text:
Northwest Coast Energy News
Energy, environment and science in northwest British Columbia
Northwest Coast News
About Northwest Coast Energy News
Advertise on Northwest Coast Energy News
Tag: NEB
Federal Court of Appeal overturns approval of Northern Gateway
In a two to one decision, the Federal Court of Appeal has overturned the Harper government's approval of the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline, finding that the federal government's consultation process with First Nations on the BC coast that occurred after the NEB decision and the Joint Review Panel Report was inadequate, saying:
We conclude that Canada offered only a brief, hurried and inadequate opportunity in Phase IV—a critical part of Canada's consultation framework—to exchange and discuss information and to dialogue. The inadequacies—more than just a handful and more than mere imperfections—left entire subjects of central interest to the affected First Nations, sometimes subjects affecting their subsistence and well-being, entirely ignored.
The dissenting judge found that the federal government under Stephen Harper had adequately consulted the First Nations. The split decision means that one of the parties, either the federal government, Enbridge Northern Gateway or the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers may seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Read the decision
Northern Gateway decision (PDF)
Appeal court overturns Ottawa's approval of Northern Gateway pipeline
Northern Gateway pipeline approval overturned
Author Robin RowlandPosted on June 30, 2016 June 30, 2016 Categories BC, Canada, consultation, Enbridge, First Nations, Gitga'at, Gitxaala, Haida, Haisla, Harper, Joint Review Panel, Kitimat, Law, Northern Gateway Pipeline, Pipelines, Politics & GovernmentTags BC, Enbridge, environment, Federal Court of Appeal, First Nations, Haisla, Joint Review, Kitimat, National Energy Board, NEB, Northern Gateway, Pipelines, Politics & Government, Stephen Harper1 Comment on Federal Court of Appeal overturns approval of Northern Gateway
BC Supreme Court rules province failed to consult First Nations on Northern Gateway
The B.C. government acted improperly and "breached the honour of the crown" when it signed away a provincial review and gave the federal Joint Review Panel for responsibility for assessing the environmental impact of the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline, Madam Justice Marvyn Koenigsberg of the Supreme Court of B.C. ruled Wednesday.
In a largely technical decision, Justice Koenigsberg ruled that British Columbia must come to its own decision on Northern Gateway. That's because what is called the "equivalency agreement" that handed the decision over to the federal agency was not "was reasonable or correct for the Province to exercise its discretion."
She ruled the equivalency agreement "is invalid" and said the project cannot begin until a provincial environmental assessment certificate has been issued.
"The province is required to consult with the Gitga'at about the potential impacts of the project on areas of provincial jurisdiction and about how those impacts may affect the Gitga'at's aboriginal rights, and how those impacts are to be addressed in a manner consistent with the honour of the Crown and reconciliation," Koenigsberg ruled.
Read the judgement (pdf)
Justice_Koenigsberg_Coastal-First-Nations-v-British-Columbia-Environment
That may be the final nail in the Northern Gateway's coffin. The province opposed the project at the JRP because the Northern Gateway had not met the five conditions for heavy oil transport that was set down by the government.
The court ruling comes shortly after British Columbia told the National Energy Board that it also opposed the $6.8-billion Kinder Morgan TransMountain pipeline because, at this point, that project cannot meet BC's five conditions.
B.C. Justice Minister Suzanne Anton said the province is reviewing the Supreme Court decision.
There are 19 more court challenges to the Northern Gateway and to the Joint Review process, most before the Federal Court of Canada.
The Gitga'at First Nation and Coastal First Nations which brought the suit in January 2015 say that the ruling means Enbridge pipeline must now face provincial environmental assessment decision, which includes consultation with First Nations across the province.
"Approval of the project falls within federal jurisdiction and this decision from the B.C. Supreme Court does not change that approval or the project's environmental assessment," said Ivan Giesbrecht, communication manager for Northern Gateway, in a statement to the CBC.
Northern Gateway says the federal decision stands, and its still working to meet the 209 conditions set out by the NEB, along with the B.C. government's conditions.
"Northern Gateway and the project proponents, including Aboriginal Equity Partners, remain committed to this essential Canadian infrastructure," Giesbrecht told the CBC.
But among the 209 conditions attached to the approval by the Joint Review Panel Condition 2 said that construction must begin before December 31, 2016. Under Conditions 20 and 21, Enbridge must have secured commitments for at least 60 per cent of the pipeline's capacity at least six months before starting construction.
Enbridge still doesn't have any customers and with the world price of oil below $40 US a barrel, the chances of getting customers are slim. In its most recent NEB filing on December 21, 2015, Enbridge stated, "Further to its filing of June 29, 2015, Northern Gateway has not executed firm [transportation service agreements] with its prospective shippers."
Koenigsberg 's ruling doesn't official stop the Northern Gateway as some are celebrating. Rather the decision means that British Columbia must set up its own review process and then come to a decision. That decision could, in theory, approve Northern Gateway with conditions just as the Joint Review Panel did.
The news release from the Coastal First Nations goes on to say:
The ruling, which is a major victory for the Gitga'at First Nation, means the equivalency agreement is invalid, that the government must now make its own environmental assessment decision regarding the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline, and that it must consult with and accommodate First Nations along the pipeline route about potential impacts to their Aboriginal rights and title.
"This is a huge victory that affirms the provincial government's duty to consult with and accommodate First Nations and to exercise its decision-making power on major pipeline projects," said Arnold Clifton, Chief Councillor of the Gitga'at First Nation.
"This ruling is an important victory for our communities and presents another hurdle to the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline," said Chief Marilyn Slett, President of the Coastal First Nations. "It means the province must now sit down with First Nation communities across BC and find ways to address the severe and irreversible impacts of this project."
The constitutional challenge was brought by the Gitga'at First Nation and the Coastal First Nations, and was argued by Joseph Arvay, Q.C., (and his colleagues Catherine Boies Parker and Tim Dickson at Farris LLP ) one of Canada's pre-eminent constitutional lawyers and an expert in Aboriginal and administrative law.
"The province has been talking a lot about its opposition to oil pipelines in recent days," said Art Sterritt, a member of the Gitga'at First Nation. "Now it must put its money where its mouth is and apply the same rigorous standards it advocated for during the Joint Review Panel process, while consulting with every single First Nation who would be affected by this project. We've said it before: The Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline is dead."
The ruling means that, until the province makes a decision on the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline and issues an Environmental Assessment Certificate, none of the approximately 60 permits, licenses and authorizations necessary for the project to proceed can be issued.
Author Robin RowlandPosted on January 13, 2016 January 13, 2016 Categories BC, consultation, First Nations, Gitga'at, Great Bear Rainforest, Hartley Bay, LawTags BC, Coastal First Nations, economy, Enbridge, First Nations, Joint Review, NEB, Northern Gateway, ocean, Pipelines
Phil Germuth, Enbridge's "What the…." moment and what it means for British Columbia
Councillor Phil Germuth questions Northern Gateway officials about their plans for leak detection, Feb. 17, 2014 (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)
Enbridge Northern Gateway officials are loath (to put it mildly) to speak to the media but sometimes they let things slip. Earlier this summer, at a social event, I heard an Enbridge official (probably inadvertently) reveal that when the company's engineers came before District of Kitimat Council earlier this year they were surprised and somewhat unprepared to fully answer the detailed technical questions from Councillor Phil Germuth on pipeline leak detection.
In January, 2015, Phil Germuth will take the centre chair as mayor at the Kitimat Council Chambers.
The results of the municipal election in Kitimat, and elsewhere across BC show one clear message; voters do want industrial development in their communities, but not at any price. Communities are no longer prepared to be drive by casualties for giant corporations on their road to shareholder value.
The federal Conservatives and the BC provincial Liberals have, up until now, successfully used the "all or nothing thinking" argument. That argument is: You either accept everything a project proponent wants, whether in the mining or energy sectors, or you are against all development. Psychologists will tell you that "all or nothing thinking" only leads to personal defeat and depression. In politics, especially in an age of attack ads and polarization, the all or nothing thinking strategy often works. Saturday's results, however, show that at least at the municipal level, the all or nothing argument is a political loser. Where "all politics is local" the majority of people are aware of the details of the issues and reject black and white thinking.
Northern Gateway's Ray Philpenko gives a presentation on pipeline leak detection to Kitimat Council, Feb. 17. 2014. (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)
The Enbridge official went on to say that for their company observers, Germuth's questions were a "what the….." moment. As in "what the ….." is this small town councillor doing challenging our expertise?
But then Enbridge (and the other pipeline companies) have always tended to under estimate the intelligence of people who live along the route of proposed projects whether in British Columbia or elsewhere in North America, preferring to either ignore or demonize opponents and to lump skeptics into the opponent camp. The Northern Gateway Joint Review Panel also lost credibility when it accepted most of Northern Gateway's arguments at face value while saying "what the ……" do these amateurs living along the pipeline route know?
Pro Development
"I am pro-development," Germuth proclaimed to reporters in Kitimat on Saturday night after his landslide victory in his campaign for mayor.
On the issue of leak detection, over a period of two years, Germuth did his homework, checked his facts and looked for the best technology on leak detection for pipelines. That's a crucial issue here where pipelines cross hundreds of kilometres of wilderness and there just aren't the people around to notice something is amiss (as the people of Marshall, Michigan wondered at the time of the Line 6B breach back in 2010). Enbridge should have been prepared; Germuth first raised public questions about leak detection at a public forum in August 2012. In February 2014, after another eighteen months of research, he was ready to cross-examine, as much as possible under council rules of procedure. Enbridge fumbled the answers.
So that's the kind of politician that will be mayor of Kitimat for the next four years, technically astute, pro-development but skeptical of corporate promises and determined to protect the environment.
Across the province, despite obstacles to opposition set up by the federal and provincial governments, proponents are now in for a tougher time (something that some companies will actually welcome since it raises the standards for development).
We see similar results in key votes in British Columbia. In Vancouver, Gregor Roberston, despite some problems with policies in some neighborhoods, won re-election on his green and anti-tankers platform. In Burnaby, Derek Corrigan handily won re-election and has already repeated his determination to stop the twinning of the Kinder Morgan pipeline through his town. In Prince Rupert, Lee Brain defeated incumbent Jack Musselman. Brain, who has on the ground experience working at an oil refinery in India, supports LNG development but has also been vocal in his opposition to Northern Gateway.
