Greater Montreal mayors come out against TransCanada’s Energy East pipeline

MONTREAL – Mayors from the greater Montreal area came out against TransCanada’s proposed Energy East pipeline.

The Montreal Metropolitan Community (MMC), which represents 82 jurisdictions, says it is opposed to the project.

Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre, the present president, told a news conference today the organization has determined the environmental risks far outweigh any economic benefits for that region.

Related

Canadian heavy crude crashes to more than 50% discount to WTILack of export infrastructure has soured China on oil purchase of Canada: CNOOC officialCanadian oil exports to U.S. reaches highest level ever, as shale production falls

The proposed pipeline would take Alberta crude as far east as an Irving Oil refinery in Saint John, N.B. If approved, the pipeline will run 4,6oo kilometres, transporting 1.A million barrels of oil each day from 2020. The plan called for the pipeline to chop across roughly 100 kilometres of territory belonging to 10 cities from the Montreal Metropolitan Community, including Laval, Terrebonne, Montreal and Mirabel.

The project would include existing TransCanada pipeline as far east as Montreal, plus new pipeline to become constructed through Quebec.

Coderre says the pipeline is worth about $2 million annually in economic advantages to the Montreal area, while a major cleanup oil spill might cost between $1 billion and $10 billion.

Laval and Terrebonne, two largest members of the MMC, had already said in September they oppose TransCanada’s planned $15.7-billion pipeline, which would transport crude in the Alberta oilsands to a terminal in New Brunswick before exporting it to overseas customers. Marc Demers, mayor of Quebec’s third-largest city, said in September that Laval “unequivocally opposes the pipeline because of environmental concerns, citizen safety and the threat of spills within the island-city’s waterways.”


TransCanada has stated it understands community’s concerns, but argues pipelines remain the safest means of transporting an investment which the world still depends.

It cites a 2013 report by the Fraser Institute that found pipelines were 4.Five times safer than using trains to move oil. Blocking a pipeline, TransCanada argues, will result in more oil transported to Canada by train.

In November, TransCanada announced it had been abandoning all intends to build an export terminal in Quebec for the Energy East pipeline. In April it had abandoned its intends to develop a terminal in Cacouna over concerns over the beluga whale habitat, but it had continued to scout other possible locations across the St. Lawrence River.

After months of analysis, TransCanada said the pipeline are the best served with only one port, in New Brunswick. While Quebec’s environment minister said scrapping the idea of an export terminal was good news for the environment, Premier Philippe Couillard noted it managed to get more difficult to see what economic benefits the pipeline will bring when it comes to infrastructure and jobs if no terminal had been built in the province.

Business groups, such as the employers’ group Conseil du patronat and also the Board of Trade of Metropolitan Montreal, had pushed for the pipeline, saying it might bring a large number of jobs towards the province and an important supply of revenue for oil refineries in east-end Montreal. Oppositions parties argued the risks of having a pipeline run through more than 600 of Quebec’s waterways outweighed its benefits.

The Energy East pipeline is viewed through the oil industry like a key link to exporting Alberta’s crude oil overseas, particularly because the U.S. government rejected TransCanada’s plans for that Keystone XL pipeline connecting Alberta with the U.S., in November.

Environmental consultations were held across the territory last September and October and Coderre says a lot of the 140 groups that submitted briefs were in opposition to the work.