I’m sorry but I don’t care what anyone says or has to quote from whatever site they can Google, we shall see what happens. There will be some sort of Lng export facility(s) in the Northwest. Lng is not going anywhere for the foreseeable future. Ships are being built to run on Lng including cruise and ferries. Did the Liberals overplay their plans, sure they did, but I didn’t see the NDP offer any plans for economic development in BC. The Canadian dollar is low which makes any construction a lot cheaper, which is an incentive for any company looking to build. So all you negative nelly’s can continue to Google and quote and I will sit back and wait and see what may or may not happen.
1 Like
I have a feeling that Grant_G is using this thread as his blog, only because (I guess) he doesn’t get much traffic flowing to his personal blog site.
But hey, this thread is getting 2100 views so far.
I think Grant_G is probably a great guy. Probably drives an older truck a fuel burning boat. Aside from his narcissistic posts, It would be awesome to read something positive from an obviously intelligent observer, and researcher
1 Like
i like the idea of solar, but the reality is that unless big corps back out of peoples lives they will not let it happen. look at places that have tried to go green only to be told they had to be on the grid or they would loose their house. Plus oil prices i bet go to about 10.00 a barrel. before going to 65.00 and leveling out.
I■m over 4 million page reads on my site…And the first four years I never had a stat counter…
Nice try though…
As for the comment above, about $5 to $10 billion for a nuclear plant…Hogwash, China build them for $2 billion…
And how much is a LNG terminal?..Shell Canadas LNG proposal..$40 Billion...The Gorgon LNG terminal in Australia..$60 billion...Thats like the cost of 50 Chinese nuclear plants…
You people need to pick up your game…By the way…I drive a 2014 dodge ram, …I get 50 miles per gallon on the highway…
Cheers
Grant, I don’t know if you saw my messages above, but if you’re copying and pasting into HTMF, don’t use the ■ character. It messes up your formatting.
It seems you’re using the ‘accent grave’ symbol instead of an apostrophe.
Link to the original post, with an example: Petronas LNG in Prince Rupert, Happening or Not? - #44 by MiG
In your post above, see how the formatting changes because you wrote Canada`s instead of Canada’s ? And it switches back when you write That`s instead of That’s.
Screenshot:
Well, convince us that you have 4 million page reads.
EDIT: Your Blogger profile tells me you got 9222 profile views. You sure you got 4 million views since 2013?
I have no words.
Geez… I only asked you to convince us (as in prove it to us), which so far you haven’t yet.
EDIT: I like to remind you that DWhite did try to engage a meaningful discussion with you, but then you told him to “go fyck yourself”. That’s just one of many. Talking about throwing rocks from a glass house…
It’s meaningful, and 100 percent on topic. You just don’t want to answer his questions, which seems to be the norm from you.
Remember when you called Murray Kristoff a racist? You know how that went.
edited due to thread snips
I believe the rational folks here could care less about what you think.
I think alot of people won’t be back on this site!
[/quote][quote=“Grant_G, post:99, topic:16980”]
Meaningful conversation…He tried to compare an election result, an election which everyone got wrong, an election where Adrian Dix blew a 20 point lead…That`s what you call meaningful?..D White looking for a gotcha moment…Totally off topic…
[/quote]
Hi Grant
Off topic? I was not talking about whether or not LNG SHOULD be built. I was not talking about whether or not LNG WOULD be built. I was talking about how people (and not just you) were so certain that their prediction would come true. My question was directed at jabber63 and investor and stglider and anybody else who seemed certain that their prediction was the right one. And in your case, I simply asked whether you were as certain of this event as you were about an event that you got wrong. You didn’t say that it is unlikely that LNG will happen. You didn’t say that there is a slim to none chance that it wouldn’t happen. You said IT WOULDN’'T HAPPEN. Just like you said the Liberals were done. So my question is very fair.
And your excuse that everybody got the election wrong really doesn’t cut it. Because… I have a memory of you (at least I vaguely remember it being you) arguing with somebody on the Tyee about the election outcome days before the election. Now maybe it wasn’t you so I apologize BUT somebody was absolutely certain the Liberals were going to lose and somebody was equally certain they would win and was talking about internal polling. That person got it right. So yes the election outcome was a surprise, the polls got it wrong, a bunch of prognosticators got egg on their faces. On election night I was actually listening to Alex Tsumakis criticizing Global and CTV and CBC for declaring the Liberals winners after a half hour of counting because he just couldn’t/wouldn’t accept the outcome.
So I repeat. My question is very fair. Are you 100% certain that we can take this to the bank or are you just pretty certain. Because it is very ironic that you talk about fool me once when it comes to responding on this site but that truism doesn’t seem to apply to your own certainty about making predictions.
On top of that I asked whether your opinions were based on anger directed at the government for lying about LNG potential. And again it is ironic that you are fighting me because for the most part I agree with most if not all of what you are saying (certainty aside).
I agree that it was crappolla pie in the sky for the industry as a whole. But my question directed at you wasn’t about the sparkly pony spinfest, my question was about the single project of Petronas. Is there the potential of one project going ahead (which it sounds like you could have supported), and if so why not Petronas?
Simple questions Grant.
Uh oh. You poked the grizzly.
1 Like
Who are these “a lot of people” ?
Petronas picked the wrong spot…Since almost none of the LNG proposals are going to happen…Petronas can buy out a different location…For example the Exxon Mobile/CONOC site…
Why mess with Canada■s second most productive wild salmon river…
Talk to you later
Thanks for that Grant. So what’s the most productive salmon run in the world?
Answer: the Fraser River. A river that has had heavy industry lining its banks for decades, that is disturbed hundreds of times each day by recreational and commercial shipping, and that has had thousands of tonnes of waste pumped into it. After many decades of this treatment, somehow the salmon run seems to be thriving.
Much of the ‘science’ peddled by the environmental crowd is simply biased, anti-capitalist nonsense. They really will oppose anything that creates jobs.
2 Likes
again Grant you do not understand the way Petronas has set up PNW LNG, they have to have shovels in the ground this year or their partners can leave the company, that is why in the fall they have stated they will go ahead with the project if they get the CEA approval, that announcement was to keep their partners in the company, if they decide to switch sites and go and redo all the CEA again their partners will leave the company. so for petronas it is all or nothing this year.
And they care about what u think? ??
So they would be ok with it if it didn’t create jobs. Do you really believe that’s their motivation?