The new mayor in Terrace Carol Leclerc is an unknown factor, a former candidate for the BC Liberal party, who campaigned mainly on local issues. In the Terrace debate she refused to be pinned down on whether or not she supported Northern Gateway, saying, "Do I see Enbridge going ahead? Not a hope," but later adding, "I'd go with a pipeline before I'd go with a rail car."
Kitimat election signs. (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)
Plebiscite confirmed
Kitimat's mayor and council elections also confirm that Northern Gateway plebiscite vote last April. Kitimat wants industrial development but not at the price of the community and the environment. The unofficial pro-development slate lost. A last minute attempt to smear Germuth on social media was quickly shot down by people from all sides of the Kitimat debate. Smears don't usually work in small towns where everyone knows everyone.
Larry Walker, an environmentalist with a track record in municipal politics as an alderman in Spruce Grove, Alberta, won a seat. Together with Rob Goffinet and Germuth, that is three solid votes for the environment. The other new councillor is Claire Rattee who will be one to watch. Will the rookie be the swing vote as Corinne Scott was?
Mario Feldhoff who came to third to Goffinet in the overall vote (Edwin Empinado was second) is a solid councillor with a strong reputation for doing his homework and attention to detail and the unofficial leader of the side more inclined to support development. Feldhoff got votes from all sides in the community.
During the debates, Feldhoff repeated his position that he supports David Black's Kitimat Clean refinery. But as an accountant, Feldhoff will have to realize that Black's plan, which many commentators say was economically doubtful with oil at $110 a barrel, is impractical with oil at $78 a barrel for Brent Crude and expected to fall farther. Any idea of a refinery bringing jobs to Kitimat will have to be put on hold for now.
LNG projects are also dependent on the volatility and uncertainty in the marketplace. The companies involved keep postponing the all important Final Investment Decisions.
There are also Kitimat specific issues to deal with. What happens to the airshed, now and in the future? Access to the ocean remains a big issue. RTA's gift of land on Minette Bay is a step in the right direction, but while estuary land is great for camping, canoeing and nature lovers, it is not a beach. There is still the need for a well-managed marina and boat launch that will be open and available to everyone in the valley.
Germuth will have to unite a sometimes contentious council to ensure Kitimat's future prosperity without giving up the skepticism necessary when corporations sit on a table facing council on a Monday night, trying to sell their latest projects. That all means that Germuth has his job cut out for him over the next four years.
Author Robin RowlandPosted on November 17, 2014 November 18, 2014 Categories Business, Canada, Chevron, District of Kitimat, election, Enbridge, Joint Review Panel, Keystone XL, Kinder Morgan, Kitimat, KM LNG, LNG, LNG Canada, Northern Gateway Pipeline, Pipelines, Politics & Government, Prince Rupert, referendum, Rio Tinto, Rio Tinto Alcan, Shell, Terrace, TransCanada, TransMountain pipeline, Vancouver, voteTags Claire Rattee, Edwin Empinado, Enbridge, hearings, Joanne Monaghan, Joint Review, Kitimat, KM LNG, Mario Feldhoff, National Energy Board, NEB, Northern Gateway, ocean, Phil Germuth, Politics & Government, Prince Rupert, Rob Goffinet, Trish Parsons1 Comment on Phil Germuth, Enbridge's "What the…." moment and what it means for British Columbia
Controlling land and pipelines key to Haisla LNG future NEB filing says
The Haisla Nation's plan for entering the LNG business is based on the idea that "it is anticipated that the Haisla Projects will be developed using a business model based on controlling two components of the value chain: land and pipeline capacity" according to its application to the National Energy Board for a natural gas export licence.
Cedar LNG Development Ltd., owned by the Haisla Nation, filed three requests for export licences with the NEB on August 28, under the names Cedar 1 LNG, Cedar 2 LNG and Cedar 3 LNG. Another name used in the application is the "Haisla Projects."
The 25-year export licence request is standard in the LNG business; it allows export of natural gas in excess of projected North American requirements. Thus like the NEB hearings for the Kitimat LNG and LNG Canada projects it is not what is called a "facility" licence which is what Enbridge Northern Gateway requested.
The project anticipates six "jetties" that would load LNG into either barges or ships at three points along Douglas Channel, one where the present and financially troubled BC LNG/Douglas Channel Partners project would be.
A second would be beside the BC LNG project, which may refer to the Triton project proposed by Pacific Northern Gas parent company Altagas.
Both are on land now owned by the Haisla Nation in "fee simple" land ownership under Canadian law.
Map from the Haisla application to the NEB showing that the Haisla Projects Region will allow for a total of six LNG jetty sites. One of these, on DL99, is currently ear-marked to be used for a project involving a consortium (BCLNG) One will be situated on the DL309 Haisla fee simple land and the other four jetties are to be situated on the Haisla leased lands that surround the Chevron-led LNG development at Bish Cove. The map also shows that the Haisla own land at Minette Bay.
The other four would be on land surrounding the current Chevron-led Kitimat LNG project along Douglas Channel and in the mountains overlooking Bish Cove which the Haisla have leased.
Haisla Nation Chief Counsellor Ellis Ross at Bish Cove, June 19, 2013. (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)
The move last week and the revelation of the Haisla's plans for the land are a cumulation of Haisla Nation Chief Counsellor Ellis Ross's idea of restoring more of the First Nation's traditional territory by buying or leasing the land using standard Canadian land law and at the same time getting around some of the more restrictive provisions of the Indian Act that apply to reserve land.
Just how the Haisla will go into the pipeline business is not as clear as the First Nation's acquisition of the land. The application says:
The pipeline capacity required to transport sourced LNG to the Haisla Projects will include a mix of new and existing pipeline and infrastructure. The Haisla are in the advanced stages of negotiating and drafting definitive agreements with the major gas producers and pipeline transmission companies located in the vicinity with respect to securing pipeline capacity. It is expected that the Haisla Projects will rely on the Haisla's business partners or customers to source gas from their own reserves and the market.
With the Haisla basing their business strategy on land and pipelines, the First Nation's strategy is looking for flexibility in what is a volatile and uncertain market for LNG.
The application says the Haisla "are currently in advanced stage discussions and negotiations with a number of investors, gas producers, LNG purchasers, pipeline transmission companies, technology providers and shippers. As such, the particular business models have yet to be finalized. However, it is anticipated that between the various Haisla Projects, multiple export arrangements may be utilized."
As part of the idea of flexibility, the actual LNG infrastructure will be constructed and operated with potential partners. That is why there are three separate applications so that each "application will represent a separate project with independent commercial dealings with investors, gas producers, LNG purchasers, pipeline transmission companies, technology providers and shippers."
The Haisla say that they are "working with a number of entities to develop business structures and partnerships to provide transaction flexibility, adequate financing, modern technology, local knowledge, and marketing expertise specific to Asian targets. The separate projects will accommodate expected production and demand and will also allow for a number of midlevel organizations to be involved with the various projects as well as traditional major gas producers and LNG purchasers."
The Haisla are working with the Norwegian Golar LNG which had been involved in the stalled BC LNG project, using a Golar LNG's vessels and technology, using a new design that is now being built in Singapore by Keppel Shipyard.
Golar LNG uses PRICO LNG process technology developed by Black & Veatch, (Wikipedia entry) "which is reliable, flexible and offers simplified operation and reduced equipment count."
The filing says the project will "be developed using either barge-based or converted Moss-style FLNG vessels. The terminals will consist of vessel-based liquefaction and processing facilities, vessel-based storage tanks, and facilities to support ship berthing and cargo loading"
The jetties to be used for the Haisla Projects may be either individual FLNG vessels or "double stacked", meaning that the FLNG vessels are moored side-by-side at a single jetty. The Haisla have conducted various jetty design work and site /evaluation studies with Moffat and Nichol.
The Haisla Projects anticipate that the construction will be in 2017 to 2020, "subject to receiving all necessary permits and approvals" and is expected to continue for a term of up to twenty five years. There is one warning, "The timelines of the Haisla Projects will also depend on the contracts and relationships between the Applicant and its partners."
The filing goes on to say:
Haisla Nation Council and its Economic Development Committee are committed to furthering economic development for the Haisla. The Haisla's business philosophy is to advance commercially successful initiatives and to promote environmentally responsible and sustainable development, while minimizing impacts on land and water resources, partnering with First Nations and non-First Nations persons, working with joint venture business partners, and promoting and facilitating long-term development opportunities.
The Haisla Applications will allow the Haisla to be directly involved as participants in Canada's LNG industry, rather than having only royalty or indirect interests. The Kitimat LNG and LNG Canada projects, and the associated Pacific Trails Pipeline and Coastal Gas Link Pipeline, have increased economic opportunities in the region and the Haisla are very supportive of these projects locating within the traditional territory of the Haisla. The support of the Haisla for these two projects reflects a critical evolution of the Haisla's economic and social objectives.
You can see the filing on the NEB projects page at http://www.neb-one.gc.ca/clf-nsi/rthnb/pplctnsbfrthnb/lngxprtlcncpplctns/lngxprtlcncpplctns-eng.html
Map from the Haisla Nation application to the NEB showing the proposed LNG developments in relation to Douglas Channel.
Map from the Enbridge filing with the Joint Review Panel showing the same area with the proposed Northern Gateway bitumen terminal.
Author Robin RowlandPosted on September 3, 2014 September 3, 2014 Categories AltaGas, BC, BCLNG, Business, Canada, Chevron, Coastal GasLink, Douglas Channel, First Nations, Haisla, Kitimat, KM LNG, LNG, LNG Canada, natural gas, NEB, Pacific Northern Gas, Pacific Trail Pipeline, Pipelines, Politics & Government, tanker, TechnologyTags BC, Black & Veatch, Business, Douglas Channel, Ellis Ross, environment, First Nations, Golar, Haisla, Keppel Shipyard, Kitimat, KM LNG, Liquefied natural gas, Liquified Natural Gas, National Energy Board, natural gas, NEB, Pipelines, Prico LNG
Haisla Nation starting their own LNG export project: industry reports
The Haisla Nation have filed an application with the National Energy Board for their own liquified natural gas export project, according to industry newsletters.
