It has been argued that
Alberta, to maintain its economy, needs access to markets that need oil, and
that the USA market is not as accessible or as open as once presumed. Therefore
an expansion of the pipeline to B.C.’s shores is required. The argument for
this position is reasonably compelling. Alberta is a landlocked province; it
has no access to the rest of the world without transporting its oil through
another jurisdiction. As well, it does not get in the US full market value for their
product. A year ago when it was clear that the US government was not going to
allow the TransCanada Keystone pipeline to proceed, it seemed as if Alberta
needed another way of getting its product to market. As well, because of new
drilling techniques including fracking and horizontal drilling, the US is able
to access more of its own buried oil. Therefore the need for Alberta to find
new markets was obvious.
However, if the above
assumptions are not true, then the need for the expansion of the Kinder-Morgan
pipeline is less obvious. I came across a report from the Parklands Institute –
an Alberta non-partisan centre that suggests that the above assumptions are
inaccurate. The report titled Will
the Trans Mountain Pipeline and Tidewater Access Boost and Save Canada’s Oil
Industry? argues that (1) that the two pipelines slated for either expansion or
development to the USA will be approved and that there is still the possibility
that the Trans Canada East pipeline, which is still under review, will be approved
– once these pipelines are built, there will be enough capacity to ship Alberta
oil; (2) that if Alberta oil is shipped
to Asia, it may sell for less than it is sold for in the US due to the cost of
shipping; (3) that US still needs to import 46% of its oil from off shore and
that its primary sources of Venezuela and Mexico may not be reliable
If the above report is
accurate and reasonably unbiased, the argument that BC has some responsibility as
a member of a federation of provinces to at least consider the wellbeing of
other citizens in that federation and therefore should not block the Kinder
Morgan pipeline on principle alone, holds significantly less water. There may
be all kinds of reasons why the pipeline expansion should not go through
including the fact that it may cross over unceded First Nation land. There are
also could be compelling reasons why it should.
It may be that we need to have,
as a country, some sort of discussion as to what we can do to both protect the environment
and ensure that all Canadians have equal access to supports and service.
Unfortunately most of us do not know all of the facts to participate in that
discussion. Furthermore, I am convinced that it is almost impossible to have the
discussion in a calm, rational way. I suspect that facts, which should be
absolute, can be (mis)interpreted in a myriad of ways that will ensure that no
one will want to, or be able to look at the issues from a critical point of
view.
Part of the problem is that
both sides of the debate are afflicted with tunnel vision. The environmentalists
can only see oil producers (and all of the businesses that are associated with
it) as being intentionally evil, ruthless polluters whose only reason for
existing is to get rich while raping the planet. Anyone who supports such
people is equally as bad and deserves to be shouted down and not listened to.
On the other hand those who are engaged in the extraction of crude see environmentalist
as naive tree huggers who live in a fantasy world where everyone but them pays
more taxes, where service are free and we can all run our cars on air. Of
course neither characterization is accurate, but people cling to them. It is so
much easier to feel victorious in a debate when one can demonize the
opposition.
We teach or at least I
hope we teach young people that when they debate an issue, while one can attack
an opinion, one should never attack the person expressing that opinion. If we were ever taught that - we clearly have forgotten it. Until
we adults can get to the point where there does not have to be a winner and a
loser in the debate; until we can accept that some if not most of the people on
the other side are not that different from us; until we can learn to look at
fact in a rational way, no solution can be found that will allow us to move
forward together. We really need to grow up and learn how to talk to each other
as friends and neighbours – not as the enemy.
