We can expect a similar legal situation with the Mackenzie Valley pipeline when it comes. The National Energy Board (assuming it is the lead agency to carry out the review) is likely to rule (once again) that the end-use greenhouse gas emissions from the gas transported in the pipeline are not environmental effects of transporting the gas (like saying that cigarettes are not related to the lung cancer from smoking because they are only transnporting the smoke to its destination). Therefore, the climate change effects of the pipeline will be found to be minimal.

The fraudulence of this is demonstrated by the Government of Canada press release on GSX. Herb Dhaliwal claimed that the review process ensures that GSX is consistent with "sustainable development" and "integrating our economic, social and environmental goals" -- in other words, the political leaders are going to pretend the broader environmental issues have been addressed -- yet the actual review under the CEA Act was far too narrow to make findings on sustainability or integration of goals. And we know that a major fossil fuel infrastructure project will result in more greenhouse gas emissions.

The GSX Concerned Citizens Coalition holds that the National Energy Board is systematically failing to properly apply the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act -- we just don't have the money to prove it in court (it would probably have to be appealed to a high level).

----- Original Message -----

From: Arthur Caldicott

To: CANET-L@YORKU.CA

Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 8:33 PM

Subject: Government of Canada accepts Panel conclusion on GSX

Those listening to the news Friday evening may hear that the federal government has approved BC Hydro's proposed GSX Pipeline. Do not be misled. BC Hydro has not yet seen light at the end of the tunnel.

The Georgia Straight Crossing Natural Gas Pipeline would run from Sumas, on the Canadian border, through Washington State, under the Strait of Georgia, to Vancouver Island. It's purpose is to provide fuel to one existing and one new gas-fired electricity generation project on Vancouver Island. Together, these projects constitute a new electricity era for British Columbia, moving us from a largely hydroelectric jurisdiction to one in which fossil fuel combustion is a significant part of the electricity mix. It does not have to happen. Conservation, sustainable alternatives, and renewed cablesystems from the mainland are part of a balanced energy approach that has lower economic risks, and lower environment impacts. GSX can still be stopped.

July 2003 - the Joint Review Panel (JRP) finds GSX will not have significant environmental impacts under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). Sends report to Environment Canada for Cabinet review.

TBA - JRP and NEB are to issue their decision - approval, conditional approval, or denial - of a Certificate of Convenience and Public Necessity (CPCN) under the NEB Act, and their report, which includes their reasons for decision.

Under the National Energy Board Act, the JRP must decide whether the pipeline is necessary and in the public convenience. The need for the pipeline, in all of Hydro's evidence through the hearing, was to be the VIGP. The BCUC denial of a permit for VIGP had not yet occurred when the JRP issued their report under CEAA.

Now, however, the Panel have the opportunity to demonstrate that they are in touch with reality, or are divorced from it. They may refuse to look beyond the evidence that was available to them, up to the end of the GSX hearing in April, and may ignore the BCUC denial of a CPCN for VIGP. Their track record is not auspicious in this regard. Remember that in June, they had the opportunity to review Terasen evidence that an alternative to GSX was available, in upgrades to the existing pipeline to Vancouver Island, and refused to review that evidence. It augurs poorly for what the Panel might decide under the NEBA.

What you can do: Write quickly to David Anderson, to the NEB, and copy to media. Your letter can be simple, non-technical, and to the point. GSX should not be granted a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity under the National Energy Board Act because of these two facts:

- even if that were not the case, an alternative to GSX has been put forward by Terasen that costs less (exposes the public to less financial risk) and would result in lower environmental impacts than would a new pipeline on a new route

For more info, contact the GSX Concerned Citizens Coalition (gsxccc@sqwalk.com, www.sqwalk.com) or GSXCCC's president, Tom Hackney (thackney@island.net) or me (arthurcaldicott@highspeedplus.com).

Here's the press release, issued, oddly, by Herb Dhaliwal, Natural Resources Minister, rather than David Anderson who as Canada's Minister of the Environment is the authority responsible for the Joint Review Panel.

OTTAWA – The Government of Canada today released its official response to accept the Joint Review Panel's conclusion that the Canadian portion of the Georgia Strait Crossing (GSX) pipeline project is unlikely to cause significant environmental effects, provided specific actions are taken to protect areas that could be affected.

The proposed international pipeline is intended to provide natural gas from Sumas, Washington, to Vancouver Island for the generation of electricity, but would also be available for meeting future residential, commercial and industrial gas demand on Vancouver Island.

“I would like to thank the members of the Joint Review Panel for their hard work and their efforts in ensuring proper consideration of the issues under review,” said the Honourable Herb Dhaliwal, Minister of Natural Resources Canada. “The GSX pipeline could potentially bring numerous benefits to residents of Vancouver Island, including enhanced security of natural gas supply and employment opportunities for the community and the province of British Columbia. However, we must also ensure that any development integrates our environmental, social and economic goals, and this is why the review process exists.”

The Joint Review Panel was appointed in September 2001. Public consultation sessions were held in six communities on Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands in January 2002, and public hearings were conducted in 2003. In July 2003, the Joint Review Panel recommended that the project be allowed to proceed to federal regulatory and departmental decision making, as long as the Panel's recommendations were made part of the requirements of any approval by the National Energy Board (NEB).

The Government of Canada's response marks the completion of the environmental assessment of the GSX Canada pipeline project by the Joint Review Panel under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. The project will now proceed to the next stage of approvals to be carried out by various federal departments and the NEB. The Panel will then decide whether to issue a certificate under the National Energy Board Act to the project proponent, which will be subject to approval by the Governor in Council.

This process advances the Government of Canada's commitment to the sustainable development of our natural resources – contributing to their economic importance and to a strong society and communities through knowledge, innovation, technology and international leadership. By integrating our economic, social and environmental goals, we can ensure our quality of life and build the Canada we want, for ourselves and for future generations.