There is nothing at this point in the public section of the NEB website, probably due to the holiday weekend. Northwest Coast Energy News is contacting Haisla leaders for confirmation.
According to both the Daily Oil Bulletin and Natural Gas Intelligence the Haisla have formed three companies, Cedar 1 LNG Export, Cedar 2 LNG Export and Cedar 3 LNG Export, and have applied to the NEB for three standard 25 year export licences.
According to Natural Gas Intelligence:
The filings with the National Energy Board (NEB) envision construction starting in 2017-2020 of a network of six jetties or docks jutting out from Haisla land on the shore of Douglas Channel for floating LNG vessels. Each requested export license would enable operations by two jetties.
The plan calls for a mini-armada of six mobile processing plants, with each one capable of converting up to 400 MMcf/d of gas into liquid cargo for overseas deliveries.
Work is under way with international tanker firm Golar LNG to commission construction of the vessels in Singapore at the Keppel Shipyard, according to the applications.
With the project still in planning stages, Cedar LNG did not disclose cost estimates. Names of prospective partners in the terminals; Asian customers, BC gas suppliers and pipeline service providers were also undisclosed. Discussions are under way on all fronts with an array of industry participants, Cedar told the NEB.
The Hasila are partners in the stalled BC LNG project that ran into trouble when the original Texas based investors got into financial difficulty. AltaGas, parent company of Pacific Northern Gas, is also involved in Triton, a floating LNG project that would be at an old log sort on Douglas Channel, the same site as the BC LNG project.
Map of current LNG and other projects in the Kitimat area from the BC airshed report. (Environment BC)
Author Robin RowlandPosted on August 29, 2014 August 29, 2014 Categories AltaGas, BCLNG, Business, First Nations, Haisla, LNGTags BC, Cedar LNG, Douglas Channel, Haisla, Liquefied natural gas, Liquified Natural Gas, LNG, National Energy Board, NEB
Enbridge Kalamazoo cleanup now set at $1.157 billion and growing
The cost of Enbridge's cleanup from the spill at Marshall, Michigan in 2010 is now $1.157 billion the company said Friday as it released its second quarter results. That is an increase of $35 million from the estimates Enbridge released at the end of 2013 and the first quarter of 2014.
As of June, 2014, Enbridge faces possibly $30 million in fines and penalties from the United States government.
In its quarterly report Enbridge said
EEP [Embridge Energy Partners] continues to perform necessary remediation, restoration and monitoring of the areas affected by the Line 6B crude oil release. All the initiatives EEP is undertaking in the monitoring and restoration phase are intended to restore the crude oil release area to the satisfaction of the appropriate regulatory authorities.
On March 14, 2013, as previously reported, the United States Environmental Protection Agency ordered in Enbridge to undertake "additional containment and active recovery of submerged oil relating to the Line 6B crude oil release."
Enbridge says it has "completed substantially all of the EPA order, "with the exception of required dredging in and around Morrow Lake and its delta."
"Approximately $30 million of the increase in the total cost estimate during the three months ended June 30, 2014 is primarily related to the finalization of the MDEQ approved Schedule of Work and other costs related to the on-going river restoration activities near Ceresco," Enbridge reported.
Enbridge also said it is working with the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality "to transition submerged oil reassessment, sheen management and sediment trap monitoring and maintenance activities from the EPA to the MDEQ, through a Kalamazoo River Residual Oil Monitoring and Maintenance Work Plan."
Enbridge also said that costs may still go up, saying there continues to be the potential for "additional costs in connection with this crude oil release due to variations in any or all of the cost categories, including modified or revised requirements from regulatory agencies, in addition to fines and penalties and expenditures associated with litigation and settlement of claims."
Enbridge said that "a majority of the costs incurred in connection with the crude oil release for Line 6B are covered by Enbridge's comprehensive insurance policy…. which had an aggregate limit of $650 million for pollution liability." So far, Enbridge has recovered $547 million of the $650 million from its insurers. Enbridge is suing its insurers to recover the rest of the money.
That means that "Enbridge and its affiliates have exceeded the limits of their coverage under this insurance policy. Additionally, fines and penalties would not be covered under the existing insurance policy," the company said.
Insurance renewed
Enbridge said it has "renewed its comprehensive property and liability insurance programs under which the Company is insured through April 30, 2015 with a liability aggregate limit of $700 million, including sudden and accidental pollution liability, with a deductible applicable to oil pollution events of $30 million per event, from the previous $10 million."
It adds:
In the unlikely event multiple insurable incidents occur which exceed coverage limits within the same insurance period, the total insurance coverage will be allocated among Enbridge entities on an equitable basis based on an insurance allocation agreement among Enbridge and its subsidiaries.
All Enbridge figures are in US dollars
The Northern Gateway Joint Review Panel required Enbridge that "its Northern Gateway's Financial Assurances Plan must provide a total coverage of $950 million for the costs of liabilities for, without limitation, cleanup, remediation, and other damages caused by the Project during the operations phase. The plan should include the following components and minimum coverage levels." (That figure in Canadian dollars)
Author Robin RowlandPosted on August 1, 2014 August 1, 2014 Categories clean up, Emergency response, Enbridge, Environment & Science, Joint Review Panel, Kalamazoo, Kitimat, Michigan, Northern Gateway Pipeline, oil spill, Pipelines, United StatesTags clean up, Enbridge, insurance, Joint Review, Kalamazoo, Kitimat, liability, Marshall, NEB, Northern Gateway, oil spill, Pipelines
The Supreme Court decision on Tsilhqot'in Rights and Title is a shot across the bow of the Alberta bound National Energy Board
The response to the Joint Review Panel decision on the Northern Gateway, beginning in December and continuing until this Canada Day, both in the public and in the media is sharply divided by the Rocky Mountains.
A lof of Albertans, most of the energy companies and many in the media, especially the Toronto-based business press, keep telling Canadians that the NEB is an independent, quasi-judicial body, that carefully weighs the scientific and other evidence before coming to a conclusion.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper stands up in Question Period and from his prepared script also claims the JRP and NEB are independent bodies.
Most of those writing about the attitude of the National Energy Board have never attended a single hearing, As for the Joint Review,. those from the major media who did attend were only there for the opening and closing sessions.
Members of the Northern Gateway Joint Review Panel, left to right, Kenneth Bateman, chair Sheila Leggett and Hans Matthews make notes at the June 25, 2012 hearings at the Haisla Recreation Centre, Kitamaat Village. A map of Douglas Channel can be seen behind the panel. (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)
In British Columbia, those attended the Northern Gateway Joint Review sessions saw a strange and arcane bureaucratic system with rules of evidence and procedure often tilted toward a proponent in the energy sector.
Those rules of evidence were created for the cosy club atmosphere of the NEB in Calgary where mostly there are friendly hearings attended only by the proponents and energy sector lawyers. Those same rules were infuriating to those in northwest British Columbia trying and failing to persuade the JRP to take seriously many of the concerns of the region. The rules of evidence and procedure were baffling to lawyers practicing in BC; even the highly experienced lawyers from the BC Department of Justice were chewed out by the JRP in Prince George for not following proper procedures.
Most egregious was the JRP's refusal to consider the late evidence on the growing number of humpback whales in Douglas Channel.
The tail fins of a humpback whale are seen in Douglas Channel near Bish Cove, as a fishing boat speeds toward Kitimat harbour in a rain storm on Aug. 21, 2013. (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)
The JRP seemed to believe that time stopped at the evidentiary deadline, and although it acknowledged that Northern Gateway was a 50 year project, the panel didn't need to know anything new.
A careful reading of the two volumes of the Joint Review Panel report and decision clearly shows that JRP finding was not, as one columnist called it, a triumph of science over emotion, but a proceeding that was biased from the outset to find in favour of Enbridge. It is clear that even though the Joint Review Panel did impose 209 conditions on Northern Gateway, reading those almost 500 pages one sees time and time again that Northern Gateway's evidence and assurances were accepted at face value, while the panel treated the evidence and testimony from opponents with a much higher level of skepticism.
One of my sources once told me that the "NEB is nothing more than an extension of the Petroleum Club." In the 1991 budget, then Prime Minister Brian Mulroney moved the NEB headquarters from Ottawa to Calgary as a political gift to Alberta.
At that time the move was also seen as practical, Alberta was still complaining no one in Ottawa was listening to it. So if the Conservative government moved the NEB to Calgary, it would be there listening to the oil patch. NEB offices were scattered across the country, consolidating them in Calgary seemed, at the time, to be a way of saving taxpayers' money and enhancing internal communications.
Seen now, about 25 years later, it's clear the NEB move from its Ottawa headquarters and regional offices to Calgary was a disaster waiting to happen. Over the past quarter century, despite its claims of independence, the NEB and its staff have become so embedded in the oil patch energy culture of Calgary that (probably subconsciously) the NEB has shown that it is largely incapable of really taking seriously the culture of British Columbia on issues such as the Northern Gateway and Kinder Morgan projects. The NEB Calgary culture is also colliding,with the concerns and culture of other parts of the country as diluted bitumen pipelines head eastward.
That embedding in Alberta isn't going to change. It might have been a good idea to move the NEB headquarters back to Ottawa but it's too late for that. The NEB this week is moving to new quarters in Calgary at a cost to taxpayers of a staggering $21 million.
The Conservative omnibus bills that gutted environmental protection and speed up the review process has made things much worse–at least until this week.
Now the Supreme Court has sent a shot across the bow of the full steam ahead National Energy Board, compelling the board to put much more weight on the concerns of First Nations.
The decision upholding the Tsilhqot'in claim to its traditional territory means the NEB and any future joint review panel (whether involving multiple federal agencies or federal agencies and a province) are going to have to take the concerns of First Nations and indeed all Canadians a lot more seriously—and the future of the planet as well, as described in the first part of this analysis. Chief Justice Beverly McLaughlin wrote that on First Nations` traditional territory:
that it is collective title held not only for the present generation but for all succeeding generations. This means it cannot be alienated except to the Crown or encumbered in ways that would prevent future generations of the group from using and enjoying it.
"Future generations" is the key phrase.
Future generations could undermine that whole world view of the Joint Review Panel, since the panel so casually dismissed the fears of a major disaster on the coast, saying it was "unlikely" and could be "mitigated."
The JRP basically had a so-what attitude to British Columbia, arguing that since parts of the British Columbia environment had already been degraded any future environmental problems would be minimal and could be "mitigated."
