GLG
Well-Known Member
Another day another lawsuit....
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/busi...+approval+Northern+Gateway/9401141/story.html
Maybe this is a plant in the JRP by someone on the panel or it could be incompetence at it's finest.
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/busi...+approval+Northern+Gateway/9401141/story.html
Maybe this is a plant in the JRP by someone on the panel or it could be incompetence at it's finest.
The panel had always insisted that climate change questions were outside its mandate, and, in its report, the panelists also argued there wasn't a clear connection between Gateway and the booming oilsands.
"We did not consider that there was a sufficiently direct connection between the project and any particular existing or proposed oilsands development or other oil production activities to warrant consideration of the effects of these activities," they wrote. The panelists cited, as evidence to back up this assertion, that the pipeline proponent didn't signal an intention to develop oilsands resources.They also noted that the pipeline starting point at Bruderheim, near Edmonton, "would not be located near oilsands developments and could receive oil from a variety of sources." Yet in the same report, panelists cited testimony from project advocates directly linking Northern Gateway to the oilsands industry in order to back up their argument that the project was in Canada's economic self-interest. "Those arguing in favour of the project said bitumen production was growing faster than upgrading capacity in Canada. . . . To obtain full value, they said, bitumen would need to reach complex refineries beyond those currently served in the North-Central and Gulf Coast regions of the United States. The next-nearest concentration of complex refineries is in East Asia, mainly in China. "They said Northern Gateway would provide a relatively short and direct route to East Asia as well as access to other refining markets such as India and California."