Showing posts with label pipeline. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pipeline. Show all posts

Monday, July 15, 2013

Petro-transport: rail or pipeline? - Apocalypse in small town Québec


         Here is the human face of nonsustainable development based on fossil fuel energy. Early Saturday morning, July 6th, 2013, a runaway driverless train, loaded with light crude oil, crashed at high speed into the town center of Lac Mégantic, Québec. It overturned, spilling oil which ignited and creating a general conflagration which obliterated the town center. Even if you don't speak French, the following 10 minute youtube video is worth watching for the emotional adrenaline and the visual effect. It even catches a bit of the mesmerizing, hypnotic quality of great fires which draw onlookers like a magnet with their surrealistic kinetics and infinite gradations of color and texture.

            This then, dear reader, is the high price we pay for non-sustainable development (or "pseudo-development" as I prefer to put it). We desperately need to develop new, cleaner sources of energy! And sooner, rather than later. Ironically these "new" sources are not lacking: all that is lacking is political will. Today, one can only ask: how many more holocausts like this will it take.. (And as a friend worries: and when the masses finally do wake up, might it not be too late to do anything.. ouch!)



             As of this writing, 50 persons are missing and presumed dead. Thirty five bodies, charred beyond recognition, have been recovered, more than a week later. Few have been identified. Much of the town center (population 6000) has been effaced. Landmarks, including historic architecture and the town library, are gone - forever (a replacement is not the original..) The town library was a regional archival center. All that local history lost..

             Some people, of course, don't want pipelines - "not in my backyard!" Yet, statistically speaking, rail transport is even more risky and about three times more expensive. The alternative - "the road not chosen" - is to reduce our consumption of oil with alternative energy sources which have less environmental - and human - impact.
           

            The rail company behind this accident, Montreal, Maine and Atlantic, looks like a vulture, buying up failing regional rails. Their reputation is terrible. There have been many complaints of breakages, leaks, spills, noise and indifference to public complaints from residents of Lac Mégantic and environs long be
fore this catastrophe. The complaints fell on deaf ears. The bottom line appears to be all that counts, either for corporations in the current deregulated market economy or for the spineless governments that service them. According to some accounts I heard, even the very rail line itself is falling apart in places. Another problem was the fact that heavy trains with dangerous cargoes were passing within about 30 feet or so of residences. This is insane..

  


              As one might expect, it's a "complicated" story with multiple finger pointing starting already.

              The train - with one driver only - stopped at a town, several miles distant. The driver should have set both air brakes and manual brakes. One locomotive (of 5) was left running to
keep pressure up in the air brakes. The driver checked into a hotel for the night. All this was "standard practice".

             During the night, for unknown reasons, a fire started on the front of the train. What followed is contested by different parties. A volunteer fire fighter team put out the fire (which involved turning off the running locomotive, possibly decoupling it from the train and various other manipulations). Before the firefighters left they encountered representatives of the rail company who insured them that all was in order.


             Then, once again for unknown reasons, in the early morning hours of Saturday, July 6th, the driverless train rolled down the slope it was parked on. 


              Why was it parked on a slope in the first place?

              Why, given that train was carrying hazardous material, was it "standard practice" to leave it unattended with one locomotive running all night?.

               At any rate, the rogue train gathered speed over a distance of several miles and rolled into the center of Lac Mégantic at a frightful rate (some say over 60 mph making buildings shake and awakening sleepers). It derailed in the town center, oil was spilled and ignited somehow. The rest is history.

              People seem very angry over this one because of the traditional arrogance and indifference of the rail company to complaints and safety issues.


              Of course, regardless of where the blame lies, 50 people are dead and numerous families and businesses have been devastated. Economic costs will be astronomic as the town center was blown away. No one has a handle on the ecological damage yet but it promises to be severe, perhaps irreparable in places. Oil and toxic combustion products are said to have saturated the soil to a depth of eight feet, for example. Local aquatic ecosystems - lake and river - are affected, but to what degree no one knows. Tourism is down, with numerous cancellations throughout the region. The longterm knock on effects will last for perhaps a decade, amplifying the costs of the initial accident several fold. And these are only the monetary costs. Add to that the "cost" of bereavement, stress related medical costs, post traumatic syndrome.. 

              An event like the Lac Mégantic conflagration can be approached from a number of viewpoints and perspectives. Beyond the heartrending human tragedies it is easy to see the accident as the more or less inevitable result of an eternal conflict of values. One the one hand, there are the values of profit and individual "autonomy" and, on the other, the "Common Good" and a felt obligation to pass on to our children a planet in as good shape as the one we inherited from our parents. Only in our time - due to the intensity of modern technology, ideological shifts and the pressure of overpopulation - has this eternal conflict reached truly apocalyptic dimensions.

               What is actually shaping the balance of forces between "individual freedom" and the "Common Good" are ideological considerations. Despite conventional denials, North America is actually under an ideological regime as rigid as that of the former Soviet Union but vastly more sophisticated. So sophisticated, says critic Yuri Orlov, that we don't even know someone is pulling our strings. Soviet propaganda was ridiculed by the people, behind closed doors. Our propaganda system, which trains us to mindlessly consume things we don't really need, actually gives us the appearance of delivering what is promised. Only recently have people have people begun to challenge received neoconservative, Market Forces, ideology: the Occupy Movements could be read as a recent symptom of simmering discontent.

