Why will BC not play ball with Canada to create an energy supper power...

[eyeball]

7 minutes ago, Nefarious Banana said:

eyeball . . . you couldn't even push your vehicle into the garage without oil~industry products.  Dream on.

I'd get it towed, why delude myself believing I could push it there?

[LinkSoul60]

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

I'm surprised you don't know how it would benefit Canada.

A pipeline to the north coast would allow Canada to sell much more oil to Asia and the rest of the world.  It would therefore increase production and create thousands of jobs in the construction and operation process.  This would bring in billions of dollars in royalties, corporate taxes, and private income taxes to Alberta and the federal government.  It would create thousands of spin off jobs as well.  Canada could become an energy superpower.

It would also enable Canada to move away from dependency on the U.S. as our main customer, which pays a lower price for our oil.  

Perhaps a refinery in Prince Rupert or area could also provide more lower cost fuel products to B.C.

Don't be too surprised, I'm aware.  Would we benefit the same with LNG exports...sure we would and some suggest more opportunity and a 'cleaner' alternative to oil.  Both Eby and Smith are playing to their provinces voters and Eby has 2 LNG projects in construction with 5 in development. Smith wants the oil pipeline but could also benefit from LNG exports coming out of AB.

The US will probably always be our largest customer because of our landlocked proximity and the size of their economy.  The TMX pipeline isn't at full capacity yet but allowing suppliers to get to Asian markets at higher prices.

Building a refinery is not likely at all.  High cost, regulatory challenges and a longer term declining demand for fuel make investment unlikely. 

[LinkSoul60]

52 minutes ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Have heard John Rustad on the radio/talk shows . . . he answers every question in a straight~forward manner, doesn't dance around a question like the NDP do.  He has a working man's logic on how to get things going . . . in short, he makes sense.

Eby on the other hand, has a scattered mind on any topic he's quizzed on by any moderator who isn't a CBC stooge.

BC deserves better than Eby and his band of brain~dead penguins . . . 

eyeball . . . you couldn't even push your vehicle into the garage without oil~industry products.  Dream on.

Not an Eby fan at all but Rustad doesn't appear to have the broad support in his own party. Would not be surprised to see that leadership challenged in a bigger way shortly (and that's only coming from probably the same radio/talk shows you listen to?).

[blackbird]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Okay, dominion includes over people who want to ruin Earth's ecosystems and make a good part of it increasingly unlivable.

You're the one who says man can't control the climate or weather so man will need to control man instead.

So you are talking in circles and not making sense.

I already explained man does take reasonable measures to not pollute the environment and protect the country.  Could improvements be made such as reducing the pollution of the ocean with plastics and other things of course.  But you have to be reasonable.  Whenever humans live and move there is going to be some effect on the environment.  That is expected.  We can't live without leaving some evidence of our being on earth.  But it is foolish to think we should eliminate one industry which is essential for man's survival and prosperity on earth.

[eyeball]

21 minutes ago, blackbird said:

But it is foolish to think we should eliminate one industry which is essential for man's survival and prosperity on earth.

What if it threatens our prosperity and survival however and virtually every scientist in Earth is concerned it does?

It seems a little foolish to just ignore that don't you think?

[Army Guy]

4 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

There's a good argument that we should be expanding our LNG exports rather than the non-stop talk about an oil pipeline.  With tanker bans in place for the coast those need to be addressed by federal government before this goes anywhere, if it even does...  Both Smith and Eby are doing nothing more than posturing for their provinces.

In what context do we stop talking about oil pipe lines, One could also say there is a good augment for more oil pipelines... And how do we create this energy power house without oil....

And yes tanker bans are federal left over from Justin's right of terror, i think everyone will admit Not many of Justin's polices were any good.

How does EBY coming out on national media and telling the nation that any pipeline is not worthy of national attention...what does that do for BC, And i'll repeat myself again, this is a liberal program to build an energy corridor to make Canada less dependent on the US market and turn this nation into a energy power house.. So how does EBY rhetoric fit into any of that...add to that BC has already has 2 projects on approved list...one would think he should be more grateful and wanting to support the liberal program even more...instead it loos like he is only interested in BC....which is great, but this is not what the program is suppose to accomplish...IT is national...

[Army Guy]

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

There's a lot more to fish management than just fishing. And any coin that says overfishing on one side says mismanagement on the other. Someone let fishermen fish, loggers log, miners mine, farmers farm, developers develop...all these and more affect fishing to.

