There was another poll released a few days ago where the results clearly show that British Columbians are strongly opposed to Enbridge`s northern gateway pipeline proposal and particularly to supertankers loaded with uncleanable once spilled Alberta bitumen as a cargo..
2/3 rds of BCers are vehemently opposed...
http://www.justasonmi.com/?p=2712
These poll results are nothing new, nothing new indeed, in fact between Enbridge and the Stephen Harper oil company Government they have spent $85 million dollars advertising pipelines and oil movement with supertankers and still massive opposition to Enbridge`s northern gateway pipeline proposal remains...
Enbridge are thugs, goons and proven habitual liars..
Last night in the Vancouver Sun another Enbridge article appeared, it was galling, pathetic and reeked of how desperate Janet Holder and Enbridge are...Facing the reality of their proposal grinding to a halt and ultimately being quashed Enbridge came out firing, upset with the latest Justason poll..Enbridge was upset about a tiny technical arguing point over what constitutes the "Inside Passage"..
I`ll let Justason tell you themselves(for now)
___________
Enbridge claims environmental poll wording about Northern Gateway is misleading
February 9, 2014 by
Vancouver B.C. (9 February 2014) – Yesterday afternoon, Enbridge released a video with the apparent purpose of discrediting my firm’s poll about the Northern Gateway pipelines and tanker proposal.
The video takes the position that activist groups released a misleading poll, which claims a majority of B.C. residents is against the Northern Gateway Pipeline. According to Enbridge, these activists misrepresented the facts.
Enbridge cites the following as inaccurate:
Fair enough. “Inside passage” was not the correct term to describe their entire crude oil tanker route. But oil tankers will, at a minimum, transit the waters known formally as the The Inside Passage. Moreover, they will travel waters colloquially known as the inner or inside passage, the region between the major islands (of Haida Gwaii and Vancouver Island) and the mainland. Although Enbridge stated during the Joint Review Panel process that the region known as the inside passage is not a part of their current transport plans, these statements are not legally binding or enforceable. Nonetheless, JMI will update the question accordingly in future polling.
Will swapping out these words change the research findings? Of course not.
We’ve asked the questions four times over the past two years. Consistently, two-thirds oppose Northern Gateway’s plan to introduce crude oil tankers to B.C.’s coastal waters.
Let’s leave my firm’s work aside for the moment.
Our colleagues locally and nationally also cover this topic. Polls that present the project without mentioning tankers generally find fewer than half of BCers supportive: 47% in the most recent Maple Leaf Strategies survey and 42% in Insights West’s November 2013 poll).
Why the difference from my firm’s 29% support figures? B.C. residents are more concerned about the impact of tankers on the B.C. coast than they are about pipelines. When these pollsters present potential concerns of the Northern Gateway project, tanker traffic and oil spills are top concerns, regardless of residents’ support or opposition to the proposal.
Less than half of B.C. residents support the proposal when we’re discussing just the pipeline. When reminded that tankers are a critical element in their proposal, support drops about 20 points. I raised this nearly two years ago in an oped to The Vancouver Sun, ”Oil Tankers, not pipelines, are the hot potato issue.”
As I said in April 2012, “If the researcher asks British Columbians about pipelines, about 50 per cent are relatively tolerant right now. If the researcher asks about pipelines and supertankers, tolerance diminishes.”(read the rest at the below link)
http://www.justasonmi.com/?p=3661
________________-
First off, let us talk about the still uncleaned $1.4 billion and counting Kalamazoo river bitumen spill in Michigan, the NTSB stated that Enbridge acted like "Keystone cops" and that Enbridge knew years before the bitumen spill that their pipeline was failing, Enbridge did nothing, nothing except let it rupture and pollute another precious environment..
________-
National Transportation Safety Board
Office of Public Affairs
WASHINGTON - Pervasive organizational failures by a pipeline operator along with weak federal regulations led to a pipeline rupture and subsequent oil spill in 2010, the National Transportation Safety Board said today.
