There are three similarities between BP’s runaway oil well in the Gulf of Mexico and the proposed Gas N Go station on the Dyke Road in Comox:  the lack of preventive measures before the projects got started, the over-confidence in technology, and the inability of government to handle the spill. 

Now, to be realistic, there is a huge difference between what is happening in the Gulf of Mexico and what could happen here.  But, depending upon its scope, a Gas N Go spill could severely damage a highly sensitive ecosystem.  It could wipe out fisheries, bird habitat and seafood businesses in the Courtenay River Estuary and Baynes Sound.  And it could deal a body blow to the tourism industry in our local communities.

In terms of prevention, there was no requirement for a detailed environmental assessment for BP’s drilling activities in the Gulf of Mexico—nor is there for most other drilling operations.  The U.S. Federal government has been giving out drilling licenses like candy.

Here, on the Dyke Road, in the middle of a highly sensitive ecosystem, there was also no environmental assessment.   But there is a difference. BP’s drilling operation was in the middle of the ocean, 48miles from land.  Gas and go is on the land, in a vulnerable ecosystem, only 60 meters from the Ocean—but still no environmental assessment.   

In the Gulf of Mexico both the company and the government bought into the belief that the technology was fool-proof and fail safe.  Before the drilling began the CEO of BP went on record to state that an oil spill that would damage the land (in four Gulf States and now Florida) was “virtually impossible.” 

Here at home we have been assured that the fuel tanks to be buried in the ground of the site are of “the latest technology,” fool-proof and fail-safe.  (No mention of human error, say from the crash of a gas tanker turning across streams of traffic to enter the site).  If you buy the “latest technology” risk-free” argument—google  “gas stations and water pollution.”  You’ll get 900,000 results of service station pollution problems from around the world, many of them from major oil companies like BP that did have the “latest technologies.”  Does anyone know of a de-commissioned gas station in this day and age that did not require remediation work to clean up contaminated soil?

As for clean-up, the U.S. Federal Government seems totally incapable of handling a clean-up. It stresses that the BP is responsible for the cleanup.

What about a potential spill here on the Dyke Road? 

If you check with the local Emergency Measures folks you will find that there is no local capability to handle a spill into the estuary.  They refer the matter to the Department of the Environment in Nanaimo.

If you check with Nanaimo, as we did, you’ll find that, according to the Environmental Management Act, it is the owner of the gas station that is responsible for the cleanup—just like in the Gulf of Mexico.  The Department will only intervene after the local owner proves incapable of dealing with the problem or if, and I quote, “the owner goes bankrupt.”

If you think the comparison between the Gulf of Mexico and Gas N Go is far-fetched, or if you have confidence in the current “let-the-owner-clean-it up” policy, try this example much closer to home. 

In February, 2008 in the town of Lake Cowichan here on Vancouver Island, diesel fuel leaked out of a service station’s underground diesel tank into a creek and then into the Cowichan River, one of the province’s two most important fishing rivers.  The government spotted the problem after a few days, but left it up to the property owner to fix the problem.  He hired consultants to do the work; the government supposedly was monitoring the situation.  But the work was shoddy; government oversight was useless. 

After 5 months, the tank, still leaking fuel, hadn’t been removed.  Massive excavations of contaminated soil were required on a neighbour’s property.  The gas station owner went bankrupt.  The provincial government, pressured by the community, finally stepped in.  The Minister authorized up to one million dollars of tax-payers money for the cleanup. 

So much for a timely response and an effective clean-up policy. 

The Gulf of Mexico and Lake Cowichan force us to look again at our own situation.  Does anyone really believe, given all we know about the ecological sensitivity of the location,  the physical liabilities of the site on the Dyke Road, the track record of gas stations, and recent past clean-up practices, that the property owner and government can prevent an environmental disaster, or even deal with it when it occurs?  

Mike Bell, Chairperson
Sierra Club Comox Valley
250-890-3671

Note: Sierra Club Comox Valley is the youngest group of Sierra Club BC. Gathered initially to oppose a proposal for a gas station in a high-risk earthquake area, the core group expanded their vision to address the sustainability of the entire Courtenay River watershed. Currently, Sierra Comox Valley is focusing on two key campaigns: No Gas on the Dyke and the Raven Coal Mine Campaign (in partnership with Coal Watch Comox Valley).