Monday, September 1st11.8°C
22736
23038

BC Conservative Party option.

Discuss the upcoming provincial election. Keep it civil in here, people. It's not the Political Arena.

Moderators: Triple 6, Jo, ferri

Re: BC Conservative Party option.

Postby hobbyguy » Nov 16th, 2012, 8:58 am

So for those who still think dilbit transport is a good idea: why did Enbridge try to cover up that its Wisconsin spill was dilbit? Why does the US IRS not classify dilbit as "oil"?
We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both. - Louis D. Brandeis
hobbyguy
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2323
Likes: 167 posts
Liked in: 527 posts
Joined: Jan 20th, 2011, 9:10 pm

Re: BC Conservative Party option.

Postby NAB » Nov 16th, 2012, 9:27 am

LoneWolf_53 wrote:
Alvis wrote:Aside from all the political wrangling, I believe the last two earthquakes we had off the coast of Haida Gwaii pretty much put the last nails in the Enbridge pipeline coffin.


I hadn't realized the pipeline was slated to run out into the ocean off the coast. :127:

I wonder how many earthquakes there have been where the pipeline is actually proposed?


hmmmm, can we think of any offshore earthquakes recently that caused devastation on land?

Nab
NAB
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 22985
Likes: 38 posts
Liked in: 206 posts
Joined: Apr 19th, 2006, 1:33 pm

Re: BC Conservative Party option.

Postby LoneWolf_53 » Nov 16th, 2012, 9:33 am

NAB wrote:hmmmm, can we think of any offshore earthquakes recently that caused devastation on land?

Nab


On land where the pipeline is proposed?

I think your grasping there NAB.
"Friends are the family that we choose ourselves!"
User avatar
LoneWolf_53
Walks on Forum Water
 
Posts: 10645
Likes: 335 posts
Liked in: 918 posts
Joined: Mar 19th, 2005, 1:06 pm

Re: BC Conservative Party option.

Postby NAB » Nov 16th, 2012, 9:39 am

In that the pipelines would run to storage and marine loading facilities right on the coast, it certainly would be exposed to potential rim of fire quakes in the area (as well as any resulting tsunamis). Just because a big one hasn't happened in the area yet doesn't mean it won't. And we do know "the big one" is overdue by historical standards.

Nab
NAB
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 22985
Likes: 38 posts
Liked in: 206 posts
Joined: Apr 19th, 2006, 1:33 pm

Re: BC Conservative Party option.

Postby maple leaf » Nov 16th, 2012, 11:57 am

LoneWolf_53 wrote:
NAB wrote:hmmmm, can we think of any offshore earthquakes recently that caused devastation on land?

Nab


On land where the pipeline is proposed?

I think your grasping there NAB.


There are real risks though, from submarine slides in the Douglas Channel.There have been many over the years which caused tidal waves,the one in 1968 when I lived there was significant enough to cause considerable damage to the wharf and fishing boats.There was another one in 1971 and one of the biggest was in 1974 and again in 1975


Updates with statement from Natural Resources Canada, new filings by Enbridge Northern Gateway and the Attorney General of Canada (in box below)
The Geological Survey of Canada has identified a tsunami hazard and a possible seismic fault in Douglas Channel near Kitimat. A scientific paper by the Geological Survey and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans says there were once two giant landslides on Douglas Channel that triggered major tsunamis and that the landslides were possibly caused by an earthquake on the fault line.

http://nwcoastenergynews.com/2012/09/18 ... s-channel/



http://books.google.ca/books?id=kaJz_SN ... rf&f=false
User avatar
maple leaf
Übergod
 
Posts: 1401
Likes: 155 posts
Liked in: 100 posts
Joined: Nov 6th, 2011, 11:37 am

Re: BC Conservative Party option.

Postby Alvis » Nov 16th, 2012, 1:45 pm

*sarcasm and too much drama play better in the Political Arena, not here/Jo*
Man can now fly in the air like a bird, swim under the ocean like a fish, he can burrow into the ground like a mole. Now if only he could walk the earth like a man, this would be paradise.
Tommy Douglas
User avatar
Alvis
Board Meister
 
Posts: 415
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 4 posts
Joined: Feb 18th, 2008, 9:04 am

Re: BC Conservative Party option.

Postby LoneWolf_53 » Nov 16th, 2012, 4:44 pm

NAB wrote:In that the pipelines would run to storage and marine loading facilities right on the coast, it certainly would be exposed to potential rim of fire quakes in the area (as well as any resulting tsunamis). Just because a big one hasn't happened in the area yet doesn't mean it won't. And we do know "the big one" is overdue by historical standards.

Nab


What we also know is that earthquakes, and other natural disasters, happen all over the globe, yet goods still get transported, and the consumer rarely questions how the item got to them.

We also know that transporting items such as fuel by truck also comes with inherent risk, and if memory serves, more so than a pipeline, yet it's still a regular method of transport.

You live on the Island, so out of curiosity sake, how does the fuel you use get to your gas station? Truck, fuel tanker, pipes, or combination of the above, basically across the same coastal waters you're so concerned about? For that matter, geological events have been more prevalent closer to you, than to Kitimat.

As far as I'm concerned, it makes far more sense to focus on state of the art safety measures, than to quibble over what method is used to move resources, that are going to get moved one way or another.
"Friends are the family that we choose ourselves!"
User avatar
LoneWolf_53
Walks on Forum Water
 
Posts: 10645
Likes: 335 posts
Liked in: 918 posts
Joined: Mar 19th, 2005, 1:06 pm

Re: BC Conservative Party option.

