Showing posts with label Energy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Energy. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 14, 2013

FUNDING: Community and Business Toolkit for Tidal Energy Development

English: Bay of Fundy © 2004 Matthew Trump
English: Bay of Fundy © 2004 Matthew Trump (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
ATEI is Pleased to Announce Release of the Community and Business
Toolkit for Tidal Energy Development.

Click here
<http://tidalenergy.acadiau.ca/community-business-toolkit-.html>to learn
more and download a
copy (http://tidalenergy.acadiau.ca/community-business-toolkit-.html


In June 2011, the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB) announced
Community Feed-In Tariffs (COMFIT) for various renewable energy
developments, including small-scale tidal energy. This innovative
government policy gives communities/developers a long-term, guaranteed
price for electricity generated from renewable resources. The UARB also
announced that feed-in tariffs for large-scale tidal energy would be
forthcoming.

However, many question remain around how communities and businesses in
Nova Scotia can benefit from tidal energy development. To address some
of these questions the *Acadia Tidal Energy Institute,* with support
from municipal, provincial and federal partners, has developed the
*Community and Business Toolkit for Tidal Energy Development.* The*
Community and Business Toolkit for Tidal Energy Development *will assist
communities and businesses in better understanding the opportunities
stemming from tidal energy while encouraging responsible harvesting of
the tidal energy resource.

The* Community and Business Toolkit for Tidal Energy Development
*contains a series of modules that describe opportunties and strategies
for communities and businesses to become involved in tidal enegy
development. The modules also provide relevant advice, checklists and links.

*The Entire Toolkit and Individual modules can be downloaded from the
links below.*

Dana Morin
/Director-Business Development/**
*Fundy Tidal Inc.*
121 Second Street
Westport, Nova Scotia, B0V 1H0
Office: (902) 839.2078
Cell: (902) 790.3565
www.fundytidal.com <http://www.fundytidal.com/>

*Marine Renewables Canada, www.marinerenewables.ca <www.oreg.ca>*

/Aligning industry, academia and government to ensure that Canada is a
leader in providing ocean energy solutions to a world market.
/*Fundy Energy Research Network (FERN), fern.acadiau.ca
*/Fostering Collaborations in Tidal Energy Research/

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

OPINION: From Off the Coast of Massachusetts: A Cautionary Tale About Natural Gas Infrastructure


CLF Scoop: From Off the Coast of Massachusetts: A Cautionary Tale About Natural Gas Infrastructure

Posted: 30 Jan 2013 07:55 AM PST
The front page of the Boston Globe last week presented a powerful, timely and cautionary tale about  two liquefied natural gas terminals  that sit off the coast of Gloucester and Salem. Those terminals are the tangible reminder of a massive push undertaken by energy industry insiders to build such terminals.  The intensity of that push, which began to build around 2002, becoming most intense during the 2004  to 2007 period and then petering out in the years since, contrasts sharply with the reality described in the Globe article: that those two offshore terminals have sat idle for the last two years.
That push to build LNG import facilities, which was such a mania in energy industry circles circa 2005, yielded some crazy ideas, like the proposal to hollow out a Boston Harbor Island and the infamous Weavers Cove project in Fall River. The offshore terminals, while the least bad of those proposals, reflected short sighted thinking detached from careful regional planning.  Both in terms of the need for these facilities and design decisions like regulators not forcing the projects to share one pipeline to shore instead of (as they did) twice disturbing the marine environment to build two duplicative pieces of infrastructure.
Today, the hue and cry is no longer about LNG, instead we are bombarded with impassioned demands for more natural gas pipelines as well as more measured discussions of the need for "smart expansions". Will we have the collective intelligence to be smarter and more careful this time? Will the permitting process force consideration, as the law requires, of alternatives that make better use of existing infrastructure and pose less risk to the environment and the wallets of customers? Fixing natural gas leaks and becoming much more efficient in our use of gas is a key "supply strategy" that needs to be on the table and fully examined before committing to new pipelines.
And as it so often is, the overarching issue here is protecting future generations by addressing the climate issue. Science and prudent energy analysis, makes it clear that we need to put ourselves on a trajectory to end the burning of fossil fuels, including natural gas by the middle of this century. Given this reality every proposal to build massive and long-lived facilities to import more of those fuels must be viewed with great skepticism.

