Pipeline leaks in federally-regulated pipelines rose sharply in the last decade, an analysis of Transportation Safety Board data shows. According to the TSB’s data, the spills have increased by more than double between 2004 and 2013. Data from 2014 also shows reported occurrences at pipelines are on track to surpass 2013 levels.

Overwhelmingly, when there is an incident, it is highly likely that it will also mean “release of product,” or a leak. On average, 87% of the incidents recorded caused a leak. Similarly, incidents with a leak usually means an uncontained release. On average, a whopping 97% of incidents with a leak were “uncontained.” In both 2005 and 2006, every single incident with a leak was uncontained. In 2013, there was a sharp drop, but 2014 is likely to surpass that. From January to October, the same number of incidents have been reported, with still two months of data to report.

Transportation Safety Board Manager of Pipeline Operations Manuel Kotchounian says the increase is the result of a new 2009 pipeline and recent conversions. ”

More kilometres [of pipeline] means more potential issues,” he says. But that’s not all; there is also a difference in the way new and modified pipelines are monitored in their first few years, which Kotchounian says also contributes to the spike between 2009 and 2012.

“New pipelines tend to have a lot of attention focused on them… when a pipeline is being watched very closely, a lot of leaks are found,” Kotchounian says. “The more inspections, the more issues.”

The TSB’s 2013 report on pipeline occurrences gives a similar hypothesis for the marked decrease in 2013: “The decreasing trend may in part be accounted for by the decrease in the number of minor incidents for pipeline facilities that had recently been started up or converted (e.g., from a gas pipeline to an oil pipeline). In general, after an initial start-up phase, the number of minor incidents will decrease and stabilize.”

Currently, there are several proposed new pipelines that could be built in coming years, including TransCanada’s Keystone XL, TransCanada’s Energy East, and Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain pipeline, which has seen regular protests from anti-pipeline groups as it prepares for the approval process. Additionally, Enbridge is considering a reversal of its Line 9, in order to bring Albertan crude through Quebec for export on the East Coast. If these new projects are realized, many new incidents can be expected.

Ben West, Tar Sands Campaign Director at ForestEthics Advocacy, a US-based environmentalist group that has vigourously opposed the Trans Mountain and Northern Gateway pipelines, says there is just no guarantee that any new pipelines can be monitored to ensure there are no leaks.

“If you look at any pipeline in North America, they all have a number of spills associated with them over the years; some are bigger, some are smaller, but of course if you live close to one of those spills, even a small one is significant,” he says.

“So at the end of the day I don’t have a tremendous amount of faith that anybody can promise to build a pipeline that will never leak, when all it takes is one serious incident to have serious implications.” West says that instead of building new pipelines with higher standards such as those proposed, the standards should be applied to the existing infrastructure that is “out of sight, out of mind, until something goes wrong.”

This data only covers pipelines regulated by the TSB, which are any pipelines that cross provincial or international borders. All other pipelines are provincially regulated. Any pipeline that is regulated by the TSB is also regulated by the National Energy Board, using different criteria.  The two federal bodies collect, record, and publish data separately. Comparing data recorded between the two “would be comparing apples and oranges,” Kotchounian says.

“The National Energy Board has slightly different definitions of what is reportable. What this means is that you can’t reconcile data from different organizations,” he says. Comparing either of their data to, say, Alberta’s occurrence data “wouldn’t make sense.”

In October 2013, CBC News published NEB documents obtained through access to information that showed where incidents happened, and that they had doubled within 12 years. Kotchounian says the NEP definition of “incident” includes much smaller issues, because they are the actual regulator. TSB, on the other hand, has a mandate to promote safety across the board.

“We’re only involved when there is an accident.” An “accident” is usually a larger “big explosion or big fire,” Kotchounian says. These have remained steady throughout the last decade, at only a handful per year.

But shouldn’t the data be harmonized?

“In theory, they should be. But once you get into the nitty gritty, each jurisdiction has a different need for the data,” he says.The TSB is currently in transition with their data collection. Since July 2014, they adopted the policy that any occurrence, no matter how big or small, is recorded as one statistic.  But they are still recording both “accidents” and “incidents” as of October 2014.

“It’s kind of a grey area,” Kotchounian admits.

The Canadian Energy Pipeline Association says its members, which include all of the major operators in Canada, commit $1.5 billion annually to promote safety. CEPA could not respond to questions about pipeline safety by publication time.

West says that overall, the Harper government has shown to be on the side of the pipeline operators and oil producers, whether in rhetoric or in regulation.

“I think by and large we’ve seen more of a sales pitch than a genuine discussion [on the issue of building new pipelines],” West says. He and other environmentalists are adamant that the overall problem is climate change and the need to reduce consumption. This is the main reason – more than any individual leak – that his organization, ForestEthics, opposes Northern Gateway and Trans Mountain. They are currently involved in a law suit against the federal government and the NEB, arguing that the changes to NEB consultation infringes on section 2 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Whether a regulatory body or a Member of Parliament, West believes that ultimately all areas of the federal government are reflecting the pro-pipeline view of Stephen Harper.

“In the federal government, all roads lead to the Prime Minister’s Office.”