Seemingly determined to destroy the credibility of the Fraser Institute, the Fraser Institute released another study this week.
Heroically stretching the definition of think tank, the institute's latest opus takes a swipe at unenlightened activists fretting over increased oil tanker traffic.
Oil tankers are far less likely to run aground these days than they were in the 1970s.
"And yet," the study's author notes, "some activists and politicians want to restrict and/or ban tanker traffic in Canadian waters."
It is true that some environmentalists haven't moved on from Enbridge's 230,000-litre spill in 2012 or the Exxon Valdez disaster of 1989 - but then again, neither has the environment.
More than 25 years after Exxon's deluge of oil coated the Alaska coastline, many animal populations are still recovering. A pod of orcas didn't produce a single calf in the 20 years following the spill and the once thriving herring population has shown no signs of recovery.
Back then, the oil industry characterized the chances of a spill as infinitesimal, West Vancouver Mayor and oilman Michael Smith noted during last year's debate about LNG tankers in Howe Sound.
Maybe the oil industry was wrong back then and they're right today. Maybe Howe Sound will be fine and every drop of LNG and Alberta oil will make it to Asia, where it will be burned and belched into the atmosphere. Maybe the Fraser Institute has a point: we shouldn't worry about what will happen if something goes wrong. We should worry about what will happen if everything goes right.
