Pipeline Politics - Is Canada the only "sucker" Nation?

[Derek 2.0]

15 minutes ago, poochy said:

Consider it environmental equalization payments to the places you have been getting your oil from who have been carrying the risk for you. 

 

I don't consider it any other way then what it is.......British Columbia takes the risk and Alberta gets the reward........and it won't get built, nor is it needed, once Trump approves Keystone XL.

[TimG]

22 minutes ago, Derek 2.0 said:

Sure, but even with the massive upgrades to Port of Vancouver and Deltaport, shipping has only increased ~3-4%........the increased capacity of Kinder Morgan's pipeline will see traffic increase from ~5 tankers a month to over 30......what's that? An increase of 500+%

To be honest I would be fine with shipping bitumen but I don't believe these protesters have any interest in supporting the increased rail traffic necessary to fill ships regularly. In fact I would rather see the stuff upgrade to syncrude before export but that is not going to happen given the current obsession with GHGs. This obsession leaves oil companies no choice but to do as little as possible within Canada so someone else gets blamed for the refining emissions. 

That said, I see the bitumen angle as a smoke screen to hide the fact that they just want to shut down Alberta's economy and screw Albertans.

Your stats on the tanker traffic vs. cargo traffic are grossly misleading. 5 large ships *per day* arrive at Vancouver ports (150 per month) so even with the increase to 30/month the vast majority of traffic comes from cargo ships. So the threat to Orcas is a red herring. 

The spill response credibility is the one area where I agree there is a concern. But as the Bella Bella and other incidents shows oil tankers are the least of our concerns given the huge volume of ships that all carry fuel.  OTOH, oil has been shipping out of Alaska for decades and they have had no incident since Exxon Valdez. That tells me it is possible to adopt processes that reduce the risk to near zero for tankers.

 

 

[drummindiver]

On Friday, December 02, 2016 at 1:35 PM, TimG said:

I suggest you read up on the Oka Crisis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oka_Crisis

One of the roles of the military is to provide aid to civilian police forces if they are overwhelmed. Since the minister was talking about a purely hypothetical scenario of mass law breaking it we cannot discuss appropriateness. My hope it never comes to that but there is nothing legally incorrect with the minister's hypothetical musings. 

Here is a link to the appropriate law: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/N-5/page-54.html#h-224

FWIW: I suspect Oka was in the back of the minister's mind when he made those comments. An event that may be lost in history for most of younger people on the west coast.

 

...and this should have been done in Caledonia when the OPP left the townspeople out to dry.

[Smallc]

CPC partisans against pipelines - the slogans write themselves.

[?Impact]

33 minutes ago, TimG said:

To be honest I would be fine with shipping bitumen

Bitumen cannot flow through a pipeline. 

[TimG]

40 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Bitumen cannot flow through a pipeline. 

On trains, like coal and grain, obviously.

Edited December 3, 2016 by TimG

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, poochy said:

Consider it environmental equalization payments to the places you have been getting your oil from who have been carrying the risk for you.  That's how a true environmentalist would think, either that or commit to stop using it altogether.

Digging/pumping the risk up and sending it here you mean. Only you would describe and put what's happening in such a mangled context, either that or you'd commit to only living on polluted water, air and soil.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, TimG said:

That said, I see the bitumen angle as a smoke screen to hide the fact that they just want to shut down Alberta's economy and screw Albertans.

A number of us simply want to see action on climate change...a couple of decades ago, when Alberta and Canada should have been planning on leaving fossil fuels, especially the dirtiest ones, in the ground.

There's a big difference between wanting to shut down Alberta's economy and conserving the productivity of our planet's ecosystems. The natural environment takes precedence over the human economy - you can have one without the other but not the other way around. There's no amount of smoke that will hide that fundamental reality. We're actually saving Alberta's economy. 

[Guest]

It's not action on climate change. It's pretend action on climate change. If a pipeline doesn't get built, the people waiting for the product don't suddenly start building windmills. They get it from somewhere else. 

The natural environment does not take precedence over the human economy. That ought to be obvious anywhere you look. It's only in places like Alberta an effort is actually made to mitigate the effects of the economy on the environment. 

[bush_cheney2004]

38 minutes ago, eyeball said:

There's a big difference between wanting to shut down Alberta's economy and conserving the productivity of our planet's ecosystems. The natural environment takes precedence over the human economy - you can have one without the other but not the other way around. There's no amount of smoke that will hide that fundamental reality. We're actually saving Alberta's economy. 

 

So when will BC stop logging or commercial fishing ?  

[eyeball]

13 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

So when will BC stop logging or commercial fishing ?  

Probably when the world becomes to overheated from burning fossil fuels, about the same time everything else is grinding to a halt.

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

Probably when the world becomes to overheated from burning fossil fuels, about the same time everything else is grinding to a halt.

 

Methinks de-forestation and massive destruction to marine environments started long before bitumen mining and transport.  