On Sunday, July 25, 2010, at about 5:58 p.m., a 30 inch-diameter pipeline (Line 6B) owned and operated by Enbridge Incorporated ruptured and spilled crude oil into an ecologically sensitive area near the Kalamazoo River in Marshall, Mich., for 17 hours until a local utility worker discovered the oil and contacted Enbridge to report the rupture.
The NTSB found that the material failure of the pipeline was the result of multiple small corrosion-fatigue cracks that over time grew in size and linked together, creating a gaping breach in the pipe measuring over 80 inches long.
"This investigation identified a complete breakdown of safety at Enbridge. Their employees performed like Keystone Kops and failed to recognize their pipeline had ruptured and continued to pump crude into the environment," said NTSB Chairman Deborah A.P. Hersman. "Despite multiple alarms and a loss of pressure in the pipeline, for more than 17 hours and through three shifts they failed to follow their own shutdown procedures."
Clean up costs are estimated by Enbridge and the EPA at $800 million and counting, making the Marshall rupture the single most expensive on-shore spill in US history.
Over 840,000 gallons of crude oil - enough to fill 120 tanker trucks - spilled into hundreds of acres of Michigan wetlands, fouling a creek and a river. A Michigan Department of Community Health study concluded that over 300 individuals suffered adverse health effects related to benzene exposure, a toxic component of crude oil.
Line 6B had been scheduled for a routine shutdown at the time of the rupture to accommodate changing delivery schedules. Following the shutdown, operators in the Enbridge control room in Edmonton, Alberta, received multiple alarms indicating a problem with low pressure in the pipeline, which were dismissed as being caused by factors other than a rupture. "Inadequate training of control center personnel" was cited as contributing to the accident.
The investigation found that Enbridge failed to accurately assess the structural integrity of the pipeline, including correctly analyzing cracks that required repair. The NTSB characterized Enbridge's control room operations, leak detection, and environmental response as deficient, and described the event as an "organizational accident."
Following the first alarm, Enbridge controllers restarted Line 6B twice, pumping an additional 683,000 gallons of crude oil, or 81 percent of the total amount spilled, through the ruptured pipeline. The NTSB determined that if Enbridge's own procedures had been followed during the initial phases of the accident, the magnitude of the spill would have been significantly reduced. Further, the NTSB attributed systemic flaws in operational decision-making to a "culture of deviance," which concluded that personnel had a developed an operating culture in which not adhering to approved procedures and protocols was normalized.
The NTSB also cited the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration's weak regulations regarding pipeline assessment and repair criteria as well as a cursory review of Enbridge's oil spill response plan as contributing to the magnitude of the accident.
The investigation revealed that the cracks in Line 6B that ultimately ruptured were detected by Enbridge in 2005 but were not repaired. A further examination of records revealed that Enbridge's crack assessment process was inadequate, increasing the risk of a rupture.
"This accident is a wake-up call to the industry, the regulator, and the public. Enbridge knew for years that this section of the pipeline was vulnerable yet they didn't act on that information," said Chairman Hersman. "Likewise, for the regulator to delegate too much authority to the regulated to assess their own system risks and correct them is tantamount to the fox guarding the hen house. Regulators need regulations and practices with teeth, and the resources to enable them to take corrective action before a spill. Not just after."
As a result of the investigation, the NTSB reiterated one recommendation to PHMSA and issued 19 new safety recommendations to the Department of the Transportation, PHMSA, Enbridge Incorporated, the American Petroleum Institute, the International Association of Fire Chiefs, and the National Emergency Number Association.
A synopsis of the NTSB report, including the probable cause, findings, and a complete list of the safety recommendations, is available at http://go.usa.gov/wsO. The full report will be available on the website in several weeks.
