Article content

If you ask the B.C. government why it’s trying to block the federally approved Trans Mountain pipeline, it will say it’s all about protecting the ocean. “I’m standing up for the coast, man,” B.C. Premier John Horgan said last month.

Rather than crude oil, the Trans Mountain pipeline will carry diluted bitumen, a heavier and more viscous petroleum product. Pipeline opponents maintain that this makes the project a uniquely dangerous environmental threat.

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

tap here to see other videos from our team. Try refreshing your browser, or Is the Trans Mountain pipeline really an ocean-murdering hellspawn like B.C. says it is? Back to video

There may be some truth to that, but it’s safe to say that B.C. is currently awash in a galaxy of pipeline fears that don’t necessarily square with reality.

Below, our attempt to explain the risks, debunk the myths and illustrate, as best as possible, whether the Trans Mountain pipeline really is the destroyer of worlds that activists say it is.

The pipeline makes a coastal B.C. spill more likely

It’s bad when a tanker hits something and spills fossil fuels into the ocean. The Trans Mountain pipeline will raise the amount of tankers in B.C. waters, thus statistically increasing the chances that one of them will hit something and cause a spill. Currently, about five tankers per month pull into the waters off Vancouver and fill up with diluted bitumen shipped in on the existing Trans Mountain pipeline system. The pipeline expansion would increase that number to more than 30 per month. The points below will discuss the relative risk that these extra tankers represent, and in approving the project, the National Energy Board deemed these risks to be “acceptable.” However, if British Columbian opponents cannot abide any increase in risk to ocean safety — no matter how marginal — nothing is going to change their mind on the pipeline. One complicating factor is that most of the economic benefits from the pipeline will flow to Alberta and Interior B.C. communities. Thus, for coastal communities computing a cost-benefit analysis for the project, their ledger is necessarily going to be tilted in favour of cost.