Premiers want to make Canada economic powerhouse except B.C. & Quebec withholding approval of pipeline

[Aristides]

5 hours ago, Army Guy said:

I'm not shitting on BC, but responding to herbie the love bug...and the BC government in response to Alberta's inquiries...they are not interested in pipelines at this time, and yet they are building one themselves across the province...it makes no sense. I mean the entire idea here is to create a projects that will make "Canada"more prosperous...to create a energy corridor across the nation...how do you do that with out more pipelines...BC needs more pipelines or they would not be building one themselfs, so why not another bringing Alberta's oil and gas to market as well, is it just because it is Alberta....what about Sask could they build it? 

Just the asian market alone is a huge market for natural gas let alone other oil products why would we cut our noses off despite our faces...

As for the East i take it you mean Quebec...well i think that is coming,Alberta wants pipelines going into churchill first, i personally think this is a waste of time , but it will open a northern port which we need....Quebec has already a taste for natural gas pipelines, and it seems that a majority of Quebecer's want it to...But they are in the same boat as BC, it may come down to driving oil pipelines through Quebec as a condition to get their natural Gas pipeline...right now the quickest project would be drive a line through BC. what BC gets is good paying jobs, and investments made to BC...  

Big  difference between a gas pipeline and an oil pipeline when it comes to possible environmental damage. Same goes for an oil tanker spill vs a LNG carrier venting NG into the atmosphere. I approved of TMX because it follows an existing right of way that is easily accessible and been in use since the 50's. Any tanker spills are also easily accessed and in waterways that already have a large amount of tanker traffic. Northern Gateway is a completely different animal. Not only is the terrain a lot more challenging, the weather is a lot worse. Right now they are looking at increasing Transmountain capacity by dredging Vancouver harbour and Burrard Inlet to allow larger tankers. BC is taking a shit load of Alberta oil to tidewater and the east coast is taking SFA. The environmental risks of taking a pipeline east are far lower than ramming them through the northern Rockies to be tankered through fjords that rival Norway's. Churchill might be one option if climate change can make it ice free enough. 

BC gets very little once the lines are completed. 

Edited yesterday at 03:28 AM by Aristides

[Aristides]

The TMX goes through my town, not far from me. There were no demonstrations or vandalism during its construction. I also noticed that a lot of the construction workers had trucks with Alberta plates, which made sense.

Edited yesterday at 03:31 AM by Aristides

[herbie]

5 hours ago, Army Guy said:

BC is already building pipelines across their own province...and don't sit there and tell me all those native lands that were crossed those people were not compensated for their troubles...

Do you understand the difference between oil and gas? One is a goopy liquid and one is a gas. No difficult and expensive cleanup. And you can't get what you want from some people by waving money in their face.
Native people know the difference and have bought into many of these as they own and control some, they're thinking long term benefit nor cash right now then p1ss off.

Thousands of BOATS use the inside Passage, not ships. Cruise ships, ferries, the odd lumber carrier and the rest are private boats, yachts and tugs with barges, Not even hundreds of ships. The route seaward is anything but easy. A ferry right there off Kitimat a few years ago and others over the years, it is nothing like a busy shipping route. Those are north at Prince Rupert and South at Vancouver, the main ports.

Oil is already going through Juan De Fuca, risking the Fraser River salmon run, and BC's not about to put the Skeena run under threat as well.
SO use some logic, corporate $$ pulled out of TMX and it took $34 billion of out tax dollars to complete and the same challenges exist for any new one no matter how much you wish it was different now just cuz some belligerent cow in Alberta demands it.

 

[PIK]

But B.C has no problem doubling cruise ships which are the scourge of the seas.

[herbie]

7 hours ago, PIK said:

But B.C has no problem doubling cruise ships which are the scourge of the seas.

Because you can't afford to go on one makes that a valid criticism of oil tankers?

[PIK]

40 minutes ago, herbie said:

Because you can't afford to go on one makes that a valid criticism of oil tankers?

 I live on the water and own a camp in the madawaska highlands. Why would I want to go on one. But back to cruiseships, their disgusting and dirty.

[blackbird]

21 minutes ago, PIK said:

 I live on the water and own a camp in the madawaska highlands. Why would I want to go on one. But back to cruiseships, their disgusting and dirty.

Nature emits far more CO2 gas into the atmosphere than mankind.  Look at all the forest fires burning.  Each one is emitting a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere.  There  are at least 100 fires burning in CAnada.