I had to give up fishing for good 15 years ago after 7 years of protesting. I'm not protesting against pipelines, I'm voting against them.

That's right, government dictates rule.

Sure there is, but fish management also includes the fishermen...Just because so wingnut in the federal government gave you quotas does not mean you have to fish your limit...if you do your complicate in the mismanagement...More fish means better pay checks more food on your table, i get all of that....but it also means it is kind of hypocritical when point the finger at the feds as the sole factor....And ya i agree the feds could not organize a gangbang in the whore house....but there is also  public service employees who should be advising the MP's in charge who deal with this industry every day...

 

[paxamericana]

In typical Canadian fashion, the only thing Canucks hate more than America is possibly other Canucks. It's a product of your rugged geography, the confederation is a patchwork of hatred, a ripe secessionist breeding ground. As luck would have it, there is one super power that all provinces could join, so they inevitably will, it's just a matter of time...before Canadian pride eats itself and this long two century of mental illness can come to an end. 

Edited October 8, 2025 by paxamericana

[eyeball]

22 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

...Just because so wingnut in the federal government gave you quotas does not mean you have to fish your limit...

You must be under the illusion a quota is a guarantee.

Whatever else it is, in DFO's hands and management they've been a disaster to Canada's fisheries...while still managing to make billionaire fishermen like the Galen Westons and Jimmy Partisans of the waterfront fabulously if not putrecently wealthier than ever.

29 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

...And ya i agree the feds could not organize a gangbang in the whore house....but there is also  public service employees who should be advising the MP's in charge who deal with this industry every day...

Oh yeah, they just report what Galen's and Jimmy's lobbyists want. Beyond knowing who'll be richer at the end of the day the Fisheries Minister du jour doesn't have a fùcking clue what's going on. What more do they need to know? As for the "public service employees" you'd be amazed at how many move back and forth through a revolving door between corporate fishing interests and fisheries management.

BTW have you been following what I've been saying about fishing communities and canaries lately?

Much of your economy is managed in much the same way. 

[paxamericana]

13 minutes ago, eyeball said:

fishing communities and canaries lately?

unless the Canadian population is growing, it doesn't much matter . There's quite literally not enough mouths to feed. This would mean export but that's subject to....tariff. 

[LinkSoul60]

35 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

In what context do we stop talking about oil pipe lines, One could also say there is a good augment for more oil pipelines... And how do we create this energy power house without oil....

And yes tanker bans are federal left over from Justin's right of terror, i think everyone will admit Not many of Justin's polices were any good.

How does EBY coming out on national media and telling the nation that any pipeline is not worthy of national attention...what does that do for BC, And i'll repeat myself again, this is a liberal program to build an energy corridor to make Canada less dependent on the US market and turn this nation into a energy power house.. So how does EBY rhetoric fit into any of that...add to that BC has already has 2 projects on approved list...one would think he should be more grateful and wanting to support the liberal program even more...instead it loos like he is only interested in BC....which is great, but this is not what the program is suppose to accomplish...IT is national...

We're not going to stop talking about pipelines until if/when a northern project happens. I'm actually a bit surprised there isn't more talk of the West to East pipeline...  Eby is NDP so no need to follow the liberal party line around energy. Im not a fan but he does have a point... Smth only has this out there to see if the private sector would invest in this project so there's not much for him to say without pissing off the FN's who don't want this.  If there was private sector money coming forward he said he'd work with AB. Moot points if there's a tanker ban so that's on Carney's government to have those discussions with FN's, who are opposed. BC has active LNG and mining projects with opportunity for expanding so he's championing those while cSmith champions for AB. Go figure...

[LinkSoul60]

33 minutes ago, paxamericana said:

unless the Canadian population is growing, it doesn't much matter . There's quite literally not enough mouths to feed. This would mean export but that's subject to....tariff. 

Our population is growing too fast according to most so there goes that 'argument'...

A reminder...  If we're exporting you're importing, which means you're paying the tariff, not us.  

Edited October 8, 2025 by LinkSoul60

[paxamericana]

50 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

Our population is growing too fast according to most so there goes that 'argument'...

 

Ah but that would assume your vegetarian population growth decides to eat fish... oh wait. Invest in artic curry powder instead ? oh wait those plants can't growth above a certain lat... oh no. You've fell in my trapt door.

