BC Energy Oroboros 2

rwOV4CmQJiZTc4rq0_Bbqzl72eJkfbmt4t8yenImKBVvK0kTmF0xjctABnaLJIm9

According to the The Financial Post,  B.C. Hydro, the Crown agency responsible for electricity in the province has been privately expressing concerns that earthquakes triggered by fracking are a potential risk to its dams.

Fracking brings dams

Fracking brings earthquakes

Earthquakes break dams

Fracking breaks dams

Apparently, concerns about this possibility were first expressed in internal documents in 2009 and it is suggested that as early as 2014, B.C. Hydro drew up an agreement with the B.C. Oil and Gas Commission (BCOGC), to create five-kilometer buffer zones around dams within which new fracking and drilling rights would not be issued.

While this alleged agreement indicates the serious concerns within BC Hydro,  their public position seems a little more cavalier. In a response to Financial Times queries on this matter, BC Hydro seems to have responded with the following  – “… our dams can withstand events many times larger than those associated with fracking.”  The crown corporation holds that while,  ” fracking does have the potential to increase natural seepage  … ( this) … is an issue of increased cost, not dam safety … ”

Image: https://www.scoop.it/t/transcalar-imaginary

http://business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/b-c-hydro-concerned-earthquakes-from-fracking-could-damage-peace-river-dams

 

What is Consultation?

chiefsThere are presently 3 applications for judicial review brought by Gitwilgyoots Tribe, Gitanyow Tribe and by and SkeenaWild Conservation Trust in connection with the PETRONAS/ Northern Gateway investment proposal on Lelu Island. In considering the reasonableness and good faith of the government’s decision to proceed with this development, it seems clear from the Federal Appeal’s court decision on the matter of the Northern Gateway Pipeline Project that the Crown is obliged to consult with First Nations on whose territories economic developments take place before proceeding with any decision making.  There are two specific issues that need to be resolved: –

1. Who should be consulted which boils down to whose authority the Court recognizes over the lands occupied by the Gitwilgyoots and the Gitanyow tribes. In this matter  the Lax Kw’alaams Band Council has launched a legal challenge to the tribal authority of hereditary chief Simogyet Yahaan.

2. What does meaningful consultation amount to – As David P. Ball notes in a Metro Vancouver article, when asked what ‘meaningful consultation’ would look like Chief Malii of the Gitanyow replied: “It means you have to really listen to the aboriginal group, take into account what they’re saying, and you have a discussion … It’s not just having a meeting or writing a letter; it’s an actual exchange.”

The first point goes to the heart of First Nations autonomy as Band Council’s are appointed under the auspices of Canadian legislation, while hereditary leadership in inherent to the native order and relationship with this land. The second point, which is the subject of this post, goes to the heart of the matter of any possible reconciliation with the First peoples on our common abode. It seems to be a matter of good faith and common sense, that recognition of the First Nations should involve some semblance of respect for their jurisdiction.  Faith and sense which the details of the Tribes’ applications for judicial review indicate the Crown may not have displayed!

http://www.metronews.ca/news/vancouver/2016/10/27/no-meaningful-consultation-on-pacific-northwest-lng.html

Image: http://theecoreport.com/legal-challenges-petronas-lng-project