CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33831

Warnings: (20%)
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:33 pm
 


Proculation wrote:
From what I hear in Quebec media, ALL the oil will be exported. So, Quebec is just a land to pass for Alberta companies to make money.


Sure, like the Quebec media has never lied to you, right ? :wink:

Proculation wrote:
Do you have that in the ROC in the media ? Not the language barrier but the misinformation ?



Not just ROC, but the ROW.

Mainstream media everywhere are broadcasting nothing but garbage.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20727
PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2016 7:37 am
 


andyt wrote:
Well, there's a well reasoned argument.


:roll:

As opposed to the BS you and other left wing nutjobs keep spewing about the Trans-Mountain expansion?

There's never been a marine spill from Trans-Mountain in its entire history.

NEVER.

And Kinder Morgan is willing to spend $200 million to build/staff five bases to deal with one just in case something that has never happened actually does happen.

But is that good enough for anyone in Vancouver?

Of course it isn't.

Nothing Kinder Morgan (or any other pipeline company) offers will ever be good enough for the enviro-weenies who think our society can be powered by wind or solar. Just because some true believers think that a Prius is capable enough to haul their organic veggies and free trade coffee doesn't make it so.

We can and should move towards a carbon free economy, but that isn't going to happen next year or next decade - it's going to take a long time and a helluva lot of money.

Therefore, it makes sense to use existing valuable assets (oil & natural gas) now when they are still worth something to pay for those changes, instead of just relying taxing the middle class.

However, pipeline opponents refuse to use logic and instead rely on emotion like this:



Last edited by bootlegga on Wed Sep 07, 2016 7:40 am, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20727
PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2016 7:39 am
 


Canadian_Mind wrote:
bootlegga wrote:
andyt wrote:
Yes, it would have to be doubled and would ship out of Vancouver. Already been some conflict just around the surveying of the line, probably be a big hullaballoo if the attempt was made to actually build it. One reassurance is that the Liberals have agreed to re-open the Kitsilano Coast Guard base, but for many people, including myself, they would have to demonstrate that major safety precautions and spill response systems are in place.


Yeah, who gives a shit that Kinder Morgan has operated for more than 60 years without a single maritime spill, right?

https://www.transmountain.com/

The hysteria in Vancouver around the Trans-Mountain expansion has no merit whatsoever - the hippies in BC don't want the pipeline because it's oil, and instead think we should power our society with rainbows and good intentions.


Didn't city work crews in Burnaby strike the pipeline, causing it to burst a few years back?


That wasn't a maritime spill, that was a broken pipeline that leaked into the river. A subtle difference, but it is different.

What Andy always goes on about (as he does on page 1) is a tanker spill in the Fraser River.

That has NEVER happened in the 60+ years Trans-Mountain has been in operation.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33600
PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2016 8:05 am
 


No, I go on about tanker spills in Burrard Inlet. A subtle difference, I grant you.

A seven fold increase in traffic will of course have no impact on the likelihood of a spill. /sarcasm

As I've repeatedly said, what I want is firm commitments by Kinder Morgan and the govt that very high level spill response will be in place if this goes ahead, and that Kinder Morgan will be on the hook for the total clean up costs, which could be immense. Not sure why you deem that to be unreasonable, except of course that a spill wouldn't affect you, so who cares, right?


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8723
PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2016 10:12 pm
 


Oh FFS that spill was a contractor's map fuckup.
On land. No river, no inlet, on goddam land. Got my ex-gf's house real good. Buah ah ah.

Nonetheless, the people in Vancouver don't want MORE tankers in their harbour. Their decision. No one else's.
But just to ask, does the fact they haven't had a marine accident yet prove they won't in the future? Implying increasing the number of tankers is still multiplying by zero?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Boston Bruins


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 11964
PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 5:07 am
 


andyt wrote:
No, I go on about tanker spills in Burrard Inlet. A subtle difference, I grant you.

A seven fold increase in traffic will of course have no impact on the likelihood of a spill. /sarcasm

As I've repeatedly said, what I want is firm commitments by Kinder Morgan and the govt that very high level spill response will be in place if this goes ahead, and that Kinder Morgan will be on the hook for the total clean up costs, which could be immense. Not sure why you deem that to be unreasonable, except of course that a spill wouldn't affect you, so who cares, right?


