Sunday, February 4, 2018

Trans Mountain pipeline project will be built, prime minister vows


The prime minister is standing his ground on the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion as Alberta feuds with B.C. over new restrictions on shipments of bitumen that would flow through pipeline networks from Alberta to the West Coast.
"We have a federal government to look out for the national interest above various disagreements within the provinces and we did exactly that on the Trans Mountain pipeline," Justin Trudeau said in an interview Thursday with CBC Radio's Edmonton AM.
"I'm not going to opine on disagreements between the provinces in this case," said Trudeau, who is in Edmonton for a town hall meeting at MacEwan University Thursday night, part of a series of meetings in Western Canada.
"We're just going to reiterate that the decision we made was in the national interest and we're going to move forward with that decision, which means we're going to get the Trans Mountain pipeline built."
Alberta Premier Rachel Notley has threatened legal action and economic sanctions in retaliation against new spill restrictions in B.C. which would create another roadblock for the already-delayed Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion.
The $7.4-billion project was approved by the federal government in 2016.

'We can't continue to be trapped'

Trudeau said the decision was environmentally and economically sound and the new sanctions will not succeed in derailing the project.
"We know that getting our oil resources to new markets across the Pacific is absolutely essential," Trudeau said.
"We can't continue to be trapped with the price differential we have in the American market. We need this pipeline and we're going to move forward with it responsibly like I committed to."
B.C. is proposing to restrict any increase in diluted bitumen shipments while it conducts more spill response studies. Notley described the proposal as an "unconstitutional attack" and vowed to fight the policy in court.
George Heyman, B.C.'s minister of environment and climate change strategy, denied that it is sparking a constitutional crisis, saying his government is just doing its job.
'They're both sort of right and they're both a little bit wrong' - Eric Adams, legal expert
Eric Adams, an associate professor in the faculty of law at the University of Alberta specializing in constitutional law, said Notley's claims that B.C. is breaking federal law are only partially correct.
"They're both sort of right and they're both a little bit wrong," Adams said.
"To the extent that B.C.'s jurisdiction is interfering with the ability of the pipeline to be constructed, they're probably overreaching their constitutional jurisdiction, but to say that they have no ability to care about environmental concerns within their borders is also not right."
Legally, the dispute is not as black and white as the duelling NDP governments suggest, Adams said.
"It's a really tricky area and the lines are blurry," he said. "Which is why politicians are able to speak definitively, but on the other hand, maybe it's not as definitive as they are suggesting."

'Overlapping powers'

According to the Constitution, Ottawa has jurisdiction over federal infrastructure projects like pipelines, but B.C. has a strong legal standing over environmental threats within its borders, Adams said.
"B.C. is doing what they know they have capacity to do," he said. "Which is, make life difficult for this infrastructure project which they are opposed to, and they're going to continue to that."
Politics News
Will the federal government step in on the B.C. - Alberta pipeline feud?
Will the federal government step in on the B.C. - Alberta pipeline feud?3:19
According to constitutional law, Trudeau could pull rank and make the project expansion happen through legal sanctions, said Adams, but it's more likely that the dispute will be resolved in the courts.
"Our Constitution is one of overlapping powers and that causes difficulties and uncertainties," he said. "The governments have to be prepared to listen to one another and to work together toward a solution.
"The reason that's not possible at the moment is that they're both taking hard line positions where that compromise is not possible."

'This is not new'

The spat is just the latest rough patch in an increasingly rocky relationship between the two provincial NDP governments which stand divided on pipelines, said political analyst Paul McLoughlin.
The threats of sanctions and economic retaliation are reminiscent of a similar spat over the Northern Gateway pipeline in 2013, which resulted in frosty relations between the provinces' two standing premiers.
"In some senses, this is not new," McLoughlin said.
"This goes right back to Alison Redford and Christy Clark. And it's the same kind of negotiation that was going on, that's how it struck me ... and there's politics in all of it."

Evernote helps you remember everything and get organized effortlessly. Download Evernote.

