[All] How green energy funds Line 9

[Louisette Lanteigne]

Hi Folks
 Line 9 is being funded in part, by green energy investors. Here is how this scheme works:
Enbridge Inc. builds pipelines like Like 9. There is a separate company called Enbridge Investments Holding Inc. This other company has 400 megawatts of renewable and alternative power generation capacity as noted on their website: http://www.enbridgeincomefund.com  
The International Consortium of Investigative Journalism search on Enbridge Investments Holdings Inc. shows how that firm is strongly sponsored with offshore oil investments in Hong Kong and Asia. In other words: Not subject to Canadian taxes. https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/  On the SEDAR website http://sedar.com I did a name search for both Enbridge Inc and Enbridge Investments Holdings Inc and found they transferred over 1.5 billion in funds from the Investment company to support Enbridge Inc. who is in charge of the Line 9 project. Money was flowing from Sept to Jan 2014.
The reason I found that was because oil dropped 60% the 3rd quarter of 2014 and yet Enbridge Inc. 2014 fiscal report declared a profit in spite of falling oil values and in spite of the delayed opening of Line 9. There was no rational way they could have not got a hit unless they found money somewhere else.  In my view, they used green energy investment money to hide their losses. 
I spoke with the Alberta Security Exchange commission and confirmed that Enbridge Inc. and Enbridge Investment Holdings Inc. are indeed: TWO separate companies. 
I mentioned how the NEB Act has laws about mergers and acquisitions and how they must be notified if there are mergers or acquisitions.   
   - 74. (1) A company shall not, without the leave of the Board,      
      - (a) sell, transfer or lease to any person its pipeline, in whole or in part;
      - (b) purchase or lease any pipeline from any person;
      - (c) enter into an agreement for amalgamation with any other company; or
      - (d) abandon the operation of a pipeline.

   - Definition of “pipeline” and “company”

My friend, economist Robyn Allen flagged similar issues with the Kinder Morgan pipeline project calling it ILLEGAL. http://thetyee.ca/News/2014/11/24/Kinder-Morgan-Breaking-Law-Economist-Alleges/
She backed out of both Kinder Morgan Hearings and Northern Gateway over corruption concerns. https://dogwoodinitiative.org/blog/robyn-allan-withdraws

The issues she spoke on are the same I observed with Line 9. It was a kangaroo court. The EA for Line 9 was limited to the area of the pumping stations only and everything off site was deemed out of scope. Engineering concerns, structural integrity issues and even Enbridge's own data was ignored and deemed irrelevant when we referenced it to concerns off site. 
The City of Toronto found out about the Line 9 hearing by Ecojustice. There were several testimonies regarding lack of notice.  The hearing process did not allow any chance to cross examine engineers. It was a puppet show. We sat there, and spoke but it was still not a bona fide process. Our concerns were never addressed. There was no meaningful attempt to facilitate dialogue, resolutions or concessions. They never did address our questions.
The staff at the Alberta Securities Exchange encouraged me to contact the National Energy Board and share my concerns. I requested that they provide me with a written response on these concerns but they never did respond to me. I sent the email directly to their secretary and board members. There is no plausible deniability on these issues at their end. I told them everything I had. 
It is my fear, that Hydro One may be sold to Enbridge or to Suncor or other oil industry firms. I don't want to see the 6 billion in revenues from Hydro One exploited to facilitate funds for pipelines and oil ventures. 
Lulu 


  From: "temara.brown at gmail.com" <temara.brown at gmail.com>
 To: Louisette Lanteigne <butterflybluelu at rogers.com>; GREN <all at gren.ca> 
 Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2015 3:37 PM
 Subject: Re: [All] Hydro One question for GREN
   
 Ask‎ them to suggest an alternative revenue tool to fund transit and to put it on the table as an alternative to selling off Hydro One. The NDP has said no to every proposed revenue tool. But if you want to say you support investing in transit, you actually need a plan to pay for it!!
Temara Brown 
 


|   From: Louisette LanteigneSent: Saturday, June 6, 2015 2:31 PMTo: GREN >Reply To: Louisette LanteigneSubject: [All] Hydro One question for GREN |


 Hi Gren folks
I have the chance to meet with Andrea Horwath and Catherine Fife on Tuesday to discuss the sale of Hydro One.
Does GREN have a position on this matter? If so I can relay a document on our behalf.
The primary concern I have personally is that in Canada, divesting is tricky because most major Green Infrastructure projects are actually being funded by Big Oil. Enbridge, TransCanada etc. Here is a CBC story about this:http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/difficult-to-invest-in-green-energy-in-canada-without-big-oil-1.3100233
Big oil can move their funds from green funds to oil ventures. Ontario Hydro makes 6 billion in tax revenues. Currently it is sustainable energy but the Liberals want to sell of 60% of it and they are keeping the deal secret. We need to speak up on this one.
Lulu 




  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20150606/d548a7d7/attachment.html>