Energy and climate justice campaigner Andrea Harden-Donahue
The Council of Canadians is available for comment on the National Energy Board (NEB) decision to include both upstream and downstream greenhouse gas emissions in the upcoming review of the 1.1 million barrel per day Energy East project.
“The NEB allowing a wider discussion on greenhouse gas emissions of Energy East is a significant win and something we’ve argued for since the project was proposed,” says Andrea Harden-Donahue, Energy and Climate Campaigner with the Council of Canadians. “The crude production needed to fill the Energy East pipeline would generate up to an additional 30 to 32 million tonnes of upstream carbon emissions each year — the equivalent of adding more than seven million cars to our roads. The downstream emissions are obviously much higher. The NEB remains flawed, and we stand by our assessment that the review of Energy East should be put on hold until the federal government has finished overhauling the NEB and federal environmental laws.”
“We have vehemently opposed Health Canada’s decision to exempt the Energy East terminus from rigid air quality standards,” says Robin Tress, an organizer with the Council of Canadians in Halifax. “In 2014 we went to the Federal Court of Appeal because the NEB’s failure to include upstream and downstream emissions in its review of Energy East was a direct failure to meet its own mandate for environmental health and public safety. This underscores why Energy East should fall under new regulations.”
The Council of Canadians has been campaigning against the Energy East tar sands project since February 2013.