48375
47833

Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Re: Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Postby Cactusflower » Nov 9th, 2017, 5:00 pm

mikest2 wrote:
Cactusflower wrote:I think the issue is this: Suppose the Kinder Morgan expansion was re-routed to go through your backyard. And suppose that you, being a supporter of the pipeline woke up one morning to find your backyard swimming pool full of diluted bitumen from a leak that happened overnight. Would you say, "Oh, that's okay, I'll just clean this mess up myself and call KM or Trans Mountain to come and fix the leak. I sure wouldn't want those refineries in WA State to go without AB product. After all, they provide us with much of that refined product, since most of our refineries have been closed due to lack of crude."

Sure you would. [icon_lol2.gif]

More likely, I'd think I just won the lottery...........


Yes, I suppose you would, because you think you could just scoop it out and put it in your SUV's gas tank.
Cactusflower
Übergod
 
Posts: 1258
Likes: 578 posts
Liked in: 265 posts
Joined: Aug 27th, 2017, 10:33 pm

Re: Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Postby Veovis » Nov 9th, 2017, 5:03 pm

Cactusflower wrote:I think the issue is this: Suppose the Kinder Morgan expansion was re-routed to go through your backyard. And suppose that you, being a supporter of the pipeline woke up one morning to find your backyard swimming pool full of diluted bitumen from a leak that happened overnight. Would you say, "Oh, that's okay, I'll just clean this mess up myself and call KM or Trans Mountain to come and fix the leak. I sure wouldn't want those refineries in WA State to go without AB product. After all, they provide us with much of that refined product, since most of our refineries have been closed due to lack of crude."

Sure you would. [icon_lol2.gif]


SO make believe hypothetical concepts mean government officials can do as they please? I know this book called a bible that deals with imaginary things that you want out of government but when YOU make it up it's ok then?

One set of rules for all please, you don't get to decide what counts and doesn't and neither does Barnaby's Mayor.

This still isn't about the pipeline and your imaginary issues with it, it's with someone potentially abusing a position for a personal reason. Just because you agree doesn't with his reason does not make his actions right. (should there be such actions)

If my neighbor was selling his house and I didn't want him to move and worked at the land transfer office because of my personal feelings would it be ok for me to void the sale every time so he couldn't move? What if you liked him not to move to, would that make my actions ok then?

To clarify, no, no it wouldn't. Our emotional interest in the pipeline means nothing in regards to this issue.

2 people like this post.
Veovis
Guru
 
Posts: 5232
Likes: 640 posts
Liked in: 3141 posts
Joined: Apr 19th, 2007, 2:11 pm

Re: Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Postby hobbyguy » Nov 9th, 2017, 5:54 pm

It is important to realize that the cynical demovictions Derek Corrigan is just playing politics. He is a typical "plastic kayak" type that professes concern for "the little people" while booting them out of their rental homes.
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
Guru
 
Posts: 6564
Likes: 1661 posts
Liked in: 5553 posts
Joined: Jan 20th, 2011, 8:10 pm

Re: Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Postby Cactusflower » Nov 9th, 2017, 8:49 pm

*removed*
Last edited by ferri on Nov 11th, 2017, 9:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Off topic
Cactusflower
Übergod
 
Posts: 1258
Likes: 578 posts
Liked in: 265 posts
Joined: Aug 27th, 2017, 10:33 pm

Re: Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Postby Veovis » Nov 11th, 2017, 8:52 am

*removed*
Last edited by ferri on Nov 11th, 2017, 9:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Response to off topic post.

2 people like this post.
Veovis
Guru
 
Posts: 5232
Likes: 640 posts
Liked in: 3141 posts
Joined: Apr 19th, 2007, 2:11 pm

Re: Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Postby fluffy » Nov 11th, 2017, 10:13 am

"Modal Verbs" (can, could, may, might...) are used when speaking of a possibility that is uncertain.

No shortage of these whenever someone writes of oil spills. One thing is certain though, the statistical probability that a spill could/might/may/can occur rises significantly when oil is moved by rail as opposed to pipeline.

