The Joint Review Panel assessing the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline will enter the final phase of hearings today.
A total of 37 groups and individuals - including First Nations, environmental groups, community organizations, the B.C and Alberta provincial governments, federal government, oil industry and business groups and others - will make their final statements to the panel before it begins the six-month process of deliberations.
Prince George Citizen reporter Peter James is in Terrace to report the action inside and outside the hearings.
While it is possible that compelling new information will be brought forward at the final hour, most of the presenters will likely reiterate the same points which have been raised time and again through this process.
The two sides of the Enbridge argument can be divided into the "oil is bad" camp and the "money is good" camp.
The main arguments of the oil is bad crowd are as follows:
Oil in the Douglas Channel or Pacific Ocean is bad.
Oil in rivers and streams is bad.
Oil burned and converted into atmospheric carbon dioxide - contributing to catastrophic climate change - is bad.
Oil dug out of the Alberta oil sands, causing the environmental degradation of the the area's land and water, is bad.
Oil sold unrefined to foreign markets is bad.
Oil pipelines are exceedingly-complex systems in which human error and mechanical failures are a near certainty - which is bad.
The counter arguments offered by the money is good folks look like this:
Money is money, which is good. The Northern Gateway Pipeline will make oil companies more money, which is better.
Money can buy the best spill prevention technology and response systems, which is good.
Money pays for government services like health care and education, which is good.
Money pays workers and creates jobs, which is good.
Money supports local economies, which is good.
Money will make training and employment opportunities for First Nations along the pipeline, which is good.
And unfortunately, both sides are completely right: oil really is bad and money really is good.
There is nothing good about oil and the impact it has on the environment. But it is the primary transportation fuel of the global economy, which means it is - and probably will remain for some time -a necessary evil.
Money genuinely is good in all kinds of unexpected ways. From paying for an extra teacher or doctor; to supporting that local restaurant you love; to helping a family end the cycle of poverty and give their kids a better future, money really can be a great thing.
But are the short- to mid-term economic gains offered by the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline worth the long-term impact to the local and global environment? There is always a way to make money, but there is only one Earth.
What the members of the Joint Review Panel will have to grapple with - other than the reams of technical minutia -is essentially a decision about values.
Any deficiencies in the technical aspects of the project can be fixed, but if the pipeline is built it will fail and oil will spill -maybe not a lot, but it will happen. That is a 100 per cent certainty.
Even the best, most over-designed systems created by human beings - from the pyramids of Giza to NASA's space program -fail eventually.
Are British Columbians and Canadians prepared to accept that spills, environmental damage and climate change impacts will happen if Northern Gateway is built in exchange for billions of dollars in economic investment? That is the question the members of the Joint Review Panel will ultimately have to make a ruling on by the end of the year.
Good luck to them. They have an unenviable and thankless job ahead.
--Associate news editor Arthur Williams
