All First Nation reserves in support of Kinder Morgan

[alanjh595]

All First Nations crossed by Trans Mountain pipeline route in support of project: Kinder Morgan

Since federal approval was granted in late November, twelve new Aboriginal communities have affirmed their support for the proposed Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion, says Kinder Morgan Canada.

There are now 51 Aboriginal communities that have signed mutual benefit agreements with the project valued at more than $400 million.

This includes all of the First Nations whose reserves the pipeline crosses and about 80 percent of communities within proximity to the pipeline right-of-way, the company says. The 51 agreements include 10 in Alberta and 41 in B.C.

http://www.jwnenergy.com/article/2016/1 ... er-morgan/

[Merry]

The bottom line is that the oil sands WILL move their product to market. And, if they can't do it via pipeline, they'll do it via rail. Of those two choices, pipelines are by far the better of the two.

[Cactusflower]

The bottom line is that the oil sands WILL move their product to market. And, if they can't do it via pipeline, they'll do it via rail. Of those two choices, pipelines are by far the better of the two.

Trouble is, the pipeline expansion isn't going to reduce the amount of bitumen that's already arriving at the coast by rail. It will simply add to it. And as someone else has previously mentioned, transporting bitumen by rail is safer than mixing it with toxic diluent and shipping it via pipeline.

[alanjh595]

The bottom line is that the oil sands WILL move their product to market. And, if they can't do it via pipeline, they'll do it via rail. Of those two choices, pipelines are by far the better of the two.

Trouble is, the pipeline expansion isn't going to reduce the amount of bitumen that's already arriving at the coast by rail. It will simply add to it. And as someone else has previously mentioned, transporting bitumen by rail is safer than mixing it with toxic diluent and shipping it via pipeline.

Where is that quote found?

[maryjane48]

The bottom line is that the oil sands WILL move their product to market. And, if they can't do it via pipeline, they'll do it via rail. Of those two choices, pipelines are by far the better of the two.

Compare pipeline accidents compared to rail . Pipeline incidents far out paces rail ones. In other words your wrong .
And if you really cared about safety you would be against all oil sand mining as it poisons folks

[Cactusflower]

Trouble is, the pipeline expansion isn't going to reduce the amount of bitumen that's already arriving at the coast by rail. It will simply add to it. And as someone else has previously mentioned, transporting bitumen by rail is safer than mixing it with toxic diluent and shipping it via pipeline.

Where is that quote found?

In the link provided in the topic "Oil by rail can be safer".

[alanjh595]

Trouble is, the pipeline expansion isn't going to reduce the amount of bitumen that's already arriving at the coast by rail. It will simply add to it. And as someone else has previously mentioned, transporting bitumen by rail is safer than mixing it with toxic diluent and shipping it via pipeline.

Where is that quote found?

In the link provided in the topic "Oil by rail can be safer".

Please provide it as a common courtesy, since I provide all of mine for your ease of use.

[Cactusflower]

^^I didn't provide the link, but I found it, and so can you.

[The Green Barbarian]

Compare pipeline accidents compared to rail . Pipeline incidents far out paces rail ones.

how about deaths? Or does that not suit your diseased narrative?

[alanjh595]

^^I didn't provide the link, but I found it, and so can you.

Prove it. Supply the link that you are referring to.

[seewood]

The Alaska pipeline that has been in service since 1977

Incidents[edit]


The massive length and remoteness of the pipeline make it more or less impossible to secure
The pipeline has at times been damaged due to sabotage, human error, maintenance failures, and natural disasters. By law, Alyeska is required to report significant oil spills to regulatory authorities.[156] The Exxon Valdez oil spill is the best-known accident involving Alaska oil, but it did not involve the pipeline itself.[157] Following the spill, Alyeska created a rapid response force that is paid for by the oil companies,[158] including ExxonMobil, which was found liable for the spill.[159]

An explosion on July 8, 1977, Pump Station No. 8, killed one worker, injured five others, and destroyed the pump station. A US House of Representatives Committee later announced the cause was workers not following the proper procedures, causing crude oil to flow into a pump under repair at the time.[160] Since the startup of the Alaska pipeline on June 20, 1977, to August 15, 1977, seven incidents and accidents have caused the pipeline to be shut down periodically. The NTSB investigated the system, and made recommendations.[161][162]

The largest oil spill involving the main pipeline took place on February 15, 1978, when an unknown individual blew a 1-inch (2.54-centimeter) hole in it at Steele Creek, just east of Fairbanks.[163] Approximately 16,000 barrels (2,500 m3) of oil leaked out of the hole before the pipeline was shut down.[155] After more than 21 hours, it was restarted.[164]

The steel pipe is resistant to gunshots and has resisted them on several occasions, but on October 4, 2001, a drunken gunman named Daniel Carson Lewis shot a hole into a weld near Livengood, causing the second-largest mainline oil spill in pipeline history.[165] Approximately 6,144 barrels (976.8 m3) leaked from the pipeline; 4,238 barrels (673.8 m3) were recovered and reinjected into the pipeline.[166] Nearly 2 acres (8,100 m2) of tundra were soiled and were removed in the cleanup.[167] The pipeline was repaired and was restarted more than 60 hours later.[168] Lewis was found guilty in December 2002 of criminal mischief, assault, drunken driving, oil pollution, and misconduct.[169]

The pipeline was built to withstand earthquakes, forest fires, and other natural disasters. The 2002 Denali earthquake damaged some of the pipeline sliders designed to absorb similar quakes,[170] and it caused the pipeline to shut down for more than 66 hours as a precaution.[168] In 2004, wildfires overran portions of the pipeline, but it was not damaged and did not shut down.[171][172]

In May 2010, as much as several thousands of barrels were spilled from a pump station near Fort Greely during a scheduled shutdown. A relief valve control circuit failed during a test of the fire control system, and oil poured into a tank and overflowed onto a secondary containment area. [173]

A leak was discovered on Jan 8, 2011, in the basement of the booster pump at Pump Station 1. For more than 80 hours, pipeline flow was reduced to 5 percent of normal. An oil collection system was put in place, and full flow resumed until the pipeline was again shut down while a bypass was installed to avoid the leaking section.[174][175][176]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Ala ... ine_System

[hobbyguy]

^^I didn't provide the link, but I found it, and so can you.

In other words you invented that nonsense.

[maryjane48]

Green how many folks died on oil platforms ? Those are connected to pipelines and count . You really think its more deaths by rail involving oil ?

Just deepwater horizon and couple out in north sea far out death rail car accidents.

[Muzza]

Green how many folks died on oil platforms ? Those are connected to pipelines and count . You really think its more deaths by rail involving oil ?

So you are saying that oil should be transported from the ocean to land via rail?????!!!!!???

[alanjh595]

Green how many folks died on oil platforms ? Those are connected to pipelines and count . You really think its more deaths by rail involving oil ?

Just deepwater horizon and couple out in north sea far out death rail car accidents.

How many "oil platforms" are in BC? Can they even get rail cars out to the oil platforms?