Northern Gateway regulatory submissions reveal polarizing views of Alberta and B.C.

Claudia Cattaneo | National Post

Regulators will have a tough time deciding whose public interest prevails: Alberta’s urgent need for new markets for its oil-based economy, or British Columbia’s resolve that any risk is one too many for its environment.

Tijana Martin/Postmedia News files Regulators will have a tough time deciding whose public interest prevails: Alberta’s urgent need for new markets for its oil-based economy, or British Columbia’s resolve that any risk is one too many for its environment.

In its last shot at defending the Northern Gateway pipeline, Enbridge Inc. says it has produced evidence to boot during the nearly completed regulatory review that the proposed project would generate enormous economic benefits for the country.

A look at arguments over the Northern Gateway pipeline

More than 40 written final arguments have been submitted on the Northern Gateway project. Here are a sample of submissions to the National Energy Board:

ForestEthics Advocacy, Living Oceans Society and Raincoast Conservation Foundation “The Coalition submits that Northern Gateway has failed to demonstrate binding commercial support for the Project, that the risks associated with the Project exceed the potential benefits of the Project and that the Project is contrary to the principles of sustainable development.

Read more.

Northern Gateway regulatory submissions reveal polarizing views of Alberta and B.C.

Investigate. Inform. Inspire.

Publications | Scientific Papers | Reports & Books

Find us & follow

You can help Save the Great Bears: find out how