Martyn Brown: Justin Trudeau declares war on British Columbia




on February 1st, 2018 at
  • Alberta premier Rachel Notley and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's alliance on pipelines could cause federal Liberal fortunes to crash in B.C.
"That pipeline is going to get built," Justin Trudeau has declared on Edmonton's CHED radio.
"We will stand by our decision. We will ensure that the Kinder Morgan pipeline gets built."
With that, Canada's prime minister has declared war on British Columbia's efforts to stop that widely unwanted project, which our provincial government has taken new actions to frustrate, further to its other announced and ongoing efforts.
In pandering to the all-powerful interests of Big Oil—and to the voters of Alberta—yet another Trudeau has given British Columbians the finger.
It is an appalling political intervention, aimed at placating the increasingly antsy shareholders of Kinder Morgan and the other wealthy purveyors of dirty fossil fuels, whose industry is choking our planet and threatening our oceans.
"We can't be simply trapped in the American market and that's why getting this pipeline built, which has been waited for a long time, is something that this government is serious about," Trudeau brayed. The environment, Aboriginal rights and title, and B.C.'s coastal communities be damned.
Think of it as his own new national energy program—one that stands his father's NEP on its head.
In contrast to Pierre Elliott Trudeau's NEP plan, the son-of-P.E.T.'s own pet project is more about selling out to international oil interests and helping Canadian oil prices and profits soar than about capping those cost burdens or newly protecting Canada's oil reserves for Canadians.
This time, young Trudeau is gunning for British Columbia, ironically, largely to curry favour with Alberta and to win more seats in that province, which was for so long a Liberal wasteland.
He is determined to push through a pipeline that stands to threaten the very fabric of Super, Natural British Columbia, which our provincial government is rightly trying to protect with long overdue regulatory reforms that accord proper protections for our environment.
I expect that Trudeau will get a very rocky ride at his town hall meeting tomorrow in Nanaimo. And deservedly so.
Though if his reception in Winnipeg was any indication, he won't much care, confident as he is that his security detail will rapidly silence any dissenting voices. Out of "respect" for everyone else in the audience, don't you know?

