We can't be held hostage developing critical infrastructure by any and all native groups who feel that the pipeline is crossing their "traditional land". Enbridge wasn't going to just raze a path and put pipe in, any parties that actually owned the land would have been compensated. If anything the consultation process was too far reaching, it's really become a joke process where anyone from anywhere who has any concerns can come bog down the process. This has taken years, and people are still crying they weren't consulted enough.
A much more legitimate concern is tanker traffic off the north coast, but even still it shouldn't hold up this project. Kitimat port would only be scheduled for 220 tanker calls a year. The most pessimistic failure rate of tankers I can find is 3X10^-6 vessles per year, which could also be expressed as 1 per 333,333 per year. Divided by 220 that means we can expect a disaster once in the next 1500 years. Which seems like over the top risk aversion compared to the national benefits to be gained.
|