalamazoo river, the National Energy Board (NEB) approved the reversal of Line 9A, which runs from the Sarnia Terminal to the North Westover pumping station near Hamilton, Ontario.

In late November, Enbridge filed an application to reverse Line 9B, the 636 km of pipelines that run from North Westover to the Montreal Terminal — or, the remainder of the original Trailbreaker project. The company also requested an increase in the pipeline’s capacity to 300,000 barrels-per-day, and changes to regulations in order to allow the transportation of diluted bitumen (or ‘dilbit’), thick tar sands oil diluted with a toxic chemical cocktail that helps it scrape through pipelines like hot liquid sandpaper.

Pending NEB approval, Enbridge hopes construction will begin in late 2013 so the pipeline can be in service by spring 2014. While the NEB will be holding public hearings regarding the reversal and capacity expansion, the Harper Government has the power to override decisions of the board. The majority government gave itself this power in its economic action plan, right after gutting a number of environmental regulations – upon the request of the oil and gas industry – in its 400+ page omnibus budget bill.

A bad deal for everyone and everything but Enbridge

Natural Resources Canada has budgeted over $9 million for ads promoting pipelines and resource development. Full-page ads in Montreal papers, funded by industry and commerce groups, say the reversal contributes to “sustainable development” in Quebec.

Joe Oliver says it’s just “good public relations.”

In reality, bringing tar sands oil out east is a bad deal for the climate, a bad deal for the economy, and a bad deal for the 99 municipalities, the 18 First Nation communities, and the 9 million people who live within 50km of the pipeline route.

Climate change is already affecting Quebecers. We wore t-shirts at the St. Patrick’s Day Parade; an early spring threatened our maple sugar season and apple crops; our streets flooded in Quebec City; and our cocktails warmed up on terraces even faster thanks to our sweltering July. Temperatures in March 2012 broke so many records that it broke the record for how many records were broken.

We need to leave 80 per cent of the world’s fossil fuels in the ground if we want to avoid catastrophic climate change. Investing in infrastructure that locks us into further expanding tar sands production is just about the worst thing Canadians can do for the planet.

And unless everyone wants to move to Fort McMurray, Harper’s rhetoric that the tar sands create jobs and help the economy just isn’t true. Although the reversal project is expected to create a whopping three permanent jobs, more than 15 factory jobs have been lost for every natural resource employment position created since 2007 because of the stronger Canadian dollar. A pipeline in your backyard won’t really save you money at the pump, and getting oil of the ground has never been more expensive.

Pipelines carrying dilbit, like the one that spilled into the Kalamazoo River in 2010, are more likely to spill due to internal corrosion. The spills are also much harder to clean up, since the heavy bitumen sinks, while the chemicals evaporate into a toxic cloud that leaves nearby residents with headaches, nausea, and respiratory problems. Refining the tar sands crude would contribute even more to the horrible air quality in Sarnia and Montreal, and leave individuals with a higher risk of cancer.

Who wins? Nobody but Enbridge and the other corporations that are profiting off the privatization of the commons and the pollution of our planet.

Growing cross-border resistance

Pipelines have become one of the key political issues of the day, and thousands across North America are opposing these destructive projects. Last month, TransCanada rerouted the Keystone XL pipeline after an 85-day tree-sit in Texas. Thousands are mobilizing across British Columbia to stop the Northern Gateway and Kinder Morgan pipelines and just this week, five people disrupted the Enbridge hearings in Vancouver to raise climate issues and condemn the process for silencing the voices of the public.

Quebec has stopped the Trailbreaker before

Three years of organized civil resistance prevented the construction of the Dunham pumping station after the project received the go-ahead from Quebec’s Farmland Protection Commission in 2009. Two-thirds of residents signed a petition opposing the project, and many of the over 300 participants who attended a 2-week climate camp in 2010 pledged to take non-violent direct action if the pumping station was built without community consent. Citizens of Dunham also joined forces with Equiterre in order to win a number of successful court challenges against the pipeline company.

Now, Quebec is gearing up to stop the Trailbreaker once again, alongside neighbours in Ontario and the growing opposition across the U.S. border.

City councils in Burlington, Vermont and Casco, Maine have passed municipal resolutions opposing the transportation of tar sands oil through their cities and across their states. Burlington has also passed concrete measures to pull the city’s investments out of the tar sands and eliminate the city’s use of tar sands oil. Over 50 municipalities along the pipeline route in New England have similar resolutions on the table, and organizers in Toronto are building support around a motion that would prohibit shipping diluted bitumen through the city.

Perhaps Montreal Mayor Michael Applebaum’s attempts to clean up the city after Gérald Tremblay’s resignation will include measures that protect residents from the toxic impacts of a spill.

Looking ahead

This Saturday, Climate Justice Montreal is hosting a day of workshops, a panel, and collective strategizing to build resistance and alternatives to tar sands pipelines in Quebec. The event is the first in a week of cross-border actions in Ontario, Quebec, and New England, culminating in a massive demonstration in Portland, Maine on January 26.