Protests like this action by Greenpeace in 2013 are likely to continue in the wake of the prime minister's hard line in favour of the Kinder Morgan pipeline.
The federal Liberals are about to get a rude awakening. The great thing about living in a democracy is it allows us all to get vocal and actively engaged in shouting back at those who would silence our voices.
Trudeau has laid down the gauntlet to all those who oppose the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion project and Kinder Morgan's plan to turn Metro Vancouver into a major exporting hub for unrefined bitumen.
He has irresponsibly implied that British Columbia's opposition to that project, and to the shockingly deficient National Energy Board approval process—currently the subject of Federal Court of Appeal challenge—is basically irrelevant to him.
Damn us all to hell, it will be built, he pledges.
He deems it to be a project that is required "in the national interest", one that he will presumably support with all the constitutional muscle available to his federal government.
Them's fighting words, I suggest, figuratively speaking.
They beg for a swift and ardent political response from B.C. premier John Horgan that is equally bold and unequivocal as his friend Alberta premier Rachel Notley's response was to the measures announced by B.C. Environment and Climate Change Strategy Minister George Heyman.
Horgan's initial response today to Notley was a good start, but with respect, the prime minister's vow to impose the Kinder Morgan project goes way beyond her "sabre rattling", as Horgan characterized it.
It should be answered directly as the dismissive assault it is on B.C.'s autonomy, presuming as it does that nothing we say or do will stand in the way of that dubious enterprise.
It is clearly not in the national interest for the prime minister to personally draw the line in the sand that he has. Least of all, in the midst of a monumental court challenge, which B.C.'s provincial government has engaged as an intervenor.
It is frankly wrong of him to say what he did, in the face of an ongoing legal challenge from seven First Nations, the City of Vancouver, the City of Burnaby and environmental organization to the NEB process that approved that project.
It is absolutely not in the national interest to put Big Oil's desire for higher profits ahead of all the needed shift to renewable energy that our country must support if it is to have any hope of meeting Trudeau's own Paris climate accord commitments.
To suggest that the Kinder Morgan project and its implicit vision for massive new oil sands development is in any way consistent with Canada's climate action imperatives is duplicitous and also dangerously deceptive to all Canadians.
A seven-fold increase in oil supertanker traffic in the Salish Sea that would further threaten Canada's coastal communities and marine wildlife is clearly not in the national interest.
Especially without the due scientific research about the true nature of heavy oil spills that the B.C.'s NDP government has now rightly committed to undertaking, along with new regulatory environmental safeguards for oil spill prevention, response, remediation, and compensation.
It is not in the national interest for the federal government to run roughshod over Aboriginal Canadians' constitutional rights and title, by declaring as a "done deal" a project that is so vehemently opposed by the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs and First Nations fighting it in court.
This is exactly the same attitude that recently resulted in the Federal Court of Appeal ruling against the federal government and Kinder Morgan on the Coldwater Indian Band case. It was wrong then, as it is wrong now, morally, if not also legally.
Is Trudeau really so young, reckless, or insensitive to those Aboriginal Canadians' legitimate concerns and passionate opposition to that project that he would use whatever might it might take to impose it in the face of their legal, moral, political, and – heaven help us—even physical resistance?
Wilderness Committee
All Canadians should take a long overdue trip down memory lane, to see the havoc that "my way, or the highway" attitude from senior governments produces.
These 16 snapshots on CBC News should help to jog Trudeau's decidedly lacking memory.
They should remind us all of the lengths that Aboriginal Canadians have gone to in years past, to protect their interests from myopic governments that discount their rights and resolve.
Is Trudeau really so contemptuous of his government's obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that he would sanction a pipeline built over the objections of so many Indigenous Canadians, come what may?
Let us pray that's not the case.
Yet for a guy who claims to be against bullying, his salvo on Kinder Morgan as our country's highest elected official is a slap in the face to all Canadians who view that project as an affront to so much of what they hold dear about this country.
Trudeau may think it is national interest to ram through that pipeline that would see up to 890,000 barrels a day of diluted bitumen shipped to tidewater, whatever its risks to our sensitive terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems.
He may think it is in the national interest to saddle Canadians with added carbon taxes that will be needed to offset the massive greenhouse gas emissions associated with that project—which the NEB failed to even consider in its approval process.
He may believe it is in Canada's interest and in the planet's interest to pad the pockets of Big Oil with a project that would generate more than 100 million tonnes of greenhouse gases into our atmosphere, as its dirty oil is burned for filthy energy.
British Columbians, by and large, do not.
We say, it is not in our province's interest, or indeed in the national interest, to build that pipeline and expanded heavy oil export facility.
It stands to threaten B.C.'s sensitive land and marine environment, to undermine British Columbia's tourism economy, and to destroy Vancouver's global "brand".
It makes a mockery of Vancouver's "Greenest City" vision and action plan. Even a single bitumen spill resulting from that project could impose incalculable economic costs that Trudeau's government has refused to properly contemplate or prevent.
In short, by so overtly siding with Big Oil in assuaging Alberta on this issue, Canada's prime minister has exposed himself and his government for what it really is: a gutless wonder, with more brute power than brains or common sense.
Perhaps it is all bravado and nothing more than a stalling tactic, of short-sighted appeasement, to calm Canada's energy markets and to reassure the big-monied interests to which the federal Liberal party is also so beholden.
I sure hope so.
But if Trudeau is as serious as he would have us all believe about his unswerving commitment to Kinder Morgan, Canada's investment climate is about to get a whole lot rockier, not the opposite.
If he is as really dug-in on this fight as his words would suggest, so are we, who oppose this project for the dire menace it really is—to our economy, to our environment, to reconciliation, and above all, to our national interest.
Back off, Trudeau. We mean it.


Evernote helps you remember everything and get organized effortlessly. Download Evernote.