Friday, April 8, 2011

ENERGY: Quebec continues to block Labrador transmission to the south.

So this makes the cable to Nova Scotia even more vital. Now the hidden question that no one is asking. Will the Newfoundland Labrador and Nova Scotia energy company bypass New Brunswick's transmission lines and build a tiny cable across to Maine ... AND bring Maine into the partnership?  New Brunswick may have screwed itself to the wall by trying to sell our NB Power to Hydro Quebec. Business hates partners that can't be trusted. Did NB earn that label thanks to Shawn Graham? Perhaps.

My opinions this morning
Art
***********************
centre
NL: Quebec energy agency rejects N.L. appeal for access to electricity grid

Published on April 8, 2011Staff ~ The Canadian Press

[ST. JOHN'S, NL] - Newfoundland and Labrador's government says Quebec's energy regulator has upheld a decision to deny access to the province's electricity transmission system for power generated by the Lower Churchill project.

The ruling follows an appeal filed by Nalcor Energy, Newfoundland's Crown-owned utility, against an earlier decision on complaints filed by the Labrador project against Hydro-Quebec.

Shawn Skinner, Newfoundland and Labrador's minister of natural resources, says the Quebec ruling doesn't address the province's arguments for open transmission access.

Skinner says Newfoundland and Labrador strongly disagrees with the decision and the actions of Hydro Quebec to block the ability of the Atlantic province to export electricity from the proposed Lower Churchill Falls project at Muskrat Falls.

He says in a news release that Newfoundland and Labrador is reviewing its options, including a judicial review.

The minister says a Quebec legislature motion on Wednesday criticizing federal support for the Lower Churchill project shows Quebec is blocking access
Image via Wikipedia
Get the pictures and subscribe at: http://fundytides.blogspot.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, April 7, 2011

ENERGY: CBC Special Report shows how Quebec has won with hydro while NB diddled with nuclear!

A quick look at this map show how well Quebec has done in moving to hydroelectric power while NB and NS continued to waste time and resources with oil, coal and nuclear. Same coin ... smart on one side ... stupid on the other.
Click for larger view

Get more details at: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/features/power-switch/index.html  Well worth the visit.


Get the pictures and subscribe at: http://fundytides.blogspot.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, March 19, 2011

ENERGY: Ralph Nader on our Nuclear Nightmare ... who will pay and why.


Nuclear Nightmare

The unfolding multiple nuclear reactor catastrophe in Japan is prompting overdue attention to the 104 nuclear plants in the United States—many of them aging, many of them near earthquake faults, some on the west coast exposed to potential tsunamis.

Nuclear power plants boil water to produce steam to turn turbines that generate electricity. Nuclear power’s overly complex fuel cycle begins with uranium mines and ends with deadly radioactive wastes for which there still are no permanent storage facilities to contain them for tens of thousands of years.

Atomic power plants generate 20 percent of the nation’s electricity. Over forty years ago, the industry’s promoter and regulator, the Atomic Energy Commission estimated that a full nuclear meltdown could contaminate an area “the size of Pennsylvania” and cause massive casualties. You, the taxpayers, have heavily subsidized nuclear power research, development, and promotion from day one with tens of billions of dollars.

Because of many costs, perils, close calls at various reactors, and the partial meltdown at the Three Mile Island plant in Pennsylvania in 1979, there has not been a nuclear power plant built in the United States since 1974.

Now the industry is coming back “on your back” claiming it will help reduce global warming from fossil fuel emitted greenhouse gases.

Pushed aggressively by President Obama and Energy Secretary Chu, who refuses to meet with longtime nuclear industry critics, here is what “on your back” means:

1. Wall Street will not finance new nuclear plants without a 100% taxpayer loan guarantee. Too risky. That’s a lot

Thursday, March 17, 2011

ENERGY:Nuclear Power Plants in Canada.

For the record. Here is a list of all Canadian nuclear reactors.



Courtesy Canadian Nuclear Society

On the map, circles represent research reactors, triangles represent commercial facilities. Please refer to CNS' site map for more detail.

