Panel approves Mackenzie pipeline project: Calgary Herald
Finally! The JRP has approved the Mackenzie Valley Gas Pipeline project, albeit with a number of recommendations that have yet to be reviewed.
Not a big surprise, and it doesn't mean that the project is a lock, but it was a significant and necessary step in the process. As I said in my last post, the panel cannot be accused of rushing their final report, and thus it might just enjoy more credibility among critics.
So, what now? This spring, the National Energy Board will hold its final round of hearings, with this report as their starting point. These hearings will be relatively brief, and we should have a final report by fall.
The more important developments will likely take place behind closed doors, namely the negotiations between proponents and the federal government to establish a "fiscal framework". Read that as "government support" for the project, but given that our Prime Minister's home riding is in Calgary, it's fair to assume that they will do all they can to accomodate this project.
Time will tell, but this is an important day.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
The event of the year! (maybe)
Long-overdue Mackenzie pipeline report to be issued Wednesday Canada.com
Well, they ran counter to their own press directive, but the Joint Review Panel has announced that their long-awaited socio-economic and environmental report on the proposed Mackenzie Valley gas line will (finally) be released tomorrow.
I don't think it's overstating to call this the single most important event to happen in the course of development of either of the major northern pipeline projects of 2009, even if it comes on the penultimate day of said year.
What are the odds? is it a definite "no"? (highly unlikely), or with no controversial recommendations that may slow development? (more likely, but not by much)
The nay-sayers will be out, either worrying about the threat to the Alaska line (there is none; the Alaska line won't proceed until Mackenzie is either finished or definitively killed off), or will once again question the economics in the light of "plentiful" (but pricey and controversial) shale gas.
And what about the environmentalists? Well, the World Wildlife Fund is actually neutral on the Mackenzie gas line, granting that the proponents have already done quite a bit in their routing and engineering to protect sensitive areas. The Sierra Club doesn't oppose the line per se (though they have expressed concern that the gas will be used to fuel tar sands extraction). Environmentalists as a group aren't likely to present the greatest obstacle in the JRP's report.
The sections dealing with potential social impacts will likely see the most scrutiny when the report is released tomorrow. While there is already some modest affluence in the communities along the route of the line, there is considerable concern that a sudden flood of cash to the region may fuel addictions, domestic violence, and other social concerns. These are difficult, complicated issues with no simple resolution short of turning the line down flat.
A flat turn-down is extremely unlikely, though. Judge Thomas Berger recommended a moratorium on building this line back in the early 80s, citing the need to settle native land claims and give this population more time to assess the impacts. These goals have been mostly been reached, and First Nations along the line have been given a significant piece of equity in the project through the Aboriginal Pipeline Group. This group now stands to lose millions if the project doesn't proceed.
The JRP has taken far longer than anticipated, but there's an upside to that: the time it has taken to prepare this report adds to its credibility. The JRP can hardly be accused of rushing.
Well, they ran counter to their own press directive, but the Joint Review Panel has announced that their long-awaited socio-economic and environmental report on the proposed Mackenzie Valley gas line will (finally) be released tomorrow.
I don't think it's overstating to call this the single most important event to happen in the course of development of either of the major northern pipeline projects of 2009, even if it comes on the penultimate day of said year.
What are the odds? is it a definite "no"? (highly unlikely), or with no controversial recommendations that may slow development? (more likely, but not by much)
The nay-sayers will be out, either worrying about the threat to the Alaska line (there is none; the Alaska line won't proceed until Mackenzie is either finished or definitively killed off), or will once again question the economics in the light of "plentiful" (but pricey and controversial) shale gas.
And what about the environmentalists? Well, the World Wildlife Fund is actually neutral on the Mackenzie gas line, granting that the proponents have already done quite a bit in their routing and engineering to protect sensitive areas. The Sierra Club doesn't oppose the line per se (though they have expressed concern that the gas will be used to fuel tar sands extraction). Environmentalists as a group aren't likely to present the greatest obstacle in the JRP's report.
The sections dealing with potential social impacts will likely see the most scrutiny when the report is released tomorrow. While there is already some modest affluence in the communities along the route of the line, there is considerable concern that a sudden flood of cash to the region may fuel addictions, domestic violence, and other social concerns. These are difficult, complicated issues with no simple resolution short of turning the line down flat.