While in the introduction to its definition of the Public Interest, the JRP says
If approved and built, the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project could operate for 50 years or more. Sustainable development was an important factor in our environmental assessment and our consideration of the public interest. The project would have to meet today's needs without compromising the ability of future generations.
Sounds like that might match the Chief Justice. But, as the old saying goes, the devil is in the details. And just a few paragraphs later, the JRP says:
Our assessment of the project's effects on residents and communities Considering Northern Gateway's project design, its commitments, and our conditions, we concluded that the project's potential effects on people's land, water, and resource use could be mitigated. We were not persuaded that construction and routine operations of the project would have a negative effect on the social fabric of communities in the project area. We also were not persuaded that the project would adversely affect the health and well being of people and communities along the route or in coastal areas. We found that the net overall economic effects of the project would be positive and would provide potential benefits and opportunities to those individuals and businesses that choose to participate in the project.
"Trust Enbridge"
The JRP's attitude toward a major disaster was "trust Enbridge."
We found that some level of risk is inherent in the Enbridge Northern Gateway project, and that no party could guarantee that a large spill would not occur. We found that a large spill, due to a malfunction or accident, from the pipeline facilities, terminal, or tankers, is not likely.
We found that Northern Gateway has taken steps to minimize the likelihood of a large spill through its precautionary design approach and its commitments to use innovative and redundant safety systems, such as its commitments to address human error, equipment failures, and its corporate safety culture. These commitments and all others made by the company
Oh well, the ecosystem will recover eventually—a conclusion that could be reached only by ignoring the evidence from Prince William Sound, site of the Exxon Valdez spill.
We found that, in the unlikely event of a large oil spill, there will be significant adverse environmental effects, and that functioning ecosystems recover through mitigation and natural processes.
We found that a large oil spill would not cause permanent, widespread damage to the environment. The extent of the significant adverse effects would depend on the circumstances associated with the spill. Scientific research from past spill events indicates that the environment recovers to a state that supports functioning ecosystems similar to those existing before the spill. We found that, in the unlikely event of a large oil spill, there would be significant adverse effects on lands, waters, or resources used by residents, communities, and Aboriginal groups.
We found that, in rare circumstances, a localized population or species could potentially be permanently affected by an oil spill. Scientific research from a past spill event indicates that this will not impact the recovery of functioning ecosystems.
In other words, some communities, probably aboriginal communities, would have be sacrificed in the public interest and the economics of Alberta while the economy of that part of British Columbia would be destroyed.
Will the JRP have to start over?
The environmental law community and First Nations leaders are already taking a look at another paragraph in the Supreme Court judgement. Paragraph 92 in lawyer speak.
At the celebration of the Supreme Court decision, on June 26, Gerald Amos welcomed the suggestion from lawyers that the ruling could force a re-examination of Northern Gateway. (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)
One of the many reports comes from West Coast Environmental Law which noted in an e-mail
[T]he Tsilhqot'in decision, Canada's highest court brings home the implications of this for Enbridge and other project proponents:
Once title is established, it may be necessary for the Crown to reassess prior conduct in light of the new reality in order to faithfully discharge its fiduciary duty to the title-holding group going forward.
For example, if the Crown begins a project without consent prior to Aboriginal title being established, it may be required to cancel the project upon establishment of the title if continuation of the project would be unjustifiably infringing.
And what about the overhaul of environmental legislation in 2012 to smooth the way for pipeline and other industrial development?
The court notes: "Similarly, if legislation was validly enacted before title was established, such legislation may be rendered inapplicable going forward to the extent that it unjustifiably infringes Aboriginal title."
In other words, the Supreme Court decision resets everything.
It could nullify the recent decision by the Prime Minister to permit the Northern Gateway to go ahead. Or it could mean, especially given the number of court challenges just to the JRP, that, in light of the Tsilhqot'in decision the panel will be ordered by a court to go back to the drawing board and reconsider its findings.
Then there are the pending challenges to the Harper decision allowing the Northern Gateway to go ahead. Sources told Northwest Coast Energy News that the first of a number of court challenges were to be filed last week. It is likely that after the holiday weekend, lawyers will be rewriting their filings and their briefs in light of the Tsilhqot'in decision and presenting the Federal Court with those challenges some time in July.
The justices of the Supreme Court did allow a public interest exemption on the use of First Nations land for a larger purpose, but there must now be genuine consultation and the public interest will likely have be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, it can't just be the whim of a prime minister with a tame, unquestioning caucus who decides what is in the public interest.
Who consults whom?
In the decision, Chief Justice McLaughlin wrote:
Governments and individuals proposing to use or exploit land, whether before or after a declaration of Aboriginal title, can avoid a charge of infringement or failure to adequately consult by obtaining the consent of the interested Aboriginal group
The right to control the land conferred by Aboriginal title means that governments and others seeking to use the land must obtain the consent of the Aboriginal title holders. If the Aboriginal group does not consent to the use, the government's only recourse is to establish that the proposed incursion on the land is justified under s. 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.
Compare that again with what the JRP said. As with the environmental impact it begins by saying:
The Panel finds that the magnitude, extent, and potential impacts of this project required an extensive program of public consultation. The Panel considers thorough and effective consultation to be a process that is inclusive of, and responsive to, all potentially-affected groups and individuals.
Then the JRP says:
The Panel notes that, among potentially-affected parties, there were differing perspectives on what constitutes a thorough and effective process of consultation. There were also different views among some parties about how consultation should occur, and their roles and responsibilities during consultation.
And then:
The Panel believes that it is critical for all parties to recognize and understand their respective roles and responsibilities for achieving effective dialogue during consultation. The Panel noted the principles of thorough and effective consultation at the beginning of this chapter. The Panel finds that these principles require that a process must provide timely, appropriate, and effective opportunities for all potentially-affected parties to learn about a project, provide their comments and concerns, and to discuss how these can be addressed by the applicant.
So what does it mean?
The JRP starts off by giving Northern Gateway a slap on the wrist:
The applicant [Enbridge] must be genuinely responsive. Affected parties have an ongoing and mutual responsibility to respond to opportunities for consultation, to communicate concerns they may have, and to discuss how these can be addressed.
But then it goes on in the same paragraph:
Consultation requires trust, mutual respect, and relationship-building. All parties have an obligation to seek a level of cultural fluency, in order to better understand the values, customs, needs, and preferences of the other parties involved in the consultation process. All parties may be required to adjust their expectations in response to the information, concerns, and interests raised and considered through the process. The Panel observed that this approach did not always occur in this proceeding.
Get the phrase "all parties." It is clear here that the JRP is taking on the First Nations and other opponents for not seeing Northern Gateway's point of view, since it accepts, as seen below, Northern Gateway's contention that it is doing a good job with consultation,
And the word "trust." Again the Alberta-bound JRP (the panel had no members from British Columbia, two from Alberta, one from Ontario) are saying "trust Enbridge."
Unfortunately after a decade of operating in the northwest, and despite its spin, Enbridge has failed time and time again to establish trust with First Nations and it has equally failed to establish trust with a significant number non-aboriginal residents of the northwest.
The companies developing LNG projects have, for the most part, established a level of trust.
The joke up here is now so old it's a cliche (but still unknown to the eastern media) where an LNG executive says, "We look at what Enbridge did and do the exact opposite."
The Panel accepts Northern Gateway's view that consultation is a process which should ensure that all parties are better informed through consultation, and that it involves being prepared to amend proposals in light of information received. In this regard, the Panel notes that Northern Gateway made numerous changes to the design and operation of the project in response to input provided by the public, landowners, governments, and stakeholders
In fact, Northern Gateway is still fumbling the ball.
It is true that Northern Gateway did change its plans and put another $500 million into the plans for the project–after a lot of public pressure and growing controversy during the JRP hearings over its plans.
JRP Chair Sheila Legget during the final arguments in Terrace, June 17, 2013. (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)
Equally telling was Northern Gateway's dismissal in its final arguments (arguments accepted by the JRP) that there was no earthquake hazard in the region, despite two major earthquakes at Haida Gwaii and southern Alaska just months earlier, both of which shook Kitimat.
In the final oral arguments, Northern Gateway's lawyer Richard Neufeld summarily dismissed the fears of the Haida and Heiltskuk First Nations about destruction of the herring spawning beds because, he said, first, the chances of a tanker disaster were unlikely and second, even if there was a tanker disaster it was even more unlikely that it would occur during the spawning season. (Not that the spawning season matters, herring beds in San Francisco Bay are still damaged years after a spill there).
Now with the Tsilhqot'in decision, Enbridge can no longer summarily dismiss those fears. The companies who have proposed liquefied natural gas projects are meeting with anyone, including avowed opponents, and opening dialogues, even if both sides continue to disagree. Despite its spin, accepted by the political pundits and eastern business media, those who live in the northwest know Northern Gateway's consultations and engagement, so far, have mostly been with friendly groups and friendly audiences.
The Supreme Court decision is going to change that attitude in the coming weeks. If Enbridge wants Northern Gateway to go ahead, the company is going to have to genuinely engage with First Nations. Given all the damage created by Enbridge over the past decade, that engagement is unlikely to change anything.
The Supreme Court decision is going to have one more consequence.
Eventually, in a few years, the decision will negate that stupid attitude from the conservative media and some in the business community that the people of northwestern British Columbia are against all development. That was never true but it's a convenient excuse for those columnists and conservatives not to question their own assumptions.
If the reporters and columnists had bothered to come up here, if the press-release dispatching business leaders had bothered to leave their executive suites, they'd know what northwestern BC wants is responsible and sustainable development, not quick in and out profits.
The Supreme Court decision means that any future industrial development in the northwest will be much different from anything seen in the past because First Nations must be involved from the beginning.
Given its sorry track record, it is unlikely that Enbridge will be part of that development. but others will profit, yes profit, from that failure.
In the coming years it is also likely that there will be a new approach to development from the National Energy Board after they begin to see their narrow oil-patch friendly approach and rulings struck down by the courts quoting the Tsilhqot'in decision.