Research 1-Univ Alberta, Edmonton (S), 2-Saskatchewan Research Council, Saskatoon (S), 3-AECL Whiteshell (WR-1, S Demo), 4-McMaster Univ, Hamilton (P), 5-Univ. Toronto (S), 6-Royal Military College, Kingston (S), 7-AECL Chalk River Laboratories (NRU, NRX, PTR, ZED-2, ZEEP), 8-Nordion, Kanata (S), 9-Ecole Polytechnique, Montreal (S), 10-Dalhousie Univ., Halifax (S). S=Slowpoke II (20 kw); P=Swimming Pool (5 MW). AECL's Whiteshell reactors and Chalk River NRX and ZEEP reactors are shutdown.

Commercial 1-Bruce and Douglas Point, 2-Pickering, 3-Darlington, 4-Gentilly, 5-Point Lepreau, 6-NPD. Douglas Point, Gentilly 1, and NPD have been decommissioned; Bruce A2 is mothballed.

Canada has focused on the CANDU (Canadian Deuterium-Uranium) design, which uses heavy water as the moderator and coolant and natural uranium as the fuel. Canadian companies operating the reactors are - Ontario Power Generation (Nuclear division), Bruce Power, and Quebec Hydro - and the New Brunswick Power Commission operate the commercial facilities.

Canadian nuclear reactors are regulated by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), the successor to the former Atomic Energy Control Board (AECB)

More information here.

Get the pictures and subscribe at: http://fundytides.blogspot.com

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

TIDAL POWER:Maine firm set to connect to grid

Official seal of EastportImage via WikipediaAP Exclusive: Tidal power to connect to grid
Forbes
And Taylor say there's lot more potential in neighboring Canada, where he said the Bay of Fundy's tremendous tides moving through each day carry the daily equivalent energy of four hurricanes. Ocean Renewable and Fundy Tidal Inc. of Westport, ...
Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, December 18, 2010

Turbine pulled out of Bay of Fundy

Last Updated: Friday, December 17, 2010 | 4:20 PM AT CBC News

The damaged underwater turbine in the Bay of Fundy was recovered Thursday by OpenHydro.

The damaged underwater turbine in the Bay of Fundy was recovered Thursday by OpenHydro. (Nova Scotia Power)

The damaged underwater turbine in the Bay of Fundy was recovered Thursday by Irish tidal renewable energy company OpenHydro.

The 400 tonne turbine was removed from the floor of the Minas Channel.

"The turbine is in extremely good condition," said James Ives, OpenHydro's CEO. "All the blades have failed. We have overloaded the turbine. We've underestimated the loadings in the Bay of Fundy. We underestimated the energy in the Bay of Fundy."

OpenHyrdo and Nova Scotia Power first tried to remove it in November.

That attempt was unsuccessful due to a rise in tides. Subsequent efforts to retrive it were hampered by bad weather, including strong winds.

The turbine was deployed in November 2009.

The turbine will now be towed to Cherubini Metal Works in Dartmouth for a forensic engineering assessment.

They will try to extract information on six sensor systems.

Then it will be decided if another attempt to put a turbine in the Minas Channel will happen and if it will be the refitted turbine or a new one.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/nova-scotia/story/2010/12/17/ns-turbine-pulled-out-of-bay-of-fundy.html?ref=rss#ixzz18TgNSYVf

Monday, November 1, 2010

ENERGY: Sackville not shutting door on oil and gas

Get the pictures and subscribe at: http://fundytides.blogspot.com

Detail of Tower for drilling horizontally into...Image via WikipediaBy Katie Tower, Transcontinental Media

Source: The Sackville Tribune, October 29, 2010

[SACKVILLE, NS] — Sackville may have denied a gas exploration company the rights to drill on municipal-owned land but that doesn’t mean town officials are willing to close the door on other opportunities that could come their way if the industry is successful in other parts of the region.

Councillor Merrill Fullerton said the town needs to be ready to take advantage of the benefits of an oil and gas exploration sector that is about to emerge strong in the province.

Responding to residents’ concerns over comments made last month by Sackville’s director of economic development, who commented that the town needs to position itself for oil and gas industry development, Fullerton said the municipality has no intention of targeting the sector itself but should be open to other possibilities.

“There’s certainly no one on this council who is advocating for drilling or processing,” he said. “But what we do need to understand, as a community, is the economic spin-offs that could come from this. We’re not going to bury our heads in the sand.”

Although Petroworth Resources Inc., a Toronto-based exploration company, officially confirmed this month that they will not test for natural gas deposits on town-owned land, Fullerton said the company has obtained 159 permits to conduct seismic testing in areas surrounding the community.

