Accept Petronas- Get Land

General Forums Prince Rupert Forum
61

The offers works out to $6 dollars per day per First Nation member rising slowly, provided the money is doled out evenly, the deal is backloaded to deacdes out, offer start at $12 million per year, reaching $50 million per year in year 40…!!!.

thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/05/09/No … LNG-Offer/

Once you account for inflation and dollar depreciation, the offer is a joke, not to mention that a healthy Skeena River, a healthy WILD SALMON run will only increase in value, future value could exceed $250 million per year, $300 million per year in Salmon value.

Don■t be fooled by jingling pocket change.

62

[quote=“Grant G”]The offers works out to $6 dollars per day per First Nation member rising slowly, provided the money is doled out evenly, the deal is backloaded to deacdes out, offer start at $12 million per year, reaching $50 million per year in year 40…!!!.

thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/05/09/No … LNG-Offer/

Once you account for inflation and dollar depreciation, the offer is a joke, not to mention that a healthy Skeena River, a healthy WILD SALMON run will only increase in value, future value could exceed $250 million per year, $300 million per year in Salmon value.

Don■t be fooled by jingling pocket change.[/quote]

I wouldn’t classify it as jingling pocket change. The proponent would be spending billions to start the project up so I don’t think it’s unfair that the money paid out to lax kwlaams would increase once some of the initial investment is recovered. I’m not sure why the discontent with the dollar figure. Millions of accumulated funds over years and securing the future for generations. Most of us would be ecstatic to be offered money because of where our ancestors lived. If the argument is about location, I agree. If it’s about money, get a life.

63

[quote=“Grant G”]The offers works out to $6 dollars per day per First Nation member rising slowly, provided the money is doled out evenly, the deal is backloaded to deacdes out, offer start at $12 million per year, reaching $50 million per year in year 40…!!!.

thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/05/09/No … LNG-Offer/

Once you account for inflation and dollar depreciation, the offer is a joke, not to mention that a healthy Skeena River, a healthy WILD SALMON run will only increase in value, future value could exceed $250 million per year, $300 million per year in Salmon value.

Don■t be fooled by jingling pocket change.[/quote]

The Tyee article takes a proposal to Lax Kw’alaams that contains financial benefits, up front and over time, and land from BC, and then re-frames it as an “LNG payout” to every Lax Kw’alaams band member, which it is not. There is nothing in the documents on Lax Kw’alaams web site that even vaguely suggests that benefits from an agreement would flow through in that manner. Tyee has created a fiction, and then asks people not to be fooled. You have evidently bought into that. It’s a “joke” of your own creation.

BC First nations have negotiated hundreds of benefits agreements in the forestry, mining, and energy sectors with the province and increasingly the private sector. Having worked on some of those negotiations I am well aware that some people do not like those agreements and are keen to discredit them. The feds have taken similar initiates in the fishing industry, which has increased first nations ownership of licences and quotas.

It is for the first nation to decide what to do with the revenue. Benefits agreements have often supported re-investment, particularly in declining resource industries. Money received under agreements consequently levers other investment. The “jingling pocket change” analogy trivializes the potential for higher levels of economic activity.

Meanwhile, and ironically, the economic case for Skeena salmon as a critical and valuable resource easily stands on its own merits. It does not require support from fiction-based arguments against benefits agreements with first nations of the kind that you have fabricated.

64

One must look at the sea of lies from the BCLNGA and big energy.

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … eb-we.html

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … iving.html

Petronas has admitted publicly, of the $11.4 billion dollars for their Prince Rupert LNG plant, …Over $9 billion dollars of it has been outsourced overseas, …Mainframes and modules will be built in South Korea and barged to BC…The plant Petronas has proposed building in BC will employ a mere 150 people fulltime…

Yes, big media talks about Petronas spending $36 billion in BC, the number is fabricated, …Petronas■s Lulu island project is an estimated $11.4 billion, …$9 billion worth outsourced overseas…

Petronas is owned by the Government of Malaysia, …Malaysia gets 40% of the country■s budget through Petronas profits, …The people of Malaysia receive very little from their Government, and you expect a foreign country to lavish wealth on another people?..

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … itish.html

You can■t trust these foreign governments, period…

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … r-tax.html

And one can■t close their eyes to the damage fraccing does, …LNG is a beggars fuel with no real future…The Leaking and the Lemon.

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … d-lng.html

65

It is up to the First Nation people to decide…Indeed, there has been two voting sessions, the count is…580 First Nation votes against Petronas proposal…Zero for the proposal…

Nuff said…The people have spoken

66

Game over for Petronas…Wisdom and long term sustainabilty win out…Wild Salmon forever…

"A hereditary chief says Lax Kw’alaams members are poised in the final round of voting to reject a $1-billion cash offer dangled by a major liquefied natural gas project, posing a setback for the venture led by Malaysia’s Petronas.

