“It is a poison disguised as medicine.” – the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines

I find it ironic to see the word, shame, associated with Canada and our commitments towards environmental sustainability. After all, Canada was one of the first governments in the world to support and ratify the Kyoto agreements in 1997. Since Canada’s departure from the Kyoto Protocol after the 2011 United Nations Climate Change Conference, it is clear that our federal government’s interests is no longer lie in becoming a global environmental leader committed towards reducing carbon emissions, but rather, a global economic leader committed towards producing carbon emissions.

The $7-billion Enbridge Northern Gateway Project proposal for the 1,170 kilometre pipeline between Bruderheim, Alberta, and Kitiman, British Columbia has generated lengthy hearings over the past several years on whether or not our nation should support such a controversial project. Considered as “a poison disguised as medicine” by the Executive Director of Greenpeace International, the endless debates for and against this project can be simply summarized in one statement—the economy versus the environment.

On one hand, according to CBC, proponents of the proposed Gateway pipeline claim that the project will bring new opportunities for economic development to Canada. By exporting our natural resources to the massive energy consumers in the Pacific markets, the Gateway pipeline will create over 3,000 construction jobs and 560 long-term jobs in British Columbia. This, as Enbridge claims, will eventually translate to 32 million dollars in earned income each year that will be funnelled back into local economies for years to come. Furthermore, the project addresses a number of major safety issues by ensuring that over 70 percent of the proposed pipeline route will go through previously disturbed land and that the pipeline will be constructed from steel that is 20 percent thicker than required.

On the other hand, opponents of the pipeline argue the potential environmental risks the Gateway pipeline poses for the sensitive ecosystems in Northern British Columbia and the western seacoast. Critics of the Gateway pipeline have stated on The Globe and Mail that the project has caused significant anxiety for many people in the surrounding areas, in particularly, for those working in the thriving forestry and fishery industries. Concerns were expressed that the heavy, molasses-like diluted bitumen transported from the Alberta oil sands will be more corrosive and difficult to clean up in an event of an oil spill. Thus, in an event of an accident such as the 2010 Deep-water Horizon oil spill and 2011 Little Buffalo oil spill, irreversible damage will be done to overall health of these priceless and delicate ecosystems. Moreover, the opponents assert that the increased activity in oil sand processing facilities and amplified tanker traffic throughout the Douglas Channel once the pipeline is built will contribute to an upsurge in the emission of greenhouse gases and other pollutants.   

Even though this contentious issue can be broken down and analyzed as two distinct positions each with its pros and cons, I believe another way of looking at the issue is to consider the parties who will benefit from these pros, and the parties who will have to bear the consequences of these cons. It is very obvious to me that all the benefits will go straight to the major proponents for the Gateway project, including the Pacific countries, the Alberta’s oil and gas industries, and the Enbridge stockholders. This is because all aspects of the Gateway project are directly controlled and influenced by these major players. However, on the contrary, those who do not have direct control or power over the Gateway project, which includes the people of British Columbia and the First Nation communities, will have to endure all the risks and consequences that the pipeline raises. Consequently, the project no longer becomes a simple question of: “Should we build the Gateway pipeline?”, but instead, a complicated socio-ethical question of: “Should one sector benefit at the expense of another sector in the same country?”.

My answer? Absolute not. As evident from Canada’s departure from being a major leader in environmental sustainability to a major player in the energy sector, I think Canadians are becoming more and more similar to our close neighbours down south to the extent of even importing some of their abstract economic ideologies to Canada. For the better or worst, which I firmly believe is the latter, these superficial values for economic growth and wealth will not get us far. Yes, the economic potential associated with the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project will bring over 81 billion dollars in revenue to our federal government and increase Canada’s gross domestic product (GDP) by 270 billion dollars over the next 30 years. However, this will be short-lived as The Alberta Energy Resources Conservation Board claims that the oil sands will eventually run out by the next century. If the estimates are correct, what will we do then? Additionally, we must consider how much these benefits will actually be going directly back to the average Canadian citizen? A study by the Centre of Policy Alternatives indicates that the share going to workers will only be 18 percent of the total GDP, which is extremely low by Canadian economic standards that have “traditionally seen a labour share of income in excess of 50 percent of GDP”. Hence, aside from the selected few who have total leadership over the project, the common Canadian will not be benefiting a whole lot from the Gateway pipeline. Instead, Canadians will have to confront a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth, where Statistic Canada has already revealed in 2012 that the top 10 percent of Canadians accounted for 47.9 percent of all wealth, while the bottom 30 percent of Canadians accounted for less than 1 percent of all wealth. Consequently, if this trend continues, it will increase social tensions and weaken social cohesion between Canadians.

Essentially, what I think our Federal government is doing at the moment by exporting our resources through the Gateway pipeline (and various other pipeline projects) is to fulfill our impulsive thirst for economic growth. What they do not realize is that by doing so, they are not only leaving a wasteland for our future generations, but they are also giving other foreign superpowers opportunities to have more control in our economic and political systems. By embracing the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project, we are basically taking in “a poison [that is] disguised as medicine”. In this case, the Gateway project is poisonous such that it will completely destroy the integrity of this nation, while giving the illusion that it will help develop Canada’s economy well into the twenty-first century. Thus, the Canadian leaders of today and tomorrow must be able to seek past the narrow frame of the dollar sign and ensure that we are creating a virtuous and sustainable Canada for our children and ourselves.