He pointed out that there could be plenty of benefits for local firms and contractors, who could provide all types of services and maintenance work, if natural gas is found in Tantramar.

“We can sit back and pretend that we want nothing to do with the industry but I think we’d be doing a great disservice if we did.”

Fullerton noted that the oil and gas industry is a sector that could create employment and increase the tax base in the municipality and shouldn’t be overlooked as an economic development opportunity.

“This supply chain is quite large and we need to understand the opportunities that come with that.”

Councillor Virgil Hammock agreed with Fullerton, noting that councillors are certainly concerned over the drilling process used to mine for natural gas, but they need to be open-minded if they want to benefit from any potential finds.

“I do have problems with the industry and the fracking that’s going to happen outside our community,” he said. “But we can’t completely close our minds to what’s going on around us.”

Friday, October 22, 2010

ENERGY: Sierra Club targets export of nuclear waste.

Get the pictures and subscribe at: http://fundytides.blogspot.com

 SCC awaits decision on Bruce Power’s plan to ship 1600 tonnes of nuclear waste across the Great Lakes to Sweden
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) held two days of public hearings in Ottawa September 28- 29th, 2010 to discuss Bruce Power’s proposal to move 16 used steam generators to Studsvik, Sweden where they would be disassembled, melted down and recycled. Leftover waste would be shipped back to Canada.

Interveners representing concerned environmental and community groups joined Sierra Club Canada’s Executive Director, John Bennett, in asking the CNSC to adjourn the hearing to allow time to prepare a proper study on the potential environmental impacts that such an undertaking would entail.

Bruce Power’s proposal represents “a major deviation from the approved plan” set out in their 2005 Environmental Assessment. As such, John argued before the panel that Bruce Power’s current proposal “should require revisiting the environmental assessment.”

For more information: http://www.sierraclub.ca/en/blog/john-bennett/blue-box-nukes


Friday, October 8, 2010

ENERGY: More problems at Lepreau - Fuel tube problems could delay N.B. nuclear plant

Get the pictures and subscribe at: http://fundytides.blogspot.com

Last Updated: Friday, October 8, 2010 | 7:03 PM AT
CBC News



Any further delay of the Point Lepreau refurbishment could jeopardize a campaign promise to freeze power rates made by the incoming Progressive Conservative government. (CBC)

NB Power has announced that Atomic Energy of Canada Limited will have to start over with one of the most important parts of the refurbishment of the Point Lepreau nuclear plant.

The federal Crown corporation is going to remove all 380 calandria tubes to reinstall and reseal them, which could further delay the completion of the project, already more than a year behind schedule.

It has been estimated that NB Power will have to pay $1 million a day to purchase replacement power while the reactor is not in service.

"Project staff are proceeding with the removal of all 380 calandria tubes," said an NB Power statement that was released at 5 p.m. AT Friday, as New Brunswickers prepared for the three-day Thanksgiving weekend.

"We do not have specific details from AECL on how it will impact the overall timeline of the project.

"In our continued efforts to be open and transparent with our employees and customers, we are releasing this information to you now as this is currently happening and will provide you with more detailed information as it becomes available later next week."

The calandria tubes are made to house smaller nuclear pressure tubes, which in turn contain radioactive nuclear fuel bundles.
Refurbishment originally scheduled for 2009 completion

They were the first major piece of equipment to be installed in the reactor as part of the much-delayed refurbishment of the 27-year-old generating station in southern New Brunswick.

The refurbishment, which began on March 28, 2008, is expected to extend the generating station's life by 25 to 30 years. It was supposed to be completed by September 2009.

Before Friday's announcement, the $1.4-billion refurbishment was already hundreds of millions of dollars over budget.

The most optimistic recent forecasts estimate the refurbishment will be completed by October 2011, and NB Power will need until February 2012 to get the power plant to begin generating electricity again.

The removal of the original calandria tubes took AECL one year.

With the delays, the incoming Progressive Conservative government will be in charge of a refurbishment deal they signed up for in 2005, when they were led by Bernard Lord.

The newest delay could be a problem for incoming leader David Alward, who takes power Oct. 12. He promised a three-year freeze on power rates, which was calculated on the assumption the reactor would be operational in February.

