|
Author |
Topic Options
|
Posts: 23565
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 12:22 pm
EyeBrock EyeBrock: Gunnair Gunnair: Well, from the oil argument, I for one am thoroughly against the northern gateway pipeline to Kitimat not so much because I prefer Iranian oil, but because of my years sailing the north coast and scale of devastation that a tanker leak up there would cause not to mention the degree of difficulty for cleaning it up. I'm sure there are other options Gunny. Getting a pipeline to a Canadian coast from Alberta is something we should do. The Yanks seem to prefer to import oil from the blood-oil ME states, we can return the favour by shipping our oil to China and the pacific rim nations without it crossing into the US. Possibly, however the North Coast is simply a bad call.
|
Posts: 53383
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 12:29 pm
martin14 martin14: Cull the seals, I'd rather have the cod. Sink the Portugese overfishing vessels first, though.
|
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:59 pm
Gunnair Gunnair: Well, from the oil argument, I for one am thoroughly against the northern gateway pipeline to Kitimat not so much because I prefer Iranian oil, but because of my years sailing the north coast and scale of devastation that a tanker leak up there would cause not to mention the degree of difficulty for cleaning it up. The pipline isn't the problem it's Douglas Channel and the potential for disaster that scares me.
|
Posts: 23565
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:17 pm
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy: Gunnair Gunnair: Well, from the oil argument, I for one am thoroughly against the northern gateway pipeline to Kitimat not so much because I prefer Iranian oil, but because of my years sailing the north coast and scale of devastation that a tanker leak up there would cause not to mention the degree of difficulty for cleaning it up. The pipline isn't the problem it's Douglas Channel and the potential for disaster that scares me. Well, the pipeline does have to go through a number of areas where leaks could be catastrophic, however, it's the tanker traffic which would have the greatest effect on the north coast.
|
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:27 pm
Gunnair Gunnair: Well, the pipeline does have to go through a number of areas where leaks could be catastrophic, however, it's the tanker traffic which would have the greatest effect on the north coast.
Yes but we already have the Kinder Morgan one running even farther than this one and it's been in operation since the 50's and hasn't had any significant impact on the environment with spills other than that contractor who hit it a couple of years ago and hosed down all those homes with oil. So I guess it's a crap shoot, although like I said I'm more concerned about Douglas Channel than the pipeline leaking. But, when I was looking for the map of that Pipeline I came across this article. Kinder Morgan's Grand Plan to Pipe Oil Sands Crudehttp://thetyee.ca/News/2011/06/02/Kinde ... GrandPlan/$1: They are also requesting to divert more Alberta crude and bitumen capacity to the Westbridge tanker terminal in Burrard Inlet and away from existing land-based refineries in B.C. and Washington. If approved, this would immediately expand crude capacity through Vancouver from 52,000 bpd to 79,000 bpd -- an increase of more than 50 per cent. So the Enbridge Pipeline isn't the only one on the radar. Wonder why there isn't any squawking about this yet?
|
Posts: 23565
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:46 pm
Northern Gateway is taking all the focus. If it is already a fait accompli and the 18 months of talk is mere dross, then what better way to sneak in something else.
Fuck.. where's my tinfoil hat!
|
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 6:03 pm
Gunnair Gunnair: Northern Gateway is taking all the focus. If it is already a fait accompli and the 18 months of talk is mere dross, then what better way to sneak in something else.
Fuck.. where's my tinfoil hat! I'm wearing it. 
|
Posts: 23565
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 6:05 pm
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy: Gunnair Gunnair: Northern Gateway is taking all the focus. If it is already a fait accompli and the 18 months of talk is mere dross, then what better way to sneak in something else.
Fuck.. where's my tinfoil hat! I'm wearing it.  Share!
|
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 7:14 pm
Why blame seals for doing what comes naturally to them, i.e. eat fish, make lots of little seal babies? A seal's just an animal, incapable of consciously committing harm or capable of greed or malice. Seems to me that the irresponsible and greedy humans who nearly wiped out the cod in the first place should still be the ones shouldering the vast majority of the blame. 
|
Posts: 23565
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 7:23 pm
Thanos Thanos: Why blame seals for doing what comes naturally to them, i.e. eat fish, make lots of little seal babies? A seal's just an animal, incapable of consciously committing harm or capable of greed or malice. Seems to me that the irresponsible and greedy humans who nearly wiped out the cod in the first place should still be the ones shouldering the vast majority of the blame.  Seals don't fight back.
|
Posts: 11825
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 7:29 pm
They've blamed seals and orcas when the salmon runs were slim here too.
For Bart - yeah we do import oil, but it's Alberta oil by pipeline. The KinderMorgan to Vancouver only has ONE carrying crude. They shut down most of the refineries here and use them as tank farms, the other pipes now carry gasoline. The product we got from the USA was gasoline & diesel trucked from the refineries at Cherry Point in Washington to stations in the Vancouver area. Vancouver Island and the coastal communities get stuff barged from Vancouver. There are no Iranian oil tankers coming in, and very few crude tankers going out from Vancouver.
|
Posts: 11825
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 7:39 pm
The oil should be refined in Alberta, then any pipeline leak is less dangerous. And there's no need for the thinning agents to be sent to Alberta, they can use both pipes to send products out. Any Albertans going to gripe about megarefineries that would instantly stabilize small towns and provide thousands of really good jobs? I don't think so.
|
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 7:40 pm
herbie herbie: They've blamed seals and orcas when the salmon runs were slim here too.
Vancouver Island and the coastal communities get stuff barged from Vancouver. There are no Iranian oil tankers coming in, and very few crude tankers going out from Vancouver. That won't be the case if Kinder Morgan gets their wish.
|
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 10:16 pm
Gunnair Gunnair: Thanos Thanos: Why blame seals for doing what comes naturally to them, i.e. eat fish, make lots of little seal babies? A seal's just an animal, incapable of consciously committing harm or capable of greed or malice. Seems to me that the irresponsible and greedy humans who nearly wiped out the cod in the first place should still be the ones shouldering the vast majority of the blame.  Seals don't fight back. I prefer animals. They're innocent of all sin. They don't think up things like slavery, religion, panzerkampfwagens, taxes, or presidential primary campaigns to inflict on each other the way that people do. 
|
Posts: 23565
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 10:19 pm
Thanos Thanos: Gunnair Gunnair: Thanos Thanos: Why blame seals for doing what comes naturally to them, i.e. eat fish, make lots of little seal babies? A seal's just an animal, incapable of consciously committing harm or capable of greed or malice. Seems to me that the irresponsible and greedy humans who nearly wiped out the cod in the first place should still be the ones shouldering the vast majority of the blame.  Seals don't fight back. I prefer animals. They're innocent of all sin. They don't think up things like slavery, religion, panzerkampfwagens, taxes, or presidential primary campaigns to inflict on each other the way that people do.  Yep. More often than not, people truly disgust me.
|
|
Page 2 of 3
|
[ 31 posts ] |
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests |
|
|