Northern Gateway endangers environment, energy security: geologist
The proposed $5.5-billion Northern Gateway Pipeline will jeopardize Canada’s long-term energy security while at the same time leading to an unprecedented expansion of the oil sands with its dangerous social and environmental impacts, a former senior federal government geologist says.
David Hughes, who worked as a petroleum geologist for the Geological Survey of Canada for 32 years, says in his 30-page study of the pipeline proposal that Canada already has enough pipeline capacity to supply current and near-future needs.
He says that there is sufficient capacity in existing pipelines and in approved pipeline expansions to meet even the most optimistic growth scenarios by the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) and the Alberta government.
CAPP estimates that oil sands production will grow to 152 per cent of 2010 levels by 2025. The Alberta government predicts production will more than double by 2020, to 3.5 million barrels per day from 1.6 million.
Enbridge Inc. claims its Northern Gateway pipeline is needed to meet this growth and open markets to Asia and the U.S. west coast to oil sands bitumen.
Hughes says, however, that the expansion of pipelines that already go to the West Coast will help meet expansion needs as well as help open foreign markets.
Enbridge says its pipeline will ship 525,000 barrels per day of diluted bitumen from the oilsands. This means that oil sands production will have to grow an additional 33 percentage points over and above current growth predictions just to meet the capacity of this pipeline. In other words, as Enbridge claims, oil sand production will more than triple over the next 25 years.
Hughes argues that such unprecedented growth is impossible given the enormous social and environmental impacts already evident from a decade of oil sands expansion.
In the event that such a high rate of expansion is achieved, it will mean that Canada will export billions of barrels of it highest quality bitumen to Asia at a time when we are running out of conventional oil, he says in his report on the pipeline.
Canadians consume 1.75 million barrels a day, of which 780,000 is imported. The National Energy Board predicts that by 2025 consumption will rise to between 2.2 and 2.8 million barrels per day.
The imports, which supply oil to the Maritimes, Quebec and half of Ontario, have risen steadily over the last 20 years and the National Energy Board predicts they will continue this pattern.
About 98% of the Canada’s oil resources are in the oil sands, which means they now represent the nation’s strategic energy reserve.
The vast majority of oil sands production to date is from the minable surface reserves, which are the best quality. The Alberta government estimates these mining reserves contain about 34 billion barrels. At the predicted rate of production of 3.73 million barrels per day by 2025, these resources will likely be depleted by 2045, Hughes says.
“The proclivity to liquidate these resources as fast as possible in the name of economic growth is a very short-sighted policy practised by the Alberta and federal governments at the expense of the long-term energy security of Canadians,” Hughes states.
The 132 billion barrels that are too deep to be mined will required a more energy-intensive, more costly and more environmentally destructive method of recovery, Hughes says.
This method, referred to as Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage, pumps steam into underground pipes to extract the bitumen. The rate of recovery is much lower than mining and the amount of energy used to extract the bitumen is much higher — about 3.8 barrels of oil equivalent recovered to every barrel burned compared with a ratio of five to one for mining, Hughes says. Conventional oil is about 20 to one.
Hughes said the predicted expansion of the sands “may be good for the corporate growth ambitions of Enbridge but represents a travesty in the management of this non-renewable resource for Canadians, who are its owners, both in terms of the environment consequences of such an expansion and its long-term energy security implications.”
The proposed $5.5-billion Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline will travel 1,177 kilometres over the Rocky Mountains from Bruderheim — just north of Edmonton — to Kitimat, B.C., with a completion date of late 2016. Oil tankers will have to navigate about 160 kilometres through narrow channels to get to the Kitimat oil depot. The company and the federal government says the pipeline is vital to the expansion of Canada’s oil markets. At the moment all of Canada’s oil exports go to the U.S.
Enbridge claims the project will create 940 long-term jobs.
Hughes has submitted his report to the Joint Review Panel, which the federal government created to decide if the pipeline should be built. More than 4,000 individuals and organizations have submitted briefs and requests to give testimony.