Postby NAB » Nov 16th, 2012, 5:03 pm

With me, the issue I oppose is the transport of bitumen/dil-bit before upgrading, ,,,,,by any means at all. And I will not support any political party or candidate who supports it. That sorta eliminates the BC Conservative Party as an option for me.

Nab
NAB
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 22985
Likes: 38 posts
Liked in: 206 posts
Joined: Apr 19th, 2006, 1:33 pm

Re: BC Conservative Party option.

Postby Alvis » Nov 16th, 2012, 6:13 pm

NAB wrote:
LoneWolf_53 wrote:
I hadn't realized the pipeline was slated to run out into the ocean off the coast. :127:

I wonder how many earthquakes there have been where the pipeline is actually proposed?


hmmmm, can we think of any offshore earthquakes recently that caused devastation on land?

Nab

Yes. It happens all the time. There can be tsunamis as well as damage to the ground itself. The above staqtement about the pipeline going out into the water is uninformed and ignorant.

Japan tsunami 2011, now imagine a pipeline in the way of the water and debris. Now in Japan the tsunami damage went quite a ways inland due to it being flat. What would happen to a tsunami that hit a small inlet that was fed by a river coming out fo a small valley?
Image

This is from 2007 in Japan again.
Note the amounf of land shift caused by an OFFSHORE earthquake. What would happen to a pipeline in this area, near the ocean? How long would it take to stop the flow of oil?

"The M6.6 mainshock of the Niigata Chuetsu Oki (offshore) earthquake occurred at 10:13 a.m. local time on July 16, 2007, and was followed by a sequence of aftershocks that were felt during the entire time of the reconnaissance effort. The mainshock had an estimated focal depth of 10 km and struck in the Japan Sea offshore Kariwa. Analysis of waveforms from source inversion studies indicates that the event occurred along a thrust fault with a NE trend. The fault plane is either a strike of 34 degrees with a dip of 51 degrees or a strike of 238 degrees with a dip of 41 degrees. Which of these two planes is associated with the mainshock rupture is unresolved, although attenuation relationship analysis indicates that the northwest-dipping fault is favored. The quake affected an approximately 100-km-wide area along the coastal areas of southwestern Niigata prefecture. The event triggered ground failures as far as the Unouma Hills, located in central Niigata approximately 50 km from the shore and the source area of the 2004 Niigata Chuetsu earthquake. The primary event produced tsunami run-ups that reached maximum runup heights of about 20 centimeters along the shoreline of southern Niigata Prrefecture"
Image
Man can now fly in the air like a bird, swim under the ocean like a fish, he can burrow into the ground like a mole. Now if only he could walk the earth like a man, this would be paradise.
Tommy Douglas
User avatar
Alvis
Board Meister
 
Posts: 415
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 4 posts
Joined: Feb 18th, 2008, 9:04 am

Re: BC Conservative Party option.

Postby LoneWolf_53 » Nov 16th, 2012, 6:32 pm

*NOT appropriate for this area, take it to the Political Arena/Jo*
"Friends are the family that we choose ourselves!"
User avatar
LoneWolf_53
Walks on Forum Water
 
Posts: 10645
Likes: 335 posts
Liked in: 918 posts
Joined: Mar 19th, 2005, 1:06 pm

Re: BC Conservative Party option.

Postby Alvis » Nov 16th, 2012, 6:51 pm

*NOT appropriate for this area, take it to the Political Arena/Jo*
Man can now fly in the air like a bird, swim under the ocean like a fish, he can burrow into the ground like a mole. Now if only he could walk the earth like a man, this would be paradise.
Tommy Douglas
User avatar
Alvis
Board Meister
 
Posts: 415
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 4 posts
Joined: Feb 18th, 2008, 9:04 am

Re: BC Conservative Party option.

Postby LoneWolf_53 » Nov 17th, 2012, 12:40 am

*NOT appropriate for this area, take it to the Political Arena/Jo*
"Friends are the family that we choose ourselves!"
User avatar
LoneWolf_53
Walks on Forum Water
 
Posts: 10645
Likes: 335 posts
Liked in: 918 posts
Joined: Mar 19th, 2005, 1:06 pm

Re: BC Conservative Party option.

Postby Alvis » Nov 17th, 2012, 12:45 am

*NOT appropriate for this area, take it to the Political Arena/Jo*
Man can now fly in the air like a bird, swim under the ocean like a fish, he can burrow into the ground like a mole. Now if only he could walk the earth like a man, this would be paradise.
Tommy Douglas
User avatar
Alvis
Board Meister
 
Posts: 415
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 4 posts
Joined: Feb 18th, 2008, 9:04 am

Re: BC Conservative Party option.

Postby Jo » Nov 17th, 2012, 8:26 am

I see two people who are perilously close to losing access to the BC forum. Take the off-topic silliness to the Political Arena.
jo@castanet.net
Old as dirt. Twice as gritty.
User avatar
Jo
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 18508
Likes: 1408 posts
Liked in: 1159 posts
Joined: Nov 27th, 2004, 1:33 pm

Re: BC Conservative Party option.

Postby ScottSA » Jan 11th, 2013, 10:30 pm

I believe it's time to bring this thread back to life. The BC Conservatives are coming out of the gate at a full gallop in 2013 - we hope to welcome around 20 new candidates in January alone, and I know for a fact that several ridings here in the Okanagan are well within reach even at this point. My campaign team and I are extremely optimistic about the election in May in Vernon-Monashee.

The Liberal government continues to disgrace itself on an almost daily basis, the NDP is simply dog paddling and hoping to slide in under the radar, but the BC Conservatives are the only party willing to be honest with voters, and to actually walk the walk.
ScottSA
 
Posts: 83
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Feb 1st, 2009, 9:22 am

PreviousNext

Return to B.C. Provincial Election 2013

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests