Northern Gateway a must?

[Guest Peeves]

They lobby.

Its called work, or a job, or employment to lobby.

Sudoku and crosswords between 1 and 2PM though. Just like....other working people?

Then ONE working stiffs opinion should be worth at least 500 wearing feathers or furs or ecco. (Suzuki), green.

[guyser]

They lobby. Who pays them? Saudi Arabia?

And Americans, French , Belgians , Germans....so?

Screw them all and the horses they rode in on! If you're not a Canadian you should be banned from lobbying in our country.

The Saudis and Chinese use their money and power for their OWN interests, NOT for OURS!

So does Canada, the US, France.

So?

At the end of the day, the decision will be in the best interests of society/business.

Did you not rep an American company in the past?

[guyser]

Then ONE working stiffs opinion should be worth at least 500 wearing feathers or furs or ecco. (Suzuki), green.

Some conclusion , albeit silly.

One persons opinion is one persons opinion.

Big business cares little about the environment beyond being seen to be nice (and if it is still profitable to keep on), envviro's care little about business beyond being nice.

We leave the decision up to those who can find some balance.

[bush_cheney2004]

There has been an increasingly public exposure of foreign funding and foreign celebs taking on Canada's oil pipeline plans. While that may be acceptable for US interests IN THE USA, if they push here,if they spend money in supporting the 'Green' lobby, they should be sent packing.

That's all well and good, but are you equally adamant that all the foreign investment for energy development in Canada be "sent packing"? There would be no tar sands development or offshore drilling without such foreign funding.

[eyeball]

Tanker passage? Those things come and go every day, what makes Kitimat so special?

Navigating 1/4 mile long vessels through three 90 degree turns in a narrow passage for starters. The channels in and out of Kitimat are a far more challenging things to navigate through than Prince William Sound. Apparently there are going to be some 15000 of these tankers navigating through the area over the lifetime of the project.

The thing I notice about these big energy projects is that they get riskier and riskier. Oil and gas producers have to go deeper, farther and work under more dangerous conditions to keep the profits flowing.

To me this is the biggest indicator that we need to reassess our purposes for this oil with an eye to the future. Just digging it out and shipping it off for the benefit of one or two generations seems both selfish and short-sighted. We should be conserving this oil and allocating it more sparingly if its getting that rare.

Edited January 11, 2012 by eyeball

[fellowtraveller]

The Berger Inquiry was launched, did its job, and the pipeline was put on hold.

That one made sense,

Did it really? In the end, the project was all about the money, with First Nations groups holding out for more and failing to initially get it. Round two in the 90s saw them gain a 1/3 share of the project, followed by a ten year(!) review process which ended in 2011 with NEB approval. of course, the entire natural gas market in North America had changed before then and the people with the money had lost interest completely. I doubt the Mackenzie pipeline will be done for at least another generation, if then. Meanwhile, there are no jobs for First Nations people anywhere in the Mackenzie corridor and of course zero royalties.

There would be no tar sands development or offshore drilling without such foreign funding.

Bullshit. There would be less development if it was entirely funded within the country, and it would be slower, but those dead dinosaurs would still rise to the surface eventually.

Want some examples of why you are wrong?

1) first oil sands project was called GCOS(now Suncor) built in the 1960s and was largely financed by the Alberta govt . . A big chunk of the money was raised locally, there was so much public interest in investing that Albertans were offered the opportunity to buy one share for $100. The interest was so overwhelming they had to hold a lottery for shares. I know this because my mother won the right to buy one share. My father also applied but didn't get one.

2) the governments of Alberta, Canada and Ontario all provided big chunks of cash for the startup for Syncrude, the whopper project that launched in the 1970s. Without that seed money plus a guaranteed return on investment(guaranteed by the taxpayers of Alberta and Canada), it would never have been built as the risk was sseen as high by the oil companies. Once it became cleaer that Syncrude ansd Suncor were profitable- which took 20+ years- all the rest has followed.

But your assertion that there would be no oil snds develpment without foreign money is wrong. The reality is that without public funding and Canadian governments assuming ALL the risk, there would be no development or more accurately it would have taken far longer.

[bush_cheney2004]

1) first oil sands project was called GCOS(now Suncor) built in the 1960s and was largely financed by the Alberta govt . .

Nope...stop right there. Suncor was a subsidiary of Sun Oil..later Sunoco...which was a US corporation. The oil extraction process was developed at great risk while still an American subsidiary, and it was American capital that took it on the chin when prices headed south in the 80's. Trudeau invented the disasterous NEP to "go Cuba" on the Americans, but only succeeded in pissing off Alberta. Alberta, then and now, knows where their friends with deep pockets really reside, including rich Texans with tall hats.

