According to a recent report from the University of British Columbia, “Site C has more significant adverse environmental effects than any project ever reviewed under the history of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, including impacts on dozens of species, aquatics, vegetation, wildlife, Aboriginal use of lands and resources, and cultural heritage.” The British Columbian and Canadian governments are most likely breaking treaty #8, which gave local first nations usage of the land that will be submerged. BC Hydro has not properly evaluated less destructive, and far less expensive, alternatives like geothermal energy. We won’t need the power for decades, if ever. Why do the Liberals push Site C?
On June 1, 2016, the Governors of Washington, Oregon and California joined British Columbia’s Environment Minister and representatives from six West Coast cities, in the Borgia Room of San Francisco’s Westin St. Francis Hotel, to sign what history may show was a key milestone in the struggle to mount a concerted defence against the ravages of global temperature rise. The 2016 Pacific Coast Climate Leadership Action Plan has a strong emphasis on issues like ocean acidification; the integration of clean energy into the power grid; “support for efforts by the insurance industry and regulatory system to highlight the economic costs of climate change; and so-called “super pollutants” (also known as short-lived climate pollutants).” This sounds good, but do the Pacific Coast’s “Climate Leaders” mean business?
The ECOreport looks into the ongoing dispute over BC’s proposed coal terminal at Fraser Surrey Docks, a Second Municipality Applied for Intervenor Status
By Roy L Hales
A second municipality applied for intervener status in the legal challenge against the proposed Fraser Surrey Docks Coal Transfer Facility. After reviewing the information, New Westminster has joined Surrey in applying for intervenor status. White Rock is also considering joining the suit. A number of other Lower Mainland municipalities previously expressed concerns about the way Port Metro Vancouver was conducting its review of the proposed facility. After the coal facility was approved, Ecojustice filed filed an application for judicial review of the permit approval on behalf of Voters Taking Action on Climate Change (VTACC), Communities & Coal, and two individual citizens.
It wasn’t so long ago that Prime Minister Stephen Harper referred to the oil sands “ethical oil” as a very important source of economic growth. Given the Canada’s renewable energies sector came into being during his watch and the government spent more research and development money on them than any other sector during 2012, it could be said Harper is pursuing his own “all of the above” program. The comparison ends with industry. Harper has not seriously addressed Canadian emissions. While international attention has focused on Alberta’s oil sands, BC’s government is hoping to harvest a trillion dollar economy by pursuing natural gas, coal and tar sands crude interests. Canada’s climate inaction is a harsh contrast to US actions. Continue reading Canada’s Climate Inaction is a Harsh Contrast to US Actions→
The coal terminals in BC’s Lower Mainland are being enlarged to handle a great deal more cargo. The capacity of Neptune Terminals, in North Vancouver, has doubled. Westshore Terminals, in Delta, has applied to make a $230 million “upgrade.” It has yet to be seen if a new coal terminal will go in at Fraser Surrey Docks. Just before Burnaby’s council passed a resolution showing their opposition to the proposal, Mayor Derek Corrigan commented that BC is turning into a Banana Republic. Continue reading Burnaby’s Mayor Compares BC To a Banana Republic→