The Editor,
The public comment on jet fuel proposal was closed last week. But I want to share the feelings of a 20-year resident in Richmond about the proposed jet fuel tankers in the Fraser River and an 80-million litre tank farm on the river bank just 300 meters away from the apartment building and recreation complex.
I support all travelling business and YVR expansion, not because I have relatives, friends and neighbours working with the YVR directly or indirectly.
We need the airport for living, but I did not see the need to build the proposed jet fuel facility.
As responsive citizens, we need an environmental friendly proposal to replace the submitted controversial project and addendum.
I have no objection to the YVR spending $1.7 billion to expand the airport terminal, but there is no need to increase the jet fuel supply in short-term or long-term:
- YVR aircraft movement has dropped 12 per cent in 2011 since 2008. (http://www.yvr.ca/Libraries/Facts_and_Stats/December_2011_Movements.sflb.ashx)
- The drop in air traffic is national- and international-wide.
- Theres less jet fuel consumption due to higher cost of jet fuel and more new aircrafts.
- There are less aircrafts at YVR due to the upgrade of the new Abbotsford International Airport soon (Note: no tank farms in Abbotsford, the jet fuel is supplied from a pipeline connected to the refinery in Bellingham, WA.)
- There are less YVR users due to more residents flying out from Bellingham and Seattle, WA due to the cheaper air tickets.
- Theres less air passengers for family reunions and business meetings due to Facebook, Skype and Internet conference techniques.
- There are less air passengers due to more cruise ships to Vancouver and improved border crossing by vehicle.
There are also hundreds reason to call off the proposal, I just list a handful here:
The VAFFC mentioned in their proposal that the risk of oil spill every six years cannot be avoid.
The entire city council opposed the jet fuel project.
The Richmond Fire Dept. confirmed its unable to handle an oil tanker fire.
Environment Canada said it is an unacceptable risky project for fish and wildlife in the Fraser River.
The David Suzuki Foundation and dozens of environmental societies already presented their concerns and asked for a less risky option.
Planes need fuel to fly, but people, fish and wildlife need a safe place to live.
I urge VAFFC to please withdraw your proposal for I do not see the 3-5 per cent yearly increase of jet fuel. I do not see the need for an 80-million litre tank farm, which is 20-days storage at daily consumption rate of four million litres.
Please consider a new pipeline from the Bellingham refinery to eliminate the proposed oil tankers in the Fraser River and the increasing oil tankers in the Burrard Inlet.
This is the only win-win opportunity.
Daniel Leung, Richmond
