Comments

  1. Sat Aug 18, 2012 3:30 am
    Finally a little common sense. Now if he can just get Enbridge to get onboard this could be a good solution to the current stalemate.

    Besides we won't have to rely on antiquated semi functioning California or Washington State refineries to get our gas. Because, we can refine our own.

  2. by avatar Brenda
    Sat Aug 18, 2012 4:37 am
    Vancouver has a refinery. Which (according to the news) is not doing that well. Can the people who can not work there anymore go to Kitimat.

    http://www.chevron.ca/operations/refining/default.asp

    (did that pipeline btw ever cause any damage? )

  3. by avatar herbie
    Sat Aug 18, 2012 4:59 am
    They could sell their Burnaby condo and buy half of Kitimat. Or Terrace....

  4. Sat Aug 18, 2012 5:59 am
    If they are planning to buy a state-of-the-art refinery in Kitimat, they should incorporate Bio Fuel Systems, which uses CO2 + others to produce a new fuel. Plus this technology is carbon negative. :)

  5. Sat Aug 18, 2012 6:24 am
    "Brenda" said
    Vancouver has a refinery. Which (according to the news) is not doing that well. Can the people who can not work there anymore go to Kitimat.

    http://www.chevron.ca/operations/refining/default.asp

    (did that pipeline btw ever cause any damage? )


    I don't remember ever hearing about any problems with it and as far as I know the Trans Mountain pipeline only had the one problem when that rocket scientist operating the backhoe decided to dig it up.

    The names Kinder Morgan meant nothing to me and I'm guessing they won't mean anything to most other people but I wonder how much that would change if they knew this:

    As a company, Kinder Morgan has been in existence only since 1997, when it was founded by billionaire Richard Kinder, the former "enforcer" for Ken Lay's Enron, and another former Enron executive, William Morgan. Since its founding, KM has been on a buying binge. According to the New York Times (Oct. 17, 2011), KM has made "about 90 acquisitions" of smaller rivals in its short history. A change of ownership can make a huge difference in pipeline safety.


    Anything owned by the criminal asshole fucksticks that were in charge of Enron should be shelved before it ever starts and not from a safety perspective but from a criminal one because, you know that someone's gonna get screwed and it won't be the former Enron Execs.

    It boggles the mind that these two can now be the principal owners of piplelines all over North America rather than in jail where alot of disgruntled, broke, investors and employees likely think they belong.


    An interesting watch if you haven't seen it:

    http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/enron-th ... -the-room/

  6. by avatar andyt
    Sat Aug 18, 2012 7:05 am
    "Brenda" said
    Vancouver has a refinery. Which (according to the news) is not doing that well. Can the people who can not work there anymore go to Kitimat.

    http://www.chevron.ca/operations/refining/default.asp

    (did that pipeline btw ever cause any damage? )


    It has trouble getting feedstock at a competitive price. Northern Gateway is expected to exacerbate that problem.

    The only spill in the years that Trans Mountain has been operating is when a contractor dug into the line in Burnaby and caused a minor spill. Kinder Morgan was held partly responsible because it hadn't provided accurate info on the location of the pipeline. So this shows it can be done, running a pipeline that doesn't leak. The biggest problem that I can see is the shipping part out of Kitimat.

    Adding extra pipeline capacity to Vancouver isn't a good answer because that stuff would likely be exported to California - ie Alberta would still be getting the US instead of world price for their product.

    I didn't know David Black was a tycoon. He's certainly not one of the big boys, and mostly just seems to be putting out an idea. Doubt if Enbridge hasn't already costed it and found it doesn't add up.

  7. by avatar Thanos
    Sat Aug 18, 2012 7:18 am
    Tanker fleet owners and ship captains prefer carrying crude anyway. It's not like sitting on a floating bomb with crude the way it is with a tankerfull of diesel or gasoline.

  8. by avatar herbie
    Sat Aug 18, 2012 4:51 pm
    My Dad did his entire career at that Chevron refinery. When I was in Burnaby North school almost everyones parents worked at a refinery. There was Chevron, Shell, BA-Gulf-Petrocan and Esso over in Ioco (the suburb was named for Imperial Oil Co.)
    Thousands of good middle class jobs.
    But economically speaking the refinery should be right at the production site in Alberta, eliminating the need for any bitumen thinner line. The lines should carry the refined products to a tank farm on the coast. NOT in Kitimat.
    The Burnaby refineries cut back mainly for that reason: KinderMorgan's main line brings refined gas from more efficient mega-refineries in Alberta to the Burnaby, where they changed to mainly tank farms. The 2nd line brings crude for export and Chevron, which mainly supplies jet-fuel to the airport AFAIK.



view comments in forum
You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news.

 Share  Digg It Bookmark to del.icio.us Share on Facebook



News Link:


Advertise