Tanker spills

The forum's Skid Road. DO NOT ENTER unless you're ready for a squabble.

Re: Tanker spills

Postby alanjh595 » Feb 21st, 2018, 1:08 pm

Enviro-nuts shouldn't be driving a car anyways. That ought to reduce traffic by....????????.......10% maybe? I don't know what that would calculate out in enviro-nut terms.
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.

Merry likes this post.
User avatar
alanjh595
Guru
 
Posts: 6826
Likes: 2586 posts
Liked in: 3645 posts
Joined: Oct 20th, 2017, 4:18 pm

Re: Tanker spills

Postby Cactusflower » Feb 21st, 2018, 6:27 pm

alanjh595 wrote:
Cactusflower wrote:I should have known this thread would bring out the worst in the usual suspects.

No bitumen tankers, no bitumen spills, no problem.


Just look at who is leading the pack by starting the tread in the 1st place.........


I started the thread because it was obvious that you and the other pipeline fanatics couldn't distinguish between a pipeline to tidewater and tankers that take the dilbit from the pipeline to whatever country has ordered it. But that still doesn't stop you from wanting to make this a pipeline topic rather than staying on the tanker topic. Is that because you can't defend your position on tanker spills?
Cactusflower
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 4106
Likes: 1949 posts
Liked in: 823 posts
Joined: Aug 27th, 2017, 10:33 pm

Re: Tanker spills

Postby Ka-El » Feb 21st, 2018, 6:51 pm

alanjh595 wrote:Enviro-nuts shouldn't be driving a car anyways.

... or using their internet devices.
What did Forrest Gump say, "Stupid is as stupid does."? I think dimples has a new campaign slogan.

Snman likes this post.
User avatar
Ka-El
Guru
 
Posts: 5982
Likes: 3174 posts
Liked in: 5430 posts
Joined: Oct 18th, 2015, 8:19 am

Re: Tanker spills

Postby Jhunter199 » Feb 21st, 2018, 7:51 pm

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/br ... e20780845/
https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/marinesafety/f ... -4513.html

Tankers sailing into Canadian waters are subject to an extraordinary set of rules.
Before arriving at Kinder Morgan’s Westridge dock, they are vetted by the company for age, bollard strength — an indication of how much force a tugboat can use in the event of a rudder failure, a rare but significant risk, Mr. Obermeyer said — as well as any outstanding maintenance issues.
They are restricted to traveling in daylight hours and at slack water, when currents are slow. They must be double-hulled, meaning there is one metre separating the outside hull from where the oil is stored in compartments.
Tug escorts — up to three on fully loaded ships — and marine pilots are mandatory safeguards.

As a country we have to sell oil to other countries who need it. Just like we have to sell timber, ore, fish, beef, etc.

If we stayed away from anything that worst case could go wrong we would be right back in the stone age.

5 people like this post.
Jhunter199
Fledgling
 
Posts: 292
Likes: 260 posts
Liked in: 348 posts
Joined: Apr 18th, 2013, 9:11 pm

Re: Tanker spills

Postby Cactusflower » Feb 21st, 2018, 9:44 pm

^^Yes, I can see why you'd be concerned about the export of some of these materials. I imagine a lumber, beef, or fish spill would be catastrophic. Imagine all those beachcomber boats smashing into each other as they tried to salvage all that lumber! Or the stampede down at the ocean bottom as the crabs and other scavengers fought over the food! Not quite as bad as a bitumen spill, though. At least all the sea creatures would still be alive.
Cactusflower
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 4106
Likes: 1949 posts
Liked in: 823 posts
Joined: Aug 27th, 2017, 10:33 pm

Re: Tanker spills

Postby The Green Barbarian » Feb 21st, 2018, 9:47 pm

Cactusflower wrote: it was obvious that you and the other pipeline fanatics


pipeline fanatics = people who can do math. Amazing.
"Socialists sure are a lot dumber today than they were when I was alive" - John Stuart Mill

JT - he's been ready since 2015, to be the puppet of Gerald Butts and the Laurentide Elite.
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 29284
Likes: 12804 posts
Liked in: 17320 posts
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 8:13 am

Re: Tanker spills

Postby Jhunter199 » Feb 21st, 2018, 9:48 pm

Cactusflower wrote:^^Yes, I can see why you'd be concerned about the export of some of these materials. I imagine a lumber, beef, or fish spill would be catastrophic. Imagine all those beachcomber boats smashing into each other as they tried to salvage all that lumber! Or the stampede down at the ocean bottom as the crabs and other scavengers fought over the food! Not quite as bad as a bitumen spill, though. At least all the sea creatures would still be alive.