Donnie Wesley of the Gitwilgyoots, one of nine allied tribes of the Lax Kw’alaams, said the tribes are united in their opposition to the Pacific NorthWest LNG project near Prince Rupert, B.C."

theglobeandmail.com/report-o … e24377682/

67

[quote=“Grant G”]One must look at the sea of lies from the BCLNGA and big energy.

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … eb-we.html

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … iving.html

Petronas has admitted publicly, of the $11.4 billion dollars for their Prince Rupert LNG plant, …Over $9 billion dollars of it has been outsourced overseas, …Mainframes and modules will be built in South Korea and barged to BC…The plant Petronas has proposed building in BC will employ a mere 150 people fulltime…

Yes, big media talks about Petronas spending $36 billion in BC, the number is fabricated, …Petronas■s Lulu island project is an estimated $11.4 billion, …$9 billion worth outsourced overseas…

Petronas is owned by the Government of Malaysia, …Malaysia gets 40% of the country■s budget through Petronas profits, …The people of Malaysia receive very little from their Government, and you expect a foreign country to lavish wealth on another people?..

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … itish.html

You can■t trust these foreign governments, period…

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … r-tax.html

And one can■t close their eyes to the damage fraccing does, …LNG is a beggars fuel with no real future…The Leaking and the Lemon.

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … d-lng.html[/quote]

What are you trying to argue? Is it location? Money? Corruption? Investment funds being spent outside of Canada?

It’s not up to you or the Lax Kwlaams to make a decision on the merits of the entire project and make a decision for us all collectively. I don’t care if they bring project components in from overseas. There’s still a significant financial gain for our region if this or any of the projects goes through, on Lelu or elsewhere.

68

[quote=“Grant G”]It is up to the First Nation people to decide…Indeed, there has been two voting sessions, the count is…580 First Nation votes against Petronas proposal…Zero for the proposal…

Nuff said…The people have spoken[/quote]

This project will go through with or without their approval, either where its originally planned or somewhere else. Funny how benefit packages from other LNG companies have been accepted from other FN bands east of here, so obviously they’re not all opposed to LNG.

69

[quote=“Crazy Train”]

[quote=“Grant G”]One must look at the sea of lies from the BCLNGA and big energy.

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … eb-we.html

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … iving.html

Petronas has admitted publicly, of the $11.4 billion dollars for their Prince Rupert LNG plant, …Over $9 billion dollars of it has been outsourced overseas, …Mainframes and modules will be built in South Korea and barged to BC…The plant Petronas has proposed building in BC will employ a mere 150 people fulltime…

Yes, big media talks about Petronas spending $36 billion in BC, the number is fabricated, …Petronas■s Lulu island project is an estimated $11.4 billion, …$9 billion worth outsourced overseas…

Petronas is owned by the Government of Malaysia, …Malaysia gets 40% of the country■s budget through Petronas profits, …The people of Malaysia receive very little from their Government, and you expect a foreign country to lavish wealth on another people?..

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … itish.html

You can■t trust these foreign governments, period…

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … r-tax.html

And one can■t close their eyes to the damage fraccing does, …LNG is a beggars fuel with no real future…The Leaking and the Lemon.

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … d-lng.html[/quote]

What are you trying to argue? Is it location? Money? Corruption? Investment funds being spent outside of Canada?

It’s not up to you or the Lax Kwlaams to make a decision on the merits of the entire project and make a decision for us all collectively. I don’t care if they bring project components in from overseas. There’s still a significant financial gain for our region if this or any of the projects goes through, on Lelu or elsewhere.[/quote]

Really, if it is not up Lax Kwlaams people than why are they voting?..Petronas must move their proposed location to a place that doesn■t interfere with the wild salmon of the Skeena…IT IS NOT UP TO YOU TO DECIDE THE FATE OF A RIVER ECOSYSTEM…

LNG is going the way of the DoDo bird…Asia is moving to nuclear power, as is China and south Korea, they are nixing LNG as costly, short term thinking…Won■t be long before LNG is eliminated as a fuel altogether.

powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca … first.html

70

Finally reeled you back in. Keep it on topic about the offer, salmon or location. The Lax kwlaams aren’t voting on whether or not they buy Canadian.

71

I think prime minister harper will use his veto powers to just. Go ahead and build the plant as there is just to much money involved in this project.the lax band is being consulted and that’s all they have to do in the end ottawa will have the final say.

72

Good I hope he does…a few hundred people should never be able to make a decision for the majority who do not get a direct vote.

73

if the location is bad here is an example of that being BS. look at the fraser river last year record salmon run and how many industries, rock quarries and boats traverse that river. nothing major is going to happen to the salmon run here, there are other factors that could affect it the plant would be insignificant at most.

74

Exactly…there is less 1% of this terminal on Flora Bank, there will be NO dredging in Flora Bank…LNG carriers will be in deep water in Chatham Sound, right along side every other vessel that visits the other marine terminals in the area. Some of these LNG carriers will be even smaller than some of the ships that already traverse Chatham Sound.