Northern Gateway endangers environment, energy security: geologist | Energy | News | Financial Post
The proposed $5.5-billion Northern Gateway Pipeline will jeopardize Canada’s long-term energy security while at the same time leading to an unprecedented expansion of the oil sands with its dangerous social and environmental impacts, a former senior federal government geologist says.
David Hughes, who worked as a petroleum geologist for the Geological Survey of Canada for 32 years, says in his 30-page study of the pipeline proposal that Canada already has enough pipeline capacity to supply current and near-future needs.
He says that there is sufficient capacity in existing pipelines and in approved pipeline expansions to meet even the most optimistic growth scenarios by the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) and the Alberta government.
CAPP estimates that oil sands production will grow to 152 per cent of 2010 levels by 2025. The Alberta government predicts production will more than double by 2020, to 3.5 million barrels per day from 1.6 million.
Enbridge Inc. claims its Northern Gateway pipeline is needed to meet this growth and open markets to Asia and the U.S. west coast to oil sands bitumen.
Hughes says, however, that the expansion of pipelines that already go to the West Coast will help meet expansion needs as well as help open foreign markets.
Enbridge says its pipeline will ship 525,000 barrels per day of diluted bitumen from the oilsands. This means that oil sands production will have to grow an additional 33 percentage points over and above current growth predictions just to meet the capacity of this pipeline. In other words, as Enbridge claims, oil sand production will more than triple over the next 25 years.
Hughes argues that such unprecedented growth is impossible given the enormous social and environmental impacts already evident from a decade of oil sands expansion.
In the event that such a high rate of expansion is achieved, it will mean that Canada will export billions of barrels of it highest quality bitumen to Asia at a time when we are running out of conventional oil, he says in his report on the pipeline.
Canadians consume 1.75 million barrels a day, of which 780,000 is imported. The National Energy Board predicts that by 2025 consumption will rise to between 2.2 and 2.8 million barrels per day.
The imports, which supply oil to the Maritimes, Quebec and half of Ontario, have risen steadily over the last 20 years and the National Energy Board predicts they will continue this pattern.
About 98% of the Canada’s oil resources are in the oil sands, which means they now represent the nation’s strategic energy reserve.
The vast majority of oil sands production to date is from the minable surface reserves, which are the best quality. The Alberta government estimates these mining reserves contain about 34 billion barrels. At the predicted rate of production of 3.73 million barrels per day by 2025, these resources will likely be depleted by 2045, Hughes says.
“The proclivity to liquidate these resources as fast as possible in the name of economic growth is a very short-sighted policy practised by the Alberta and federal governments at the expense of the long-term energy security of Canadians,” Hughes states.
The 132 billion barrels that are too deep to be mined will required a more energy-intensive, more costly and more environmentally destructive method of recovery, Hughes says.
This method, referred to as Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage, pumps steam into underground pipes to extract the bitumen. The rate of recovery is much lower than mining and the amount of energy used to extract the bitumen is much higher — about 3.8 barrels of oil equivalent recovered to every barrel burned compared with a ratio of five to one for mining, Hughes says. Conventional oil is about 20 to one.
Hughes said the predicted expansion of the sands “may be good for the corporate growth ambitions of Enbridge but represents a travesty in the management of this non-renewable resource for Canadians, who are its owners, both in terms of the environment consequences of such an expansion and its long-term energy security implications.”
The proposed $5.5-billion Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline will travel 1,177 kilometres over the Rocky Mountains from Bruderheim — just north of Edmonton — to Kitimat, B.C., with a completion date of late 2016. Oil tankers will have to navigate about 160 kilometres through narrow channels to get to the Kitimat oil depot. The company and the federal government says the pipeline is vital to the expansion of Canada’s oil markets. At the moment all of Canada’s oil exports go to the U.S.
Enbridge claims the project will create 940 long-term jobs.
Hughes has submitted his report to the Joint Review Panel, which the federal government created to decide if the pipeline should be built. More than 4,000 individuals and organizations have submitted briefs and requests to give testimony.
Northern Gateway endangers environment, energy security: geologist | Energy | News | Financial Post