I still believe we honestly have to stop being afraid of every single thing. When was the last west coast tanker spill?

3 people like this post.
Jhunter199
Fledgling
 
Posts: 292
Likes: 260 posts
Liked in: 348 posts
Joined: Apr 18th, 2013, 9:11 pm

Re: Tanker spills

Postby The Green Barbarian » Feb 21st, 2018, 11:27 pm

Jhunter199 wrote:
I still believe we honestly have to stop being afraid of every single thing. When was the last west coast tanker spill?


It's not really about that. It's about the prime directive from US interests (and swallowed wholesale by a tiny minority of gibbering morons in Canada) to shut down the oil sands, or at least ensure that all production only flows south, at a really cheap rate. I find no matter how dumb the cause, if you spin it the right way, and you have enough cash, you can convince people to believe anything. What I don't get is how we as a country allow this happen. How do such a small number of brain-washed zealots have so much power? When historians look back on our history, this will definitely be a period of time that will be studied, and it won't be flattering.
"Socialists sure are a lot dumber today than they were when I was alive" - John Stuart Mill

JT - he's been ready since 2015, to be the puppet of Gerald Butts and the Laurentide Elite.

4 people like this post.
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 29284
Likes: 12804 posts
Liked in: 17320 posts
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 8:13 am

Re: Tanker spills

Postby CapitalB » Feb 22nd, 2018, 10:06 am

The Green Barbarian wrote: I find no matter how dumb the cause, if you spin it the right way, and you have enough cash, you can convince people to believe anything. What I don't get is how we as a country allow this happen. How do such a small number of brain-washed zealots have so much power? When historians look back on our history, this will definitely be a period of time that will be studied, and it won't be flattering.


I literally could not agree more. Pure truth. Preach brother
So much of the violent push-back on everything progressive and reformist comes down to: I can see the future, and in this future I am not the centre of the universe and master of all that I survey, therefore this future must be resisted at all costs.
User avatar
CapitalB
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 840
Likes: 421 posts
Liked in: 554 posts
Joined: Nov 14th, 2017, 11:27 am

Re: Tanker spills

Postby Cactusflower » Feb 23rd, 2018, 4:11 pm

Jhunter199 wrote:
Cactusflower wrote:^^Yes, I can see why you'd be concerned about the export of some of these materials. I imagine a lumber, beef, or fish spill would be catastrophic. Imagine all those beachcomber boats smashing into each other as they tried to salvage all that lumber! Or the stampede down at the ocean bottom as the crabs and other scavengers fought over the food! Not quite as bad as a bitumen spill, though. At least all the sea creatures would still be alive.


I still believe we honestly have to stop being afraid of every single thing. When was the last west coast tanker spill?


I believe it was the Exxon Valdez in 1989, and it still hasn't been cleaned up, and Exxon is still refusing to be accountable. They're dragging their feet until all the victims are dead, I guess, so they don't have to pay.

That's exactly what CAPP and KM/TM will do when they dump a load of bitumen in Burrard Inlet or the Salish Sea. And I don't think Notley and Trudeau have enough money between themto pay for a miniscule amount of the damage either.
Cactusflower
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 4106
Likes: 1949 posts
Liked in: 823 posts
Joined: Aug 27th, 2017, 10:33 pm

Re: Tanker spills

Postby Jhunter199 » Feb 23rd, 2018, 5:33 pm

Cactusflower wrote:

I believe it was the Exxon Valdez in 1989, and it still hasn't been cleaned up, and Exxon is still refusing to be accountable. They're dragging their feet until all the victims are dead, I guess, so they don't have to pay.

That's exactly what CAPP and KM/TM will do when they dump a load of bitumen in Burrard Inlet or the Salish Sea. And I don't think Notley and Trudeau have enough money between themto pay for a miniscule amount of the damage either.


