Article content continued

There are challenges, but let’s examine the whole case for a pipeline to Hudson Bay:

Environmental: A pipeline from Alberta to the west coast of Hudson Bay will cross numerous rivers and lakes, together with muskeg and permafrost. It is probably the most challenging part of the entire proposal. But are these impassible hindrances? Ask the Alaskans who have, for over 40 years, successfully operated an oil pipeline through a comparable environment.

Oil spills: Over the past decade ocean going “tankers” have carried an average of about 12 million barrels of oil per day and delivered 99.99 per cent of that without spillage. Yes, there have been some ghastly marine tanker incidents (in the largest tanker spill ever, the Atlantic Empress disgorged 400 million litres of crude oil off Trinidad in 1979; 10 years later, the Exxon Valdez spilled 170 million litres off Alaska). However, the noticeable trend is downwards: The last major marine spill was off Angola in 1991 (350 million litres). Why? Back then, tankers were “single hulled” — modern tankers must be “double hulled” and so are much harder to pierce.

Land-based costs: A Prairie pipeline with a throughput capacity of about 180 million barrels per year will require, I am told, a tariff of about $2.25/throughput barrel/1,000 km to pay for capital and building costs. This translates into a tariff for a 1,400 km line from Alberta to Hudson Bay of about $3.15/barrel. Add to that pumping, storage and terminal expenses which, it has been suggested to me, will run at about $1.60 per barrel. Total cost before marine shipping: $4.75 per barrel.