A new report released by the Living Oceans Society, Pembina Institute and the Natural Resources Defence Council (NRDC) discusses the risks associated with transporting tar sands oil through Enbridge's proposed Northern Gateway pipeline.

The report entitled 'Pipeline and tanker trouble' was written by Danielle Droitsch, Susan Casey-Lefkowitz and Anthony Swift from the NRDC as well as Nathan Lemphers, senior policy analyst at the Pembina Institute and Katie Terhune energy campaign manager at the Living Oceans Society. The report documents the risks that transporting diluted bitumen poses to communities along the pipeline and tanker paths, to salmon bearing rivers and to coastal ecosystems, including the Great Bear Rainforest.

"While the considerable environmental impacts of bitumen production are well documented, the increased risk and potential harm from transporting bitumen is less known," said Lemphers. "This report shows why the Northern Gateway pipeline is not worth the risk for the communities, rivers and Pacific coastline of British Columbia."

Paul Stanway, spokesperson for Enbridge Northern Gateway disagrees with the report saying that studies have shown that the corrosive characteristics of diluted bitumen are comparable to that of conventional crude.

"Alberta Innovates [a research and innovation organization] recently completed an independent and fact based analysis to address concerns surrounding pipelines carrying diluted bitumen. Corrosion specialist Dr. Jenny Been performed an indepth review of corrosivity of diluted bitumen in pipelines in comparison to conventional or non-oilsands crude oil," he said.

According to Stanway, Dr. Been concluded that the characteristics of diluted bitumen are not unique and are comparable to conventional crude oils during pipeline flow," Stanway said.

"Analysis of historic data shows that the internal corrosion related pipeline failure rate of diluted bitumen is statistically comparable to the conventional oil.

Stanway said, "Enbridge has been transporting crude from oil sands production since 1979 from our Athabasca system, which went into service in April 1999. It was the first liquids pipeline directly linking both the Athabasca and Cold Lake oil sands deposits with the pipeline transportation hub at Hardisty. A complete metal loss inspection of this line in 2009 revealed no increased risk or incidence of internal corrosion. We currently transport more than 80 unique commodity types that range in sulphur content and viscosity. Crude oil viscosity, sulphur content and total acid number have not been associated with increased risk or incidence of internal corrosion on the Enbridge system."

Stanway said, "Both Canada and the United States have comprehensive regulations that require pipeline operators to assure products transported adhere to quality specifications and the pipeline is designed, inspected and maintained to prevent internal corrosion."

The report also details concerns over increased supertanker traffic on B.C.'s waterways.

According to Terhune, the pipeline would be serviced by over 220 supertankers each year sailing through B.C.'s North Coast waterways. "That's twice as many inbound tankers as there is now. And a lot more than there is in Kitimat ... In Kitimat there is currently 10 tankers per year that carry condensate."

She went on to say, "There is fierce opposition in B.C. to allowing oil supertankers into our coastal waters and rightly so. History has shown that oil tankers come with oil spills. It is not a question of if, but when a spill will happen."

Many First Nations communities have also taken a stand against the Northern Gateway project.

"Our communities have taken a stand against the Northern Gateway pipeline because we would lose everything," said Gerald Amos, member of the Haisla First Nation and director of the Headwaters Initiative. "This pipeline is where we draw the line. Big oil pipelines and the accompanying oil super tankers mean that life as we know it will be over."

He said he doesn't believe Enbridge will mitigate the risks involved with transporting bitumen. "All the evidence tells us that there is no way of guaranteeing there won't be a spill .... if push comes to shove I am prepared to stand on the line and prevent their machinery from crossing into Haisla territory. My concerns about this project are too high," Amos said.

Casey-Lefkowitz said, "It doesn't seem worth the risk. The benefit flows to the major oil companies while the communities of B.C. take all the risk. We don't need an expansion of the tar sands and there is no safe, risk free way of transporting bitumen across B.C.'s ecosystem."

The report also makes recommendations for provincial and federal policies associated with the Northern Gateway project, asking for rejection of the proposed pipeline and a ban on large oil tanker traffic off of British Columbia's coast.

"In their growing desperation to get dirty bitumen to international markets, Alberta's tar sands oil industry expects British Columbia to bear a very high cost," said Casey-Lefkowitz.

NRDC has recently added its voice to growing Northern Gateway opposition, with members and activists sending almost 100,000 letters in the last month to the B.C. government and Enbridge asking that the pipeline not be built.

"We have a difficult challenge ahead. But up to 80 per cent of British Columbians don't support the pipeline, as well as many of B.C.'s First Nation groups. If Ottawa decides to support the project they will be going against the wishes of the majority of B.C. and that won't be an easy decision for the Prime Minister to make," Lemphers said.