The Government of Canada has said it will introduce legislation by spring 2017 to formalize a moratorium for crude oil tankers on British Columbia’s (B.C.) north coast. See: http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=1162439

Needless to say, there are immediate questions;

- why is there no tanker moratorium to be imposed on Canada's east coast or on B.C.'s south coast?

- why is this being implemented in the face of north coast First Nations, like the Lax Kw'alaams, that want and need the economic benefits of marine terminals in their traditional areas?

- why are more than 440 crude oil tankers per year, each one transporting one-half million barrels of bitumen dilbit, through Vancouver's crowded central and inner harbours, under both Second Narrows bridges, under the Lions Gate bridge, past Stanley Park, down the length of the Salish Sea and through the Gulf Islands and the Haro Strait, past the city of Victoria, and through the Strait of Juan de Fuca acceptable - but not out of deep-water Prince Rupert which has clear and direct access to the high seas - and the shortest route to Southeast Asia markets?

- why are medium crudes that float, at least initially, such as syncrude and partially upgraded bitumen, included in the proposed ban - but dilbit containing raw bitumen having a density greater than brackish coastal waters permitted in the Salish Sea?

According to the government "The moratorium will cover the Great Bear Rainforest/Great Bear Sea area: an area from the Alaska/B.C. border down to the point on B.C.’s mainland adjacent to the northern tip of Vancouver Island, and this includes Haida Gwaii."

"The new legislation will prohibit oil tankers carrying crude oil or persistent oil products as cargo from entering or leaving ports and marine installations in this area. This measure will complement the existing voluntary Tanker Exclusion Zone, which has been in place since 1985."

"The moratorium will apply to the shipment of crude oils as defined by the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships and this will be set in the legislation. It will also apply to related oil products that are heavier and, when spilled, break up and dissipate slowly. As a result they remain longer in the environment compared to lighter products that tend to dissipate more rapidly. A complete list of these persistent products included in the moratorium will be outlined in a schedule to the legislation. The list of scheduled products could be amended in the future through the regulatory process based on the evolution of science and technology."

​​​​​​​Examples of related oil products included in the moratorium:

Partially upgraded bitumen

Synthetic crude oil

Pitch

Slack wax

Bunker C fuel oil

Liquefied natural gas

Gasoline

Naphtha

Jet fuel

Propane

Mike Priaro, P.Eng.

Calgary

403-281-2156