Interview with Burnaby Pipeline Watch (Part One)- Alan and Karl

This past month, we have been discussing the Kinder Morgan pipeline, as well as alternative forms of energy. We recently spoke with Karl and Alan, who both work with Burnaby Pipeline Watch about the current issues of Kinder Morgan as well as potential alternatives to the pipeline. Here is the first of our two-part interview.

1) What is your proposed alternative to the Kinder Morgan pipeline?- 

Wind and/or solar power. Use natural products as much as possible. Focus on renewable energy and localizing production. Instead of oil and gas coming from abroad, make it localized (plastic products), which can be done maybe through 3D products and design. We previously had a manufacturing based economy, but the Mulroney and Reagan governments of the 80’s changed that. Those governments were major influences on the creation of the free market and globalization. This has created huge disparities in wealth in Canada. We need to use the free market to our advantage instead of a disadvantage. The alternative needs to be sustainable and for the benefit of the environment here in British Columbia. The problem is that companies are paying political groups to say there is no climate change, which puts us in a real mess of a situation. It shows how governments are not working in our interest. All of these issues have created a consumer culture instead of a sustainable culture. This needs to change with further knowledge, localized production and renewable energy sources.

We need to transform from a consumer- based society to a human, health and happiness society, although the issue is that this is not in line with modern corporate ideals.


2) What do you think of solar power?- 

In a one word answer, it’s good! The problem with solar power though is that the current form of energy is too cheap. Taxpayers are subsidizing it, that’s why it’s so cheap. That’s the reason why people want it as opposed to solar. We need to look at the long-term benefit of renewable energy.

3) Looking at the economic side of the pipeline, are there other feasible ways to replace the economic loss of the removal of the pipeline?-
There are many feasible alternatives, such as promoting Green jobs and localizing production. We do not see the pipeline through BC as being beneficial economically. If we have a spill, we lose far more than the benefit that we get. There has been a ridiculous amount of money lost because of those spills. Industrial model since 1750 is to move in, extract, send it back, manufacture, send it to colonies, trash environment, and move on. Look at what happened to cities like Detroit. Ultimately, that can happen in BC, if we strip resources and rely on these resources. The car killed Detroit, and this can kill British Columbia.

4) There has always been talk about why Kinder Morgan is bad, but we want to talk about the economics of it. Why do you think socially and economically that the Kinder Morgan pipeline is bad for BC?- 

It will destroy the green industries that already exist, such as eco-tourism. It will create a lower quality of life for seniors, including such health issues as respiratory illness from air pollution as well as diesel coming from trains, tankers, trucks, etc. This is what kills people. There is a major economic cost to health issues. That carbon sitting in Alberta isn’t going anywhere and it is not going to disappear. There is no rush to use it up. Only rush is so Richard Kinder can make an extra Billion dollars. Climate change is another economic and social cost. We have a worldwide responsibility to take care of our environment and the world around us. The Burrard Inlet now has tanker farms, which can destroy several different industries, can pollute the area and cause major economic and social difficulties.

Part two of this interview will be up shortly!