Edited October 8, 2025 by paxamericana

[blackbird]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

What if it threatens our prosperity and survival however and virtually every scientist in Earth is concerned it does?

It seems a little foolish to just ignore that don't you think?

No, I don't believe it threatens our prosperity and survival.  The real threat is from those who want to kill the fossil fuel industry.  The whole world depends on fossil fuels for survival and will for the foreseeable future.   There is no real alternative that could take the place of fossil fuels.  It has not been proven that manmade emissions is causing significant climate change.   That is a huge lie that much of the world has swallowed.  It could cost the world great harm to cut off fossil fuels.

[paxamericana]

2 minutes ago, blackbird said:

That is a huge lie that much of the world has swallowed.  It could cost the world great harm to cut off fossil fuels.

There are definitely a large amount of useful ideots in the world but ever since the beuracratic state pushed that propaganda I suspect the global green agenda was for more nefarious reasons. 

Edited October 8, 2025 by paxamericana

[herbie]

What's this new bullshit?
People oppose the pipeline going through their pristine backyard on the reason they want to reduce the use of fossil fuels?

Give your goddam head a shake! I might be able to round up both of them for you.

[LinkSoul60]

12 hours ago, paxamericana said:

Ah but that would assume your vegetarian population growth decides to eat fish... oh wait. Invest in artic curry powder instead ? oh wait those plants can't growth above a certain lat... oh no. You've fell in my trapt door.

Your trolling is getting real weak...  You're running out of material and just pulling things out of your ass now.  Fell into your trap door, sure 😂   Now you're talking about vegetarians, fish (which vegetarians don't eat) and curry...  Not sure what that has to do with population growth, but suppose you would know the curry well given Indians account for the second largest group of immigrants in the US behind Mexicans.  

Pick up your trolling will ya...  maybe start talking about the great things Trump has done with his drill baby drill energy policy and tariffs?

[Nefarious Banana]

12 hours ago, paxamericana said:

There are definitely a large amount of useful ideots in the world but ever since the beuracratic state pushed that propaganda I suspect the global green agenda was for more nefarious reasons. 

You're a Canadian posing/trolling as an American.

Most folks here know this and choose to ignore your stuff. 

Have a great day.

[blackbird]

16 hours ago, eyeball said:

What if it threatens our prosperity and survival however and virtually every scientist in Earth is concerned it does?

That is false to begin with.  Not every scientist on earth believes in man-made climate change.

There are a large percentage who say they believe in it, but likely almost all of them never did any studies themselves on it and are just going along with the general opinions.  None of it has been proven.

Here are a few scientists who disagree with the man-made climate change claims.

quote

1. Richard Lindzen: The Atmospheric Physicist

• Proposed the controversial “iris hypothesis,” intimating that Earth has a natural cloud feedback mechanism to temper warming. Richard Lindzen’s Profile at MIT EAPS
• His critique of climate models focuses on their inability to encapsulate atmospheric processes comprehensively. Richard Lindzen’s Work on Climate Models
• Although highly esteemed in atmospheric sciences, his theories generally represent a fringe view among most climate scientists. Richard Lindzen’s Wikipedia Page

2. Bjørn Lomborg: The “Skeptical Environmentalist”

• He acknowledges human-induced climate change but contends its dangers are overblown. Bjørn Lomborg’s Website
• Advocates cost-benefit analyses prioritizing other pressing global challenges like economic development and healthcare over climate control. Bjørn Lomborg’s Work on Cost-Benefit Analysis
• Supports incremental environmental solutions over aggressive policies. Bjørn Lomborg’s Policy Recommendations

3. Judith Curry: The Uncertainty Specialist

• Curry has formerly held the chair position of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech. Judith Curry’s Profile at Georgia Tech
• Her work primarily focuses on uncertainties surrounding climate models and natural climate variability. Judith Curry’s Blog on Climate Uncertainty
• She suggests that mainstream climate scientists regularly underestimate the complexity and uncertainty intrinsic to future climate conditions forecasts. Judith Curry’s Research on Climate Uncertainty
• unquote
• Top 10 Scientists Who Disagree with Climate Change

click on the link for the other seven scientists who disagree with climate change

Edited October 8, 2025 by blackbird

[cougar]

On 10/7/2025 at 8:23 AM, Army Guy said:

Why do BC'ers hate Alberta so much....