               On the whole, though, most people probably still believe in the (North) American Dream: that a "little man" though his own efforts, if he is made of the Right Stuff, can make it big or, at least, "move up in society" so that his children will live better. This dream has, of course, been an illusion for decades as high quality North American jobs were shipped overseas to third world sweatshops - to the disadvantage of workers in both the first and third world. It's the old "divide and conquer" strategy, obviously..

               We have lost the wisdom of the framers of the American Constitution. They believed in "separation powers" so as to avoid the abuse of power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers

                Today, deregulated industries like the railways, decide how they will implement government guidelines. True, some money is saved upstream in the form of bureaucratic cuts. But the last few decades have also increasingly shown us that pennies saved by cutting public services cab turn into dollars of accumulating costs downstream. We have become in the wisdom of our grandmothers: penny wise and pound foolish. Our ideology cost us more than it saves us. It is only in the case of apocalypses like that of Lac Mégantic, that we are confronted with truly stupefying actuarial statistics: how much, exactly, is a human life worth..

Wednesday, April 3, 2013

The Imperial Prime Minister: wither democracy?

             An interesting half-hour discussion this morning on the state of Canadian democracy, heard on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's morning radio program, "The Current". Recently social conservative backbencers have openly complained that the Prime Minister's Office is stiffling their right to represent their constituents on issues such as abortion law and sex selective abortion of girls reportedly practiced in some ethnic communities. They claim that they have been told that these issues are not welcome on the floor of parliament and will not be debated.

             Brent Rathgeber, a Conservative Member of Parliament (MP) representing Edmonton, Alberta speaks on the first segment of the audio-clip (hit the "Listen" button of the link below). Rathgeber is not himself a social conservative but believes that fundamental principles of democratic governance are being violated by his own party. Conservatives, he claims, have traditionally stood for freedom of speech and freedom of open debate.

Conservative Backbenchers muzzled?

            The last segment, beginning around minute 16, is an interview with conservative pundit Andrew Coyne. Coyne has some interesting points to make about the general state of health of Canadian democracy today. Party discipline, he notes, has grown across all party lines in recent decades. But why? I have asked myself this very question quite a few times lately. Is Canada moving towards an American style presidential system and away from British style adversarial parliament? A recent article by Mr Coyne in which he compares the Canadian and Australian parliaments suggests this might be the case.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/03/27/andrew-coyne-backbench-revolt-isnt-pro-life-vs-pro-choice-its-for-the-freedom-of-all-mps/

             Coyne concludes his article with the stirring lines:

"This did not begin with Warawa, in short, and it will not end here. The question is whether opposition MPs will join the fray. The shuttering of Warawa’s motion, after all, was an all-party affair: it was his motion this time, but it could be theirs next. There’s a fight worth having, here, but it isn’t Conservatives vs. Opposition, or pro-life vs. pro-choice. It’s for the freedom of all MPs against the dictates of a system that, as in no other democracy, has vested all power in the party leader."

              The distortions of the democratic process are everywhere if one takes the time and effort to look and see. In this blog we have examined recent efforts on the part of the Harper governement to silence scientific debate relating to the hazards of fossil fuel use (climate change in general and potential biohazards resulting from extracting and refining Alberta tar sands). See the internal blog links at the end of this article for links to these articles.

              In his interview on "The Current", Coyne described the perncious current practice - borrowed from the US? - of utilizing omnibus bills to ram through federal budgets without debate. Listen to the audioclip of the link below, Backbench MPs muzzled?, beginning around minute 16 for the Coyne interview. Obviously "pragmatism" or "efficiency" are invoked to justify this undemocratic practice: modern goverments have simply grown too large, too complex and too interconnected in their functioning to afford the luxury of longwinded debate..

Backbench MPs muzzled?

              The following article, published Easter Sunday in the New York Times by Canadian academic Prof. Thomas Homer-Dixon, sounds an alarm for citizen's on both sides of the border.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/01/opinion/the-tar-sands-disaster.html?_r=1&

              Prof Homer-Dixon in a short, 8 minute, interview on the CBC newsprogram: "As it happens", 2 April, 2013. This spoken statement of his position, I find particularly eloquent.

http://www.cbc.ca/asithappens/features/2013/04/02/thomas-homer-dixon-nyt-editorial-the-tar-sands-disaster/


             My own analysis of the state of democracy in Canada and the world is more "structural" and perhaps more pessimistic than conservative pundit Andrew Coyne's. I perceive the disenfranchisement of the citizen / the disempowerment of civil society as an inevitable byproduct of technocracy. One's actual starting position on the political spectrum appears irrelevant. Technocracy operates it centralizing of power and regulation of information flows whether one begins from the Left - marxist Communism - or from the Right - fascism and its antechamber, the modern corporation controlled State. Wherever one starts from, one ends up in the same place. Chinese taoist philosophy says that the tao (the nature) of water is to seek sealevel. All rivers flow to the sea. I see Fascism as the tao of industrialisation. "Republican values" - in the French revolutionary sense of "republican": liberty, equality, fraternity and representative government arose prior to the industrial reveolution (and technocracy). The Great Historical Question: would such "republican" values have risen if the industrial revolution had occurred in the first half of the 18th century instead of the first half of the 19th century..

