You could hear people across the country cringe when the Husky Energy pipeline oil spill occurred in northwest Saskatchewan in late July.
Supporters of pipelines cringed because they understand the environmental ramifications of an oil spill. They also recognized the timing; the spill occurred a couple of weeks before the start of the National Energy Board hearings into the proposed Energy East pipeline.
Critics of pipelines cringed because they also understand the environmental implications of pipeline spills. And while some might be privately cheering a pipeline spill because it gives them ammunition for their anti-oil agenda, they are in the minority.
Regardless, the timing couldn’t be worse. Pipeline proponents, including Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall, have been touting pipelines as the safe way to transport oil. And they’re right. The odds of having an oil spill related to a pipeline are remote.
But now the environmentalists get to take these readings, criticize all forms of oil transportation and explain why Energy East is evil.
It also plants seeds of doubt in the minds of the reasonable skeptics and the fence sitters who aren’t sure whether pipelines are the best route.
We hope the panel responsible for Energy East is smart enough not to be manipulated by the pipeline naysayers, and we hope they will ultimately make their decisions based on science and safety, not based on idealism.
Husky Energy will have to be held accountable for the oil spill. The amount of oil leaked from the pipeline was relatively small at just 200,000 to 250,000 litres. But the impact has been significant. And there are no minor spills when it comes to water sources.
Try telling the people of Prince Albert, North Battleford, Melfort and other affected communities that this was a minor oil spill. They’ve had to deal with challenges associated with their drinking water. They’ve had the terrible inconvenience associated with restricted water use during the summer months.
And, of course, there is the significant impact on fish and other wildlife.
The pipeline critics get to paint this picture when they appear before the National Energy Board, or when they speak to the media. And some of their comments will be irrefutable; the oil spill in the North Saskatchewan River is the example of the risk associated with pipelines.
The pipeline supporters will have to promote that Energy East will be built to more stringent standards. And they’ll have to remind the public that Energy East will meet every single condition facing it.
Pipelines are still the safest way to transport oil – a commodity we still need. We’re generations from a world without oil.
New pipelines, like Energy East, will get more oil to market, and boost our economy. If they’re done right, the oil will be shipped safely and without incident for decades to come.