NTSB Media Contact:
Office of Public Affairs
490 L'Enfant Plaza, SW
Washington, DC 20594
(202) 314-6100
Peter Knudson
http://www.ntsb.gov/news/2012/120710.html
___________________
Also, in Michigan Enbridge was caught hiding spilled bitumen under grass and canvas, also Enbridge was caught hiding spilled bitumen under several feet of sand, 3 years plus later the Kalamazoo river remains soiled and toxic with 60 miles requiring a dredging of the bottom, because, bitumen can`t be cleaned up, in other words the only way to clean up a river poisoned with Alberta bitumen is to remove the river bottom, that won`t work in British Co9lumbia, our rivers are too fast flowing and dredging would destroy wild salmon spawning beds, Enbridge`s northern gateway pipeline would have to cross over 800 rivers and streams in BC, as well as cross a remote mountain range where there is no ability to respond to landslides, earthquakes, faulty infrastructure or other when it ruptures..The video takes the position that activist groups released a misleading poll, which claims a majority of B.C. residents is against the Northern Gateway Pipeline. According to Enbridge, these activists misrepresented the facts.
Enbridge cites the following as inaccurate:
“Up until now, crude oil supertankers have not entered B.C.’s inside passage…. The federal government is now considering allowing crude oil supertankers in these waters.” (View unedited questions and results here.)I thought they might object to our reference to oil spills, but they edited these words out of our question in their video. Enbridge objects to our use of “inside passage” to describe the waterways the tankers would use for transport. We also use “northern inside coastal waters” and “coastal inlets of the Great Bear Rainforest” to describe this region.
Fair enough. “Inside passage” was not the correct term to describe their entire crude oil tanker route. But oil tankers will, at a minimum, transit the waters known formally as the The Inside Passage. Moreover, they will travel waters colloquially known as the inner or inside passage, the region between the major islands (of Haida Gwaii and Vancouver Island) and the mainland. Although Enbridge stated during the Joint Review Panel process that the region known as the inside passage is not a part of their current transport plans, these statements are not legally binding or enforceable. Nonetheless, JMI will update the question accordingly in future polling.
Will swapping out these words change the research findings? Of course not.
We’ve asked the questions four times over the past two years. Consistently, two-thirds oppose Northern Gateway’s plan to introduce crude oil tankers to B.C.’s coastal waters.
Let’s leave my firm’s work aside for the moment.
Our colleagues locally and nationally also cover this topic. Polls that present the project without mentioning tankers generally find fewer than half of BCers supportive: 47% in the most recent Maple Leaf Strategies survey and 42% in Insights West’s November 2013 poll).
Why the difference from my firm’s 29% support figures? B.C. residents are more concerned about the impact of tankers on the B.C. coast than they are about pipelines. When these pollsters present potential concerns of the Northern Gateway project, tanker traffic and oil spills are top concerns, regardless of residents’ support or opposition to the proposal.
Less than half of B.C. residents support the proposal when we’re discussing just the pipeline. When reminded that tankers are a critical element in their proposal, support drops about 20 points. I raised this nearly two years ago in an oped to The Vancouver Sun, ”Oil Tankers, not pipelines, are the hot potato issue.”
As I said in April 2012, “If the researcher asks British Columbians about pipelines, about 50 per cent are relatively tolerant right now. If the researcher asks about pipelines and supertankers, tolerance diminishes.”(read the rest at the below link)
http://www.justasonmi.com/?p=3661
________________-
First off, let us talk about the still uncleaned $1.4 billion and counting Kalamazoo river bitumen spill in Michigan, the NTSB stated that Enbridge acted like "Keystone cops" and that Enbridge knew years before the bitumen spill that their pipeline was failing, Enbridge did nothing, nothing except let it rupture and pollute another precious environment..
________-
NTSB Press Release
National Transportation Safety Board
Office of Public Affairs
Pipeline Rupture and Oil Spill Accident Caused by Organizational Failures and Weak Regulations
July 10, 2012
WASHINGTON - Pervasive organizational failures by a pipeline operator along with weak federal regulations led to a pipeline rupture and subsequent oil spill in 2010, the National Transportation Safety Board said today.
On Sunday, July 25, 2010, at about 5:58 p.m., a 30 inch-diameter pipeline (Line 6B) owned and operated by Enbridge Incorporated ruptured and spilled crude oil into an ecologically sensitive area near the Kalamazoo River in Marshall, Mich., for 17 hours until a local utility worker discovered the oil and contacted Enbridge to report the rupture.