NB Power predicted in April that power rates would rise an extra three per cent next year because of the refurbishment cost overruns.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunswick/story/2010/10/08/nb-point-lepreau-refurbishment-delays.html?ref=rss#ixzz11oHWayFR




Pre-operational environmental monitoring report for the Point Lepreau, N.B., nuclear generating station - 1981 (Canadian technical report of hydrography and ocean sciences)

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

ENERGY: Alward to shelve Areva deal at Point Lepreau

Get the pictures and subscribe at: http://fundytides.blogspot.com
Generation: Premier-elect says he plans to put future nuclear plans with Areva on ice and concentrate on the ongoing completion of Point Lepreau power plant refurbishment

REBECCA PENTY
Telegraph-Journal

Premier-elect David Alward says he will put an agreement with nuclear firm Areva Canada Inc., to look at building a second reactor in the province, on the back burner when he takes the reins next month.

Toronto energy consultant Tom Adams said he believes the Areva deal was an attempt by the outgoing Liberal Premier Shawn Graham to direct attention away from a scrapped plan to sell NB Power assets to Hydro-Québec, which was originally met with public discontent.

Alward, who will be sworn in on Oct. 12, said Tuesday his focus will be on seeing a completion of the ongoing Point Lepreau nuclear power plant refurbishment, which continues to be mired in long delays.

"My priority is to get Point Lepreau up and running and Mr. Graham, perhaps at an opportune time, came out with the idea there could be a second nuclear plant in the province 10 to 15 years down the road," Alward said, a day after winning a large majority in the provincial election.

Areva, the New Brunswick government and NB Power announced in Saint John in early July that the French company - the world's largest nuclear vendor firm - would examine the feasibility of building a light-water nuclear reactor in the province by 2020, creating a clean energy park with other sources of power including natural gas cogeneration, wind, biomass and solar, as well investing in research and development.

The idea was that the private sector would finance the project and NB Power would operate the reactor.

But Alward later said the benefits would have to outweigh the risks for New Brunswickers and expressed concern there would be a request for government investment in the nuclear plant.

The Progressive Conservative leader said Tuesday he wants the existing plant at Point Lepreau back on the grid by February 2012 and that "other things will take care of themselves after."

Read the entire article here: http://nbbusinessjournal.canadaeast.com/journal/article/1239378

Pre-operational environmental monitoring report for the Point Lepreau, N.B., nuclear generating station - 1981 (Canadian technical report of hydrography and ocean sciences)

Saturday, August 22, 2009

Head Harbour Passage and LNG - maybe it's all about something else?


Get the pictures and subscribe at: http://fundytides.blogspot.com

Why legislate when it could cut off Canada's options for other port expansion on the Canadian side or, more ominously, the planned filling of Head Harbour Passage and Western Passage with multiple, whale-grinding energy turbines ... a much greater threat than an LNG tanker. Or... perhaps both sides want a conflict to be adjudicated in international court? Or are we simply pawns in a bigger game?

Makes one wonder if our politicians are truly interested in the best interests of their Quoddy constituents?

I don't hear much about these upcoming issues from our erstwhile leaders of SPBC LTD.

I know, I know shhh ... you might upset someone or give succour to the enemy. But as Max says, legislation would resolve the issue! The foundation has already been prepared for a Marine Protected Area or a Marine Managed Area. Get on with it!!!  We've been screwing around with this since Pittston ... that's over 40 years!

That's my opinion tonight. Art
******************************************  
MAX WOLFE
COMMENTARY


It's not often in this frosty corner of the globe that you can get the local population to gather for a meeting on a hot, steamy evening in a church. An Anglican Church to boot.

Columnist Max Wolfe argues that Canada can protect its territorial waters on the east coast by regulating ship traffic in Head Harbour Passage.
 
The gothic arches may be an exaltation of the almighty but they don't do much for the sweat stains under your armpits. The baroque festival in Lameque is celebrated in an equally sweltering church at an equally sweltering time of the year - most years, so I guess it can be done. And it is good to see the church providing their facilities for occasions of serious community concern. It keeps them relevant

The occasion this week was the annual general meeting of Save Passamaquoddy Bay Canada, in the Anglican Church in St. Andrews. About 200 people turned out to sit on hard pews and listen. Speakers were well informed and discussion was limited. It was too hot or maybe the converted had been preached to and were more or less satisfied with what they heard. There were no dissenting or even critical voices.

