Leaking ferry wreckage a wake-up call for BC's northern coast

Posted on March 28, 2006

The oil and diesel fuel leaking from the Queen of the North and the failure to contain the spill are proof that a proposed oil pipeline and marine terminal on British Columbia's north coast poses an enormous risk to BC's fisheries and coastal waters, according to the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS).

The pipeline proposed by Enbridge Inc., would carry crude oil 1,100 kilometers from Edmonton to Prince Rupert, crossing more than 1,100 rivers and streams, including the headwaters of BC's two largest salmon rivers, the Fraser and the Skeena.

"The oil industry has never successfully contained a major marine oil spill anywhere in the world," says Sabine Jesses, conservation director of CPAWS, BC chapter. "Industry experts confirm that a major spill on the north coast, if this terminal goes ahead, is simply a matter of when, not if."

"The Exxon Valdez incident is still in litigation," added Jessen, "with the oil company refusing to honor court decisions in regard to compensation. Clearly, the oil industry does not yet consider the public interest to be their responsibility insofar as a liability for accidental oil spills."

"History shows that a best-case scenario for oil recovery in marine spills is, at most, 10 per cent," he says. "The Exxon Valdez incident is still in litigation. Clearly, the oil industry does not yet consider the public interest to be their responsibility insofar as a liability for accident oil spills."

"History shows that a best-case scenario for oil recovery in marine spills is, at most, 10 per cent," he says. "The Exxon Valdez incident is still in litigation. Clearly, the oil industry does not yet consider the public interest to be their responsibility insofar as a liability for accident oil spills."

CPAWS is a signatory to the Northern Environmental Non-Government Organizations Statement of Principles for Oil and Gas Development, which states "Where development is appropriate, it must conform to northern values, benefit northern peoples and contribute to sustainable communities."

"The Enbridge Gateway Project does not meet these standards," says Jessen. "It would result in heavy oil tanker traffic on one of the most dangerous coasts in the world, and for a mere thirty jobs in Kitimat - or about the same number of jobs as at the local hardware store. This is a risk/reward ratio that is absurd."

"BC's north coast is a sensitive and highly productive ecosystem, and an oil spill here would devastate marine environments and the communities that depend on them, Bruce Hill.

The company's plan for the pipeline and marine terminal includes measures to prevent or clean up spills, but CPAWS contends all available evidence points to the fact that a major oil spill on this coast would be nearly impossible to deal with and would have devastating and long-lasting impacts.

"Despite claims that risks are minimal and technology has improved, pipelines still break, tankers still sink and oil still gets into the environment," says Jessen. "The slow and poor progress with containing the oil slick from the Queen of the North shows that human capacity to clean up and mitigate the damages associated with even minor oil spills is still insufficient to make any guarantees" says Jessen. "The Queen of the North spilled about 225,000 liters of diesel fuel, the Exxon Valdez, which is similar to the tankers that Enbridge wants to send along BC's coast, spilled about 290 million liters of oil."

--30--

Contact: Sabine Jessen, Conservation Director, 604-685-7445

Bruce Hill, Northern Campaign Director, 250-615-0141