OEB decides climate not connected to pipelines

Late on Friday afternoon, the Ontario Energy Board issued its second procedural order related to the proposed Enbridge fracked gas pipeline across rural Hamilton. As many of us expected, the OEB has decided that climate change is outside its mandate and that emissions from upstream fracking and downstream burning of the gas in the pipe will not be considered in its hearings on the Enbridge pipeline.

However, it has accepted that various related matters raised by proponents of climate inclusion can be considered and it will hold an oral hearing (with the location still to be determined). And there are definitely next steps that Hamilton 350 can implement after successfully inundating the OEB with nearly 150 letters.

The OEB document notes that it “received numerous letters of comment from individual citizens and citizen groups and organizations” and that “most of the comments voiced concerns regarding environmental impacts and were opposed to the construction of the proposed project.” It classed “concerns related to greenhouse gas emissions and climate change” as one of the two environmental concerns in these letters, with the other being “concerns with local site-specific impacts of the proposed pipeline on the ecologically sensitive wetlands and lands.”

The key conclusion states: “The OEB acknowledges that the upstream production and downstream consumption of natural gas associated with the use of the proposed pipeline may raise questions of compliance with overall national and provincial goals associated with domestic and international commitments to reduce GHG emissions. In addition, natural gas extraction methods have been the subject of an international debate as to their safety and environmental effects. However, the OEB must exercise its responsibilities within the limits of its statutory authority. The OEB has concluded that issues related to impacts associated with the extraction and production of natural gas to be delivered, as well as the effects of the consumption of that natural gas in the context of overall national and globally-focused environmental policies, are out of scope.”

Other parts of the decision are more helpful. The hearings will consider “whether conservation or efficiency are viable alternatives” to the pipeline and the OEB “agrees with the Green Energy Coalition (representing Hamilton 350) that the impact of government policy on future gas utilization is a factor that may be relevant to the demand for natural gas and therefore the need for the project.” This is a key question that comes down to whether Ontario will replace nuclear facilities with fossil fuels supplied by Enbridge, or clean water power from Quebec.

The OEB has also agreed with the Schools Energy Coalition that “consideration of the risk that the project will become a stranded asset due to uncertainty of the demand forecast is part of the assessment of need for the project.” It noted the contention of the several intervenors that the climate crisis means “that an investment in infrastructure with a 30 to 40 year payback increases the risk of stranded assets” and ruled the “risk of forecast demand not being realized is inherent to forecast modelling and therefore included in the need for the project (issue #1) and in costs and rate impact (issue #5).”
All of these concessions likely resulted from the public pressure we have helped exert on the OEB and they will make it more difficult for Enbridge to get approval for its fracked gas pipeline.

The timelines set out in the OEB statement require intervenors to file questions with Enbridge by March 27 and Enbridge to reply by April 20. That certainly means the OEB won’t make a decision by Enbridge’s deadline of April 30.

The concerns raised by the City of Hamilton are noted by the OEB including its request to add the issue of how the pipeline conflicts with the city’s 2050 commitment to be carbon neutral. However, unlike every other proposed amendment to the issues list, the OEB doesn’t bother to reply to this specific request. It also completely ignores the demand of both the city and the Hamilton Conservation Authority that ecological studies be completed and independently peer reviewed prior to an OEB approval decision.

The Ontario Clean Air Alliance is finalized a full-colour flyer opposing the pipeline and any increase in gas use to generate electricity in Ontario that will be available shortly. This is being jointly issued by OCAA, Hamilton 350 and Environment Hamilton a petition to expand our contacts. OCAA is promising to provide us with 20,000 copies for door-to-door and other distribution in Hamilton.

CATCH coverage of OEB decision at http://hamiltoncatch.org/view_article.php?id=1620
​