Northern Gateway Pipeline Approved

[WestCoastRunner]

Could be, but I suspect the native communities will be able to mount serious challenges. Harper can overide the wishes of the province(s) but land claims/titles may prove more difficult.

You are right that land claims/titles scares the oil companies and the federal government the most!

[hitops]

If you live along the coastline of BC, it becomes your home. It is our home. Our economy relies on a clean environment free of toxic oil spills that could undermine the entire province of BC. Not everyone in Canada has equal say in what happens.

The protests against this will be many many many times above the protests of the Clayoquot protests. We now have soccer moms, dads, officer workers, the average british columbian, most first nations people. This battle has just started.

BC eats huge gobs of oil-profit money happily every year, courtesy of Alberta. The day they stop doing that is the day the argument for 'their' coastline can be made with anything but utter hyprocrisy.

Sorry you can't have it both ways. Either Canada's resources are for all, or they are not.

The 'we will make trouble' argument is just childish and immature. The country cannot function if each region gets to puff their cheeks and stamp their feet like a 2 year old. Canada is a sovereign nation, not BC.

The argument for preventing pipe because BC doesn't like it, makes as much sense as every in Canada having to pay BC a fee for everything they buy that gets to them using BC ports. In other words, none.

Edited June 18, 2014 by hitops

[On Guard for Thee]

You are right that land claims/titles scares the oil companies and the federal government the most!

For example one could hark back to the Berger Inquiry of the Mackenzie Valley pipeline.

[Derek 2.0]

This is where the entire country and federal government have underestimated British Columbians. It's not just hipsters and First Nations lobby groups. It is every town that this pipeline will go through, every community along the coast where those tankers will pass by. It will be a big fight and remains to be seen who will win, however I am not optomistic that the federal government will listen to the people of BC.

A big fight? Like Clayoquot Sound?

In the end, they’ll give a bigger slice to the First Nations groups, well addressing most of the environmental concerns….I doubt it will bbe a quick process, but ultimately if it leads to additional revenue and jobs for the Province, it will happen.

[WestCoastRunner]

it will happen.

I have no doubt it will happen.

[On Guard for Thee]

This is where the entire country and federal government have underestimated British Columbians. It's not just hipsters and First Nations lobby groups. It is every town that this pipeline will go through, every community along the coast where those tankers will pass by. It will be a big fight and remains to be seen who will win, however I am not optomistic that the federal government will listen to the people of BC.

The cons do have 21 members currently who will have to seek reelction in BC.

[jacee]

And boatloads of money will get wasted away on lawyers fees, which as you say could better be spent on less ugly/dangerous forms of energy.

Good point.

[WestCoastRunner]

BC eats huge gobs of oil-profit money happily every year, courtesy of Alberta. The day they stop doing that is the day the argument for 'their' coastline can be made with anything but utter hyprocrisy.

Sorry you can't have it both ways. Either Canada's resources are for all, or they are not.

The 'we will make trouble' argument is just childish and immature. The country cannot function if each region gets to puff their cheeks and stamp their feet like a 2 year old. Canada is a sovereign nation, not BC.

The argument for preventing pipe because BC doesn't like it, makes as much sense as every in Canada having to pay BC a fee for everything they buy that gets to them using BC ports. In other words, none.

You are perhaps forgetting that BC is taking the most risk with these pipelines traversing very rough and isolated lands and tankers plying their way through BC water's to transport toxic bitumen to Asia.

[On Guard for Thee]

Which is when one could hark back to the Exxon Valdez. I'm doing a lot of harking back today it seems. Oh well.

[jacee]

BC eats huge gobs of oil-profit money happily every year, courtesy of Alberta. The day they stop doing that is the day the argument for 'their' coastline can be made with anything but utter hyprocrisy.

Sorry you can't have it both ways. Either Canada's resources are for all, or they are not.

The 'we will make trouble' argument is just childish and immature. The country cannot function if each region gets to puff their cheeks and stamp their feet like a 2 year old. Canada is a sovereign nation, not BC.

The argument for preventing pipe because BC doesn't like it, makes as much sense as every in Canada having to pay BC a fee for everything they buy that gets to them using BC ports. In other words, none.

I see you are continuing fail to win hearts and minds for Enbridge.

Carry on.

[hitops]

You are perhaps forgetting that BC is taking the most risk with these pipelines traversing very rough and isolated lands and tankers plying their way through BC water's to transport toxic bitumen to Asia.

There are risks to everything. Welcome to living in the modern age where we have electricity, medical care and lifespans beyond the age of 50. To have that, we need to trade, and we need to release energy from the ground.

By saying no to pipelines, by default, BC is saying yes to lots more railcars. That is far more dangerous, both to the enviro and to people.

