Notley Slams BC Oil Move

[Omnitheo]

Taken from your own link. The numbers are nowhere near the other causes of bird deaths. But now you shift the convo. It's suddenly because specific species are being affected...Yet in other posts on the forum you advocate for the use of DDT, a chemical which adversely affected raptors and nearly lead to the extinction of the peregrine falcon.

You pretend to care about birds, but only so far as caring about them suits your agenda. Beyond that you couldn't care less.

[rustled]

Wind turbines do not kill millions birds.




Oils fields rank just as highly if not higher for bird deaths (still far under Windows, radio towers and cats),
And single incidents like Exxon Valdez can skyrocket that number.

Omnitheo, I'm interested to see that transmission lines are the second largest contributor to bird deaths.

The graph is a little deceptive, in that it jumps by a multiplier of 10. But the figures are pretty clear. A far, far higher number of birds are killed by transmission lines than anything else, other than domestic and feral cats. It is astonishing to me that anyone who clearly understands this could promote wind power, particularly since the wind farms' transmission lines are, like the wind farms, situated in what should be relatively safe havens for birds. To ignore or try to understate the impact of wind farms is perception bias at its finest.

Most germane to the topic, I see that while transmission lines account for a minimum of 174 million, oilfield waste pits account for fewer than one million. This should be kept in mind by those who insist we build refineries at source, which would inevitably necessitate more transmission lines.

Are we doing everything we can to mitigate risk with pipelines? Probably not. Nor are we doing everything we can to mitigate the risk with any of what we do to maintain a first-world standard of living.

Inflating the likelihood of a pipeline spill while simultaneously deflating whatever doesn't "suit the green narrative" won't help us move as sensibly and sustainably as possible from the industrial age to the age of technology.

[bob vernon]

Just think, Steve Harper had nearly a decade in office, including a majority for about half of it, and he never got a pipeline in the ground. All those years and he did zippo. And then along come Justin Trudeau and presto. Approval and he's taking the pipeliners side in the debate with BC.

I thought Harper, being an ex oil company employee, albeit as a mail room clerk, could have done more. I guess he's just going to go down in history as a failure. And Trudeau is the champion of the pipeliners. Or did Steve just do all the "heavy lifting" of getting the pipeline built. A whole decade? That's pretty light heavy lifting. Justin seems to be doing the heavy lifting now.

[The Green Barbarian]

You pretend to care about birds, but only so far as caring about them suits your agenda. Beyond that you couldn't care less.

I don't pretend to care about birds. What I care about is that millions are being needlessly slaughtered for no good to anyone. This is just stupid. And what is really sickening is that there are those out there who are such disgusting and evil hypocrites, that they want to lie and obfuscate about the problem, purely to sell their pro-wind turbine agenda. These people are just plain horrible in my view, and should hang their heads in shame.

[The Green Barbarian]

Just think, Steve Harper had nearly a decade in office, including a majority for about half of it, and he never got a pipeline in the ground. All those years and he did zippo. And then along come Justin Trudeau and presto. Approval and he's taking the pipeliners side in the debate with BC.

I thought Harper, being an ex oil company employee, albeit as a mail room clerk, could have done more. I guess he's just going to go down in history as a failure. And Trudeau is the champion of the pipeliners. Or did Steve just do all the "heavy lifting" of getting the pipeline built. A whole decade? That's pretty light heavy lifting. Justin seems to be doing the heavy lifting now.

I would save popping the champagne corks until the axis of stupid here in BC can be over-come.

[JagXKR]

Taken from your own link. The numbers are nowhere near the other causes of bird deaths. But now you shift the convo. It's suddenly because specific species are being affected...Yet in other posts on the forum you advocate for the use of DDT, a chemical which adversely affected raptors and nearly lead to the extinction of the peregrine falcon.

You pretend to care about birds, but only so far as caring about them suits your agenda. Beyond that you couldn't care less.

The graph is from a 6year old article. Not very up to date now is it? How many wind farms have been built since then?

The 2nd link from GB has a line from Dr. Michael Hutchins:

Dr. Hutchins thinks the answers are within reach. “Bladed turbines are a 2,000-year-old technology,” he says. “We can do better.”

[rustled]

Taken from your own link. The numbers are nowhere near the other causes of bird deaths. But now you shift the convo. It's suddenly because specific species are being affected...Yet in other posts on the forum you advocate for the use of DDT, a chemical which adversely affected raptors and nearly lead to the extinction of the peregrine falcon.

You pretend to care about birds, but only so far as caring about them suits your agenda. Beyond that you couldn't care less.

It's really important to get your facts straight. You're repeating information popularized in literature but later debunked (too strong, see next post):

Published in September 1962, Silent Spring was a phenomenal success. As a literary work, it was a masterpiece, and as such, received rave reviews everywhere. Deeply moved by Carson’s poignant depiction of a lifeless future, millions of well-meaning people rallied to her banner. Virtually at a stroke, environmentalism grew from a narrow aristocratic cult into a crusading liberal mass movement.

