Personal tools
You are here: Home » Cases » Northern Gateway Pipeline

Northern Gateway Pipeline

Ecojustice is opposing a new oil pipeline that would carry tar sands oil from northern Alberta to BC's coast and threaten inland and ocean ecosystems

Document Actions
  • Print this Print this
  • Send this Send this
  • RSS feed RSS feed

NGP page header

Image courtesy of Dogwood Initiative.

Ecojustice fights to stop a proposed oil pipeline that threatens ecosystems and puts B.C.'s coastline and communities at risk of a major oil spill.


Enbridge’s 1,177-km Northern Gateway pipeline would slice through dozens of fragile ecosystems and communities, piping tarry bitumen from Alberta to the coast of British Columbia where waiting supertankers would transport it to Asia for refining.

A long-standing moratorium on new tanker traffic has kept Canada’s west coast relatively safe from spills like the Exxon Valdez disaster. But the pipeline’s approval would pave the way for up to 220 new tankers to carry bitumen through the narrow passages of B.C.’s north coast to Asian markets each year. En route, the pipeline would cross hundreds of fish-bearing streams, rivers and lakes and disturb untouched tracts of wilderness and endangered animal habitat. It would also cut through the traditional territories of 40 First Nations and Aboriginal groups – many of which stand in opposition to the pipeline.

All Canadians will be affected by the decision to approve or deny the Northern Gateway pipeline proposal, which is why Ecojustice’s involvement in this process is so important. Our lawyers are presenting evidence to a Joint Review Panel of the National Energy Board and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency that shows the pipeline is unsafe, unsustainable and unnecessary. Our goal is to ensure the threats to our water, air and land are known and scrutinized.

Support our efforts to oppose the Northern Gateway pipeline by making a donation today.

Listen live | Schedule

Recent developments

Blog Posts | Media Releases | Legal Documents | Other Resources

Environmental groups seek court order to quash federal approval of Enbridge's Northern Gateway pipeline

Posted by Kimberly Shearon at Jul 11, 2014 02:15 PM |

Joint Review Panel’s flawed final report cannot be used as basis for federal approval, groups allege

Read More…

OPINION - A tale of two pipelines

OPINION - A tale of two pipelines

A weak regulatory process is turning hearings in the proposed Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion into a lose-lose-lose situation for everyone involved.

Read More…

Federal approval doesn't guarantee Enbridge Northern Gateway will be built

Posted by Kimberly Shearon at Jun 17, 2014 03:18 PM |

Project still faces legal challenges and staunch public opposition, environmental groups say

Read More…

oil

Posted by fred washburn at Nov 17, 2012 09:09 AM
enbridge has too many oil spills and never clean them up proper

Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline

Posted by Norman Gibson at May 17, 2013 10:21 AM
Fees that Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline should be required to pay the Government of British Columbia

I believe there are two types of fees that Enbridge should be required to pay the Government of British Columbia should a decision be made to approve the construction of the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline: essential fees and royalties/taxes.

Essential Fees

The following are some of the most important fees that the Government of British Columbia should charge Enbridge. These fees must not be considered as a source of profit for the Province. The Government of British Columbia must have a 100% guarantee that these fees, whatever their eventual dollar amount may be, will be paid by Enbridge.

-An annual lease fee for the use of Crown land in the construction and operation of the pipeline
-All costs associated with oil spills from the pipeline and tankers
-All costs associated with removing the pipeline and restoring the land used by Enbridge for the project to an acceptable standard as set by the Government of British Columbia when the pipeline is no longer needed
-Fair compensation to the residents of British Columbia for having the project constructed in their province
-Fair compensation to the First Nations regarding the construction and operation of the project

If Enbridge cannot meet all of the above requirements, they should not be given permission to proceed with the project.

Royalties/Taxes

Any royalties and/or taxes that Enbridge is to pay the Government of British Columbia should be considered to be any amounts over and above the essential fees.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In years to come, should the project proceed, the people of British Columbia should not have to pay billions and billions of dollars for unexpected costs associated with the project.

Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline

Posted by Kitsilano at Nov 27, 2013 09:35 AM
We in our Band (a self-started Province wide Indian Band) stand opposed to these projects as the main position taken against global over population and environmental damage caused by the 'religion' of consumerism.

