Okay? I’m not absolutely certain, but am pretty sure Canada as a whole consumes more oil than we produce, no? Maybe someone can set the record straight here.
I just did! One quick google search will confirm.
Enbridge has had several hundred self reported breaks,im sure there are likely many more not reported,and I would guess a vast majority of them pipelines are not nearly as tough a terrain as BC. Tankers coming to somewhere near Port Simpson makes much more sense because there would be no narrow passages to navigate as narrow as the 70-80 miles of Islands needed to get up Douglas channel, but we did have a freighter sink off Celestial reef(60ish mile from Prince Rupert) in my lifetime.
My biggest issue is with the tarsands itself,it is the bigget polluter in the world already, Harpers daddy was an accountant with oil companies and has no reguard for the environment.
[quote=“CrazyMike”]
Mega tugs are going to help prevent pipeline breaches… Give your head a shake… How many weeks in your recent memory have we been without natural gas because of landslides taking out the PNG line?
Give your own head a shake. ajaye was responding to the comment about the shipping route going through sensitive and dangerous waters. His comment about the tugs had nothing to do with the pipeline.[/quote]
True but also bear in mind that anything Enbridge has to say should be weighed against their record of breaking existing regulations on their existing operations. In the past decade those same pipelines have spilt the equilvalent of 1/2 a tanker the size of the Valdez. So when they tell us that they are going to be prudent ocean operators when their land record is abysmal, we may want to consider their record before we blindly accept assurances about mega tugs and other navigation aids.
[quote=“chookie”]Enbridge has had several hundred self reported breaks,im sure there are likely many more not reported,and I would guess a vast majority of them pipelines are not nearly as tough a terrain as BC. Tankers coming to somewhere near Port Simpson makes much more sense because there would be no narrow passages to navigate as narrow as the 70-80 miles of Islands needed to get up Douglas channel, but we did have a freighter sink off Celestial reef(60ish mile from Prince Rupert) in my lifetime.
My biggest issue is with the tarsands itself,it is the bigget polluter in the world already, Harpers daddy was an accountant with oil companies and has no reguard for the environment.[/quote]
You spelled “bigot” wrong;)
[quote=“DHCollins”]
And your point is?
That individual contractors shouldn’t apply for short-term project postings because it isn’t a unionised retirement position? Give me a break.
My point is this stuff is highly toxic even before it reaches the coast. It needs to be left in the ground where it BELONGS.
calproject.org/factsheet-ibcc-tarsands.pdf
x[/quote]
Ummm… you haven’t answered the question, but I guess you’re too busy freaking out about a petroleum-based carcinogenic material.
Deny the purchase of oil to a growing economy of 1.3 billion people and Canada will be like when Chen Shui-bian ran Taiwan to the ground. Simple as that.
Human rights not to the standard that we enjoyed in Canada? Sure, but at least their politicians at state-level are more competent than Harpo.
I advise everyone watches a couple really good films one being Gasland very controversial and will make you sick !
The other film is called Food Inc, both theese films may open your eyes, to the hurt that is coming to the human population in general.
Some of the hurt and sickness has already been around for a while, one being Cancer caused by carsenogenics, mostly lung cancer,
80 years ago nobody got lung cancer, nowdays its in the hundred’s of thousands mostly caused by the root of all evil, extracting and refining oil !
Send that pipeline to Valdez or somwhere they have already destroyed ! “We Don’t Want It”
So once we turn on the tap to China there is no turning it off? Chilling thought as we contemplate expanding trade relations with Communist China and their interest in building their Naval Assets including icebreakers.
[quote=“Speakuppr”]So once we turn on the tap to China there is no turning it off? Chilling thought as we contemplate expanding trade relations with Communist China and their interest in building their Naval Assets including icebreakers.
fareasternpotato.blogspot.com/20 … econd.html[/quote]
What’s wrong with that?
80% of my objection is using Kitimat and the channels, a direct route to the open sea is the only sensible thing.
