Custom Search
Top Stories
Go to Site Index See "Top Stories" main page
NEWS RELEASE · 17th August 2012
Same oil pipeline, still an abrupt halt to the tanker moratorium despite ambitious refinery proposal, say New Democrats

A new proposal for an Alberta oil sands refinery on B.C.’s coast would still rely on the same Enbridge oil pipeline that poses environmental risks to British Columbia’s rivers and lakes, and still means an end to the tanker moratorium, say the New Democrats.

“This refinery wouldn’t change the pipeline of oil that would traverse British Columbia’s rugged land, and healthy rivers and lakes,” said New Democrat energy critic John Horgan . “This refinery would still mean an abrupt halt to the tanker moratorium, albeit with a different petroleum product transported along the province’s treacherous coastline.

“At this point, it’s a proposal without business partners and without First Nations and local community support. It doesn’t change our position on the Enbridge Northern Gateway project.”

The proposal brought forward by David Black, owner of Black Press, is to build a refinery near the coast that would capture all of the oil at the end of the Enbridge pipeline and upgrade the product before shipping. Enbridge and the companies who will own the bitumen Mr. Black hopes to process have not entered into any agreement with him. Black told media on Friday that many of the Enbridge partners oppose the proposal.

“The proposal brought forward by David Black is certainly ambitious, but it is unclear whether he will be able to commandeer the supply of oil from Enbridge and the foreign partners involved in the Northern Gateway Project,” said Horgan. “It remains to be seen whether it’s a pipe dream or if it is a credible plan with realistic price tags and capacity.”

Horgan said if it ever manages to get off the ground, it would still have to follow a rigorous environmental process and full consultation with First Nations.

David Black acknowledged on his website Friday “we should not proceed with the pipeline (or the refinery) unless there is confidence that any pipeline leakage will be immaterial.”

New Democrat MLA for Skeena Robin Austin said seeing as there is no change to the level of risk with the pipeline, then the pipeline should still not move forward.

“There is nothing wrong with the principle of trying to add value or economic benefit to the project, but the potential for disaster with the pipeline is unchanged,” said Austin. “Northern communities know the risks are too great, and that’s why they oppose the project.”
Pipe dreams
Comment by fbreker on 22nd August 2012
Previous writer is correct. China and Enbridge and harpco will never allow a refinery anywhere in BC for this toxic, sulfuric sludge from the pits of hell, euphemistically called dilbit. The Chinese will do their own value added to whatever we ship their direction - thank you very much!!
Black's ruse
Comment by Deaner on 21st August 2012
Black’s refinery is a ruse to check the “value” of sentiment on the Gateway Pipeline. (What a bunch of suckers they must think of us)
The Chinese government owners of ‘China Petrochemical Corp’ and their subsidiary ‘Sinopec’ have bought controlling interests of Alberta’s oil and have a veto in the refining of the bitumen; they need to fill their own refineries with oil and jobs. See it for what it is.. BS
Uh Oh....
Comment by Apocalypse Now on 19th August 2012
You thought the Terrace Mayor was a fence sitter before? I am sure he wont commit to anything now that there is a possibility of a refinery.
Least harmful form of Petroleum or bitumen
Comment by Moe Naguib on 18th August 2012
What is the least harmful form of Bitumen or Petroleum? Figure that out and consider as well the least harmful way to ship it, its probably not in a pipeline. Look at other countries experiences with spill frequency and cleanup, and then make an informed decision.