I wouldn't lose any sleep over CO2 emissions.  CO2 is a normal part of the environment contrary to what radical environmentalists say.   There is no "climate emergency".  That is all nonsense.

[Army Guy]

19 hours ago, Aristides said:

Big  difference between a gas pipeline and an oil pipeline when it comes to possible environmental damage. Same goes for an oil tanker spill vs a LNG carrier venting NG into the atmosphere. I approved of TMX because it follows an existing right of way that is easily accessible and been in use since the 50's. Any tanker spills are also easily accessed and in waterways that already have a large amount of tanker traffic. Northern Gateway is a completely different animal. Not only is the terrain a lot more challenging, the weather is a lot worse. Right now they are looking at increasing Transmountain capacity by dredging Vancouver harbour and Burrard Inlet to allow larger tankers. BC is taking a shit load of Alberta oil to tidewater and the east coast is taking SFA. The environmental risks of taking a pipeline east are far lower than ramming them through the northern Rockies to be tankered through fjords that rival Norway's. Churchill might be one option if climate change can make it ice free enough. 

BC gets very little once the lines are completed. 

I think both of you guys are missing the point here, the whole premise of creating a energy corridor, coast to coast is to increase the amount of resources we get to market...which means more money generated by Canada making us as a nation more prosperous, giving us more funding to fund other projects in Canada. pipelines and refineries, and all the construction creates good paying jobs...

As for the east pipelines will be going to churchill first, and i'm sure a Natural gas pipeline will be driven through to Quebec in due time... 

BC has those good paying jobs at the refineries, docks, etc...plus lets remember a good portion of your processed fuels are coming in via pipelines...

[Army Guy]

18 hours ago, herbie said:

Do you understand the difference between oil and gas? One is a goopy liquid and one is a gas. No difficult and expensive cleanup. And you can't get what you want from some people by waving money in their face.
Native people know the difference and have bought into many of these as they own and control some, they're thinking long term benefit nor cash right now then p1ss off.

Thousands of BOATS use the inside Passage, not ships. Cruise ships, ferries, the odd lumber carrier and the rest are private boats, yachts and tugs with barges, Not even hundreds of ships. The route seaward is anything but easy. A ferry right there off Kitimat a few years ago and others over the years, it is nothing like a busy shipping route. Those are north at Prince Rupert and South at Vancouver, the main ports.

Oil is already going through Juan De Fuca, risking the Fraser River salmon run, and BC's not about to put the Skeena run under threat as well.
SO use some logic, corporate $$ pulled out of TMX and it took $34 billion of out tax dollars to complete and the same challenges exist for any new one no matter how much you wish it was different now just cuz some belligerent cow in Alberta demands it.

 

Yes you can look at trans mountain...Feds pass money around by the buckets....you see anyone still protesting...Most of the provinces new projects are already have large Native ownership , because that is what it takes now.

ya, more fish stories....there are millions of reasons your salmon stocks are not recovering...pipelines may be a threat but hardly the cause of your fish decline...tackle the main causes then you can complain about salmon and pipelines......

cooperate pulled out of TMX because BC's protester's drove them out...feds bought everyone out now everyone is fat and happy....

energy corridor from coast to coast, thats the main objective of all the provinces...don't want to play ball don't... fold your tent up and go home....liberals are not forcing anyone to do anything...so the corridor stops at the BC border...thanks for coming out..

[Aristides]

2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Yes you can look at trans mountain...Feds pass money around by the buckets....you see anyone still protesting...Most of the provinces new projects are already have large Native ownership , because that is what it takes now.

ya, more fish stories....there are millions of reasons your salmon stocks are not recovering...pipelines may be a threat but hardly the cause of your fish decline...tackle the main causes then you can complain about salmon and pipelines......

cooperate pulled out of TMX because BC's protester's drove them out...feds bought everyone out now everyone is fat and happy....

energy corridor from coast to coast, thats the main objective of all the provinces...don't want to play ball don't... fold your tent up and go home....liberals are not forcing anyone to do anything...so the corridor stops at the BC border...thanks for coming out..

Get back to us when there is any kind of pipeline to the east coast. Gas or oil.

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, Army Guy said:

the whole premise of creating a energy corridor, coast to coast is to increase the amount of resources we get to market

Okay, we have one end of that corridor on the west coast now - the one TMX follows. Time to build the section that goes your way.

[herbie]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

Get back to us when there is any kind of pipeline to the east coast. Gas or oil.

My sister converted her house in Truro to propane because "gas was coming' and that meant just a nozzle change.
That was twelve years ago....