Furthermore, Flora Bank survived the toxicity of the Pulp Mill that was around for multiple decades, which produced more toxins and pollution than this LNG terminal ever will.

75

Salmon seem to have no problem on the Fraser with this mess…

76

[quote=“bthedog”]

Exactly…there is less 1% of this terminal on Flora Bank, there will be NO dredging in Flora Bank…LNG carriers will be in deep water in Chatham Sound, right along side every other vessel that visits the other marine terminals in the area. Some of these LNG carriers will be even smaller than some of the ships that already traverse Chatham Sound.

Furthermore, Flora Bank survived the toxicity of the Pulp Mill that was around for multiple decades, which produced more toxins and pollution than this LNG terminal ever will.[/quote]

Great points Jabber and bthedog!

So much fear and negativity. Dust from pellet plant, oil spills, salmon runs and next it’ll be our drinking water once the ball gets rolling on Lot 444. There will always be that element of concern but we need to be reasonable and realize that every development comes with its unique set of risks and rewards. Petronas has already taken huge steps to mitigate the effects of their development and I hope it goes through.

77

[quote=“bthedog”]

Exactly…there is less 1% of this terminal on Flora Bank, there will be NO dredging in Flora Bank…LNG carriers will be in deep water in Chatham Sound, right along side every other vessel that visits the other marine terminals in the area. Some of these LNG carriers will be even smaller than some of the ships that already traverse Chatham Sound.

Furthermore, Flora Bank survived the toxicity of the Pulp Mill that was around for multiple decades, which produced more toxins and pollution than this LNG terminal ever will.[/quote]

The pulp mill plume of toxicity might have missed Flora Bank and flowed mostly north. Here is an image showing the spread of the plume credit to Skeena Cellulose Environmental Effects Monitoring Program (Hatfield Consultants Limited 1994)
This diagram is confirmed somewhat by samples from just south of Flora Bank which show very low contamination and samples in the centre of the plume by the Canpotex proposed dredge site which showed much higher. BTW PNW for some reason included the former but not the latter in their assessment info when they were still asking for the dredge.

78

“So much fear and negativity. …There will always be that element of concern” Crazy Train
Still an awful lot of fisheries biologists and oceanographers seem to be extremely exercised about this little piece of Flora Bank eelgrass… “contains about 60% of the eelgrass in the Skeena estuary” “critical salmon habitat” , “they want to put it there? yikes!” "most of the hundreds of millions of Skeena salmon smolts turn right up Inverness Passage and end up on Flora Bank"
And the sediment movement expert is worried.

79

[quote=“atsea”]“So much fear and negativity. …There will always be that element of concern” Crazy Train
Still an awful lot of fisheries biologists and oceanographers seem to be extremely exercised about this little piece of Flora Bank eelgrass… “contains about 60% of the eelgrass in the Skeena estuary” “critical salmon habitat” , “they want to put it there? yikes!” "most of the hundreds of millions of Skeena salmon smolts turn right up Inverness Passage and end up on Flora Bank"
And the sediment movement expert is worried.[/quote]

Here is one that has no issue with the project:

Mark Johannes, Ph.D. - linkedin.com/pub/mark-johan … d/6/25/66a

“But the 3-D modelling study headed by biologist Mark Johannes concludes that an $11.4-billion LNG export terminal could be built in an environmentally responsible manner on Lelu Island, located across from the community of Port Edward on British Columbia’s north coast.”

theglobeandmail.com/report-o … e24405911/

Let the discrediting of this guy begin…

80

[quote=“atsea”]

Exactly…there is less 1% of this terminal on Flora Bank, there will be NO dredging in Flora Bank…LNG carriers will be in deep water in Chatham Sound, right along side every other vessel that visits the other marine terminals in the area. Some of these LNG carriers will be even smaller than some of the ships that already traverse Chatham Sound.

Furthermore, Flora Bank survived the toxicity of the Pulp Mill that was around for multiple decades, which produced more toxins and pollution than this LNG terminal ever will.
The pulp mill plume of toxicity might have missed Flora Bank and flowed mostly north. Here is an image showing the spread of the plume credit to Skeena Cellulose Environmental Effects Monitoring Program (Hatfield Consultants Limited 1994)
This diagram is confirmed somewhat by samples from just south of Flora Bank which show very low contamination and samples in the centre of the plume by the Canpotex proposed dredge site which showed much higher. BTW PNW for some reason included the former but not the latter in their assessment info when they were still asking for the dredge.[/quote]

If you are going to explain away the pulp mill and how its toxicity had no effect on Flora Bank because its plume flowed north, then you need to apply that that same “pass” to PNW LNG as well, as any pollution from this terminal would ALSO flow North, as this is how the weather moves in this area.

How do you explain away tankers that used to actually CROSS Flora Bank at times to get to Watson Island for loading? Seems to me that vessel passage near Flora Bank was much more frequent and much more direct during the years of the pulp mill, then it ever will be with this LNG terminal.