We know that there are two kinds of power, organized money and organized people. Dirty energy companies may have unlimited resources and the government’s PR machine at their disposal, but this weekend’s forum in Montreal is just the beginning of our collective resistance. We refuse to let one of the world’s richest oil companies turn Quebec into a dirty energy corridor.

Amara Possian is a Montreal-based writer and climate justice organizer who loves challenging injustice through satire and large puppets. Follow her on twitter @amarapossian

Shona Watt (@tinyhomestead) is a professor, sustainability coordinator, beekeeper, and photographer. Her paradise is located 3.5 miles downstream from the Trailbreaker.

SEE ALSO

• Enbridge on track to complete plan to pipe tar sands oil east – How will grassroots activists respond? Posted December 17, 2012 – “…shipping Alberta tar sands products to Eastern Canada is now being posed as a major “national unity” project. This was evident at the meeting of provincial and territorial first ministers in Halifax in late November. Quebec premier Pauline Marois (who had reversed her previous opposition to attending such meetings) met with Alberta premier Alison Redford and announced that her Parti Québécois government will establish a joint working group with the Alberta government to study the possible use of Quebec refineries receiving crude oil from the tar sands. This involves not just Alberta and Quebec alone, said Manitoba’s NDP premier Greg Selinger. “It’s part of a national strategy.”

Fair Use Notice: This blog, Citizen Action Monitor, may contain copyrighted material that may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material, published without profit, is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues. It is published in accordance with the provisions of the 2004 Supreme Court of Canada ruling and its six principle criteria for evaluating fair dealing

Burlington City Council passes resolution disapproving transport of tar sands oil across Vermont

Copies of resolution sent to Harper and Enbridge, among others. Is this the opening volley of battles to follow?

No 636 Posted by fw, December 19, 2012

Burlington is Vermont’s largest city (metro pop. 211,261 in 2010). It’s situated on the upper west side of the state, 45 miles south of the Vermont-Quebec border, on the shores of Lake Champlain.  This peripheral location leave lots of state land to construct the Vermont leg of a pipeline between Montreal and Portland, Maine. Although the resolution carries symbolic significance, by itself, it has no legislative power to prevent pipeline construction. However, the resolution does direct the City to take other definitive action within the scope of its municipal powers.

Burlington takes tough stance on tar sands oil, by Joel Banner Baird, Burlington Free Press, December 18, 2012

This week, Burlington City Council approved energy policies that direct the city to identify and then reduce its use of (and investments in) tar-sand derived fuels.

Burlington’s long-standing policy of reducing its reliance on fossil fuels has grown teeth this week.

On Monday, the City Council voted its disapproval over the transport of tar-sands oil across the state, which it termed as an unacceptable risk to “public health and safety, property values and our natural resources.”

Supporters of the measure prevailed in a 10-4 vote.

A commercial pipeline between Portland, Maine, and Montreal crosses Vermont — and is under discussion as a conduit for crude oil from western Canada to the East Coast.

Tar-sand crude is thicker and more abrasive than “sweet” crude, experts say; the combination of the former’s texture and high heavy-metal content pose an added risk of toxic spills.

Other critics of tar-sand oil decry its potential to release substantially more carbon into the atmosphere, thereby accelerating global climate changes.

But the council’s resolution is not merely speculative or symbolic. It also requires the city to:

• shift the municipal fleet away from fossil-derived fuels through efficiency, alternative fuel vehicles and through reduced vehicle use — and for the council’s Transportation, Energy and Utilities Committee to report back to the full council within three months on steps taken;

• direct that committee to assess the feasibility of requiring fuel vendors to the city to provide current lists of refinery sources, and to direct the city to buy, whenever possible, fuel from non-tar-sands sources;

• direct the Retirement Board to take action to remove money from investments in oil companies that profit from tar-sands oil — and to report back to the council by March 11;

• direct the Burlington Electric Commission to examine the possibility of using federal stimulus funds to develop a “co-generation” capacity (piping its surplus/waste heat to residential and business customers) — also with a March 11 deadline; and

• transmit a copy of the resolution to the governor of Vermont, the Vermont congressional delegation, the Canadian prime minister and the CEOs of companies associated with the pipeline: Portland Pipe Line Corporation, Montreal Pipe Line Limited, Imperial Oil Limited, Exxon Mobil Corporation, Enbridge, Inc., BP and Royal Dutch Shell.

SEE ALSO

• Enbridge on track to complete plan to pipe tar sands oil east – How will grassroots activists respond? Posted December 17, 2012 — In sellout to Mammon, federal and provincial parties, including Quebec’s PQ government and union, appear to be onside with a plan promising to be a revenue and job generator

Fair Use Notice: This blog, Citizen Action Monitor, may contain copyrighted material that may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material, published without profit, is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues. It is published in accordance with the provisions of the 2004 Supreme Court of Canada ruling and its six principle criteria for evaluating fair dealing