Author Robin RowlandPosted on June 30, 2014 June 30, 2014 Categories Alberta, BC, BC government, Business, Canada, Enbridge, First Nations, Haida, Haisla, Harper, Heiltksuk, Joint Review Panel, Kinder Morgan, Kitimat, LNG, NEB, Northern Gateway Pipeline, Pipelines, Politics & Government, Supreme Court of Canada, TransMountain pipeline, whaleTags Alberta, BC, Business, economy, Enbridge, energy, environment, First Nations, Haisla, hearings, herring, Joint Review, Kitimat, KM LNG, Liquefied natural gas, Liquified Natural Gas, National Energy Board, NEB, Northern Gateway, ocean, oil spill, Stephen Harper, Supreme Court of Canada, tanker
Harper assistant, Moore brush off Kitimat Northern Gateway plebiscite results
Both Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservative political minister for British Columbia, James Moore, have brushed off Kitimat's concerns about the Northern Gateway Pipeline after a majority of residents voted to oppose the project.
After Kitimat residents voted on April 12, 1793 No or 58.42 per cent and 1278 Yes or 41.6 per cent against Northern Gateway, District Council voted on April 21 to oppose the project . Council also voted to send a letter to the Prime Minister informing him of the plebiscite results.
On June 13, the Prime Minister's Office responded to Kitimat with what was essentially a form letter brushing off the district's concerns and the plebiscite vote. That was four days before the government officially approved Northern Gateway along with the 209 conditions set by the Joint Review Panel. At the time, the government issued a news release about the approval, but no cabinet ministers or Conservative Members of Parliament commented on the decision for the media.
Even though Northern Gateway is a high priority for the Harper government, the Prime Minister did not bother to sign the letter himself. Instead it was Salpie Stepanian , an assistant to the prime minister who responded to the District for "taking the time to write."
June 13 letter from Harper assistant Salpie Stepanian to the District of Kitimat
James Moore responded with a much shorter letter but apparently did sign the letter himself (if it wasn't a sign-o-robot). He too thanked the District for writing and asked to be kept informed. Both letters were released at Monday's District of Kitimat Council meeting.
James Moore's letter to the District of Kitimat
Notes: On Monday District of Kitimat Council approved a $2500 support grant to the Kitimat EconomicDevelopment Association that says it is "active in pursuing development that will return Kitimat to a robust, self-sufficient community." The grant was conditional in that it cannot be used for "initiatives Council does not support"–in other words Enbridge.
Related: Harper government to District of Kitimat Drop Dead
Author Robin RowlandPosted on June 23, 2014 June 24, 2014 Categories Canada, District of Kitimat, Enbridge, Harper, Joint Review Panel, Kitimat, Northern Gateway Pipeline, Pipelines, Politics & GovernmentTags Enbridge, Greg Rickford, hearings, Joanne Monaghan, Joint Review, Kitimat, National Energy Board, NEB, Northern Gateway, Politics & Government, Salpie Stepanian, Stephen Harper
Conservative government approves Northern Gateway project
As expected, the federal government has approved the Northern Gateway project. In a news release this afternoon, Natural Resources Canada said that the "Government of Canada" had accepted the 209 conditions set by the Joint Review Panel for the Northern Gateway.
In recent years, Stephen Harper's government has usually issued news releases headlined "the Harper government." The headline on the NRC website also emphasizes the 209 JRP conditions and not the approval of the overall project, which is mentioned formally in the last line instructing the National Energy Board to issue the " Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity."
Government of Canada Accepts Recommendation to Impose 209 Conditions on Northern Gateway Proposal
Proponent must demonstrate how conditions will be met, undertake further consultations with Aboriginal communities as part of next steps in regulatory process
The Honourable Greg Rickford, Canada's Minister of Natural Resources, today issued the following statement outlining the Government of Canada's decision after the Joint Review Panel's independent review of the Northern Gateway Pipelines proposal to construct and operate two parallel pipelines to transport crude oil between Bruderheim, Alberta and Kitimat, British Columbia, and a marine terminal at the port of Kitimat. The proposal was submitted by Northern Gateway Pipelines Limited Partnership to the National Energy Board (NEB) for an environmental assessment and regulatory examination in 2010. This constituted the beginning of the regulatory process.
The Joint Review Panel for the Northern Gateway Project was an independent body established by the Minister of the Environment and the National Energy Board to review the project. The Panel's rigorous science-based review included feedback from over 1,450 participants in 21 different communities, reviewing over 175,000 pages of evidence and receiving 9,000 letters of comment. The NEB is responsible for regulating some 73,000 kilometres of pipelines transporting crude oil, natural gas and petroleum products across Canada.
"In December 2013, the Joint Review Panel found that construction and operation of the Northern Gateway Pipelines project is in the public interest, subject to 209 conditions being met by the proponent. After carefully reviewing the report, the Government accepts the independent Panel's recommendation to impose 209 conditions on Northern Gateway Pipelines' proposal.
"Today constitutes another step in the process. Moving forward, the proponent must demonstrate to the independent regulator, the NEB, how it will meet the 209 conditions. It will also have to apply for regulatory permits and authorizations from federal and provincial governments. In addition, consultations with Aboriginal communities are required under many of the 209 conditions that have been established and as part of the process for regulatory authorizations and permits. The proponent clearly has more work to do in order to fulfill the public commitment it has made to engage with Aboriginal groups and local communities along the route."
The National Energy Board will now issue Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity.
Author Robin RowlandPosted on June 17, 2014 June 23, 2014 Categories Alberta, BC, Business, Canada, District of Kitimat, Enbridge, Harper, Joint Review Panel, Kitimat, Northern Gateway Pipeline, Pipelines, Politics & GovernmentTags Alberta, BC, economy, Enbridge, hearings, Joint Review, Kitimat, National Energy Board, NEB, Northern Gateway, Pipelines, Politics & Government, Stephen Harper1 Comment on Conservative government approves Northern Gateway project
Harper's Northern Gateway strategy and why it will end up in a muddy mess
It appears that the Stephen Harper's strategy for approving Northern Gateway has been revealed on background to The Globe and Mail's Gary Mason. (Either it's a revelation or a trial balloon).
It comes down to the idea that Harper will approve Gateway "in the national interest," count on a vote split between the NDP and Liberals in British Columbia to avoid any consequences to the Conservative majority and then leave it up to Enbridge to actually get the job of building the pipeline and terminal project done.
Mason quotes " a senior member of Mr. Harper's government," and while Mason doesn't say what part of Canada the source is from, (unlikely in my view the source is from BC) what the member told Mason reveals that the Harper government is still mired in it the Matrix-world that has always governed its policy on Northern Gateway.
The first step, apparently coming in the next few days, is that the Harper government "rigorous" new tanker protocols for traffic along the west coast.
Tanker protocols
So the obvious question is, will these protocols be new or will the government simply be reannoucing paper policies that they did in the March 2013? How many of the recommendations of the tanker task force is the government actually going to accept?
Even if the protocols are new, just who is going to enforce those policies?
Even if Gateway and the Kinder Morgan expansion went ahead, he argued, B.C. would still only see about 60 per cent of the annual oil tanker traffic the neighbouring state of Washington deals with. And yet Washington has an exceptionally clean record when it comes to the safe transport of oil in and out of its harbours – this, he noted, while operating under marine safety regulations that are not as rigorous as the ones Ottawa intends to put in place for the shipment of oil along the West Coast.
There are a lot big problems with that statement.
First, there's an organization that the Mason's source may have heard of known as the United States Coast Guard. The United States rigorously enforces its "weak" regulations, while Canada's Coast Guard is plagued by staff shortages and budget cuts.
Second, the State of Washington also rigorously enforces its environmental regulations, not only on the coast but across the state. I have been told by retired British Columbia forestry and environmental officials (not to mention Fisheries and Oceans) that there are often more state environmental watch dogs in most Washington State counties than in all of northern British Columbia where the Northern Gateway is supposed to be going.
The September 2013, report by the US National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration on the export of Canadian bitumen sands through the US shows that the Washington Department of Ecology is working on strengthening regulations for both pipelines and (where it's in state jurisdiction) tanker traffic. The same report says the state of Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation is updating its plans and possible regulations in anticipation that bitumen filled tanker traffic from Kitimat would come close to the coast en route to Asia.
Third, the coast of northern British Columbia is more rugged and stormy than the waters off Washington.
The one factor that the urban media seems to ignore, is the big question.
Who pays to enforce the 209 conditions that the Joint Review Panel imposed on the Northern Gateway project?
If the Harper government announces new tanker regulations in the coming days, who pays to enforce those regulations?
There were no provisions in the February budget for enforcing the 209 conditions. Rather there were continuing budget cuts to the very departments that the JRP ruled must be involved in the studying, planning, implementation and enforcement of the 209 conditions, Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans and Transport Canada.
So while Mason says "The federal government will play its part in meeting the five conditions laid out by the B.C. government for support of the project," the response must be "Show me the money!"
During the recent plebiscite campaign, Northern Gateway finally revealed its plans for the "super tugs" that will escort tankers along the coast and up Douglas Channel. Owen McHugh, a Northern Gateway emergency manager said, "Adding these four or five tugs to the north coast provides a rescue capability that doesn't exist in this format. So for any large commercial vessel that is traveling on our coast, this capacity to protect the waters of the north coast." Those tugs and Northern Gateway's plans to station teams at small bases along the coast means that the company is, in effect, creating a parallel, private, coast guard on the BC Coast.
What about the Coast Guard itself? The Harper government has been gutting Coast Guard resources along the coast even before it had its majority. It closed and dismantled the Kitsilano Coast Guard station in Vancouver. There is more dependence on the Royal Canadian Marine Search and Rescue volunteers, who have to raise money locally for modern rescue boats which cost up to $750,000. The money that government was "generously" giving to RCMSAR had to be split up to 70 stations in 42 communities along the coast as well as its administrative and training staff.
And speaking of boats, what about Coast Guard vessels on the coast? As the Globe and Mail has reported, the government's shipbuilding program is already over budget and behind schedule. The aim is Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ships and new destroyers. With the crippling of HMCS Protecteur that has raised the concerns about the already troubled supply ship program.
Does anyone notice what is missing from that list? What's missing are better Coast Guard vessels just to police all the expected tanker traffic on the west coast (whether LNG or bitumen) and no mention of dedicated spill response vessels, which under the "polluter pay" policy will likely be left to private contractors (and hope that the ships are available at the time of a spill)
How will we know?
