Tanker traffic increase threatens the Salish Sea

December 16th 2011

Public not given a say in expansion of oil exports from Burnaby port

BY CHRIS GENOVALI AND MISTY MACDUFFEE, TIMES COLONIST DECEMBER 16, 2011

On British Columbia’s south coast, Kinder Morgan wants to triple the amount of crude oil being shipped from Vancouver’s Burrard Inlet through Georgia Strait, the Fraser estuary, Gulf Islands, Haro Strait and Juan de Fuca Strait.

The proposed pipeline expansions would deliver 700,000 barrels of tarsands oil per day to Burrard Inlet by 2016.

This month, the National Energy Board approved the most recent request by Kinder Morgan to divert more oil to their Burnaby terminal, which will increase tanker traffic in the Salish Sea.

Despite requests to the NEB by Raincoast Conservation Foundation, the Gulf Islands Alliance and other organizations, this was done without a full public process. Kinder Morgan is seeking approval for additional increases in pipeline capacity by 2016, which would further expand tanker traffic.

To read the full article, please visit the Victoria Times Colonist website.

Tags: , , ,

One Response to “Tanker traffic increase threatens the Salish Sea”

  1. Jim Ronback says:

    There will be more oil tanker traffic in the Salish Sea, Burrard Inlet and the Fraser River Estuary if options 1, 2, or 4 studied by the Vancouver Airport Fuel Facilities Corporation (VAFFC) come to fruition.

    Check out:
    http://www.vancouverairportfuel.ca/files/Fuel%20Delivery%20Options%20Report.pdf 91 pages

    The 21 day comment period has just started for their Hwy 99 Addendum
    Comment form for the VAFFC project is now available:
    http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pcp/forms/VAFD_form.html

    The VAFFC application with the Addendum has not provided a Safety Case that addresses the impact of the worst case scenarios and the related combined hazard footprints for fire and explosion and contamination at the fuel farm, marine terminal, oil tankers, barges and pipelines.

    This is due to the fact it is a weak voluntary screening level environmental assessment by BC EAO and Port Metro Vancouver as CEAA’s delegate. Thus it is mainly qualitatively risk based and not effects based.

    The following scenarios that must be considered are adapted from:
    “In December 1997, Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. conducted a hazard analysis of the potential for fire and/or explosion at the LAXFUEL Fuel Farm. The following worst-case scenarios for fire or explosion at the fuel farm facility were considered.” http://www.ourlax.org/docs/draft_eir_NE/T14c_LR.pdf page 7

    ♦ Scenario 1: This scenario assumes that a single xxxxx litre tank in the largest containment area were to rupture and the fuel were to subsequently ignite. The berm of the containment area is assumed to remain intact.
    ♦ Scenario 2: This scenario could be initiated from Scenario 1. If the fire was not immediately controlled, the heat caused by the contained flames could result in the rupture (with possible explosion) of one or more of the other tanks within the bermed area.
    ♦ Scenario 3: The impact of a large aircraft crashing into the fuel farm or an oil tanker at berth or a pipeline or a collision between vessels or with obstacles in the Fraser River estuary could be expected to cause a similar but larger event. With such an occurrence, the secondary containment would probably be damaged, and unable to control the released fuel.
    Under this scenario, burning fuel could flow along the ground surface to the storm drain system surrounding the facility and into the Fraser River Ignited fuel might flow within the system, creating thermal damage, although there would be little risk of
    explosion. It is likely that a fire within the storm drain system would quickly burn out due to a lack of oxygen.
    ♦ Scenario 4: An incident during off-loading of a tanker or barge causing and fire and explosion could spread to the tank farm and a fully loaded tanker at berth. The heat caused by the flames could result in the rupture (with possible explosion) of one or more of the other storage tanks or the oil tanker

    Yours safely,

    Jim Ronback
    Director VAPOR
    http://www.vaporbc.com

    PS. Is Canada is a signatory to this international safety guide. If not, why not?
    (search for keywords like “kerosene” or “explosion”)
    International Safety Guide for Inland Navigation Tank-Barges and Terminals, June 2010
    http://www.isgintt.org/files/isgintt062010_en.pdf

Leave a Reply

This site is powered by WordPress, and Pink Sheep Media