1Citizen acceptance of new fossil fuel infrastructure:

The Northern Gateway Pipeline

Energy and Materials Research Group

EMRG

Dr. Jonn Axsen, Simon Fraser UniversitySchool of Resource and Environmental Management

January 29, 2014

2Trust and transparency?

3This evening’s flow…

1. What is the deal with

…unconventional fossil fuels?

…climate change?

…the Northern Gateway Pipeline?

2. What do Canadian citizens think about the NGP?

3. Why are Alberta perceptions so different than BC?

4. What should be done?

4

What is the deal with unconventional fossil fuels?

Climate change!

5Controversy over new fossil fuel extraction

Benefits:IndustryJob creationEconomy

Local risks:Pipeline spillsTanker spillsLand rightsAir qualityWater qualityEcosystems

Global risks:Climate change

6The pathway to mitigate climate change damages

An

nu

al G

lob

al E

mis

sio

ns

(Gig

ato

nn

es C

O2

equ

ival

ent)

2000 21002050

20

40

60

2015

Emissions path for 50/50 chance of not exceeding 2° C

Current path to soon lock-in to 4C, then 6C,

etc

50 – 75% decline by 2050

Must start declining this decade

7Carbon budget: we can only burn so much more fossil fuel to stay within 2°C limit

Source: Nature, 2012

8

What is the deal with the Northern Gateway Pipeline?

Environment vs. economy?

9NGP: Proposed to transport bitumen 1,172 km from Alberta oil sands to Northern BC Coast

10Federal rhetoric…

Joe Oliver, Natural Resource Minister:

“There are environmental and other radical groups that would seek to block this opportunity to diversity our trade…

…their goal is to stop any major project, no matter what the cost to Canadian families in lost jobs and economic growth. No forestry. No mining. No oil. No gas. No more hydro-electric dams…

…[these groups] threaten to hijack our regulatory system to achieve their radical ideological agenda.”

- CBC news, January 9, 2012

11Provincial rhetoric…

Christy Clark, BC Premier:

Five conditions for support:

1. Environmental review2. Marine oil spill response (world leading)3. Land spill prevention (world leading)4. Aboriginal benefits5. Economic benefits (BC gets fair share, reflect risk)

12

What do Canadian citizens think about the pipeline?

13

But it is hard to sort out the different “polls”

Organization Date Region SupportNGP?

OpposeNGP?

Enbridge Jan, 2012 BC 48% 32%

Insights West Feb, 2013 BC 35% 61%

Feb, 2013 AB 75% 18%

BC Chamber of Commerce Nov, 2013 BC 47% 44%

Insights West Nov, 2013 BC 42% 47%

Is 61% of BC population radical?Is 32% radical?

Why is Alberta so different from BC?

14

My survey of Canadians (N = 2,628):Spring 2013

15Northern Gateway Pipeline (NGP)

Questions:1. How do citizen perceptions vary by region?2. How does citizen acceptance vary by values and lifestyle?

Sample: Canadian “new car buyers” (minus Quebec)BC: n = 813AB: n = 508Central: n = 1111Atlantic: n = 196

Survey instrument: Web-based survey (Sentis Market Research)Lifestyle activities (44 items)Values (12 items from Stern et al. 1995)“New Ecological Paradigm” scale (Concern)NGP supportBeliefs of oil sands and NGP

16Substantial regional variation in support:

Highest resistance in BC

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

BC

Alberta

CentralAtlantic

StronglyAgree

Agree

Disagree

StronglyDisagree

Statement: “I support the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project”

17AB perceives more economic benefits;BC perceives more environmental risks

...should instead be built to eastern Canada or the United States.

...will increase overall greenhouse gas emissions.*

...has unacceptable environmental risks.*

...will provide economic benefits to Canadians.*

...will provide benefits to my province.*

...will create jobs.*

Canada should decrease or shut down the oil sands.*

Canada should keep or expand the size of the oil sands.*

There are major environmental impacts from oil sands.*

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

AlbertaBC

* Chi-square association at 99% confidence level

The pipeline project…

Canadian Oil Sands

18How to measure citizen values?

“Consider each of the items below and indicate how important each value is as a guiding principle in you life.”

Traditional• Family security, safety for loved ones• Honouring parents and elders, showing respect• Self-discipline, self-restraint, resistance to temptation

Egoistic• Being influential, having an impact on people and events• Being authoritative, leading or commanding• Wealth, material possessions, money

Biospheric• Respecting the earth, harmony with other species• Protecting nature, preserving nature• Unity with nature, fitting into nature

Altruistic• Equality, equal opportunity for all• Social justice, correcting injustice, care for the weak• A world of peace, free of war and conflict

19Identified 6 segments of Canadians:

3 with environmanetal-orientation, and 3 without

StrongEnviro.

MildlyAware

Multi-valued

Self-oriented

Tradition-oriented

Un-engaged

Values

Traditional + ++ -- + -- Egoistic - -- + + -- Biospheric ++ - ++ - -- -- Altruistic ++ - ++ -- --Enviro. lifestyle ++ + -- --NEP (Concern) ++ + - -- --

% of sample 20% 21% 21% 16% 14% 9%

20Substantial within-region variationsin support among value clusters

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

BC sample (n = 813) AB sample (n = 508)

Strong enviro.

Traditional

StronglyAgree

Agree

Dis-agree

StronglyDis-

agree

Mildly aware

UnengagedSelf-oriented

Multi-valued Strong enviro.

Mildly awareMulti-valued

Traditional

UnengagedSelf-oriented

Statement: “I support the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project”

21Potential explanations for observed regional differences in NGP support

Maybe because…

…economic benefits actually are higher in Alberta (GDP, jobs)?

…local environmental impacts and risks are higher in BC (oil spill, tanker traffic, construction)?

…media coverage and discourse?

…subtle cultural differences that engage values differently?

22

Conclusions

23Some Take Home Points1. Further developing the oil sands (e.g. NGP) counters

Canada’s climate change goals and obligations.

2. One-third of a population (BC) is not radical by definition. NGP opposition is significant and widespread in BC.

3. NGP opposition and media coverage largely ignores climate change impacts.

4. NGP support/opposition strongly aligns with values.

5. NGP support/opposition strongly varies by region (e.g. BC vs. AB) – I suspect media comes into play here.

6. My opinion on what should be done:

• Use NGP as symbolic battle to promote climate policy

• Relate climate threat to environment and economic arguments, biospheric and traditional values

24

Extras

25We are not running out of oil: The earth is full of fossil fuels

Source: Farrell and Brandt, Berkeley, 2008

Potential increasing with shale gas

Potential increasing and cost falling with innovations

26Climate change is real: 2°C as safe limit

26

Today

Tipping point

Current path

27

“The niche for the oil sands industry is fairly narrow and mostly involves hoping that climate policy will fail.” - Chan et al., 2010

“The main reason for the demise of the oil sands industry with global CO2 policy is that the demand for oil worldwide drops substantially.

… it can be met with conventional oil resources that entail less CO2 emissions in the production process.”

MIT study (2010): Oil sands will shrink if world enacts serious climate policy

28Insights West (2013): BC has more NGP opposition

than support, but maybe that is changing