A flat turn-down is extremely unlikely, though. Judge Thomas Berger recommended a moratorium on building this line back in the early 80s, citing the need to settle native land claims and give this population more time to assess the impacts. These goals have been mostly been reached, and First Nations along the line have been given a significant piece of equity in the project through the Aboriginal Pipeline Group. This group now stands to lose millions if the project doesn't proceed.
The JRP has taken far longer than anticipated, but there's an upside to that: the time it has taken to prepare this report adds to its credibility. The JRP can hardly be accused of rushing.
Monday, December 28, 2009
...And Why does this break in Moose Jaw?!
Much-delayed Arctic pipeline environmental study expected this week, years late - Business - Canada - World - The Moose Jaw Times Herald: "Much-delayed Arctic pipeline environmental study expected this week, years late"
Moose Jaw? Really?
Regardless, this Canadian Press item (which I really did try to find elsewhere) is largely restated Delta angst, but I include it because it is one more in an increasingly long list of press items stating that the JRP report is coming "this week".
Moose Jaw? Really?
Regardless, this Canadian Press item (which I really did try to find elsewhere) is largely restated Delta angst, but I include it because it is one more in an increasingly long list of press items stating that the JRP report is coming "this week".
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Holding out for a frozen pipe dream - thestar.com
Holding out for a frozen pipe dream - thestar.com
I like this reasonably balanced piece from the Toronto Star. I note that this piece also anticipates release of the JRP report in the coming week.
I like this reasonably balanced piece from the Toronto Star. I note that this piece also anticipates release of the JRP report in the coming week.
Saturday, December 26, 2009
A Deafening Silence
As noted here previously, the Joint Review Panel studying the Mackenzie Valley Natural Gas Pipeline project issued a news release early this month stating that any release of the final report would be announced with seven day's notice with a news release. This has not yet happened.
Yes, I find this troubling. For the past year (or so), the JRP has stuck by its commitment to provide its final report before 2010, eventually settling on a window of December, 2009. If we are to gather that the JRP is following its own timetable of releasing a report with a week's notice, we're a couple of days late on that advance press release.
The only good explanation I can think of for this is that comment that Robert McLeod made in Calgary back on December 15 stating that the report would be released on the 31, and that the JRP's media people decided that this would stand as an official announcement. However, this report was never corroborated, and since McLeod isn't an actual member of the Panel, this would seem a rather shoddy way to manage media relations.
Any other potential explanation is that the final report is seeing an administrative hold-up, though some public word on this would be nice.
Otherwise? There's a delay. Something that will carry the final release beyond the panel's self-imposed deadline of the end of 2009.
Yes, I find this troubling. For the past year (or so), the JRP has stuck by its commitment to provide its final report before 2010, eventually settling on a window of December, 2009. If we are to gather that the JRP is following its own timetable of releasing a report with a week's notice, we're a couple of days late on that advance press release.
The only good explanation I can think of for this is that comment that Robert McLeod made in Calgary back on December 15 stating that the report would be released on the 31, and that the JRP's media people decided that this would stand as an official announcement. However, this report was never corroborated, and since McLeod isn't an actual member of the Panel, this would seem a rather shoddy way to manage media relations.
Any other potential explanation is that the final report is seeing an administrative hold-up, though some public word on this would be nice.
Otherwise? There's a delay. Something that will carry the final release beyond the panel's self-imposed deadline of the end of 2009.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Mackenzie pipeline panel to report Dec. 31
Source: The National Post
Okay, so I was off a couple of days. This isn't confirmed, but this National Post article claims that the NWT Industry minister says the JRP report will be released on December 31.
Probably at 11:59 PM :-)
Okay, so I was off a couple of days. This isn't confirmed, but this National Post article claims that the NWT Industry minister says the JRP report will be released on December 31.
Probably at 11:59 PM :-)
It's still coming. Really.
Joint Review Panel report still expected in December - Slave River Journal
Apparently, the JRP report is still on track for a December release, though the window narrows by the day. We are supposed to see a media advisory 1 week before the actual release, so the latest we could theoretically see that is Christmas Eve.