The other 20% is because we’re RETARDED not to refine it in Canada and ship gas/diesel to wherever we want. That’s jobs and prosperity, not the freaking pipeline!
I grew up at the end of the pipeline in Burnaby. They work, and the leaks can be contained easier on land. But they don’t make bloody jobs. Of the over 1000 kids Burnaby North I don’t remember ONE who’s Dad worked for the pipeline. They all worked for the refineries. And bought houses, raised kids and paid for their university and retired with cottages and motorhomes.
Not 50 jobs, more like 5,000 jobs.
My Grandfather argued for more secondary industry in Canada. WTF are we doing still arguing that? And arguing for MORE tote dat wood, draw dat water crap.
Profits for the foreign oil companies. Loving hearing the cons whining about foreign investment in environmental groups and groups driven by ideology. The funny thing is they don’t see the delicious irony in their statements.
“Ummm… you haven’t answered the question, but I guess you’re too busy freaking out about a petroleum-based carcinogenic material”
So much for peripheral vision.
The question is moot to me because I don’t think the project should go forward. Union jobs or not make no difference. This is a matter of ETHICS, not economics. Whether you believe it or not, you are your brother’s keeper. And right now, your brothers and sisters in Alberta are getting sick off this stuff.
Now why would you exploit that for your own financial gain???
x
You can’t even answer the question.
I am Albertan and a former BC’er. You don’t need hazmat suits here.
I’m not an oil/gas worker.
It’s called making a living and support families.
This is a terrible idea. We take all the risk, big oil and Alberta reap all the reward. The government is trying to marginalize anyone who disagrees with this as radicals. How about we call them what they are - Locals. People who actually live in these areas.
[quote=“Thestar.com”] Approval should be withheld until we get credible answers on many worrisome questions:
• Pipelines routinely break, industry reassurances to the contrary. That being the case, we need to know by what means Enbridge Inc. and TransCanada Corp., sponsors of the Gateway and Keystone XL pipelines, respectively, plan to improve new pipe, pumps and so on over the lines prone to failure they’ve put in place to date.
TransCanada’s Keystone, in operation for just over a year, has already had a dozen spills. And an Enbridge pipeline rupture in Michigan’s Kalamazoo River last year caused the biggest oil spill in Midwest history. An ExxonMobil Corp. pipeline last year spilled oil into Montana’s Yellowstone River. Under U.S. federal pressure, BP PLC finally is rehabilitating a Prudhoe Bay network of pipelines that have spilled millions of gallons of oil.
Do the operators even know exactly what caused those breaks? What’s being done to anticipate and prevent spills across almost 4,000 km of proposed additional pipeline? We know that sand- and stone-laden tar-sands oil is more corrosive to pipe than conventional crude. What provisions, by way of sturdier pipe, have been made for that?
• Heavy-oil spills are much tougher to clean up than conventional crude. Surface skimmers, booms and vacuums used in spills are of little use since heavy oil quickly submerges and suffocates bottom-dwelling plant and animal life.
That being the case, approval should not be granted until the pipeline sponsors and community authorities the entire length of the proposed pipelines have “war gamed” a spill at any point along the two pipelines’ routes.
How, exactly, does one rapidly arrest a spill in a remote B.C. mountain range? Let’s see the plans, kilometre by kilometre. The Deepwater Horizon catastrophe taught us the consequences of inadequate emergency planning.
• Given its viscosity, tar-sands oil must be blended with a dilutent, called DilBit, that enables the crude to flow through the pipeline. DilBit contains the carcinogen benzene and other toxins. Industry reticence about the “secret sauce” of DilBit needs to end; communities at risk must know exactly what chemicals they’re dealing with in a spill. We know the compound is dangerous, given Enbridge’s haste in buying residential properties no longer habitable after its Michigan spill.[/quote]
thestar.com/business/article … e-approval
Interesting read. Also interesting the spin about how the people signed up to oppose are radicals, foreigners or just not legit.
