BC to approve Gateway if conditions met.........

[LID]

Wasn't it the principle of dirty oil, and the environment?

Nope, they just wanted more cash!


B.C. to approve Gateway pipeline if new conditions met

 

[d mills]

It is a little naïve to think it wasn't gonna happen once the cash starts flowin'.

 

[Bnorth]

Far too often when there are environmental catastrophes the taxpayers are left holding the bag for cleanup. So I get concerned when a company with the spill history of Enbridge wants to build a pipeline through extreme terrain with high environmental risk. I would like to see about a $500M bond placed for when these idiots manage to spill another 300k barrels into a Canadian river not an American one this time. If anyone has read the stories on the Kalamazoo spill it was complete incompetence.

 

[ferniesnow]

Far too often when there are environmental catastrophes the taxpayers are left holding the bag for cleanup. So I get concerned when a company with the spill history of Enbridge wants to build a pipeline through extreme terrain with high environmental risk. I would like to see about a $500M bond placed for when these idiots manage to spill another 300k barrels into a Canadian river not an American one this time. If anyone has read the stories on the Kalamazoo spill it was complete incompetence.

That sounds like a great idea. That's only another half billion on top of the already $6 Billion and maybe in the situation of coastal BC that may not be high enough.

 

[Bnorth]

That sounds like a great idea. That's only another half billion on top of the already $6 Billion and maybe in the situation of coastal BC that may not be high enough.

I can't tell if that's tongue-in-cheek Doug. But yes I was thinking about a billion is needed for a major coastline spill however that becomes very cost prohibitive at nearly 20% of the project cost. Believe it or not I actually like the idea of the pipeline as then we can sell our oil to a second world superpower at OPEC rates.

 

[tukernater]

I can't tell if that's tongue-in-cheek Doug. But yes I was thinking about a billion is needed for a major coastline spill however that becomes very cost prohibitive at nearly 20% of the project cost. Believe it or not I actually like the idea of the pipeline as then we can sell our oil to a second world superpower at OPEC rates.

I agree but it's not are oil, it's alberta's oil.

 

[DRD]

Umm, don't oil super tankers pass within 100km of the BC coast everyday?? There is also aframax tankers in port already,around 70/yr. fill up and leave BC's west coast. You think that KM's Trans Mountain pipeline stops in PG at Husky's refinery?

 

[Stompin Tom]

I have now read 4 different new reports on the Liberals press conference, to sum it up they basically say .................................. nothing. Yes they say the cost/risk at this point is not correct, and they list some vague points but in reality they say nothing. Right now they are a lame duck government 9 months away from an election which they are horribly behind in the polls. No commitments, no demands, no agreements. They held a presser to say .................. well, nothing.

 

[Stompin Tom]

Umm, don't oil super tankers pass within 100km of the BC coast everyday?? There is also aframax tankers in port already,around 70/yr. fill up and leave BC's west coast. You think that KM's Trans Mountain pipeline stops in PG at Husky's refinery?

.

At this point in time Super Tanker traffic is illegal anywhere along the north coast of BC. All traffic going to Alaska much travel in international waters until they reach US waters.

 

[Stompin Tom]

Umm, don't oil super tankers pass within 100km of the BC coast everyday?? There is also aframax tankers in port already,around 70/yr. fill up and leave BC's west coast. You think that KM's Trans Mountain pipeline stops in PG at Husky's refinery?

I am no expert in where pipelines go by any means, but I dont believe the pipeline you mention services the refinery in Prince George, it goes to Kamloops then on to the lower mainland. There is no oil based pipeline west of Prince George.

 

[Stompin Tom]

Umm, don't oil super tankers pass within 100km of the BC coast everyday?? There is also aframax tankers in port already,around 70/yr. fill up and leave BC's west coast. You think that KM's Trans Mountain pipeline stops in PG at Husky's refinery?

A little research and I have found that the Prince George refinery is fed by a Pembina Pipeline from Taylor BC.

 

[DRD]

.