The NTSB found that the material failure of the pipeline was the result of multiple small corrosion-fatigue cracks that over time grew in size and linked together, creating a gaping breach in the pipe measuring over 80 inches long.
"This investigation identified a complete breakdown of safety at Enbridge. Their employees performed like Keystone Kops and failed to recognize their pipeline had ruptured and continued to pump crude into the environment," said NTSB Chairman Deborah A.P. Hersman. "Despite multiple alarms and a loss of pressure in the pipeline, for more than 17 hours and through three shifts they failed to follow their own shutdown procedures."
Clean up costs are estimated by Enbridge and the EPA at $800 million and counting, making the Marshall rupture the single most expensive on-shore spill in US history.
Over 840,000 gallons of crude oil - enough to fill 120 tanker trucks - spilled into hundreds of acres of Michigan wetlands, fouling a creek and a river. A Michigan Department of Community Health study concluded that over 300 individuals suffered adverse health effects related to benzene exposure, a toxic component of crude oil.
Line 6B had been scheduled for a routine shutdown at the time of the rupture to accommodate changing delivery schedules. Following the shutdown, operators in the Enbridge control room in Edmonton, Alberta, received multiple alarms indicating a problem with low pressure in the pipeline, which were dismissed as being caused by factors other than a rupture. "Inadequate training of control center personnel" was cited as contributing to the accident.
The investigation found that Enbridge failed to accurately assess the structural integrity of the pipeline, including correctly analyzing cracks that required repair. The NTSB characterized Enbridge's control room operations, leak detection, and environmental response as deficient, and described the event as an "organizational accident."
Following the first alarm, Enbridge controllers restarted Line 6B twice, pumping an additional 683,000 gallons of crude oil, or 81 percent of the total amount spilled, through the ruptured pipeline. The NTSB determined that if Enbridge's own procedures had been followed during the initial phases of the accident, the magnitude of the spill would have been significantly reduced. Further, the NTSB attributed systemic flaws in operational decision-making to a "culture of deviance," which concluded that personnel had a developed an operating culture in which not adhering to approved procedures and protocols was normalized.
The NTSB also cited the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration's weak regulations regarding pipeline assessment and repair criteria as well as a cursory review of Enbridge's oil spill response plan as contributing to the magnitude of the accident.
The investigation revealed that the cracks in Line 6B that ultimately ruptured were detected by Enbridge in 2005 but were not repaired. A further examination of records revealed that Enbridge's crack assessment process was inadequate, increasing the risk of a rupture.
"This accident is a wake-up call to the industry, the regulator, and the public. Enbridge knew for years that this section of the pipeline was vulnerable yet they didn't act on that information," said Chairman Hersman. "Likewise, for the regulator to delegate too much authority to the regulated to assess their own system risks and correct them is tantamount to the fox guarding the hen house. Regulators need regulations and practices with teeth, and the resources to enable them to take corrective action before a spill. Not just after."
As a result of the investigation, the NTSB reiterated one recommendation to PHMSA and issued 19 new safety recommendations to the Department of the Transportation, PHMSA, Enbridge Incorporated, the American Petroleum Institute, the International Association of Fire Chiefs, and the National Emergency Number Association.
A synopsis of the NTSB report, including the probable cause, findings, and a complete list of the safety recommendations, is available at http://go.usa.gov/wsO. The full report will be available on the website in several weeks.
NTSB Media Contact:
Office of Public Affairs
490 L'Enfant Plaza, SW
Washington, DC 20594
(202) 314-6100
Peter Knudson
http://www.ntsb.gov/news/2012/120710.html
___________________
Enbridge hides bitumen under sand.
Enbridge hides bitumen under canvas and special grass.
Enbridge denies responsibility for that spill....
http://www.cbc.ca/player/Radio/The+Current/ID/2248163080/?page=7&sort=MostPopular
Enbridge averages nearly 100 major oil/bitumen pipeline spills and ruptures per year..
_______
Spills and violations[edit]
Using data from Enbridge's own reports, the Polaris Institute calculated that 804 spills occurred on Enbridge pipelines between 1999 and 2010. These spills released approximately 161,475 barrels (25,672.5 m3) of crude oil into the environment.[21]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enbridge
______________
Janet Holder`s Enbridge company has and have played fast and loose with facts, with advertising, with everything, Enbridge should be barred from operating anything, executives should be jailed and the federal government NEB review on northern gateway should be tossed out for the mere reason that Enbridge lied, cheated, withheld information and fabricated evidence throughout that phony NEB review, that is in fact why the NEB decision itself of approving northern gateway is being challenged in court by over 10 different interested parties, and once Stephen Harper approves the fake review First Nations will bog it down forever in court, failing that 1000`s are ready for war in the woods, if our BC Government refuses to recognize lawful court decisions, Stephen Harper has shredded the environmental acts, navigable waters act, the fisheries act, species at risk act we the people will respond in kind..
Enbridge during the NEB review lied about First Nations support, they lied about the Haisla ...Haida Gwaii first nations support and were asked to retract the information supplied to the NEB..
_________
December 24, 2011. 10:18 am
in Enbridge Northern Gateway
documents provided to the federal Joint Review Panel which will soon commence hearings on the controversial oils sands pipeline project.
Specifically, Guujaaw rejects Enbridge’s claim that the Haida are in the process of “relationship building” with the Calgary-based company which is seeking to build an oil transmission pipeline from Alberta to the BC coast at Kitimat.
Haida have an interest in the project because oil tankers will carry oil sands crude past Haida Gwaii,
which includes a national park and designated UNESCO world heritage site.
It hasn’t been a good week for Enbridge. Earlier, a majority of Gitxsan hereditary chiefs renounced a much-trumpted profit-sharing deal with Enbridge.
Here’s an email to the Panel, which was cc’d to me on Friday by Guujaaw.
From: guujaaw [mailto:guujaaw@haidanation.net]
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 2:46 PM
Subject: Enbridge
December 20, 2011
Enbridge Northern Gateway Project
Joint Review Panel
444 7th Avenue S.W.
Calgary, Alberta T2P 0X8
Attention: Secretary to the Joint Review Panel
Re: statement contained in Volume 5A: Aboriginal Engagement, Appendix D: National and Regional Aboriginal Organizations.
To whom it may concern;
Enbridge has provided deliberately misleading and false information contained in their Section 52 Application claiming that the applicant has built relationships with the Haida Fisheries Program, Haida Development Corporation (sic, presumably Haida Enterprise Corporation) and Haida Child and Family Services.
Haida Gwaii Community Futures is not an ‘Aboriginal Organization’ and has no idea how they got on the list.
Haida Gwaii Community Futures is not an ‘Aboriginal Organization’ and has no idea how they got on the list.
Representatives of the above organizations are in no way engaged with nor have they given any reason to believe they are “relationship building” with Enbridge.
We would like to have all of these names stricken from Enbridge’s filed documents as it is libellous bringing these organizations into disrepute, not only with their own constituents, but also the many First Nations, organizations and people who are committed to the health of this planet.
Respectfully,We would like to have all of these names stricken from Enbridge’s filed documents as it is libellous bringing these organizations into disrepute, not only with their own constituents, but also the many First Nations, organizations and people who are committed to the health of this planet.
Guujaaw
President of the Haida Nation
http://powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca/2011/12/merry-christmas-enbridge-effing.html
__________
Enbridge wasn`t finished lying to the NEB review board...Next they lied about Wildlife impacts, they faked out data from another source calling it their own..
__________
Mark Hume Nails Enbridge on Caribou Paper Cheat
6
Posted November 14, 2012 by Rafe Mair in Energy and Resources
When a clock strikes 13, you can never trust it again.
So it must be for anyone who lies about information he is using to back up a serious scientific statement upon which a great deal is at stake.
Mark Hume had an article in Sunday’s Globe and Mail BC Edition which, in a world of decent journalism, would be a headline story, titled ENBRIDGE CHEATS ON SCIENTIFIC PAPER ON THREAT TO CARIBOU.
In fact Mark does this a lot and our newspaper chiefs should blush with shame but they don’t do that very well. I leave it to you to read this superlative article but suffice it to say that Enbridge has been caught out big time and if it weren’t for Mark they would have gotten away with it.
in a 2011 paper in support of their ghastly pipeline proposal, Enbridge claimed that their project would have little or no impact on caribou.
______________-
_______-
Story of Corporate Deceit: How Enbridge erased BC islands
Everyone in BC knows that the Northern Gateway pipeline is proposed to travel from the Albertan oilsands, through our province to Kitimat where the oil would be loaded onto supertankers to travel across the ocean to China. The fear of an oil spill has really galvanized opposition to the pipeline.
So, Enbridge (the pipeline company) hired a PR firm (one that has worked for Big Tobacco and Enron) to roll out a multi-million dollar campaign to convince the public that the pipeline is safe.
The problem was that the tanker route was extremely treacherous including the maze of islands that oil tankers as long as the Eiffel Tower would have to precariously weave through.
So, what did they do? They ERASED these BC islands right off their map and pipeline safety videos.
I'm an independent specialist in scientific data visualization and I recently discovered that Enbridge deliberately removed 1,000 square kilometers of islands off their route safety video and map to make the oil tanker route look much less treacherous than it actually is.
Please join us in demanding that Enbridge pulls this ad.
They can't erase part of the BC coastline just like that.
————
This video makes their deception very clear: Enbridge Northern Gateway flyover Misleads the public
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/issues/oceans/projects/healthy-oceans/pacific-ocean-stories/story-of-corporate-deception-how-enbridge-erased-bc-islands-1/
______________
Enbridge was not done lying, wasn`t done failing at the NEB hearings..Enbridge`s own experts stated at the NEB hearings that
"There is no technology at present to clean up diluted bitumen in water"
Enbridge failed to tell the NEB how it would deal with geo-hazards, river crossings, all these inquiries were answered with..
Information to be provided after approval of the project or answered..... with ..
A work in progress....
I recommend reading this article for details on Enbridge`s failed, incomplete testimony at the NEB review.
http://powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca/2012/10/mr-jones-versus-fluvial-goemorphologist.html
Enbridge has a brutal track record, they have spoiled thousands of eco-systems, they have been caught lying at the NEB review, caught cheating, intimidating the public, caught hiding spilled bitumen under canvas and special grass, caught hiding bitumen under many feet of sand, caught being "Keystone cops", when responding to ruptured pipelines, caught ignoring pipelines with structural failings ready to rupture..
Enbridge with all the Stephen Harper federal advertising behind them, $tens of millions spent on false advertising, removing islands, removing rivers, lying about geo-hazards, lying about wildlife impacts, caught lying on many occasions about First Nation`s support..
Caught being a very bad corporate thug, and Enbridge has the audacity to whine about two technical word differences in a Justason poll..
That is so funny in a tragic warped way..
You will never get social license Enbridge for your northern Gateway pipeline and if Stephen Harper wants to destroy his federal party and be wiped from Government on your behalf...So be it, you still won`t get social license..
Lastly..
Haida Gwaii and the Great Bear Rain Forest was voted by a wide margin by British Columbians as our most treasured place, a place you Enbridge won`t be permitted to destroy, Stephen Harper be damned..
________
Site and Haida art, most ... voted by 20,056 readers in a Province ...
World's most 'Instagrammed' place is a Thai ... anywhere on one of B.C.’s islands or coasts. But Haida Gwaii has a ... of B.C., as voted by 20,056 readers ...
______________
You Janet Holder, Enbridge and Stephen Harper can go to hell, and yes, feel free to quote me..
http://powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca/2010/04/577the-unluckiest-numberten-years-out.html
http://powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca/2009/11/it-cant-happen-again-can-it.html
The Straight Goods
Cheers Eyes Wide Open