              To cut to the chase."Every cloud has a silver lining". Bad things shake people up, forcing them to consider new and better ways of living, of doing things, of making a buck. Consider the New Economy we are entering in this dawn of a new century, the post peak oil economy. Cheap oil is running out. What is left will cost more and more to discover, extract and refine. Environmental impacts will worsen. This all looks bad for our energy junkie lifestyles, certainly. But the New Economy also offers the (potential) promise of reversing the trend toward antidemocratic centralization which industrialisation and technocracy have installed. If we play our cards right we will find within ourselves the wit and wisdom to grasp this opportunity to re-empower our local communities, our families, our lives and to offer our children a future in which hope still lives.
 

internal blog links:

Harper muzzles Conservatives' Right Wing?

Harper muzzles Environmental Science?

This link gives numerous internal blog links 
climate scientists speak out

Thursday, October 4, 2012

Pipelines aren't transparent, you've noticed?


Reversal of pipeline 9 between Westover and Montréal - Équiterre reveals Enbridge's real motives.

Montréal, October 4, 2012
Équiterre (environmental group) revealed today that Enbridge has concealed the real motivations behind its project to reverse oil flow in pipeline 9 between Westover, Ontario and Montréal. 

During public hearings before the National Energy Board last May, Enbridge claimed that this project was uniquely destined to supply the energy needs of eastern Canada.

However, according to information released today, the Canadian consulate approached the governers of the New England states, particularly Maine, in order to promote the sale of Albertan oil sands in the region. Information was obtained from the Natural Resources Council of Maine through the American Access to Information law.

"For several months, we suspected that Enbridge was hiding its real intentions for the reversal of oil flow in line 9. Now we have the proof that it was not to supply consumers in eastern Canada with Canadian oil nor to reinforce the energy security of our country! The goal was, and always has been, to export oil sand bitumen to the United States" stated Steven Guilbeault, adjoint director general of Équiterre.

"Given the fact that the federal government is in bed with the petroleum industry, we are appealing to the public, to municipalities as well as to the newly elected Québec provincial government in order to prevent this project from proceeding. Enbridge wants to transport one of the most polluting forms of petroleum through the second largest city of Canada (Montréal) via one of the oldest pipelines in the country! Are we going to let them get away with this?" concluded Mr. Guilbeault.

Our translation of the following press release from Équiterre


http://equiterre.org/communique/renversement-de-la-ligne-9-entre-westover-et-montreal-equiterre-devoile-les-veritables-in?fb_action_ids=10151345070348054&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=288381481237582

Thursday, September 6, 2012

Ship Alberta crude to China - safe bet or suicide?

            Former federal environment minister Anderson slams Enbridge's safety record and challenges the wisdom of west coast oil shipments:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/news-video/video-former-environment-minister-slams-enbridge-pipeline-plan/article4450302/?from=4449911

             Greed is good? British Columbia premier Christy Clark seems to think so. In a surprise move, she wants a more generous share of the proceeds from the proposed Enbridge pipeline which would deliver Alberta crude to BC ports for shipment to China.

            Aside from environmental concerns (greenhouse gas emissions, oil spills) and the question of sharing the spoils, there is also the question of shipping jobs to China. China wants crude, not refined oil. Thus, in bowing to Chinese wishes, Canada is effectively shipping thousands of jobs out of the country. The Chinese benefit from the oil and avoid the environmental damage of extraction while gaining thousands of jobs. A sweet deal.

            Meanwhile, the oil companies make money from the sales to China while avoiding having to pay highly paid Canadian refinery workers. Another sweet deal.

            Canada's land is scrapped, jobs are shipped to China with the crude. And, of course, money that could have been invested in building a New - post cheap fossil energy - Economy is flushed down the toilet of the dying Old, fossil fuel based, Economy. Everyone gains, it seems, but the land and people of Canada. Defintely not a sweet deal on this front!
 

            When does this silliness stop? Why do we let ourselves be run over by the steam roller of big business serviced by a servile and co-opted State? Why are we such damn patsies..

             Meanwhile, Harper's followers are mesmerized by the mantra: economy - economy - economy.. and either do not see, or do not want to see, the long term damage that is being done to our land, our way of life and our planet. Wake up Earth!

             For a more nuanced, in depth analysis, consult the four part investigative series which appeared in the Vancouver Sun:


 http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Canada+fish+face+upstream+battle/6737525/story.html

              Talk about "Orwellian" bullshit: even the Chinese under Mao couldn't beat this one - unbelievable!

               "An Environment Canada website states: "A society that lives and develops as a part of nature, values the diversity of life, takes no more than can be replenished and leaves to future generations a nurturing and dynamic world, rich in its biodiversity.""