Saturday, February 3, 2018

Lasers Reveal a Maya Civilization So Dense It Blew Experts’ Minds


Photo
Tikal, home to temples and palaces, is one of the best known Maya sites in northern Guatemala. Credit Justin Lane for The New York Times

They were hidden there, all this time, under the cover of tree canopies in the jungles of northern Guatemala: tens of thousands of structures built by the Maya over a millennium ago.
Not far from the sites tourists already know, like the towering temples of the ancient city of Tikal, laser technology has uncovered about 60,000 homes, palaces, tombs and even highways in the humid lowlands.
The findings suggested an ancient society of such density and interconnectedness that even the most experienced archaeologists were surprised.
"Everywhere that we looked, there was more settlement than we expected," said Thomas Garrison, a National Geographic explorer and an archaeologist at Ithaca University. "We knew there was going to be more, but the scale of it really blew our minds."
Researchers found the structures by shooting lasers down from planes to pierce the thick foliage and paint a 3-D picture of the ground below. The technology is called Light Detection and Ranging, or lidar.


NICARAGUA
FEB. 2, 2018
By The New York Times
The method has been used elsewhere, including around the Angkor Wat temple in Cambodia. But this lidar project is the largest ever undertaken. More than 800 square miles of the Maya Biosphere Reserve in Guatemala's Petén region have been mapped, according to an exclusive report by National Geographic, which is airing a Feb. 6 television special about the project.

"This world, which was lost to this jungle, is all of a sudden revealed in the data," said Albert Yu-Min Lin, an engineer and National Geographic explorer who worked on the television special. "And what you thought was this massively understood, studied civilization is all of a sudden brand new again."
The lasers are only the first step, he added, noting that he and archaeologists still had to trek through jungles to verify the data while contending with thick undergrowth, poisonous snakes, swarms of killer bees and the odd scorpion.

Photo
Lidar data highlighted about 60,000 structures that had been hidden in the jungle for hundreds of years. Credit Wild Blue Media/National Geographic
The project was started by Pacunam, a Guatemalan nonprofit organization, and carried out with help from the National Center for Airborne Laser Mapping, which is based at the University of Houston. The lidar technology essentially allows researchers to spot bumps in the landscape. Most of the ruins look like rocky mounds — even in person, and to the naked eye — but experts can often identify a collapsed quarry, palace or street.
The Maya culture was known for its sophisticated approach to agriculture, arts and astronomy. The peak era for the civilization, which some archaeologists refer to as the Classic Period, is generally considered to have lasted from around A.D. 250 to 900.
The total population at that time was once estimated to be a few million, said Diane Davies, an archaeologist and Maya specialist based in the United Kingdom. But in light of the new lidar data, she said it could now be closer to 10 million.

Understand the world with sharp insight and commentary on the major news stories of the week.
You agree to receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.
Dr. Davies was not involved in the lidar project but considered it "really big, sensational news." She said the data should encourage people not only to re-evaluate Maya civilization, but also to learn from it.
"To have such a large number of people living at such a high level for such a long period of time, it really proves the fact that these people were highly developed, and also quite environmentally conscientious," she said.
Among the structures uncovered were roads, built wide and raised high above the wetlands to connect fields to farmers and markets to metropolises. There were also small dwellings, quarries and intricate irrigation systems. "We're seeing the spaces in between, and that's where really interesting stuff was happening," Dr. Garrison said.
He added that in addition to changing people's perception of the Maya culture, lidar represented "a sea change" in the field of archaeology.
"I don't think you see a lot of discoveries happening across the sciences right now that sort of turn a discipline on its head," he said. "It's exciting to know that it can still happen."


Evernote helps you remember everything and get organized effortlessly. Download Evernote.

West Side Story

Every time its on, every time I hear the music I just have to.