I don't think you give a shit for anything other than financially strangling Alberta.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33600
PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 10:48 am
 


I don't really think about Alberta all that much, to tell the truth. You've just picked up the Albertan attitude that the whole world revolves around them.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Boston Bruins


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 11964
PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 10:57 am
 


andyt wrote:
I don't really think about Alberta all that much, to tell the truth. You've just picked up the Albertan attitude that the whole world revolves around them.


Nope, your attitude about Alberta and Albertans shines as bright as a supernova.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20727
PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 12:07 pm
 


andyt wrote:
No, I go on about tanker spills in Burrard Inlet. A subtle difference, I grant you.

A seven fold increase in traffic will of course have no impact on the likelihood of a spill. /sarcasm

As I've repeatedly said, what I want is firm commitments by Kinder Morgan and the govt that very high level spill response will be in place if this goes ahead, and that Kinder Morgan will be on the hook for the total clean up costs, which could be immense. Not sure why you deem that to be unreasonable, except of course that a spill wouldn't affect you, so who cares, right?


Yeah, Kinder Morgan's willingness to spend $200 MILLION to build and run 5 new spill response bases is just because, right?

:roll:

Or maybe it has something to do with KM recognizing the fact that a spill might happen and making sure resources are in place to deal with it immediately...that was my point, nothing any pipeline company does will ever be enough for those dead set against pipelines.

While you're correct that a spill wouldn't affect me, neither does the construction of this or any other pipeline - I don't now, nor have I ever worked in the oil/gas sector.

I'm advocating for it (and Energy East) because it makes sense for Canada as a whole, unlike the NIMBYs in Vancouver or Montreal.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33600
PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 12:31 pm
 


Yeah, yeah, those selfless Albertans just worried about Canada as a whole.

If the proper response capability is in place, and KM has put up a sufficient bond to cover any cleanup costs, well then go for it. But I'd need to see it to believe it - certainly the Harper govt would have just tried to bullshit it's way thru, as we saw with the piss poor response to just 3000 litres (gallons?) of diesel being spilled. Let's hope the Liberals can do better. It's going to take more than pretty words. And the Liberals have also shown they can talk a better game than they play.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20727
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 12:36 pm
 


andyt wrote:
Yeah, yeah, those selfless Albertans just worried about Canada as a whole.

If the proper response capability is in place, and KM has put up a sufficient bond to cover any cleanup costs, well then go for it. But I'd need to see it to believe it - certainly the Harper govt would have just tried to bullshit it's way thru, as we saw with the piss poor response to just 3000 litres (gallons?) of diesel being spilled. Let's hope the Liberals can do better. It's going to take more than pretty words. And the Liberals have also shown they can talk a better game than they play.


This is the problem right here - I've noted several times they are putting far more assets in place, but it goes in one ear and out the other.

As I've said, NO amount of capability will ever satisfy the naysayers...EVER.

I never said all Albertans are altruistic, I said I support this because it is what is best for Canada.

BC may not need equalization payments yet (let's see how the real estate crash affects your province), but if Albertan's overall incomes drop because we can't sell our products (either to other Canadians or foreign markets), then the taxes Albertans pay also drop, and that means less equalization for every province that does benefit from it. Tack on contracts for industrial products and other things the industry orders from right across Canada and the oil industry has a huge impact on the country, whether or not you like it.

Therefore - and I know this is hard for many to understand - the oil industry succeeding is good for far more than just Alberta.


Online
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Calgary Flames
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 27484
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 12:46 pm
 


bootlegga wrote:
This is the problem right here - I've noted several times they are putting far more assets in place, but it goes in one ear and out the other.

As I've said, NO amount of capability will ever satisfy the naysayers...EVER.

I never said all Albertans are altruistic, I said I support this because it is what is best for Canada.

BC may not need equalization payments yet (let's see how the real estate crash affects your province), but if Albertan's overall incomes drop because we can't sell our products (either to other Canadians or foreign markets), then the taxes Albertans pay also drop, and that means less equalization for every province that does benefit from it. Tack on contracts for industrial products and other things the industry orders from right across Canada and the oil industry has a huge impact on the country, whether or not you like it.

Therefore - and I know this is hard for many to understand - the oil industry succeeding is good for far more than just Alberta.


Stop trying. It isn't working. It never will.

Image


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Previous  1  2



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.