Activist Groups Urge Insurers to Drop Coverage of Oil Sands Pipeline
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A coalition of 32 environmental and indigenous groups on Thursday urged insurers to stop underwriting the Trans Mountain pipeline to pressure Canada to cancel its plan to expand the project which carries crude from Alberta's oil sands to British Columbia's Pacific coast.
The coalition sent a letter to 27 companies registered to insure the pipeline, including Munich RE, Talanx and Zurich Insurance Group AG, asking them to drop their coverage before Aug. 31, the deadline for Canada to renew its liability insurance.
The groups said they hope the pressure "will show the Canadian government that the expansion is uninsurable."
The Canadian government bought the pipeline from Kinder Morgan to help solve crude transportation bottlenecks for landlocked Albertan crude. Environmental activists say the project will undermine Canada's commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 70% below 2005 levels by 2030 under the Paris climate agreement.
"Providing insurance services to a project that would allow exponential growth of the oil sands, effectively removing any remaining chance of Canada staying within the goals of the Paris climate change agreement, would critically undermine the continued viability of your industry," the groups told the insurers in the joint letter.
The activist groups include Stand.Earth, the Union of BC Indian Chiefs, German NGO Urgewald, the Rainforest Action Network and Greenpeace International.
The groups said they would ramp up pressure on Zurich, which told the campaigners in a letter last week it would continue insuring the Trans Mountain Pipeline while it discusses with the Canadian government how to meet its Paris climate agreement targets with the pipeline in place.
In June, Zurich had pledged to divest from the oil sands industry.
"By renewing coverage of the Trans Mountain Pipeline, Zurich betrays its own commitments," said Lucie Pinson, of the Unfriend Coal campaign in a statement on Thursday.
Self-insurance by the government for the expansion would cost taxpayers $1.1 billion, the groups said. Pressure is growing for financial companies to pull back from insuring and investing in polluting industries like coal and oil as part of an effort to combat climate change.
Related News
Related News
- Phillips 66 to Shut LA Oil Refinery, Ending Major Gasoline Output Amid Supply Concerns
- FERC Sides with Williams in Texas-Louisiana Pipeline Dispute with Energy Transfer
- U.S. Appeals Court Blocks Kinder Morgan’s Tennessee Pipeline Permits
- ConocoPhillips Eyes Sale of $1 Billion Permian Assets Amid Marathon Acquisition
- Valero Considers All Options, Including Sale, for California Refineries Amid Regulatory Pressure
- U.S. Appeals Court Blocks Kinder Morgan’s Tennessee Pipeline Permits
- Malaysia’s Oil Exports to China Surge Amid Broader Import Decline
- U.S. LNG Export Growth Faces Uncertainty as Trump’s Tariff Proposal Looms, Analysts Say
- Marathon Oil to Lay Off Over 500 Texas Workers Ahead of ConocoPhillips Merger
- Valero Considers All Options, Including Sale, for California Refineries Amid Regulatory Pressure
Comments