Perhaps I should of asked when was the last time there was a tanker spill on Canada's west coast that was being governed by our rules and regulations?
Jhunter199
Fledgling
 
Posts: 292
Likes: 260 posts
Liked in: 348 posts
Joined: Apr 18th, 2013, 9:11 pm

Re: Tanker spills

Postby Cactusflower » Feb 23rd, 2018, 6:32 pm

Jhunter199 wrote:
Cactusflower wrote:

I believe it was the Exxon Valdez in 1989, and it still hasn't been cleaned up, and Exxon is still refusing to be accountable. They're dragging their feet until all the victims are dead, I guess, so they don't have to pay.

That's exactly what CAPP and KM/TM will do when they dump a load of bitumen in Burrard Inlet or the Salish Sea. And I don't think Notley and Trudeau have enough money between themto pay for a miniscule amount of the damage either.


Perhaps I should of asked when was the last time there was a tanker spill on Canada's west coast that was being governed by our rules and regulations?


From what I've been reading in the news lately, it seems the US has better rules and regs regarding pollution than Canada. At least some states do, and that includes Alaska and Washington State. Look at how the Alaskan politicians are going after the BC government about the lax mining regulations. And look at how the WA State politicians are going to legislate net-pen salmon farms out of Puget sound, and are asking the BC government to support them.

No, I don't think it would have made a bit of difference if that Exxon oil tanker had run into a rock a little further down the coast, in Canadian waters. The result would have been the same.
Cactusflower
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 4106
Likes: 1949 posts
Liked in: 823 posts
Joined: Aug 27th, 2017, 10:33 pm

Re: Tanker spills

Postby alanjh595 » Feb 23rd, 2018, 6:39 pm

Have a look at the differences between the structure of the Valdese and what today's standards are. Welcome to the modern age.
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.

Smurf likes this post.
User avatar
alanjh595
Guru
 
Posts: 6826
Likes: 2586 posts
Liked in: 3645 posts
Joined: Oct 20th, 2017, 4:18 pm

Re: Tanker spills

Postby Jhunter199 » Feb 23rd, 2018, 6:44 pm

Cactusflower wrote:
I believe it was the Exxon Valdez in 1989, and it still hasn't been cleaned up, and Exxon is still refusing to be accountable. They're dragging their feet until all the victims are dead, I guess, so they don't have to pay.

That's exactly what CAPP and KM/TM will do when they dump a load of bitumen in Burrard Inlet or the Salish Sea. And I don't think Notley and Trudeau have enough money between themto pay for a miniscule amount of the damage either.

Perhaps I should of asked when was the last time there was a tanker spill on Canada's west coast that was being governed by our rules and regulations?

From what I've been reading in the news lately, it seems the US has better rules and regs regarding pollution than Canada. At least some states do, and that includes Alaska and Washington State. Look at how the Alaskan politicians are going after the BC government about the lax mining regulations. And look at how the WA State politicians are going to legislate net-pen salmon farms out of Puget sound, and are asking the BC government to support them.

No, I don't think it would have made a bit of difference if that Exxon oil tanker had run into a rock a little further down the coast, in Canadian waters. The result would have been the same.


So what your saying is the answer is NEVER?

If the Exxon had run into a rock, a little further down the coast shouldn't the question have been why the heck were they just randomly running along the BC coast?
One of the greatest thing about the BC straight/inlet is that, although it is a tight water way, it is easily navigated at slow speed, and are extensively charted.

Also factor in the technology differences between 1989 and 2018

Smurf likes this post.
Jhunter199
Fledgling
 
Posts: 292
Likes: 260 posts
Liked in: 348 posts
Joined: Apr 18th, 2013, 9:11 pm

Re: Tanker spills

Postby Cactusflower » Feb 23rd, 2018, 6:55 pm

^^http://concernedengineers.org/about-kinder-morgans-proposal/burrard-inlet-second-narrows-bridges/
There are many reasons the KM pipeline/tanker project should not have been approved, and this is just one of them.
Cactusflower
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 4106
Likes: 1949 posts
Liked in: 823 posts
Joined: Aug 27th, 2017, 10:33 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Bickering Room

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 1 guest