But your assertion that there would be no oil snds develpment without foreign money is wrong. The reality is that without public funding and Canadian governments assuming ALL the risk, there would be no development or more accurately it would have taken far longer.

Nope..it's not all about you. Go back and find out which markets were going to buy all that oil, after it was refined and transported. To this day, Canada can't move product efficiently from west to east. The East actually imports almost 1,000,000 bpd of oil and distillates.

Edited January 11, 2012 by bush_cheney2004

[Shady]

It's pretty much a constant, whether in America or here. Environmentalist extremists continually push to kill jobs, raise the price of energy, and make Canada economically weaker. And they wonder why their patriotism is questioned?

[eyeball]

It's pretty much a constant, whether in America or here. Environmentalist extremists continually push to kill jobs, raise the price of energy, and make Canada economically weaker. And they wonder why their patriotism is questioned?

What's really a constant everywhere is how economic extremists continually push to kill the environment and lower the value of everything.

If anyone's patriotism should be questioned it's your's.

[guyser]

It's pretty much a constant, whether in America or here. Environmentalist extremists continually push to kill jobs, raise the price of energy, and make Canada economically weaker. And they wonder why their patriotism is questioned?

Because their patriotism isnt?

[fellowtraveller]

Nope...stop right there. Suncor was a subsidiary of Sun Oil..later Sunoco...which was a US corporation. The oil extraction process was developed at great risk while still an American subsidiary, and it was American capital that took it on the chin when prices headed south in the 80's. Trudeau invented the disasterous NEP to "go Cuba" on the Americans, but only succeeded in pissing off Alberta. Alberta, then and now, knows where their friends with deep pockets really reside, including rich Texans with tall hats.

Nope..it's not all about you. Go back and find out which markets were going to buy all that oil, after it was refined and transported. To this day, Canada can't move product efficiently from west to east. The East actually imports almost 1,000,000 bpd of oil and distillates.

I generally respect your opinions and comments but in this case you are wrong in all regards. Please research the history of the first semi-major project in the oil sands, which started as GCOS and later became wholly owned by Suncor. They have also greatly expanded the project, but they DID NOT fund the experiment that was the oil sands startup.

Note also that neither Suncor/GCOS or the much larger Syncrude had much if any risk to their capital in their projects. The governments proviuded about 30% of the project capital. They also inplemented royalty agreeemnts/tax stuff that meant that Syncrude culd amortize 100%+_ of all capital costs and more of their operating costs before paying one penny in tax or royalty. Syncrdue(until recentlky mostly US corps) paid absolutely nothing to Canada or Alberta for decades other than through employment and contracting opportunties. So don't lecture me on the capital risk of foreign money, there wasn't any.

And yes, I am aware that central Canada is serviced mostly by oil from elsewhere. The US Midwest is also closer to the Gulf of Mexico or Texas or Oklahoma than it is to Zama Lake Alberta, but that is where the Mdiwest gets its oil and gas from. What is your point?

[fellowtraveller]

Oh, and as an aside the Syncrude builder was the US giant builder Bechtel. They screwed the pooch so hard on the Syncrude construction job so badly that to my knowledge thwey have never done another major project in Canada.

The private investors(US oil corps) didn't give s shit about costs because their capital/operating partners(AB,ON and CDN govts)had guaranteed all sosts plus interest could be written off. Profit from oil mining operations was expected, but it didn't really matter as their return on investment was a given. In the end , they have profited mightily.

Bechtel knew this and the project went from around a $300 million budget to over $1 billion, with Bechtel getting a percentage on every dollar spent or pissed away.

[waldo]

Tanker passage? Those things come and go every day, what makes Kitimat so special?

the award winning documentary SPOIL, showcasing the splendour of nature worth protecting, and the people privileged to live within it... highlights from the International League of Conservation Photographers, in the search for those iconic shots within the Great Bear Rainforest!

as for your direct question, start in around 31:00 of the film to gain an appreciation of the overall complexities in the tanker passage route, to see graphic representation and comparisons of, and to, the sunken BC ferry, 'Queen of the North' & the Exxon Valdez spill.

[jacee]

They lobby. Who pays them? Saudi Arabia?

Screw them all and the horses they rode in on! If you're not a Canadian you should be banned from lobbying in our country.

You mean the foreign owners of the oil companies shouldn't get to speak at the hearings?