Then there is the question of how will people even know if the 209 conditions are being enforced; whether or not the reports demanded by the Joint Review Panel are going be sitting on the National Energy Board server and ignored.
There is every indication, given the government's obsession with secrecy that until there is a disaster the Canadian public will never know what's going on. Harper's muzzling doesn't just cover government scientists, it covers the lowest level of bureaucrats, as District of Kitimat Council found out when low level DFO bureaucrats refused to appear publicly before council to discuss the risk to the Kitimat River.
So the scenario is, according to Mason's source
"I think once this decision is made, Enbridge could have shovels in the ground the next day," the member said. "They are ready to go. This means the First Nations could start realizing profits from this right away, as opposed to the promised profits from LNG, which may never materialize. I think they need to think about that."
First, as part of the blunders is that the Conservatives have always made is the assumption that eventually the First Nations of British Columbia can be paid off, ignoring the commitment of the First Nations, especially on the coast, to protect the environment that sustained them for thousands of years.
While the LNG market is volatile, the "member" forgets that most of the First Nations of British Columbia have opposed the Northern Gateway since Enbridge first floated the idea in 2001. The current LNG rush didn't start until after Japan shut down its nuclear power plants after the March 2011 earthquake, The first major anti-Enbridge rally, "The Solidarity Gathering of Nations" was held at Kitamaat Village in May 2010.
Writing off BC
It appears that Conservatives, in their election strategy have already written off Gateway opponents:
Still, there is a raw political calculus that needs to be taken into account. Polls measuring support for the pr.oject in B.C. vary, but generally have shown that anywhere from 55 to 60 per cent of the province opposes Gateway and 40 to 45 per cent support it. Isn't that enough to scare off a government that needs critical votes in B.C. to win another majority?
"Let's say 60 per cent are against it," he said. "And that vote splits between the Liberals and the NDP come the next election. Who are the 40 per cent going to vote for?"
As for the cabinet, it has consistently shown its contempt for northwestern British Columbia and that is unlikely to change.
Mason also speculates that Harper will approve Gateway to stick it to Barack Obama and the delays on Keystone XL. As he points out that's a political, not an economic decision.
There are civil disobedience classes being held across northwestern BC this month. Access to Information requests by the Vancouver Observer revealed increased RCMP surveillance of the anti-Gateway movement. There has always been talk of a "war in the woods" if the pipeline project is forced on an unwilling population.
So it comes down to a question that Mason and the Conservatives are avoiding. Mason's source says Northern Gateway is crucial to the national interest:
"At the end of the day, you have to do what's right, not what's politically expedient," he said. "You have to ask: What's in the best interests of all Canadians?"
So given all that will the Harper government leave Enbridge to tough it out on its own?
Highly unlikely.
But will the Harper government, with its bean counting obsession on balancing the budget be willing to pay for all that is needed?
Highly likely.
There's lots of marine clay along the pipeline route, laid down by ancient oceans. That brings to mind just one word. Quagmire, not just the wet, sticky BC mud but a political quagmire.
Author Robin RowlandPosted on May 2, 2014 May 2, 2014 Categories Alaska, BC, Canada, Coast Guard, condensate, DFO, dilbit, District of Kitimat, Douglas Channel, Emergency response, Enbridge, Environment & Science, Environment Canada, First Nations, Fisheries, Harper, hearing, Joint Review Panel, Keystone XL, Kinder Morgan, Kitimat, LNG, NEB, NOAA, Northern Gateway Pipeline, oil spill, Oliver, Pipelines, Politics & Government, protest, RCMP, referendum, safety, Ship sinking, Study, Technology, Transport Canada, United States, vote, WashingtonTags Alberta, BC, bitumen, Douglas Channel, economy, Enbridge, environment, First Nations, Joint Review, Kitimat, LNG, National Energy Board, NEB, Northern Gateway, oil spill, Pipelines, Politics & Government, Stephen Harper, tanker
Support Northwest Coast Energy News and our unique coverage from the northern BC perspective. You can donate via Paypal
Sign up for Northwest Coast Energy News Alerts on the Contact page.
Can Kitimat's historic CN railway station be saved from demolition?
Northwest Coast Energy News is only semi-retired
LNG Canada donates safety school bus for Kitimat high school sports teams
Kitimat welcomes new BC NDP government LNG policy
LNG Canada announces short list firms for procurement and construction contractors
EXCLUSIVE: Kitimat can regulate access to river camping, province indicates
Second mate of tug Nathan E. Stewart asleep on watch when it grounded off Bella Bella: NTSB
Analysis: New scientific findings likely confirm Haisla story of first arrival in the valley
The end of the Ice Age in coastal British Columbia may indicate what will happen to shrinking ice sheets in Greenland, study indicates
West Coast "kelp highway" was the earliest route for First Peoples' settlement of the Americas is the new scientific consensus
Archives Select Month March 2019 January 2019 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 December 2017 November 2017 September 2017 July 2017 March 2017 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 January 2016 December 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011
Northwest Coast Energy News Proudly powered by WordPress


text:
Los Angeles Curbed Comparisons
For Rent in Los Angeles
Options include a cozy West Hollywood unit and a two-bedroom with a pool in the Valley
By Elijah Chiland Mar 5, 2020, 12:00pm PST
Welcome to Curbed Comparisons, where we explore what you can rent or buy for a certain dollar amount in various LA 'hoods. We've found five rentals within $150 of today's price, $1,900. Vote for your favorite below!
Via Lindsay Bartlette Allen/The Rental Girl
This cozy one-bedroom unit is part of a smaller apartment building directly across the street from Plummer Park. Inside are wood floors, wide windows, and a bathroom equipped with some classic aquamarine tile. The apartment has 750 square feet of floor space and it's asking $1,995.
Via David N. Schultz, Inc.
Just up the block from Caltech, this 700-square-foot unit is part of a courtyard complex that encloses a central swimming pool and a barbecue area. The apartment has one bedroom and one bathroom, with plenty of closet space and newer laminate floors. It's asking $1,825.
Via 042 - 5225 De Longpre
Part of a lovely courtyard complex that encloses gardens and a fountain, this apartment has one bedroom and one bathroom. Interior details include wood floors and arched entryways, as well as a galley kitchen and built-in storage space in the hallway. Pets are allowed, but parking is on-street only. It's listed for $1,975.
This South Bay apartment complex near the Torrance Civic Center has plenty of amenities, including a pool and spa, a barbecue area, and a billiards room. The 700-square-foot unit has one bedroom and one bathroom. No pets here. It's listed for $1,875.
This two-bedroom unit in the Valley has 800 square feet of living space, with wood floors, large windows, and a private balcony. It also comes with access to a pool and a pair of outdoor parking spaces. Listing price is $1,885.
Which apartment would you choose?
1009 votes total Vote Now
Next Up In For Rent in Los Angeles
Mint-condition midcentury modern renting for $7K in Eagle Rock
41 Photos Inside Andy Samberg and Joanna Newsom's Mindblowing Moorcrest Estate
11 Los Angeles renters' rights everyone should know Expert advice on how to deal with slow repairs and weird move-out notices.
Mapped: The future sites of LA's 2028 Olympic games Ten years from now, the Olympics will return to Los Angeles for the first time since 1984.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Salesmanship
Thinking in Real Estate
Oraganizations
wish-condos
AVENUE & PARK CONDOS
Avenue and Park Condos By Stafford Homes In North York Toronto
Avenue and Park Condos is a new per-construction Condo project located at 1580 Avenue Road In Toronto.The Major Intersection are Lawrence Avenue West and Avenue Rd. Avenue and Park Condos is a 7 storey residential building with at grade retail. Beer store would remain on site as tenant. Access to below grade parking and loading from Avenue Road. Residential lobby entrance from Bedford Park.
Joy Condos is a New Condo by Gemterra Developments Corporation located at Kennedy Rd & Sheppard Ave E, Toronto.
Gemterra, the developer that brought us Love Condos now delivers with Joy Condos. A brand new development in Scarborough that promises big beautiful suites. These 302 residences will be located within close proximity to the 401 and other area amenities
Cove at waterways Selling NOW
Cove at Waterways is a New Condo by The Conservatory Group located at Lake Shore Blvd & Park Lawn Rd, Toronto.
Right on the water, the Conservatory group brings you Cove at Waterways, a beautiful project situated on the shores of Toronto.
Endless amenities designed to keep you active, this condo project Cove at Waterways has 17 stores and will make any condo buyer happy. The amenities are spectacular, the condo is perfect for just about anyone.
Selene: Final Phase at Tridel's Metrogate Community
With five towers built and a sixth being prepared for construction, Tridel's Metrogate community near Kennedy Road and Highway 401 is set to grow one more time. New details are emerging about the seventh and final residential tower coming to the master-planned community, soon to hit the market with the moniker 'Selene'.
Luxury Home at Kleinburg Vaughan
European Castle on 1.28 Acres in Vaughan ( Toront, Canada )
Price: $10,500,000 ( Canadian Dollar )
5+1 BED | 10 BATH | 10,000+ SQ. FT.
22 Ft High Ceilings, 5 Car Garage, Passenger Elevator, Wine Tasting Room, Entertaining and Party Room with Full Catering Kitchen.
Property Address: Kleinburg, Vaughan, Ontario Canada
Top Tourist Attractions in Toronto
Toronto, the capital of Ontario and the country's largest city, is home to a dynamic mix of tourist attractions, from museums and galleries to the world famous CN Tower and, just off shore, Toronto Islands. The city also offers a vibrant Entertainment District, featuring the latest musicals and other performing arts, and the historic Distillery District. The city center is still relatively easy to navigate, with many of the top attractions within walking distance of each other and a subway system to cover longer distances.
1.CN Tower
Toronto's famous landmark, the 553-meter CN Tower, is one of the city's must see attractions and also the most impossible to miss. Towering above the downtown, the structure can be seen from almost everywhere in the city. Visitors have the option of simply appreciating the building from the ground, or taking a trip up to one of the observation areas or restaurants for fabulous views of the city and Lake Ontario. The CN Tower, built between 1972 and 1976, was once the tallest freestanding structure in the world, but has long since been surpassed.
central park - The town with a park at its heart
Central Park is a Master Planned community carefully designed so that every home will be within walking distance of natural greenspace with a sprawling park at its heart and the Eramosa Karst next door. Inspired by New York's renowned Central Park, many of the features and street furniture will have Victorian charm and character, from a classic gazebo to a dramatic bridge and a brick and stone tunnel.
