Canada environmental groups urge restraints on arctic pipelines

Environmental groups are urging industry and the Northwest Territories and Yukon governments to adopt several principles for major pipeline projects in Canada's North.

Oct. 12, 2001

2 min read

By the OGJ Online Staff

HOUSTON, Oct. 12 -- Environmental groups are urging industry and the Northwest Territories and Yukon governments to adopt several principles for major pipeline projects in Canada's North.

The groups said, although they do not necessarily believe such large-scale developments are desirable or needed, the projects should proceed in a manner that most benefits northerners, while doing least harm to the environment.

They said, "Northern oil and gas production should also be considered a transitional measure, bridging to more sustainable energy generation and consumption measures."

The groups are the Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, chapters of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, Ecology North, Pembina Institute for Appropriate Development, World Wildlife Fund Canada, and the Yukon Conservation Society.

A consortium of Alaskan gas producers is studying options to move Alaskan gas to US consumers. One proposed route would follow the Alaska Highway through Yukon Territory. Another would parallel the coast and then use the Mackenzie Valley route to Alberta.

John Crump, executive director of the Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, said, "People have been sidetracked by the arguments for or against either route, instead of considering the potential harm from any project of this size. We are saying that if a project goes ahead there are basic principles that must be followed to mitigate that harm."

The groups said any development designed to bring American gas to American markets should also keep Canadian interests at the forefront. They said approval of the gas pipeline should be contingent on the US not developing the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the US supporting global warming mitigation measures.

They said developments should be based in proper land use and conservation planning. Fees and royalties from the projects should be reserved for economic diversification projects, wildlife conservation, and sustainable energy projects for northern communities.

Crump added, "There is no need to rush the approvals process. Let us not cut corners for the sake of an artificial urgency generated by developers. If northern oil and gas is needed now, it will still be needed later."