Of course, their presence isn't really necessary as Harper figures he has the NEB in his pocket anyway.

[PIK]

A oil spill on the west coast would never reach the shore, that is because all the garbage from japan will be a buffer.

[waldo]

A oil spill on the west coast would never reach the shore, that is because all the garbage from japan will be a buffer.

I will not pass immediate judgement on your comment; preferring instead, to allow time for you to further qualify your references to Japanese garbage and the buffer mechanics at play.

[Sa'adoni]

Two words GREENLAND.

No boats, and the Canadian Forces are already trained for oil clean up in the Arctic, the only benefit of Operation Nanook thats been run for the last 5 or so years.

[CPCFTW]

the award winning documentary SPOIL, showcasing the splendour of nature worth protecting, and the people privileged to live within it... highlights from the International League of Conservation Photographers, in the search for those iconic shots within the Great Bear Rainforest!

as for your direct question, start in around 31:00 of the film to gain an appreciation of the overall complexities in the tanker passage route, to see graphic representation and comparisons of, and to, the sunken BC ferry, 'Queen of the North' & the Exxon Valdez spill.

Oh there are "spirit" bears in the forest? Well you've convinced me! Down with jobs! Down with prosperity! Let us all live in wood log cabins among the spirit bears!

Edited February 9, 2012 by CPCFTW

[waldo]

Oh there are "spirit" bears in the forest? Well you've convinced me! Down with jobs! Down with prosperity! Let us all live in wood log cabins among the spirit bears!

notwithstanding the outright Harper Conservative government direct interference and manipulation of the so-called independent NEB hearings, this ultimately has become an effort to capture public opinion, particularly in B.C. - and this effort will intensify. Obviously, symbols... iconic symbols... are proven to hold an overwhelming presence and influence in motivating and capturing public opinion. The bears are one of those symbols... along with what the ocean means to many British Columbians... along with the people both living in and around the main and extended areas... along with the people and industries that rely on the ocean for their livelihoods.

[waldo]

Enbridge to look again at Gateway pipeline route

Enbridge Inc opened the door on Friday to re-routing its Northern Gateway oil pipeline from Canada's oil sands to a Pacific port north of the current proposed endpoint of Kitimat, British Columbia, where it faces staunch local opposition.

Enbridge Chief Executive Pat Daniel said he still believes Kitimat, with its sheltered deep-water harbor, is the best terminus for the controversial C$5.5 billion ($5.5 billion) pipeline, citing extensive studies done for the regulatory application.

However, he told a conference call on Enbridge's fourth-quarter results that the company will take another look at the port of Prince Rupert, which it had ruled out earlier because it would require the pipeline right-of-way to extend in a narrow passage for about 80 kms (50 miles) along the Skeena River.

"Recently, I have indicated that we will re-examine that to see whether there is another way to get to Prince Rupert, but all of our engineering and environmental studies continue to point in the direction of Kitimat being the best alternative," Daniel said. "We want to make sure that we have thoroughly evaluated any and all routing opportunities."

Prince Rupert is about 110 km (69 miles) north of Kitimat on the British Columbia coast.

[waldo]

Oh my! All those Harper Conservative accusations of subversion by environmental groups, of the improper influence of foreign charitable organizations... all going on while Harper Conservatives were working to undermine the supposed independence of the NEB process. And now this - say it ain't so!

Alberta, Ottawa, oil lobby formed secret committee

The federal and Alberta governments struck up a secret, high-level committee in early 2010 to coordinate the promotion of the oilsands

with Canada’s most powerful industry lobby group

, a document obtained through an access to information request reveals.

The committee brought together the president of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) with deputy ministers from Natural Resources, Environment Canada, Alberta Energy and Alberta Environment to synchronize their lobbying offensive in the face of mounting protest and looming international regulations targeting the Alberta crude.

The revelation of the secret government-industry committee comes on the heels of an announcement that Environment Canada will try to “strengthen” cooperation with the oil sector by assigning a senior official to head up the newly formed Canadian Oil Sands Innovation Alliance, a partnership of a dozen major oilsands companies

government... the advocacy arm of the oil industry! Damnit, where's the sanctity of the separation of oil and state!

[fellowtraveller]

However, he told a conference call on Enbridge's fourth-quarter results that the company will take another look at the port of Prince Rupert, which it had ruled out earlier because it would require the pipeline right-of-way to extend in a narrow passage for about 80 kms (50 miles) along the Skeena River.