Family is at the centre of it all.
It's a perfect neighbourhood for a child to grow up! A place where Nature is right around the corner and at the end of your street is the biggest park a kid could dream of including a playground. Losani has designed Central Park to be a welcoming, warm neighbourhood where kids are safe to play outdoors, and every home is a hop, skip and a jump away from adventure. It's a place where memories will be made; where families - and a true sense of community - will grow stronger every year.
Valleymede Towers - Condos by Times Group
JUST NORTH OF IMPRESSIVE.
NOT TO IMPRESS YOU, BUT RATHER TO IMPRESS UPON YOU - DEVELOPMENTS LIKE VALLEYMEDE TOWERS, WITH ITS URBAN CHIC HOTEL FEEL, COME ABOUT BUT ONCE IN A LIFETIME, THE VERY EPITOME OF LOCATION,IN THE HIGHLY SOUGHT AFTER HWY7 AREA IN RICHMOND HILL, IT'S AT THE CENTRE OF IT ALL. ONE OF CANADA'S FASTEST GROWING COMMUNITIES. KNOWN FOR HAVING THE LOWEST CONDO FEE IN THE GTA, TIMES GROUP WILL COMPLETELY TRANSFORM ONE OF THE FEW PARCELS OF LAND AVAILABLE IN THE ENTIRE AREA.
LUXE TOWNS - by TIMES GROUP
LUXURY MEANS DIFFERENT THINGS TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE. BUT THEY ALL COME TOGETHER BEAUTIFULLY IN LUXE. THERE IS THE LUXURY OF CHOICE, WITH A SPECTACULAR SELECTION OF LAVISHLY APPOINTED TOWNHOME DESIGNS. THERE IS THE LUXURY OF LOCATION, IN THE HIGHWAY 7 AREA OF RICHMOND HILL, ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING URBAN CENTRES IN CANADA. AND THERE IS THE LUXURY AND PEACE OF MIND THAT COMES WITH DEALING WITH TIMES GROUP WHO HAVE BEEN THE GUIDING FORCE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS COVETED AREA IN WHICH TO LIVE, WORK AND PLAY.
Aquabella Luxury Condos at Bayside
AQUABELLA, a 15-storey luxury condominium along Queens Quay East.
It's a rare opportunity to own a piece of the downtown Toronto waterfront. Envisioned by renowned Danish architecture firm 3xn, the building will feature a stepped, L-shape design that provides unparalleled views and ample natural light. The height of the structure peaks at the northwest corner, and extends down to the 7th floor amenity space. The large, garden terraces are AQUABELLA's most distinguishing features, with plenty of space for outdoor entertaining and relaxing.
Project Specification:
Price From : $400,000 to $6,500,000
Completion: Fall 2020
No. of units: 173
Unit size: 551 ft² to 4,326 ft²
Parking spots: 186
Ceiling height: 9.0 ft to 10.0 ft
Developer: TRIDEL & HINES
Address: 295 Queens Quay East, Toronto, ON M5A 1B9
Pebble Creek in Vaughan
BELLE VIE - Luxury Homes ( only 8 )
Belle Vie = Discerning in Style + Definitive in Location
Belle Vie is an intimate community of 8 Luxurious Costume Built homes featuring impeccably designed residences with the finest finishes that include open concept layouts. Over sized kitchens that offer a Michelin level of culinary experience, grand family rooms, exquisite trim details, brilliantly designed bedrooms, and master retreats with spa-inspired en suites
Mackenzie Creek - Freehold Townhouse
Location: Major Mackenzie and Markham Road
Deposit Structure: 5% with offer, 5% in 60 Days, 5% in 180 Days = Total 15%
Balance On title closing
Tax: Purchase Price is inclusive of HST for principle residence.
Closing Date : 2018
Maintenance Fee: $ 95/ Monthly
Prices: Strat from $900,000 and Subject To Change Without Notice
Only Very Limited Homes Are Still Available Now.
Download High Resolution Floorplan & Siteplan
159 S W + TOR
159 SW+ TOR from Bo Xu on Vimeo.
Defining The District
What does it take to define a district. to give meaning to a community, to reveal extraordinary facets of a seemingly ordinary world? 159SW is shining a light on a magnificent area that was there all along, and shining even brighter to make it truly incomparable.
A district adorned with bike paths deserves a condominium with bicycle storage and on-site bicycle repair area. A district with all the contemporary urban attractions is suited for modern building that pushes the art of architecture further. This is a district defined by 159SW+.
Halo Residences & Condos On Yonge Street
Halo Residences Condos on Yonge Street from Bo Xu on Vimeo.
Developer: Cresford Developments
Address: 484 Yonge St. Toronto, ON M4Y 1X5
Exchange Condo For SALE
Building: EXCHANGE (Bathurst/Front)
Floors: 7 levels
Units: 12 units per level
Parking: available for sale for any unit
Size: Starting around $600 per sq ft
The Alumni Collection For SALE
The Alumni Collection, located within the podium of Lighthouse East Tower at Daniels Waterfront – City of the Arts
PRICED INCREDIBLY FROM THE MID $200s, THE ALUMNI COLLECTION GETS AN A+ FOR LOCATION, DESIGN, AND SMART INVESTMENT, OFFERING:
Bo Xu
ebx7@outlook.com
www.reboxu.com
GoldenWay Realty Inc.
"Real estate is at the core of almost every business, and it's certainly at the core of most people's wealth. In order to build your wealth and improve your business smarts, you need to know about real estate."
-- Donald Trump
"In the real estate business you learn more about people, and you learn more about community issues, you learn more about life, you learn more about the impact of government, probably than any other profession that I know of."
--Johnny Isakson


Cayenne is a constipation home remedy that is effective in producing peristalsis in your colon and aids digestion. It can be used regularly at every meal and when needed for constipation. Cayenne pepper is known to help thin the blood. Learn more about this powerful herb and how it can help your heart.
Cayenne has the ability to block the ulcer producing effect of NSAIDS. It also has shown to increase the body's absorption of Thermopylae, a drug used to treat asthma.
In soups or salads break open a cayenne capsule and mix it in. You can add 1 or 2 capsules, but first start with 1/4 or 1/2 capsule so you can get use to the hot taste.


text:
Nail Care Tips
Are the chemicals used at nail salons bad for you?
by Emilie Sennebogen
How safe is your nail salon?
Valueline/Thinkstock
Hitting the nail salon for a mani-pedi is one of life's simple pleasures. But when you consider the chemicals that go into making your nails look their best, you may start to think twice. In 2011, researchers at the Cancer Prevention Institute of California concluded that nail salon workers were exposed to unsafe levels of toluene, a solvent found in nail polish and fingernail glue. Prolonged exposure to toluene can lead to reproductive and neurological damage, putting salon workers at risk. In the same study, the air inside three salons that were studied was also found to contain unsafe levels of methyl methacrylate, a substance that has been banned by the U. S. Food and Drug Administration since 1974. In questionnaires, salon workers reported experiencing coughing, shortness of breath and irritation to the eyes, nose and throat.
Toluene is only one of at least a dozen chemicals you're exposed to at a nail salon. Fingernails, just like skin, are porous, and whatever you put on them is going to work its way into the bloodstream. You're probably most at risk if you have acrylic nails applied, but any kind of chemical brushed onto your nails, including polish and remover, will find its way into your system. Most of the health concerns are concentrated on nail salon workers because of their prolonged exposure, but if you're trying to minimize your exposure to dangerous chemicals, then you may want to look for a nail salon that uses all-natural products and polishes.
Safe Nail Polish
10 Steps to Do Your Own Manicure
Chemical Hazards in Your Home
"Chemicals May Be Risky to Nail Salon Workers." Webmd.com. May 5, 2011. http://www.webmd.com/healthy-beauty/news/20110505/chemicals-may-be-risky-to-nail-salon-workers
"Health Hazards in Nail Salons." Osha.gov. May 20, 2012. http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/nailsalons/chemicalhazards.html
"What Your Nail Salon May Not Want You To Know." Wqmagonline.com. Sept. 24, 2010. http://www.wqmagonline.com/forum/topics/what-your-nail-salon-may-not
Top 5 Infections You Can Pick Up at the Nail Salon
Do nail salon workers have a higher incidence of cancer?
Nail Polish 101
The Colorful History of Nail Polish
Cuticle Cream Basics
How Fingernails Work


Anyone with information about this case is asked to call the Prince George's County Police Department's Collision Analysis and Reconstruction Unit at (301) 731- 4422. Callers wishing to remain anonymous may call Crime Solvers at 1-866-411-TIPS (8477), text "PGPD plus your message" to CRIMES (274637) on your cell phone or go to http://www.pgcrimesolvers.com.
*In an earlier version of this story it was reported that a woman had been killed. That information in incorrect and has since been changed.


text:
Bungie Reveal Destiny
Bungie have finally revealed their new cross platform game. We haven't had a drink of Bungie goodness since the brilliant Halo: Reach game was released three years ago (it seems so long ago!).
Now, after lots of speculation about the title, hints and long bouts of silence, Bungie have officially revealed xxxxxDestiny xxxx as their new game.
As people have long surmised, it's a massively multiplayer online game. And it's like nothing that has ever been before. Destiny's concept is simply amazing.
It will take a lot to top the Halo series (only cross platform war games with serious advertising budgets such as Call of Duty / Modern Warfare beat it sales wise) and people will be looking to Bungie to do just that - especially as some quarters are fearful that 343 Industries will murder the series with Halo 4.
So while the ideas behind Destiny sound epic, the realization of it will be in the game's execution, and indeed the winning over of Bungie's long time fans.
Indeed it will also be interesting where the classic Halo fan now goes. Will they stay with the Halo series or will they be tempted to the Dark Side by Bungie's new wares? I imagine the guys at HBO will be torn (well actually not, they already have destiny.bungie.org all prepared). I for one will be dipping my toes in both pools.
Perhaps it's too early to say but my heart is with Halo, my head is with Destiny.
So dear Gears of Halo fan, what do you think of Bungie's announcement?
Labels: bungie, destiny
Where are the skulls found on Halo Anniversary?
Where are the skulls found on Halo: CE Anniversary?