It amazes me that these SJWs will advocate an end to the burning of fossil fuels when no viable alternative exists yet. I have no doubt that the use of fossil fuels has its days numbered but there is no way that simply shutting off the tap would cause anything but widespread economic turmoil at this point in time. They (the SJWs) can hasten that process by dashing out right now and buying an electric vehicle, or heating their homes with solar panels and wind turbines, and I invite them to do just that if they can afford it. It would be a perfect way for them to show their true devotion to their cause.

As to the thread topic, I wholeheartedly agree that if it can be shown that there are a few using their authority as a public servant to promote a personal agenda then they should be shown the way to the EI office.
Heal the sick, feed the hungry, care for the weakest among us, and always pray in private.

2 people like this post.
User avatar
fluffy
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 18726
Likes: 189 posts
Liked in: 3315 posts
Joined: Jun 1st, 2006, 4:42 pm
Location: Ogo

Re: Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Postby hobbyguy » Nov 11th, 2017, 10:49 am

^^ PROVIDED we don't have to subsidize them through IPP Feed In Tariffs and/or Net Metering subsidies.

The data shows that you are more likely to be struck by lightning stepping out your front door than for a tanker spill to occur in a "first world" country with proper infrastructure and technology.

Yet we see the "plastic kayak" crowd paddling their plastic kayaks with plastic paddles out to "protest". Pure virtue signaling nonsense. IF they were doing so in hand made cedar strip kayaks with hand made wooden paddles, I could give them a little more credit. But heaven forbid such folk should actually do something practical like make their own kayaks from renewable materials!

The real facts are there is nothing to protest except some nimby concerns. The likelihood of a tanker spill is so infinitesimal as to be a ridiculous consideration, yet the NDP clowns like demovictions Derek Corrigan, bicycle Gregor Robertson, and the phony George Heyman gin it up to ridiculous hysteria.

I could see the hullabaloo if it was the Northern Gateway being built, where the entire marine safety and environment aspect was completely different - that one I was vehemently opposed to. But this one? Where the navigational challenges are low, the infrastructure is in place, and thousands of tankers have passed through the same waters without problems? Totally irrational response from the NDP cynics who are just trolling for a few votes.
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
Guru
 
Posts: 6564
Likes: 1661 posts
Liked in: 5553 posts
Joined: Jan 20th, 2011, 8:10 pm

Re: Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Postby seewood » Nov 11th, 2017, 5:12 pm

fluffy wrote:"Modal Verbs" (can, could, may, might...) are used when speaking of a possibility that is uncertain.


Quite right regarding a tanker spill.
However something certain are railway derailments. ( Last night CP's Potash derailment in Glacier National Park for example) This is the alternative mode to get dilbit to the coast if the pipeline continues to be screwed about with. Don't believe CP or CN requires a couple of trees worth of paper for permission to transport the stuff by rail.
I am not wealthy but I am rich
seewood
Board Meister
 
Posts: 394
Likes: 376 posts
Liked in: 356 posts
Joined: May 29th, 2013, 1:08 pm

Re: Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Postby fluffy » Nov 11th, 2017, 5:43 pm

seewood wrote:Don't believe CP or CN requires a couple of trees worth of paper for permission to transport the stuff by rail.


I bet ya lunch that it is already happening in numbers large enough to be cause for significant concern. If Kinder Morgan is eager to dump a few billion to twin the existing pipeline then that means it is probably running at capacity now, with enough new business waiting on the sidelines to make it an attractive investment.
Last edited by fluffy on Nov 11th, 2017, 8:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Heal the sick, feed the hungry, care for the weakest among us, and always pray in private.
User avatar
fluffy
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 18726
Likes: 189 posts
Liked in: 3315 posts
Joined: Jun 1st, 2006, 4:42 pm
Location: Ogo

Re: Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Postby maryjane48 » Nov 11th, 2017, 7:14 pm

Bc doesnt have to let any oil by rail through.
User avatar
maryjane48
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 15995
Likes: 9968 posts
Liked in: 2496 posts
Joined: May 28th, 2010, 6:58 pm

Re: Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Postby mikest2 » Nov 11th, 2017, 7:47 pm

maryjane48 wrote:Bc doesnt have to let any oil by rail through.


What a surprise.............. Wrong Again
Once I thought I was wrong.....but I was mistaken...