"Recently, I have indicated that we will re-examine that to see whether there is another way to get to Prince Rupert, but all of our engineering and environmental studies continue to point in the direction of Kitimat being the best alternative," Daniel said. "We want to make sure that we have thoroughly evaluated any and all routing opportunities."

Prince Rupert is about 110 km (69 miles) north of Kitimat on the British Columbia coast.

Yep, I called that one a couple of months ago.

There are already two right of ways - road and rail- clear across BC already that go to Prince Rupert. Too bad for First Nations, they won't get much if any of the gravy if they take this route.

Maybe they should just run the oil pipeline along the path of the already approved massive natural gas pipeline about to be built into Kitimat, or the spur to the existing gas line to Rupert.

Nothing dangerous in natural gas, oh no.

[waldo]

Yep, I called that one a couple of months ago.

did you also call this one... contingency planning, hey?

TransCanada looks east as Gateway pipeline gets bogged down

TransCanada Corp. is proposing a major shift in the way oil moves across Canada, urging the oil patch to consider a massive $5.6-billion new pipeline system that would carry large volumes of western crude to refineries in Ontario, Quebec and beyond.

The East Coast Pipeline Project, as TransCanada has dubbed it in presentations to energy companies, could do more than supply the east with fuels made from oil sands crude. It could serve as an alternative to Northern Gateway, the controversial West Coast export pipeline project from TransCanada competitor Enbridge Inc. that has faced a wall of opposition from first nations and environmental groups.

[jacee]

Oh my! All those Harper Conservative accusations of subversion by environmental groups, of the improper influence of foreign charitable organizations... all going on while Harper Conservatives were working to undermine the supposed independence of the NEB process. And now this - say it ain't so!

Alberta, Ottawa, oil lobby formed secret committee

government... the advocacy arm of the oil industry! Damnit, where's the sanctity of the separation of oil and state!

And look who's involved!

From your link:

According to government documents, the plans to establish such a committee appear to first have been discussed at a March 2010 meeting in Calgary involving high-ranking officials from CAPP, former PMO adviser Bruce Carson, CEOs from oil and gas companies and senior federal and Alberta government officials.

Disgraced fraudster and former PMO advisor Bruce Carson, who lobbied the government and got $65m supposedly for research into alternative technologies, but really use ONLY for lobbying on behalf of the oil industry.

The RCMP are still busy investigating a previous scandal

http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2012/04/03/rcmps-bruce-carson-investigation-probes-contract-with-former-escort-calgary-think-tank-emails/

and haven't even gotten to these yet!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/10/11/pol-vp-weston-carson.html

Instead, Carson effectively turned the school into a one-man advocacy centre to promote the Canadian oil industry in general, and the oilsands in particular, a role he had played through most of his time in the Prime Minister's Office. Documents obtained by CBC News, for instance show Carson used the Calgary school to spearhead the creation of a six-year, multi- million-dollar series of energy exhibits in three of Canada's national museums Environmental advocates have condemned the exhibits as a public relations road show for the oil sands.

...

In 2009, Carson successfully hit up the federa and Alberta governments for $50 million for a second institute called Carbon Management Canada — which he initially also headed — to fund mainly new technologies to reduce the environmental impact of the oilsands. The problem was Carson appeared to be soliciting the funds while he was sitting in the Prime Minister's Office, a move that caused his own chief of staff, Guy Giorno, to complain to the ethics commissioner.

And Guy Giorno himself will twist a rule til it squeals.

So ... from your link ... Harper's threatening Europe with a trade war if they don't like our dirty oil ... just friggen lovely! Do the rest of our industries know they're being put at risk for the oil boys?

Lobbying by federal officials has helped delay a Fuel Quality Directive in Europe that would stick a dirty label on oilsands for causing more emissions than conventional oil, thereby discouraging its mport for use as transportation fuel After an inconclusive vote last month, environment ministers will reconsider the Fuel Quality Directive in June.

The Harper government has threatened a trade war over the measure, which could set a global precedent and close off foreign markets to the Alberta crude.

Edited April 22, 2012 by jacee

[jacee]

Yep, I called that one a couple of months ago.

There are already two right of ways - road and rail- clear across BC already that go to Prince Rupert. Too bad for First Nations, they won't get much if any of the gravy if they take this route.

Maybe they should just run the oil pipeline along the path of the already approved massive natural gas pipeline about to be built into Kitimat, or the spur to the existing gas line to Rupert.

Nothing dangerous in natural gas, oh no.

It still requires a review process, and approval isn't a given.