One of the additions to the Halo: Combat Evolved has been skulls. These friend of Yorick were introduced in the Halo 2 game and have been a feature of Halo games in some way or another ever since.
Here's a list of where the Skulls are located or 'hidden' - you can find them in all sorts of strange nooks and crannies....
THIS IS A PLACE HOLDER POST UNTIL THE GAME IS RELEASED
Labels: halo: combat evolved anniversary
JJ reviews: Gears of War 3
This conclusion to the Gears of War trilogy has been a long time coming. Three red rings of death a marriage and a mortgage later, I've had the absolute pleasure to play and now review Gears of War 3.
I orignally purchased GOW1 as a filler game waiting for Halo 3 to arrive as I'd heard good things about it and that game sure delivered a fun filled kill fest and despite the nonsensical plot, ending General Raam's grubby run was a sweet deal. GOW3 has proven to be a sweet a deal as was the delight that was Halo 3 and dare I say it, a more enjoyable game to play than Halo Reach.
I thought I'd divvy this review up into the Acts of the game and give my thoughts as the game progressed.
Big ass spoilers follow.
Act 1. A big boat collides with the cole Train
So Chairman Prescott wasn't such a prick after all and may have the key to ending this whole nightmare? Such is the set up of the game - the new stranded onna boat must face new lambent horde who have no rhyme or reason for their actions, just killing. So that's what Marcus and his team of soldiers and secretaries get up to - if it's not taking down a giant Leviathan a la a Gears 2, it's the player taking the role of the Cole Train touching down on the face of some angry b'arch. At this point you begin to remember how corny GOW is but how fun the game is to actually play. It's time to find Adam Fenix!
Act 2. Like a band of hobbits, we're off to a Big Gate
Grist for the mill this level, a long journey to find Hoffman who may hold the key to finding Adam Fenix, the father of this game's hero Marcus. This leg is a bit of a slog but has a few novel features such as new guns that are quite kick ass. Baird, though always annoying, is given his dues as a true COG soldier and appears to be getting a bit more love and screen time than the prior games.
Act 3. Drop it like it's Hoff or 'meet me at the front gate'
It's often in the third act of a play where the shit hits the fan. As we all know, the Gears universe is a Mad World - so it's no surprise when in the most epic moment in Gears of War history, Marcus' brother till end end, Dominic sacrifices himself so Marcus and Anya can carry on to find Hoffman. It's possibly the finest gaming moment Gears of War has delivered thus far - how can the ending top this moment? This moment makes Seargeant Johnson dying in Halo 3 seem like a goldfish dying.
Act 4. Dom is dead, there's a dude that think's he's Ving Rhames or Simon Phoenix or something.
Marcus is a bit grumpy, his brother is dead and now he has to get some oil for a dude that's taken Dizzie hostage. The dude is some kind of cross between a pissed of Ving Rhames (the real life version) and Simon Phonix from Stallone's Demolition Man - it's epic cheese and one were GOW is let down by it's faux 'fuck you all, in your face attitudes' - it works for 12 year old gamers but not this player.
The Locust Queen turns up, flys around and pisses off - which leaves our heroes to fight their way to Dizzie's rescue - it's a good sequence and with the gnasher shotgun a fun chance to take on some Queen's guards at close quarters.
Act 5 or 6 (I'm Lost). We take the Sub Way
We'll it's more of a way to a Sub. Our heroes need to get to Azure. I've already forgotten why - but luckily Gears of War has always worked well without a comprehensive plot so I'm happy to run around dodging big electric centipedes while I get fuel for the submarine and some parts so Dizzy can take us to wherever.
The gun battles are fun, a boss battle against some heavily armoured Priests or whatever is a amusing - but as per the Arbiter in Halo 3, I can step back and let my team take some close quarters damage while I sit back from afar taking pot shots. I do however have a strong feeling this approach won't work when I get to a run through on Insane mode... revive me!
The Final Actions....
We battle through Azure's Malestrom and after all these years we finally met the father of Marcus, Adam Fenix, this should be of no surprise to any one who's played Gears before - the prior games have built to this moment and frankly it's a bit of an anti climax. This leads me to believe he's gonna die at the end of the game somehow, but not just before he faces Marcus and they hug it out.
So we battle through some kind of luxury hotel, where people b'arch about Prescott living it up large while the cities burn. I get the feeling this anger is misplaced.
There's some great set pieces throughout these final stages - they are going to really challenging on the Insane difficulty level.
You've read this far, so let's cut to the chase - the final act is a battle versus the Queen of the Locust Horde flying around on some kind of winged horse (if memory serves correct, we first saw it at the end of the first game). The game's final conclusion is obvious if you think about it - Marcus vs the Queen - it nearly happened in the second Gears game and when it happens, it's a fairly straight forward exercise in picking your moments with the Hammer of Dawn weapon.
And the story's conclusion? Well let's just say after 13 odd years of not seeing his father, Marcus gets to face his Dad for 13 seconds before he gives his life to save everyone else and make amends for the sins he believed he had committed.
Overall this was an extremely Gears of War game. If I've been snarky in places during this review it's because I expect great things from great games. Cheesey moments aside, Gears 3 has delivered a polished, bug free (??!) game with a semi coherent plot that answered a few things but created a few questions. The game features an excellent colour palate, interesting new monsters and a couple of good twists and turns. Definitely the best game of the series, my hat of the to the game's designers - they've earnt their pay this year!
So what's next for the Gears of War universe? GOW4?
P.S I was delighted to see the Carmine character live!
What could Gears of War 4 offer gamers?
Now that Gears of War 3 has been there and done that, polished to perfection and served with a tasty dose of "Bring It!" gamers around the planet could be forgiven for wondering what's next for the Gears of War universe - especially for those who do not intend to give GOW's multiplayer aspects much love.
So is Gears 4 on the cards? Keen readers may recall the whisperings about Gears of War: Exile. Supposedly an Xbox Kinnect based game, it was seemingly yanked from being announced just prior to that supposed announcement. Let's assume that this rumoured game has been canned and ask ourselves what could a new Gears of War game offer players?
There's been three Gears games now, we can't have more of the same 'bromance' story - Gears 3 was a great round off to the the trilogy (and was always intended as such) - Halo 4 is rumored to be changing things up a bit, and any fourth Game would need to do the same. This could be done by a couple of means - and the main way is dare I say it, involves going the Halo route and pulling a Halo: Reach on the Gears Universe.
Simply speaking, Gears of War 4 should be called Gears of War: Emergence Day.
Exploring the day that the Locust Horde emerged from the earth of Sera to wreak havoc on the GOG government and the people of Sera would be a prime story telling event. Just as Halo: Reach was the story of the beginning of the end for a Planet, I think plenty of gamers would be interested in exploring this side of the Gears mythology.
The plot could explore the the long conflict that was the Pendulum Wars and feature Emergence Day as the main plot driver - it could feature an entirely new cast and crew as they react to the Locust Horde. that said, perhaps the plot could tell about some of Adam Fenix's early days - it's arguable however if that would be an interesting tale game play wise.
As I said above, we can't have another 'bromance' type story a la Marcus and Dom.
The original Gears almost managed to kill off the run and gun genre - it's tactical cover based system of game play was a major hit - though not a original idea and a tad glitchy, GOW was the first really popular game to hone the concept to make it a fundamental part of the game play experience.
Now that it's been done and dusted, the game designers will have to go to a higher level and INNOVATE. Yep, you can't pull innovation out of your ass but Gears 4 will have to beyond what it has now - gosh knows what it could be but it needs to be more than new guns, multiplayer maps and other chicanery. Halo: Reach had this problem too - it's no easy task to re-invent yourself - jet packs aside ;)
Maybe that's where Gears of War: Exile comes in by having Xbox Kinect being fully integrated into a Gears game. A game that finally captures the potential of Kinnect would be truly innovative because lets face it - the Kinect games out there suck.
So dear reader, what are you thoughts? What plot elements would you like to see in Gears 4? What about guns and other tools etc? What new innovation do you think is needed? Interesting comments or questions beloooowwwwww.
Battle Scared Fem Shep Cosplay
What lurks around the corner Scarface?
As spied at Anaisroberts
More Mass Effect Cosplay and check out Tali.
Sweet cos play of Tali from Mass Effect
Here's a pretty sweet cos play of character Tali from the Mass Effect series - she's bound to have a key role in ME3. As found at Nebulaluben.


This is a course designed for those already teaching who are looking to extend their knowledge and gain a university accredited postgraduate qualification. The programme will be awarded by University of Wales.
The aim of the process is to provide a comprehensive understanding of the vocal mechanism and how it relates to the teaching of singing. It is designed to enable anatomical information to be applied in a practical context within either the private studio or group setting. It seeks to empower teachers with both a thorough knowledge of vocal pedagogy as well as a set of practical tools that can be used to enhance teaching.
Previous students have included teachers from senior conservatoire level, a Musical Theatre MD, teachers who manage large singing teaching programmes in arts centres, singers embarking on a teaching career for the first time, classroom teachers with choirs to run, as well as singing teachers from schools and private teaching practices. What is studied is not a teaching method, it is a practical working knowledge of structure and function. The knowledge gained can be applied to any singing style; it is not genre-specific. Throughout the course teachers will have written assignments to evaluate research-based publications and to consider and apply practical use of this theoretical knowledge.
My role in this course is very much the design and delivery of stage one. There seem to be many study days or weekends on offer: some focussing on methods, and others offering insights and even promises. This course will not offer answers; it will provide evidence-based information from which to draw your own conclusions. It is not a 'way to teach', it is a catalyst for your own imagination.
The voice is inside the body; we can't see much of what is happening, so teachers have tended to base their methods on how it feels. Teaching anyone to sing has always been a subjective process: intelligent and curious teachers have devised methods and theories founded on their experience. Scientific evidence can now illuminate much of our accepted teaching practice, so that we are able to understand the more useful and effective voice training methods.
This could be your chance for a re-evaluation of singing pedagogy, assessing directly relevant information, and putting it into practice. Each teaching day is based on the presentation of anatomical structure, with the application to vocal function explained fully. In addition, there is a practical exploration of basic techniques, which can be adapted to all ages and any musical styles. Inventiveness and creativity are encouraged as ways of devising your own approaches and communicating with your singing students.