...And he is sabotaging other provinces projects in order to get more project money spent in BC....and yet he is only a premier...

 

 

Why?  Because of your constant threats to shove a new pipeline up our arse!

Alberta should come up with projects that do not destroy the way of life and livelihood of the neighboring provinces and put life on earth in grave danger!

 

26 minutes ago, blackbird said:

That is false to begin with. 

To begin and end with, you just STFU !

Edited October 8, 2025 by cougar

[JohnnyCanuck]

On 10/7/2025 at 8:23 AM, Army Guy said:

Why do BC'ers hate Alberta so much....

It appears Premier Eby is digging his heals in on pipelines....There is no project, as there is no private funding....He makes it sound likes it is "his" funding and he will decide what projects will get advanced and what will not...And he is sabotaging other provinces projects in order to get more project money spent in BC....and yet he is only a premier...Not the PM....He also states that he will not accept any new pipelines because of the tanker ban...Not sure if the tanker ban is federal or provincial and can not find a source 

Really?  you believe that Premier Eby's announcements mean that all of BC's population of 5 million hate Albertans?   omg. sigh.

For those of you who are not BC'ers,   I will tell you what's going on.  Eby is playing to a section of his base - the green section.  The only current threat to Eby & the NDP's power in BC  is any resurgence of the Green party. ( we are 2+ years away from Rusted gettting his conglomeration of BC Conservatives/BCUnited/OneBC, un-whippable mavericks etc etc. into line ).   Not that the Green party will ever form a provincial government,  but they have 2 MLA's at present. What worries Eby is that the Greens will increase their percentage of the vote across the province, thus allowing the Conservatives to win on a split left vote.   Eby won (not by much) the last provincial election on spewing lies about abortion beliefs, conspiracy theories, and election fraud, which frightened enough greenies to go with the NDP strategically, just keep the conservatives out.   That is why he is on this anti-pipeline track now.

Much talk was heard in the last Federal election about Corporations not wanting to get involved in pipeline building because of the delay, cost , and difficulties in getting environmental assessments done, and getting all the permissions and approvals. The talk I heard was that  the the provinces and the federal government would first define the pipeline corridor,  get all the permissions and permits granted, then request Corporations to bd on the right to build  a pipeline in that  pre-defined and pre-permitted corridor ( What Smith is doing right now).  Eby is well aware this is what Smith is doing,  he is just plain lying when he disingenuously suggests 'there is no proponent' he knows Smith is trying to set things up, not actually build it. As I said - just playing to the green section of his base.   Eby is putting his own short term lust for retaining power ahead of building a better Canada.

My own support is for an Oil,  Natural Gas, and Electricity  backbone stretching from the west coast to the east coast, so all can draw/contribute at will and bring energy self sufficiency to 90% of the Canadian population.

Regarding the Oil Tanker Ban "The Oil Tanker Moratorium Act, also known as Bill C-48, was enacted to regulate the transportation of crude oil and persistent oil along the northern coast of British Columbia. The law was passed by the Canadian Parliament and received Royal Assent on June 21, 2019."   What is not widely known is that in years 2000 to 2012 /15  BC had built huge railyards in Prince Rupert (pacific gateway) there was a possibility that oil could shipped by rail from AB to Prince Rupert prior to any pipeline, that is why the tanker ban was rushed through even there was no pipeline.   Also FYI there are 30 to 40 crude oil carrying tankers per month going through the inside passage from Alaska to Cherry Point refinery WA.    Oil tankers from northern BC would go directly out to the pacific.

 

Edited October 8, 2025 by JohnnyCanuck
spelling

[Nefarious Banana]

Many BC residents are former Albertans.  Alberta/Saskatchewan/BC Interior folks like to get things done.

[blackbird]

53 minutes ago, cougar said:

Why?  Because of your constant threats to shove a new pipeline up our arse!

Alberta should come up with projects that do not destroy the way of life and livelihood of the neighboring provinces and put life on earth in grave danger!

 

To begin and end with, you just STFU !

You're blocked!

[cougar]

59 minutes ago, blackbird said:

You're blocked!

Thanks!

I wish I could not see the toxic sludge you spew on this forum!

[paxamericana]

2 hours ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Many BC residents are former Albertans.  Alberta/Saskatchewan/BC Interior folks like to get things done.

Former Texans and Oklahomans* . Don't pretend we did not have the same great grand parents.

Edited October 8, 2025 by paxamericana