CARC’s Final Argument: Get More Information or Reject Pipeline Project

“The information is simply deficient,” says Chuck Birchall, Chair of CARC. “Under the terms of the Joint Review Panel Agreement, the company has failed to adequately or properly examine the scope of the pipeline’s effects. It has not described the effects of the pipeline in spurring new gas exploration and development. It has not adequately described the development’s effects on the people of the north, nor on the northern environment and wildlife. To proceed with a pipeline on the basis of the current information would be to blunder blindly into the biggest development project the north has ever seen. We think the people of the Northwest Territories, and the rest of Canada deserve better.”

Many of the information deficiencies stem from Imperial’s decision to ignore or downplay the pipeline’s effect on more gas exploration and development. The company chose to view those further developments as ‘hypothetical’. This is despite the fact that most of the revenues for the Aboriginal Pipeline Group, a partner in the pipeline, depend on those ‘hypothetical’ developments. Another ‘hypothetical’ developer, MGM energy, signed an agreement in October giving it access to the pipeline. Given these facts, and the development pattern of other pipelines, it is evident that further development is more than just hypothetical, and needs to be considered in the review of this pipeline project.

CARC’s full argument is laid out in its submission to the Joint Review Panel, posted at www.carc.org. The panel is to hold its final hearings in Inuvik from November 28-30 to consider closing remarks.

CARC FINAL REMARKS:
CRITIQUE OF THE PROPONENT’S CUMULATIVE
EFFECTS ASSESSMENT (CEA) FOR THE
MACKENZIE GAS PROJECT (MGP
)

Press Release as a Word Doc

For more information, contact:

Chuck Birchall, Chair, Canadian Arctic Resources Committee  
(613) 761-2424

Site Login