If I had to take a guess, we're going to see a release sometime between the 28th to the 30th, so that advisory should come out sometime between Monday to Wednesday next week. We'll see.
Apparently, the JRP report is still on track for a December release, though the window narrows by the day. We are supposed to see a media advisory 1 week before the actual release, so the latest we could theoretically see that is Christmas Eve.
If I had to take a guess, we're going to see a release sometime between the 28th to the 30th, so that advisory should come out sometime between Monday to Wednesday next week. We'll see.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Editorial: The End of the Beginning
There has been little in the way of actual news of late, so allow me to ramble a little...
2009 is drawing to a close. It has been a year of relatively little import as regards the two major northern gasline projects, but I'm hoping it winds up being remembered as the "calm before the storm".
The most significant event of the year hasn't yet taken place: the release of the Mackenzie Valley Joint Review Panel report. Or the announcement of another delay in the release of said report. Either way, it's a significant event. The hope for many, of course, is that the report is released according to the heavily-amended schedule, and that it contains no showstoppers. Such an announcement raises the likelihood of a project announcement in the next year considerably.
It's true, though, that if the JRP fails to meet its December deadline that this would be equally significant. A delay of more than a few weeks, say, could derail the project irretrievably.
Meanwhile, in Alaska, it would appear that many residents are losing patience with Sarah Palin's AGIA. There hasn't been a lot of obvious movement, and some seem to be using this to suggest the legislation is a bust. What these critics are either missing or ignoring is that TransCanada's project is progressing as planned. There isn't any real, publicly-visible progress to be seen until TC undertakes its open season in 2010. According to recently published reports, that's still on track.
The really BIG news with TC's bid to build the Alaska Highway gasline, though, was the announcement last June of Exxon/Mobil's participation in the engineering work. While this doesn't actually tie E/M to TC's bid, it did come across as something of an implied endorsement.
And Denali, the joint ConocoPhilips/BP pipeline project continues on its merry way. They performed field work in the Yukon this year, held meetings with First Nations leaders here, and continued to insist that their schedule to conduct an open season in 2010 is still solid. Mind you, they still haven't announced exactly when in 2010 they'll be holding that open season (TC's starts in May), but they may just be maintaining flexibility. Who knows?
It's been a quiet year for news, but that doesn't mean that nothing's been happening. A lot of pieces have been moved around on the board, and we're getting set for a somewhat noisier 2010.
Brett Chandler
2009 is drawing to a close. It has been a year of relatively little import as regards the two major northern gasline projects, but I'm hoping it winds up being remembered as the "calm before the storm".
The most significant event of the year hasn't yet taken place: the release of the Mackenzie Valley Joint Review Panel report. Or the announcement of another delay in the release of said report. Either way, it's a significant event. The hope for many, of course, is that the report is released according to the heavily-amended schedule, and that it contains no showstoppers. Such an announcement raises the likelihood of a project announcement in the next year considerably.
It's true, though, that if the JRP fails to meet its December deadline that this would be equally significant. A delay of more than a few weeks, say, could derail the project irretrievably.
Meanwhile, in Alaska, it would appear that many residents are losing patience with Sarah Palin's AGIA. There hasn't been a lot of obvious movement, and some seem to be using this to suggest the legislation is a bust. What these critics are either missing or ignoring is that TransCanada's project is progressing as planned. There isn't any real, publicly-visible progress to be seen until TC undertakes its open season in 2010. According to recently published reports, that's still on track.
The really BIG news with TC's bid to build the Alaska Highway gasline, though, was the announcement last June of Exxon/Mobil's participation in the engineering work. While this doesn't actually tie E/M to TC's bid, it did come across as something of an implied endorsement.
And Denali, the joint ConocoPhilips/BP pipeline project continues on its merry way. They performed field work in the Yukon this year, held meetings with First Nations leaders here, and continued to insist that their schedule to conduct an open season in 2010 is still solid. Mind you, they still haven't announced exactly when in 2010 they'll be holding that open season (TC's starts in May), but they may just be maintaining flexibility. Who knows?
It's been a quiet year for news, but that doesn't mean that nothing's been happening. A lot of pieces have been moved around on the board, and we're getting set for a somewhat noisier 2010.
Brett Chandler
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)