Follow the money the oil industry is putting into brainwashing us. I’ll take a few bucks from has been hollywood types to counter the stink of a process where the fix is in before it even starts. creekside1.blogspot.com/2012/01/ … ce-on.html
Ethical oil is making a big todo about some brazillians that were signed up for the hearings without their knowledge … but this tactic is old dirty tricks from the canadian republican party. … creekside1.blogspot.com/2012/01/ … -with.html
And just so we are clear about who we are dealing with when it comes to the communist chinese governments interest in pushing this down our throats…therealstory.ca/2012-01-07/bc-po … ts-friends
The “idea” of having an export route for Alberta’s oil production is good.
The proposal on the table is disgusting. It delivers the absolute least economic benefit to the country as is possible.
The least amount of jobs possible.
The least cost for Enbridge.
But we residents of the Northern Resource Extraction Zone should be happy with the “least”. You should be happy for two weeks work with a shovel as it goes through your town. With the bullshit lying ads they bought in your local paper and radio about foreign puppets.
You think you’re “entitled” to benefit from your own country’s resources? Be happy to get anything at all.
[quote=“herbie_popnecker”]The “idea” of having an export route for Alberta’s oil production is good.
The proposal on the table is disgusting. It delivers the absolute least economic benefit to the country as is possible.
The least amount of jobs possible.
The least cost for Enbridge.
But we residents of the Northern Resource Extraction Zone should be happy with the “least”. You should be happy for two weeks work with a shovel as it goes through your town. With the bullshit lying ads they bought in your local paper and radio about foreign puppets.
You think you’re “entitled” to benefit from your own country’s resources? Be happy to get anything at all.[/quote]
Speaking of Jobs… Do we really think the high canadian dollar is a result of our superior banks? Welcome to Petro Dollar ailment or more commonly referred to as the dutch disease;
[quote=“Wikipedia”]In economics, the Dutch disease is a concept that explains the apparent relationship between the increase in exploitation of natural resources and a decline in the manufacturing sector. The mechanism is that an increase in revenues from natural resources (or inflows of foreign aid) will make a given nation’s currency stronger compared to that of other nations (manifest in an exchange rate), resulting in the nation’s other exports becoming more expensive for other countries to buy, making the manufacturing sector less competitive. While it most often refers to natural resource discovery, it can also refer to “any development that results in a large inflow of foreign currency, including a sharp surge in natural resource prices, foreign assistance, and foreign direct investment”.
The term was coined in 1977 by The Economist to describe the decline of the manufacturing sector in the Netherlands after the discovery of a large natural gas field in 1959.[/quote]
Interestingly enough, it appears the tar sands and the pipelines may not only be harmful to the environment but also to the Canadian Economy. In short … it’s not just North Coast jobs at risk here, the negative impact will be felt across Canada. Some interesting articles on the impact of the foreign investment flowing into Canada… the petro kind not Oliver’s Hollywood dollars…
I will argue the dollar’s not artificially high. It was artificially low for decades.
We were told that natural resources weren’t worth much for a long time. And manufacturers/producers could hide behind a low dollar instead of upgrading and improving productivity while the GST helped. And Free Trade kicked in so they could bale out of Canada altogether.
Now they want to export those raw logs and crude oil, the fish and the cattle. the ore and the ingots. We should be thankful for as little as possible. They can do it again, pay those entry level workers with 69c dollars.
And target Kitimat. They’re used to it. Fuck up a whole goddam river system and end up with dick shit. Fucking up a whole coastline and maybe 1,000 miles of interior wilderness for 50 new jobs would finish things nicely.
Here’s more deceit to feed the fire, I forgot about it until the Chamber got pissed off here.
We all got Facebook notices to click if you “like” Fort St. James. If you clicked like, you discovered you now supported the Gateway Project and pipeline.
facebook.com/pages/Fort-St-J … 9529500584
Note the picture of our Chamber of Commerce log building trying to imply they support it. And the comments of people and Directors that this is total bullshit.
I reported it as a scam and encourage others to report the page as well.