[TimG]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

A number of us simply want to see action on climate change

There is a special place reserved in hell for hypocrites that expect other people to pay the price so they can feel good about themselves. Get back to me when you stop using fossil fuels to run your fishing boat and you might have some credibility, Until then your prescriptions for Alberta are just the rantings of a selfish hypocrite.

[WestCoastRunner]

45 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

It's not action on climate change. It's pretend action on climate change. If a pipeline doesn't get built, the people waiting for the product don't suddenly start building windmills. They get it from somewhere else. 

The natural environment does not take precedence over the human economy. That ought to be obvious anywhere you look. It's only in places like Alberta an effort is actually made to mitigate the effects of the economy on the environment. 

Not sure if you live in BC but sounds like you don't. I take seriously the responsibility for leaving this province to my grandchildren and future generations to a healthy, sustainable environment with clean water, clean air, our wildlife and our natural environment. 

These pipelines will never be built in BC. 

[eyeball]

6 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Methinks de-forestation and massive destruction to marine environments started long before bitumen mining and transport.  

Methinks the same governments that managed things so destructively will do the same when it comes to managing bitumen mining and shipping.

[TimG]

Just now, WestCoastRunner said:

Not sure if you live in BC but sounds like you don't. I take seriously the responsibility for leaving this province to my grandchildren and future generations to a healthy, sustainable environment with clean water, clean air, our wildlife and our natural environment. 

And how do you plan to pay for it? The BC economy is basically selling real estate to foreigners now. Hardly a sustainable source of revenue. When the crash comes BC will be desperate for the revenue that comes from selling fossil fuels.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, WestCoastRunner said:

Not sure if you live in BC but sounds like you don't. I take seriously the responsibility for leaving this province to my grandchildren and future generations to a healthy, sustainable environment with clean water, clean air, our wildlife and our natural environment. 

These pipelines will never be built in BC. 

I live in Alberta and yes, so do I.  I'd hate to have my grandchildren and future generations out for a night in a bar when some idiot leaves the handbrake off on the train, or have their environment destroyed by development in the Niger Delta or Russia.  The pipelines won't be buit in BC because you have Hydro.  You're willing to flood land for your comforts.  If you had no water, I daresay the pipeline would not be an issue.

[eyeball]

19 minutes ago, TimG said:

There is a special place reserved in hell for hypocrites that expect other people to pay the price so they can feel good about themselves. Get back to me when you stop using fossil fuels to run your fishing boat and you might have some credibility, Until then your prescriptions for Alberta are just the rantings of a selfish hypocrite.

You go stop breathing fresh air, drinking clean water and eating healthy food before slagging everyone else who prefers to. Speaking of hell maybe you should also go live in an oven since you're the one who seems to like it so hot.

[WestCoastRunner]

42 minutes ago, TimG said:

And how do you plan to pay for it? The BC economy is basically selling real estate to foreigners now. Hardly a sustainable source of revenue. When the crash comes BC will be desperate for the revenue that comes from selling fossil fuels.

I am quite confident in the intellect, creativity, innovation and Humanity of Canadians to sustain Canadians. 

Edited December 4, 2016 by WestCoastRunner

[bush_cheney2004]

56 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Methinks the same governments that managed things so destructively will do the same when it comes to managing bitumen mining and shipping.

 

Hey...I get it....blame the government with a wink and a nod for continuing British Columbia's rape of the environment all while opposing a pipeline from Alberta.    Is Victoria still pumping raw sewage into the "pristine" water ?

Edited December 4, 2016 by bush_cheney2004

[Guest]

1 minute ago, WestCoastRunner said:

I am quite confident in the intellect, creativity, innovation and Humanity of Canadians to sustain Canadians. 

Sure, we just got two out of three pipelines approved by a government I didn't think was capable of wise decisions so it is possible.

[WestCoastRunner]

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Sure, we just got two out of three pipelines approved by a government I didn't think was capable of wise decisions so it is possible.

I suspect JT gave the approval knowing full well that BC activists won't allow it. It's a win win for JT.   He knows the strength of activists in BC 

Edited December 4, 2016 by WestCoastRunner

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, WestCoastRunner said:

I suspect JT gave the approval knowing full well that BC activists won't allow it. It's a win win for JT.   He knows the strength of activists in BC 

I don't see how allowing yourself to be embarrassed as an ineffectual leader is a win.

Edit> So I hope he sticks to his guns, and makes sure that lawbreakers in BC are punished to the fullest extent possible.

Edited December 4, 2016 by bcsapper

[eyeball]

25 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Hey...I get it....blame the government with a wink and a nod for continuing British Columbia's rape of the environment all while opposing a pipeline from Alberta.    Is Victoria still pumping raw sewage into the "pristine" water ?

Yes...note I said government's, as in more than one...many in fact. If you've seen one you've pretty much seen them all.

[bush_cheney2004]

On 12/2/2016 at 7:29 PM, Derek 2.0 said:

Just watch him.........

 

Jim Carr tried to walk back the ruling Liberal government's fascist threats to pipeline protesters, but the damage has already been done.