Today, Équiterre presented a petition with nearly 90,000 signatures to the five federal election campaign managers. It calls for the future federal government to block TransCanada’s Energy East pipeline project. Steven Guilbeault, Équiterre’s Co-founder and Senior Director, conveyed the same message at the Communauté métropolitaine de Montréal’s public consultation on TransCanada’s Energy East pipeline project held on September 23, in Montreal.
“Quebec says a definite no to Energy East, a dangerous pipeline that would transport tar sands oil, one of the most polluting oils on the planet. Tens of thousands of people—including 40,00 in the Greater Montreal area—have made this clear by signing the petition,” declared Mr. Guilbeault.
Recent surveys reveal that most Quebecers oppose the Energy East pipeline project (1). The City of Laval, along with 74 other municipalities, have officially voiced their disagreement by adopting a resolution (2). Fifteen organizations, including Université Laval, the Council of Canadians and the Union des producteurs agricoles have done the same.
All risk, no reward
The people of Quebec oppose TransCanada’s Energy East pipeline as, contrary to what its proponents say, it would generate few positive economic benefits for citizens. Instead, the oil companies would reap the profits and the oil would be exclusively for export. Also, Quebecers’ safety and water supply would be at risk in the event of a spill. And finally, tar sands development is the fastest-growing source of GHG emissions in Canada. On its own, the Energy East pipeline project would create additional 30 to 32 million tonnes of GHG per year, the equivalent of adding 7 million cars on our roads (3).
Read Équiterre’s brief submitted for the Communauté métropolitaine de Montréal’s public consultation (French only)
1. Oracle survey and study conducted by the Université de Montréal’s Chair in American Politics and Economics Studies (CEPEA), 2015.
2. Details at http://www.equiterre.org/solution/adoptez-une-resolution (French only)
3. Climate Implications of the Proposed Energy East Pipeline, Pembina Institute, 2014.