Considering there are NO MAJOR fault lines (minor ones yes) where they are fracking I don’t see how it could prematurely trigger a major one. I can’t see them extracting gas through fracking along the coast. Unless you live in a major metropolitan area, the majority of earthquakes do very little damage as shown by the 7.7 and 6.7 in 2012 and 2013. That’s my opinion.
http://www.earthquakescanada.nrcan.gc.ca/zones/westcan-eng.php
Slightly tongue in cheek, yes. The fact is though, that the ‘dangers’ of fracking are vastly overblown. The occasional 4.0 magnitude earthquake is no big deal.
David Suzuki bought the property 50 years ago for a few thousand $dollars…You can like, respect, hate or argue against David Suzuki■s perspective on business and the environment…
But to blast someone over the fact that the property Suzuki bought 50 years ago when Vancouver was a mere village has skyrocketed in value …???
That■s very similar to the cheap tawdry attacks against me and others on this thread…
Good Day
I thought you were the expert on cheap, tawdry attacks (“Go fyck yourself”) 
Some interesting perspective on David Suzuki:
Ha! Well-played. I thought as much. 
Lol. Next you’re going to tell us that climate change is real.
Wake up sheeple. Pumping water can’t cause earthquakes. Or melt steel beams. 
Fracking causing earthquakes is nothing new, but I’m interested to learn how they managed to accomplish that feat.
ok lets forget LNG, Oil, Wind, Solar or tidal power, methane power is the way to go, and very cheap, here is how cheap it is go buy a nice hose hook it to your butt and everytime you fart you have environmental methane to burn 
fracking earthquakes read the article…
Could be largest quake in Canada
If it is revealed that fracking induced Tuesday’s 4.8 quake, Gu said, it would be the largest such quake in Canada’s history.
A 4.6 magnitude fracking-related earthquake in B.C. in August was confirmed by scientists as the largest so far in Canada, perhaps even the world.
? that was right out of left field…eh
You do know that they’re talking exclusively about fracking-related quakes, right? Your initial post made it seem like you thought that fracking had caused 2 of the largest quakes in Canada’s history. When actually fracking has caused two of the largest fracking-related quakes in Canada’s history. Which is pretty obvious if you think about it. I could also say “Every single fracking-related earthquake in Canada’s history has been caused by fracking”. Does that sound impressive?
By the way, have you ever been in a 4.8 quake? Barely noticeable. Call me when you get into the 7s and 8s.
I know that, I’m only saying a 4.8 quake caused by fracking is quite a feat.
You sure it’s barely noticeable? Vancouver and Victoria folks seem to freak out over a 4.8 quake they had last month.
I never experience an earthquake BTW, could be quite interesting if not deadly.
PLA, you have experienced an earthquake. They happen all the time. Off topic, let’s hope we can manage once it get’s rocking. Meanwhile, I see fracking as the only negative in natural gas delivery
A 4.8 will typically be a gentle movement for a few seconds. You might see a couple of light fixtures move and that’s about it. I was in Vancouver for the recent quake and that’s exactly how it was. No damage anywhere as far as I know.
Some people actually find the gentle movement of a small earthquake quite soothing.
i have been in large earthquakes Duh… look at where we live and i lived in Haida Gwaii and yes they dont do much damage hear, but else were they have can be devastating.
Russia is likely to scale back volumes of gas it plans to ship to China later this decade, sources close to energy giant Gazprom say, due to the dive in global energy prices and uncertainty hanging over the Chinese economy.
The sources insist the hugely expensive pipeline project - part of President Vladimir Putin’s strategic shift eastwards - will go ahead on time. However, they acknowledge sales to China will initially be lower than envisaged when Moscow reached the $400 billion (279 billion pound) deal with Beijing in May 2014.
“We will start fulfilling the deal in 2019, but the volumes could be less that initially expected,” a source at Gazprom (GAZP.MM) told Reuters.
At the time of the deal, crude oil was trading above $100 a barrel but has since plunged to $30. In this period growth in the Chinese economy has also slowed sharply, with its currency falling and its stock market now in turmoil.
Moscow is keen to “pivot to the East” to reduce its reliance on exporting energy to the West due to a series of rows, notably over Russia’s annexation of Crimea and support for separatists in eastern Ukraine.
China is in a buyer’s market. Abundant energy supplies are now available from other sources, such as liquefied natural gas (LNG) from Qatar and Australia and pipeline gas from Central Asia, and this is undermining the Kremlin’s plans.
Gazprom’s media relations team did not comment on emailed questions from Reuters although the state-controlled company, which has a monopoly on Russian pipeline gas exports, has said the project to ship gas from eastern Siberia to China is on track.