No money can atone for or would be able to repair the damage of an accident. No money is worth the damage done to the water by the extraction of the fuels and there is no value in exporting the products overseas so they can then ship commodities to western markets.

The world must return to an agricultural economy which strives to shelter and nourish the minimum population that the Planet can provide for without causing damage to the global ecology

Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline

Posted by Ian Frasier at Jul 25, 2014 09:35 AM
Kitsilano,

I respect your views and concerns regarding the risks of the construction of the pipeline. I believe that risk mitigation is required, and may be part of the valuable design iterations that we all count on to build safe projects.

The reason why I am responding is because I found it extremely interesting by your comment "The world must return to an agricultural economy which strives to shelter and nourish the minimum population that the Planet can provide for without causing damage to the global ecology". I agree with this statement for the sustainability it describes. I also understand by your first statement identifying you as part of a province wide Indian Band. If these are your cultural views, and ones that you think represent your culture and other first nations alike (and they are, or you wouldn't have introduced yourself first and foremost as a member of an extensive Indian band), why is it not carried through with? I have read many reliable statistics of average number of children born in a first nations family is over 5 kids, compared to other minorities and Caucasians at less than 2. I believe in upholding strong, meaningful values, however, I feel that it should not carry any merit through words, but more from demonstration.

Please, don't take this as derogatory as I would welcome your respectful response so I can understand more where I am mistaken.

Ian Frasier

Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline facts from an insider

Posted by Vikesh Kohli at Jul 25, 2014 09:35 AM
Enbridge has told everyone that Northern Gateway project will cost $6.5B while it has known for months that the cost as proposed currently is above $22B. It has been cost cutting & working on different pipeline routes to ports other than Kitimat but larger diameter pipes. It is planning to change the final design of the terminal completely. It will no longer be a land terminal but will be a floating storage terminal in Kitimat area waters or other potentially more cost effective waterways in west coast of BC. It is keeping this information confidential in order to receive government approval. Enbridge is hoping it can go ahead with a totally revised plan using existing conditions & approval processes which were in place for the original lower risk project. Deceiving its customers, the public and the government is normal practice at Enbridge. This is a fact: As the government makes a decision to approve the project, Enbridge plans to change it all together while misleading everyone knowingly for months.

Facts From An Insider

Posted by Vikesh Kohli at Jul 25, 2014 09:35 AM
Enbridge has told everyone that Northern Gateway project will cost $6.5B while it has known for months that the cost as proposed currently is above $22B. It has been cost cutting & working on different pipeline routes to ports other than Kitimat but larger diameter pipes. It is planning to change the final design of the terminal completely. It will no longer be a land terminal but will be a floating storage terminal in Kitimat area waters or other potentially more cost effective waterways in west coast of BC. It is keeping this information confidential in order to receive government approval. Enbridge is hoping it can go ahead with a totally revised plan using existing conditions & approval processes which were in place for the original lower risk project. Deceiving its customers, the public and the government is normal practice at Enbridge. This is a fact: As the government makes a decision to approve the project, Enbridge plans to change it all together while misleading everyone knowingly for months.

The Truth From An Insider

Posted by Vikesh Kohli at Jul 25, 2014 09:35 AM
The public has been told that the project will cost 6.5 billion dollars while Enbridge has known for many months that the cost as proposed currently would be above 20 billion dollars. Enbridge has been planning on cost cutting and is currently working on different pipeline routes to ports other than Kitimat. Enbridge is also planning to change the final design of the terminal completely. It will no longer be a land terminal but will be a floating storage terminal in the Kitimat area waters or other potentially more cost effective waterways in the west coast of BC. Enbridge is keeping this information confidential in order to proceed with receiving the approval from the government. Enbridge is hoping it can go ahead with totally revised plans for the northern gateway project using the existing conditions and approval processes which were in place for the original lower risk project. Deceiving its customers, the public and the government is normal practice at Enbridge.

pipeline

Posted by gary mattix at Jul 25, 2014 09:35 AM
I think that if there are going to be underground pipelines then the pipes should be double walled with leak detectors and automatic isolation valves. One thing for sure is that eventually any pipe is going to fail. There is no acceptable risk of oil in the ground or water. The environment must stay protected no matter what the cost.
Copyright Ecojustice, 1998 - 2010 | Website by Groundwire | Powered by Plone