4 people like this post.
mikest2
Board Meister
 
Posts: 686
Likes: 408 posts
Liked in: 774 posts
Joined: Aug 7th, 2006, 9:00 pm

Re: Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Postby fluffy » Nov 11th, 2017, 8:07 pm

I just did a google search on "Alberta oil to BC by rail". It's been happening for years already. Reality check...railways typically follow major watercourses. Given that information, twinning the Trans Mountain may actually reduce the overall risk to BC's environment by reducing the amount of oil shipped by rail.
Heal the sick, feed the hungry, care for the weakest among us, and always pray in private.

3 people like this post.
User avatar
fluffy
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 18726
Likes: 189 posts
Liked in: 3315 posts
Joined: Jun 1st, 2006, 4:42 pm
Location: Ogo

Re: Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Postby hobbyguy » Nov 11th, 2017, 8:30 pm

^^ In point of fact the Burnaby Refinery has not only been receiving oil by rail, but also by truck - even more dangerous. Why? Because there is insufficient pipeline capacity....

In many ways the mayor of Burnaby, demovictions Derek Corrigan, is jeopardizing good paying jobs right in his own city! But Derek doesn't care about average working folks...

At any rate, a key point that MJ forgets, or doesn't know, is that the railways are under federal jurisdiction, not the BC government's jurisdiction. So indeed, BC has little say in what moves on the railroads.

Derek Corrigan, Gregor Robertson, George Heyman and the rest of the NDP by trying to defy federal authority over these matters are really being stupid. They are stacking up evidence against them every day, and they will get stuck with a costly lawsuit from KM, and they will lose. Their actions are lawless. The constitution leaves these matters up to the federal government, and that has been tested and declared to be valid by the SCOC.

The BC NDP and their affiliates (remember, Derek Corrigan's wife was an NDP MLA) and Gregor Robertson (Vision = NDP) are also fast becoming pariahs within the country, and alienating potential NDP voters elsewhere in Canada. The Alberta NDP are already going head to head with them, and the Saskatchewan government wants intervenor status as well.

I won't be surprised if Manitoba joins in.

The BC NDP/affiliates foolish actions are boxing the federal government into taking action to curb them. That may either come as direct actions, or it may come very simply as BC dropping to priority number 9,999,999 for money from federal programs.

The sad part of all that is that it weakens our Canada, and the average folks in BC will wind up paying at both ends for the lawless and foolish actions of the BC NDP/affiliates.
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

christopher likes this post.
hobbyguy
Guru
 
Posts: 6564
Likes: 1661 posts
Liked in: 5553 posts
Joined: Jan 20th, 2011, 8:10 pm

Re: Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Postby fluffy » Nov 12th, 2017, 4:41 am

I've said it a bunch of times and I'll say it again, the days off burning fossil fuels are numbered. We have some alternatives that show promise but still need a lot of work and money to bring them into the mainstream. That kind of money has to come from a robust economy, and right now our only ticket to that level of economic health is oil and gas. It's not higher math.

Knee-jerk, drop-in-the-bucket actions like what we are (potentially) seeing in Burnaby are narrow of vision and poorly thought out, and serve no purpose but to curry favour among equally myopic voters.
Heal the sick, feed the hungry, care for the weakest among us, and always pray in private.

hobbyguy likes this post.
User avatar
fluffy
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 18726
Likes: 189 posts
Liked in: 3315 posts
Joined: Jun 1st, 2006, 4:42 pm
Location: Ogo

Re: Burnaby blocking pipeline?

Postby The Green Barbarian » Nov 12th, 2017, 9:59 am

maryjane48 wrote:The legit delay is called climate change and oil spill :smt045


neither of these is legitimate. The climate is always changing so there's no reason to base a pipeline on that??? It just makes no sense. And when it comes to spills versus incinerating entire towns in Quebec there really is no discussion. Build the pipeline, and shut the hell up.
Not sure why I bother with a signature as it seems to just randomly disappear on a regular basis. Especially if it offends liberal snowflakes.

3 people like this post.
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 24066
Likes: 9283 posts
Liked in: 11103 posts
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 8:13 am

PreviousNext

Return to B.C.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: baisla, Carrs Landing Viking, Walking Wounded and 10 guests