The following is in response to the letter Pipeline conversion a safe process which appeared in Monday’s Nugget.
To the editor:
As residents of North Bay continue to voice their concerns about the risks Energy East poses to their land, water and air, TransCanada continues to respond with falsehoods and half-truths.
TransCanada asserts that Energy East won’t cause adverse environmental effects in Ontario. However, analysis commissioned by the Ontario Energy Board (OEB) shows that not to be the case. It found that the Energy East application presented no evidence the route of the converted natural gas pipeline through Ontario is appropriate for an oil pipeline. TransCanada was unable to satisfy the pipeline safety principles set out by the Ontario government because of an absence of details regarding valve placement, leak detection and emergency response plans.
Contrary to Mr. Duboyce’s claims, Energy East is an export pipeline. Quebec refineries already have access to an adequate supply of Canadian oil via Enbridge Line 9. The president of the Irving refinery, at the end of Energy East in Saint John, N.B., admitted they would continue to import Saudi oil even if the pipeline is built. Refiners care about cost and quality, not national origin, when it comes to sources of oil in a global market.
The OEB concluded that the risks of Energy East outweigh the benefits. Energy East is an export pipeline that puts North Bay’s drinking water at risk of a spill while providing negligible economic benefits. North Bay and Ontario should heed the advice of independent regulators – not TransCanada’s self-interested claims – and reject Energy East.
Climate & Energy Program Manager
Tuesday, December 20, 2016 11:33:06 EST AM