SPBC Ltd. has been fighting to keep liquified natural gas tankers out of Head Harbour Passage and Passamaquoddy Bay for three years now. There were no oratorical flourishes, stirring speeches or explosive applause at the meeting. It was all very professional and low key. The time for fiery oratory passed three years ago when the issue first hit the headlines. Now the group is slogging through the mud of the required political processes working at both the provincial and the federal levels. And the process has been ongoing for so long that SPBC is now educating the next generation of bureaucrats and politicians. They don't tire, and if anyone expects them to fold their tents and slink away into the night, think again.

These people and their supporters from around Passamaquoddy Bay see the threat of tankers in their area as not just an unacceptable challenge to Canadian sovereignty. It is a massive threat to their environment and to their way of life. So why is it that the residents of Washington County, Maine don't see it that way too? Simply because they have been misled into believing that this is a "jobs for Mainers" proposition and they need the jobs. There will, of course, be jobs for Mainers, but not very many.

SPBC has already made significant progress. They have pressured the federal government into stating more than once that Canada will not cooperate with the U.S. regulatory people looking into the matter. It's our turf, we don't negotiate with you or anyone on that. Canada promised to send a diplomatic note to the Americans and has done so. Good for us! In fact, they have done everything but be effective.

As one person aptly pointed out, if we haven't been able to do "enough" to grab the American attention, why would the Americans need to do anything at all? It is hard to argue against that, but on the other hand, the longer it all drags out, the more likely that American investors will move their money somewhere else. Time is on our side, and the longer the process takes the better for us.

The mood of the meeting was one of satisfaction with the work the SPBC was doing, but only of grudging acceptance of the snail-like pace of the negotiations, if negotiations are even in process. The meeting was typically Canadian and didn't even have the gumption to say "I'm mad and I'm not going to put up with this any longer." That is not the Canadian way. To get the American attention we need to explode our own nuclear weapon or elect a fundamentalist Muslim prime minister rather than a fundamentalist Christian one.

The big trouble is that there is never just one issue on the table when dealing with the Americans. There are always half a dozen pots simmering at the same time. There's trade, softwood lumber, border crossings, Cuba, Iraq and a whole host of problems that come from allowing ourselves to be in the American hip pocket, if not attached at the hip.
There is one thing we could do that would show we are serious and that would not involve detonating a nuclear weapon in order to get the Americans to sit up and take note, and that is to legislate.

Head Harbour passage is our internal waters, so no one can stop us from legislating rules for its use. If we were to do that, chances are the Americans might back off altogether. It would certainly give the backers of the various LNG schemes cause to reconsider their investment plans. But we are too timid.

Regrettably, in the face of the Americans we are gutless.

The posturings of the Shawn Grahams and the Greg Thompsons of the world are not going to change that. Our failure to regulate passage through these waters is the measure of our ineffectiveness. Expressions of concern by our governments are not enough. It appears the politicians have to be dragged to action, kicking and screaming. And the problem is in large part ours. We should know by now if we don't push them they won't do anything.
Our governments have been doing a reasonable job so far. We need to push them to finish the job.

Max Wolfe is a freelance writer who resides at St. Andrews.

Original article in TJ: http://telegraphjournal.canadaeast.com/opinion/article/768444

Photo Credit SeaGen turbine: wikipedia.com
 

Sunday, July 26, 2009

Good News - Bad News: Irving Shelves Second Refinery

Get the pictures and subscribe at: http://fundytides.blogspot.com

 News Item - Friday, July 24, 2009 | 1:43 PM - CBC News

Irving Oil Ltd. has announced that it will not proceed with the proposed second oil refinery project in Saint John, N.B. 
Irving Oil Ltd. has announced that it will not proceed with the proposed second oil refinery project in Saint John, N.B. (CBC)Irving Oil Ltd. and BP have halted plans to build a second oil refinery just outside of Saint John, officials announced on Friday.

Kevin Scott, Irving Oil's commercial director of refining growth, announced the decision about the second refinery project at a Saint John news conference.

A study conducted by Irving Oil and the international oil giant over the past 18 months concluded that the project was not viable during the economic downturn and the softening demand for petroleum products.

See entire article: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunswick/story/2009/07/24/nb-irving-refinery-1012.html