While excellent literature, however, Silent Spring was very poor science. Carson claimed that DDT was threatening many avian species with imminent extinction. Her evidence for this, however, was anecdotal and unfounded. In fact, during the period of widespread DDT use preceding the publication of Silent Spring, bird populations in the United States increased significantly, probably as a result of the pesticide’s suppression of their insect disease vectors and parasites. In her chapter “Elixirs of Death,” Carson wrote that synthetic insecticides can affect the human body in “sinister and often deadly ways,” so that cumulatively, the “threat of chronic poisoning and degenerative changes of the liver and other organs is very real.” In terms of DDT specifically, in her chapter on cancer she reported that one expert “now gives DDT the definite rating of a ‘chemical carcinogen.’”[16] These alarming assertions were false as well.[17] (Carson’s claims about the supposed pernicious effects of DDT are examined more fully below.)
snip
As a result [of the ban], insect-borne diseases returned to the tropics with a vengeance. By some estimates, the death toll in Africa alone from unnecessary malaria resulting from the restrictions on DDT has exceeded 100 million people.[26]

https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publicat ... ent-spring

This is a clear example of dreadful harm done in the name of environmentalism, because people went along with something that was not true.

We need to be sensible about pipelines. Passion must be tempered with prudence.

Edit to fix link.

[rustled]

Speaking of being factually correct: I was not accurate in using the word 'debunked' above. For a clear picture on the research into DDT and raptors, see http://reason.com/archives/2004/01/07/d ... lls-and-me .

The take-away for all of us should be to look at the entire picture. People were right to be concerned about the declining raptor populations, and to explore what was happening. Scientists suspecting a link to DDT were probably on the right track (see link). But particularly in the early stages of research, the movement to ban DDT outright was passion over prudence.

That's what I see here, with the environmentalists' objections to pipelines. Narrowly focusing on "what could happen if" to enforce a ban.

I was interested to hear the political commentator on CBC radio claiming Horgan was simply standing up for British Columbians. The commentator didn't seem to recognize his own perception bias here. Horgan isn't standing up for all British Columbians, and I'd suggest he may not even be standing up for most of them.

Notley seems to be more capable of seeing the big picture. Alberta's economy can't grind to a halt while ideologues figure out whether or not the sky is falling, how fast, why, and how best to prop it up.

[The Green Barbarian]

I was interested to hear the political commentator on CBC radio claiming Horgan was simply standing up for British Columbians. The commentator didn't seem to recognize his own perception bias here. Horgan isn't standing up for all British Columbians, and I'd suggest he may not even be standing up for most of them.

One of the many reasons I refuse to listen to the Communist Broadcasting Corp's radio propaganda. The only people Horgan is "standing up" for are really stupid people who can't do math.

[hobbyguy]

Not all was "eaten". The bottom of the ocean south of Anchorage has a large area with a paved bottom. Sure, it'll come back eventually once enough fallout settles on top of it, but there are few fish in that area.


And today, oh no! What if this was a tanker in a big winter storm with 10 metre waves:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c ... -1.4516087

Yeah, I know it's from a leftist news site. So it must be fake.

That actually was recognized as a risk factor that BC can not deal with. So part of the deal with the pipeline is that BC is getting salvage tugs. Hopefully something like this: http://www.fiveoceansalvage.com/the-fleet/ that can provide enough tow to handle a fully loaded tanker in bad weather.

Dang... there goes that talking point...

[The Green Barbarian]

That actually was recognized as a risk factor that BC can not deal with. So part of the deal with the pipeline is that BC is getting salvage tugs. Hopefully something like this: http://www.fiveoceansalvage.com/the-fleet/ that can provide enough tow to handle a fully loaded tanker in bad weather.

Dang... there goes that talking point...

No HG, they'll just ignore your comment and keep squawking the same tired sad cowardly mantras. These people are mentally ill, so facts don't matter.

[Dizzy1]

Taken from your own link. The numbers are nowhere near the other causes of bird deaths. But now you shift the convo. It's suddenly because specific species are being affected...Yet in other posts on the forum you advocate for the use of DDT, a chemical which adversely affected raptors and nearly lead to the extinction of the peregrine falcon.

You pretend to care about birds, but only so far as caring about them suits your agenda. Beyond that you couldn't care less.

Funny how that pretty little picture doesn't show many birds are killed by oil spills - which really, is the only relevant comparison. Saying more birds are killed by buildings or cats than wind turbines is just pointless.

[Jonrox]

Do we really need more birds? Looks to me like all of these “bird killers” are keeping the population in check.

[Snman]

Birds and wind mills are way off topic here. It's Notley vs BC. Please.

[rustled]

Not so much "Notley vs BC" but rather Notley vs Horgan's self-serving grandstanding roadblock. Seems to me she's on the side of most people in BC, so good on her for standing her ground.