At this point in time Super Tanker traffic is illegal anywhere along the north coast of BC. All traffic going to Alaska much travel in international waters until they reach US waters.

Not quite:
Tanker Exclusion Zone Clarification

You probably are correct on the pipe in PG, Husky might be fed by Pembina. I just fix their crap when it's broke.
Does that mitigate the percieved risk if it goes through Kamloops instead?

 

[Bnorth]

I agree but it's not are oil, it's alberta's oil.

I meant Canada as a whole, we're all in this big canoe together.

Umm, don't oil super tankers pass within 100km of the BC coast everyday?? There is also aframax tankers in port already,around 70/yr. fill up and leave BC's west coast. You think that KM's Trans Mountain pipeline stops in PG at Husky's refinery?

Don't talk to me like I'm an idiot. 100km off the coast is well into international waters and they are forced that far off the coast by the unofficial tanker moratorium. KM's Trans Mountain pipeline ships crude to a Burnaby port in small amounts (about 70 ships/year). The crude refined in PG comes from north of Ft St John or crosses to BC at Dawson Creek, not the trans mountain pipeline. I am a lot less concerned about a spill in the lower mainland than the pristine bukley and skeena valleys and the north coast. The KM line also has a pretty good safety record besides a $15M spill in 2007.

 

[DRD]

Who's talking to you like your an idiot? You may be more concerned about a leak in Skeena but to other people are more concerned about a leak in the lower main land. It's classis NIMBY, or Not In My BackYard.

 

[Bnorth]

Who's talking to you like your an idiot? You may be more concerned about a leak in Skeena but to other people are more concerned about a leak in the lower main land. It's classis NIMBY, or Not In My BackYard.

If it was NIMBY I would be more concerned about the twinning of the Trans Mountain pipeline that KM is currently working on.

 

[Stompin Tom]

Not quite:
Tanker Exclusion Zone Clarification

You probably are correct on the pipe in PG, Husky might be fed by Pembina. I just fix their crap when it's broke.
Does that mitigate the percieved risk if it goes through Kamloops instead?

and as per the map you provided, all traffic is in international waters along the north coast.

 

[DRD]

and as per the map you provided, all traffic is in international waters along the north coast.

I don't get the international waters thing. I said they pass within 100k which is correct. If a tanker leaks the oil isn't going to respect a line in the ocean.

 

[ferniesnow]

I can't tell if that's tongue-in-cheek Doug. But yes I was thinking about a billion is needed for a major coastline spill however that becomes very cost prohibitive at nearly 20% of the project cost. Believe it or not I actually like the idea of the pipeline as then we can sell our oil to a second world superpower at OPEC rates.

It wasn't tongue-in-cheek. With some of the added safety measures (thicker pipe at river/creek crossings, better monitoring instrumentation, and more visual checking), I heard the cost would be another $50 million. If that is what it takes, so be it. The bond idea is great but doo they actually have to have the cash up front or can that be secured with insurance, assets, or some other means?

If it is too much, maybe the bitumen will eventually go north and follow the Alaska Highway and use an Alaska port. Who knows where or when, but it will get done and it will be before the MacKenzie pipeline gets finished, IMHO

 

[Pinner]

The Mackenzie pipeline is not going to happen.

I don't think the KM pipeline is going to be tolerated by the public/Natives, a very tough sell with good reasons. KM's abysmal track record and 1500? creek/river crossings through pristine mountain terrain...and then the increased tanker traffic, wow, good luck.

 

[Stompin Tom]

I don't get the international waters thing. I said they pass within 100k which is correct. If a tanker leaks the oil isn't going to respect a line in the ocean.

Nobody has contol of international water ways, nothing a province or country can do if another country wants to run tanker traffic. The only control we have is Canadian waters. Pretty hard to outlaw tankers from international water.

If they want to build a pipeline to the north coast, the moratorium on tanker traffic will have to be changed and believe me there are allot of natives willing to go on the war path to make sure that doesn't happen.