I see you are continuing fail to win hearts and minds for Enbridge.

Carry on.

I see so you think BC'ers are just inherently more important that other Canadians?

Edited June 18, 2014 by hitops

[-1=e^ipi]

We'll probably have moved on to an alternative energy source before a shovel ever gets put in the ground.

Yes, like pixie dust or unicorn tears.

[-1=e^ipi]

Our economy relies on a clean environment free of toxic oil spills that could undermine the entire province of BC.

Can you provide a definition by what you mean by 'undermine the entire province' as well as proof of this claim?

[Moonbox]

Why? The coastline doesn't belong to the people of BC, it belongs to the people of Canada. Every people in Canada should have equal benefit and say in what happens to it.

That's funny. People in Ontario don't have to deal with the environmental risks of a pipeline going through BC, nor with the oil tankers shipping it away to China.

[On Guard for Thee]

And here I go harking back again, but what ever hapenned to the idea of, if we need another pipeline, why not point it east? That way we can stop recieving shipments of crude into NB from Saudi, and not have to send a pipe through an earthquake zone. Let's see when was the last one, oh yeah, yesterday. Canadian oil for Canadian people. Makes sense to me.

[-1=e^ipi]

Instead of investing billions in building and transporting toxic bitumen, let's invest that money in renewable energy sources.

Yes, let's try something realistic like pixie dust or solar roadways.

[On Guard for Thee]

Yes, like pixie dust or unicorn tears.

That's the type of forward looking attitude that Exxon Mobil loves.

[Derek 2.0]

Yes, like pixie dust or unicorn tears.

Not in British Columbia, fore those solutions would likely violate animal cruelty laws, well subjugating pixies on a TFW permit to slave like working conditions……The preferred solution is recycled hemp and the laughter of children.

[Moonlight Graham]

I see this as an issue between Alberta and BC. If the fed wants this, either province should be able to veto the pipeline if they choose.

[-1=e^ipi]

And here I go harking back again, but what ever hapenned to the idea of, if we need another pipeline, why not point it east? That way we can stop recieving shipments of crude into NB from Saudi, and not have to send a pipe through an earthquake zone. Let's see when was the last one, oh yeah, yesterday. Canadian oil for Canadian people. Makes sense to me.

Why the false trichotomy between a pipeline east, northern gateway and keystone XL? Why not build all 3 and diversify our markets? There is more than enough oil in Alberta for all 3 options.

[On Guard for Thee]

I see this as an issue between Alberta and BC. If the fed wants this, either province should be able to veto the pipeline if they choose.

Under current law, the feds hold sway on this type of issue (natural resources)

[On Guard for Thee]

Why the false trichotomy between a pipeline east, northern gateway and keystone XL? Why not build all 3 and diversify our markets? There is more than enough oil in Alberta for all 3 options.

"Earthquake zone" for starters.

[eyeball]

Don't forget more C02 and fuelling the growth of a rapacious super-power who will one day invade our Arctic, or so we're told, usually by the same suspects who can't wait to do business with them. Exactly whose side are these people on anyway?

[-1=e^ipi]

Anyway, I'll answer the original poster's question.

This is a very good idea. It will increase Canada's GDP giving us more resources to do whatever we want with, diversify our markets, reduce global dependance on middle eastern oil, etc.

Something I wanted to point out:

"ISIS also draws as much as $1 million per day in profit from each oil well under its control in Syria.

Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/how-isis-became-the-richest-terrorist-group-in-the-world-1.1872634#ixzz34xlCEstg"

By giving increasing global oil supply, we will reduce global prices and displace some middle eastern oil supply that indirectly or directly funds terrorists. Thanks to the idiots Obama, Harper & Cameron and their idiotic policy of funding Al Queda in Syria, these same terrorists have now taken over the northern half of Iraq. In addition, most funding from terrorists often comes from zakat (Islamic 'Charity') from oil rich nations like Saudi Arabia. To all the eco-extremists, I ask you this: When looking at the CO2 footprint of difference sources of oil, do you take into consideration the CO2 footprint of terrorism that is funded directly or indirectly from buying middle-eastern oil? What was the CO2 footprint of the Iraq war?

And the fact that Trudeau said this:

"Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau also said the pipeline “will not be built” if he becomes the next prime minister.

Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/federal-gov-t-approves-northern-gateway-pipeline-1.1873279#ixzz34xmjG8uI"

Makes me very concerned; the idea that he liberal leader would without question reject a project that is so clearly to the net benefit of the nation is concerning. It almost makes me tempted to vote for Harper, as much I despise him, especially his foreign policy.

[-1=e^ipi]

"Earthquake zone" for starters.

Pipelines can survive earthquakes. They can also be repaired.