Energy East carries threats to water: coalition

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 26/05/2015 (3766 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

SENDING oil instead of natural gas through TransCanada’s cross-province pipeline threatens two major aquifers and Winnipeg’s drinking water supply, opponents said Monday.

A coalition of environmental groups opposed to the Energy East project released a report on the 4,600-kilometre pipeline’s environmental risks and listed several communities whose drinking water would be contaminated by a spill, including Neepawa, Portage la Prairie and Brandon.

The report, prepared by retired biophysicist Dennis LeNeveu, says the pipeline crosses two major surface water sources — the Assiniboine Delta aquifer that supplies farmers and town wells, and the Sandilands aquifer, which is the headwaters of five watersheds. He said the aging pipeline’s asphalt coating is deteriorating and TransCanada’s leak-detection methods are unreliable.

“The threats to our water, from our drinking water to all of the rivers and streams, is simply much too great,” added Vicki Burns, director of Save Lake Winnipeg. “This pipeline is simply too close for comfort.”

TransCanada is proposing to convert an existing cross-Canada natural gas pipeline into one that can carry 1.1 million barrels of oil from Alberta to refineries in Eastern Canada. The National Energy Board has yet to hold hearings on the company’s application.

The gas pipeline already runs roughly parallel to the Winnipeg aqueduct that carries drinking water from Shoal Lake in Ontario.

Alex Paterson of the Manitoba Energy Justice Coalition warned a pipeline burst similar to the one near Kalamazoo, Mich., almost five years ago or even a slow leak could seep into the aqueduct and contaminate Winnipeg’s drinking water supply.

Activists concede it is a remote possibility, but said it is slow, small leaks that aren’t caught by TransCanada that pose the greatest worry.

Tim Duboyce, spokesman for TransCanada’s Energy East project, says the company operates 70,000 kilometres of pipelines and there has never been a large-scale leak on its oil lines.

There have been small-scale leaks, usually around pumping stations, that were detected by the company’s remote sensors or other leak-prevention programs, but nothing like the spill that occurred in on the Kalamazoo River from an Enbridge oil pipeline, he said.

He said TransCanada takes extra precautions around waterways by boosting the thickness of its pipe and by sending remote-controlled “smart pigs” down the line to detect small trouble spots in the pipeline before they cause problems. And he said real-time, remote sensors that track flow, temperature and pressure throughout the line are very sensitive.

“There is no leak that we don’t detect,” said Duboyce.

He said since Alberta’s oilsands will continue to produce oil regardless of whether the Energy East project gets the go-ahead, and it makes much better safety sense to transport the oil to market by pipeline rather than rail car.

He noted the report released Monday was not peer-reviewed or done with any front-line engineering assessments.

On Monday, the environmental groups called on the city and province to reject the Energy East project.

Though neither has direct regulatory control over the pipeline, the province could withhold building permits, set strict safety conditions or launch its own environmental review of the project, said Paterson.

The Manitoba government’s position on Energy East is murky.

Three years ago, Premier Greg Selinger expressed support for an east-west oil pipeline in general.

Since then, Conservation and Water Stewardship Minister Tom Nevakshonoff has applied to make submissions to the upcoming NEB hearings and plans to raise environmental and safety concerns.

maryagnes.welch@freepress.mb.ca