Thursday, February 1, 2018

This Land Was Stolen for You and Me


This 1876 woodcut designed by A.R. Waud and engraved by J.P. Davis shows Samoset, the first Native American to make contact with the pilgrims of Plymouth Colony. (Wikimedia)
Donald Trump is right about one thing: This is our New American Moment.
America has a great opportunity, and as United States Olympic hockey coach Herb Brooks said almost 40 years ago, "Great moments are born from great opportunity."
But before every U.S. citizen can "be proud of this land that we love," we have to start being honest about America.
Native Americans have a saying: "Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children."
Advertisement
Americans could learn a lot from Native Americans, the only true "legal" citizens of the United States. A Native American underscored this point at an anti-illegal immigration protest in Arizona a few years ago.
Next time someone calls another immigrant "illegal," remind them that America was founded on illegal immigration.
"The pilgrims that came over on the Mayflower were undocumented immigrants," explained Cenk Uygur on The Young Turks. "They did not have any papers. They didn't ask the permission of the Native Americans to land here. And then they certainly didn't ask the permission of the Native Americans when they started butchering them. And then moving them onto reservations. And then violating those agreements. And moving them again. And having them die on the road. And then having them die on the reservations. And then having them die in the fields that they used to hunt in and live in."
If Native Americans had built a wall, America might look a little different. To be clear, the land of our country was stolen from Native Americans by undocumented immigrants. Anyone who is complaining about illegal immigrants needs to stop.
Jennifer Mendelsohn, a Baltimore-based freelance journalist, started a project called #resistancegenealogy to point out the blatant and rampant hypocrisy of the anti-immigrant stance. Mendelsohn confronts anti-immigration public figures on Twitter with their own family histories. One of her targets was White House Director of Social Media Dan Scavino Jr., who called for an end to "chain migration." Mendelsohn looked up Scavino's family history and explained how his ancestors are like immigrants being condemned.
"If you are not Native American or [your ancestors] did not arrive here in chains, then you or your ancestors immigrated to the U.S.," Mendelsohn told The Times of Israel.
"People in genealogical glass houses shouldn't throw stones, and we're all in genealogical glass houses metaphorically speaking," she added.
Since we are all in this American experiment together, we have to create fair immigration policy—not a ransom note—that works for the 21st century. That will require compromise, but the solution is not as hard as some claim.
Set up a system that provides a path to citizenship for the immigrants who are productive members of society—the millions of undocumented citizens who are living, working and paying taxes in America. Law-abiding immigrants are contributing billions of dollars to the U.S. economy. Give those immigrants, young and old, a reasonable path to citizenship. They should not have to wait 10 to 12 years.
Not all immigrants are "rapists and drug dealers." In fact, the data show that crime is not correlated with immigration. With a vetting system, we can identify the undocumented undesirables, the real criminals. Find them. And deport them.
Treating every immigrant as a criminal is wrong. Labeling undocumented immigrants as "illegal" is inhumane. Forcing people to live in fear and uncertainty is un-American. Or perhaps the vitriol surrounding our immigration debate is as American as apple pie. If that's the case, we need to start being un-American.
Every U.S. citizen needs to recognize and accept the truth about U.S. history. Stop with the bogus "this is our country—go home" arguments. Enough with the "illegal" talk. Remember: Every U.S. citizen who is not a Native American or a descendant of slaves had ancestors who immigrated to America. Every U.S. citizen who is not a Native American is living on stolen land.
Think about that when you're standing for the national anthem or listening to Woody Guthrie.
If we wanted to put "This Land Is Your Land" in proper historical context, Guthrie's lyrics would read like this:
This land is not your land, this land is not my land
From California to the New York island
From the redwood forest, to the gulf stream waters
This land was stolen for you and me
As I went walking that ribbon of highway
I saw above me that endless skyway
I saw below me that golden valley
This land was stolen for you and me
I roamed and rambled and I followed my footsteps
To the sparkling sands of her diamond deserts
And all around me, a voice was sounding
This land was stolen for you and me
There was a big high wall there that tried to stop me
Sign was painted, it said private property
But on the back side, it didn't say nothing
This land was stolen for you and me
When the sun comes shining, then I was strolling
In the wheat fields waving and dust clouds rolling
The voice was chanting as the fog was lifting
This land was stolen for you and me
This land is not your land and this land is not my land
From California to the New York island
From the redwood forest, to the gulf stream waters
This land was stolen for you and me.
None of us were around when this country was founded. Maybe some of us would have treated the Native Americans better if we had been.
Yolanda Lopez riffs off the Montgomery Flagg "Uncle Sam" poster in 1981. (Center for the Study of Political Graphics)
We can begin to make amends by being honest about America's roots. Then we can pass some enlightened immigration reform.

Evernote helps you remember everything and get organized effortlessly. Download Evernote.

Native American confronts 'anti-illegal immigration' protesters

The truth is, Europeans are the invaders.

Miles Davis playlist on Spotify