Flows through the Power of Siberia pipeline, which starts in East Siberia, are due to start at 5 billion cubic metres (bcm) of gas, rising to 38 bcm annually under the 30-year deal - just below what Gazprom’s top gas buyer, Germany, now gets.
The pricing mechanism for what China will pay has not been revealed. Sources and analysts say the oil breakeven price for the Russian gas exports to China is around $80 per barrel, a level that is unlikely to be reached in the foreseeable future.
“In any case, the volumes will be lower (than announced),” said another source, who is close to Gazprom and familiar with the talks with China. “Gazprom has taken on an uphill task and failed.”
Several industry sources have said Gazprom was hoping to sell gas to China for $10-$11 per mmBtu - an energy measure. By contrast, China is understood by analysts to be paying $9 per mmBtu to Turkmenistan, the former Soviet republic in Central Asia that beat Gazprom to the Chinese market.
*No one knows where energy prices will be at the end of this decade or what state the Chinese economy will be in. But all bets seem to be off for now after oil’s 70 percent plunge in the past 18 months. Benchmark Asian spot LNG LNG-AS is trading at $6.50, down from over $13 in May 2014. *
Analysts see a delay as the likely outcome. “The parties are likely to postpone the project commissioning into the late 2020s,” Mikhail Korchemkin, a director of U.S.-based consultancy East European Gas Analysis.
*He sees the breakeven price for Russian gas exports to China, as measured by the benchmark Brent crude price LCOc1, at $75-$85 per barrel - but only if the pipeline construction is done by Chinese contractors, whose involvement promises to cut costs. *
It is not clear whether Moscow will accept foreign contractors or will insist on Russian firms doing the work on its territory.
*Gazprom had initially planned to invest $55 billion (38.35 billion pound) in exploration and pipeline construction to China’s border. The costs may have since been cut due to a slide in the rouble’s value which has pushed up the cost of imported equipment. *
The project includes building a huge gas processing plant needed to provide methane of the required quality and clear it of helium, which is abundant in the east Siberian gas fields.
In a sign of increasing difficulties for the Kremlin’s energy champion, sources have said Gazprom has asked other Russian gas producers to help it out to honour the deal.
*CHINESE TURMOIL *
Chen Zhu, Beijing-based managing director of consultancy SIA Energy, said the economic turmoil in China makes the project less attractive. “There is no doubt the project is strategic but on the China side, the demand outlook is not that rosy as the economy is slowing,” she said.
Chen said 2020 is a more realistic date for gas to start flowing. “Due to very high costs required to develop the large gas fields in Russia, China and Russia share the understanding that neither side is in urgent need,” she said.
The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies also said in research published in September that Beijing was in no rush to allow Russian gas into its market.
“It would increasingly appear that Gazprom is at the mercy of its Chinese counterparts, who are operating in a buyers’ market, have the lure of financing to offer, and have every incentive to adopt a wait and see policy in gas import negotiations,” it said
LNG in B.C. is Kaput
Need more?..
http://www.lngworldnews.com/rasgas-delivers-first-india-lng-cargo-under-new-deal/
RasGas of Qatar said on Thursday it delivered the inaugural LNG cargo to India under the new sales and purchase agreement signed with Petronet LNG.
RasGas and Petronet LNG, India’s largest importer of chilled gas, recently signed a revised deal cutting the price significantly and raising the contracted volume.
**Under the initial deal signed in 1999, Petronet agreed to pay about US$13 per million British thermal units,
The new SPA together with the long-term SPA between Petronet and RasGas for 7.5 MTA raises the total annual long-term commitment between the two companies to 8.5 MTA
According to a statement by RasGas, the LNG cargo was delivered to Petronet’s Dahej LNG terminal aboard the Al Thumama Q-Flex vessel on January 13.
RasGas has delivered, to this date, nearly 81 MTA of LNG to India, to meet the country’s growing demand for cleaner fuel and energy, the statement added.
Like I said…No “equity partner” of Petronas in going to spend $billions of dollars to lock in over-priced supply when they can lock in supply for half the price from existing LNG producers.
But you fine folks can still…“Dare to dream”
The partners have already committed to taking the gas. When will you begin to understand that?
Also note that the low CAD and implosion of the oil industry mean that it is extremely cheap to build the LNG trains in Canada right now. Many are predicting oil/gas markets to recover sharply this year or next, so the timing could be perfect for Petronas. They have a much longer term view of prices than you apparently do.
Petronas was also in the press a few days ago confirming that they will not be reducing their capex during this slump.
Lastly, Grant, I think you should stop posting these marginally-relevant articles about spot prices. Its just one factor of many that will be considered. No one is reading these huge posts that you add here.
