Blast from the past!

[Punchy MacEconomics]

Teddy Roosevelt would roll over in his grave is he knew that he was being quoted by someone like you. His quote is applicable though, to the NDP, the fake "charities", and all the other nay-sayers who say that the Enbridge pipeline shouldn't go ahead. They are the real cowards.

It's all well and good to quote Teddy Roosevelt, but that doesn't a refinery build. Finding capital, sourcing sites, and getting environmental approvals is what you need, as well as establishing a market for what you are refining. No one has done that. So proposing something, with zero thought process having gone into it, doesn't make you some daring individual. It just makes you a guy who is proposing something, knowing it will never work, but not caring, because your proposal is really about blocking real proposals.

Thought it summed up your rants perfectly. You are full of critical diatribes and slamming others but never supply solutions to the issue. You also never back up your assertions, like there is no market for gasoline(That's funny). That there is no capital? etc.

[Punchy MacEconomics]

Here's some more Teddy for ya,

“The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first and love of soft living and the get-rich-quick theory of life.”
― Theodore Roosevelt

[The Green Barbarian]

Thought it summed up your rants perfectly.
.

actually, it didn't sum them up at all. It's weird that you could even think this.

You are full of critical diatribes and slamming others but never supply solutions to the issue..

I do so! I said "let's twin the South Pipeline" as just an example. But I am not running for political office. The NDP are running, with a leader who is a proven scumbag. The NDP response to the Enbridge pipeline is to propose a "solution" that isn't even a solution, it's just bafflegab and smoke and mirrors. Where is the actual solution? There isn't one. You keep deflecting, but it's obvious, there is no solution to be had from the NDP. They are the "can't do it" party, always have, and always will be.

You also never back up your assertions, like there is no market for gasoline(That's funny). That there is no capital? etc.

I didn't say there is no market for gasoline, the funny part is how you are trying to spin it, as per usual, into a lie. The current market is well served by the current amount of production we have. Can you show me that we need more supply? You can't. You just want to cry about everyone else not providing proof. You are the NDP lapdog, that wants to press forward with this refinery myth. Ok so then the burden of proof is on you to prove that this plan can work.

1. Which company is going to build these magical refineries
2. Show me that demand for gasoline and other refined petroleum products is going to eclipse supply, and that the supply can't be met by current production facilities
3. Show me where you want to build these magical refineries
4. Tell me how you are going to appease the strict environmental regulations and the crazies that will come out of the wood-work when you try to build a refinery anywhere within 200 miles of human habitat or close to Native land

Instead, you just want to quote Teddy Roosevelt and spin and fabricate. If this is an indication of what we are to expect from the NDP and their trained seals, then it's going to be a long 4 years of NDP nonsense. Yikes.

[maple leaf]

As long as the pipeline is on the table with no opposition from the Clark government,and the heavy handed attitude from the Feds that it will be done no matter what.As long as that is the situation no one is going to look at alternatives.But take the pipeline off that table and you will be surprised just how many alternatives will all of a sudden appear .First we have to deal with taking the pipeline off the table.

[The Green Barbarian]

As long as the pipeline is on the table with no opposition from the Clark government,and the heavy handed attitude from the Feds that it will be done no matter what.As long as that is the situation no one is going to look at alternatives.But take the pipeline off that table and you will be surprised just how many alternatives will all of a sudden appear .First we have to deal with taking the pipeline off the table.

But why do we need to "take the pipeline off the table"? It just makes no sense. There's reasons why it shouldn't be built in Kitimat. I get that. But does that mean we have to just take all pipelines off the table? That is just silly.

[flamingfingers]

The Northern Gateway Pipeline SHOULD be taken off the table! There are too many risks versus the small amount of benefit to British Columbians and also considering the substantial amount from fisheries, tourism, etc that the area provides and will continue to provide in perpetuity. While I am definitely not a tree hugger I do believe that there is a responsibility to protect the diverse ecological systems we have here in BC. I know there are a huge number of politicians and companies that are going to push as hard as hard can be to get this pipeline laid, but I for one am totally opposed to it. Perhaps twinning the southern pipeline would be more feasible but there appears to be major concerns from the lower mainland, chiefly about increased tanker traffic.

Let Alberta provide the solution. It is their gunk... let them come up with a feasible plan to sell it. That does not factor BC into the equation.

[NAB]

If we are going to have more pipelines in BC, and ships carring oil to far away places plying our coastal waters and inlets, they should be carrying BC oil, not Alberta oil. IMO building refineries will never fly in BC... if the environuts don't stop them being built, most certainly the bad economics for the oil co's will. We are already hemmed in by surplus refinery capacity south and east. IMO the best move for a new pipeline to carry oil from Alberta and Sask.would be Trans-Canada to the east, ...entirely on the Canadian side of the border.

Nab

[The Green Barbarian]

If we are going to have more pipelines in BC, and ships carring oil to far away places plying our coastal waters and inlets, they should be carrying BC oil, not Alberta oil. IMO building refineries will never fly in BC... if the environuts don't stop them being built, most certainly the bad economics for the oil co's will. We are already hemmed in by surplus refinery capacity south and east. IMO the best move for a new pipeline to carry oil from Alberta and Sask.would be Trans-Canada to the east, ...entirely on the Canadian side of the border.

Nab

See - this is what I am talking about when I say alternatives and solutions. I think you are dead on Nab. The enviro-nuts in the US are going to block a south pipeline, and the enviro-nuts will block anything West, and there is no way in hell they are going to let a refinery get built in BC. it's just plain stupid. So - go east - it's the only real option we have.

[The Green Barbarian]

Let Alberta provide the solution. It is their gunk... let them come up with a feasible plan to sell it. That does not factor BC into the equation.

Well FF, as we all benefit from Federal transfer payments, it is all our "gunk" - "gunk" that provides for our health care, our welfare, our unemployment payments and our pension plans. That "gunk" just happens to be extremely valuable at this point in Earth's history, and we, being Canada, not just Alberta, are sitting on a huge massive chunk of it. So let's sell it, and heal our sick, look after our poor, educate our youth, and build a great and lasting country that we can all be proud of.

[flamingfingers]

GB wrote:

Well FF, as we all benefit from Federal transfer payments, it is all our "gunk" - "gunk" that provides for our health care, our welfare, our unemployment payments and our pension plans. That "gunk" just happens to be extremely valuable at this point in Earth's history, and we, being Canada, not just Alberta, are sitting on a huge massive chunk of it. So let's sell it, and heal our sick, look after our poor, educate our youth, and build a great and lasting country that we can all be proud of.

I can agree with that. And as far as refineries being built to process Alberta tar sands gunk, of course they would NEVER be built in BC. Why would you even suggest that they would? Why?

[The Green Barbarian]

I can agree with that. And as far as refineries being built to process Alberta tar sands gunk, of course they would NEVER be built in BC. Why would you even suggest that they would? Why?

sorry FF - I assumed that if the provincial NDP is proposing that we refine the oil instead of shipping it, that they'd want the jobs here. Perhaps I was confused between the federal and provincial NDP. Was it not the BC NDP who proposed the refinery option that you posted? If not, then I apologize.

[NAB]

Something to think about when the NDP (or anyone) suggests building refineries here to produce value added jobs... as well as wondering why we are proposing transhipping Alberta oil across and out of BC instead of piping it east to reduce/replace the need for importing oil at that end of the country...

"Where your gas comes from"....

" Something to think about? In the last 40 years, 31 refineries have been closed across the country."

Excerpt:
......the few refineries scattered across the country have to supply a wide variety of customers, many with different requirements. But where are these refineries and how big are they? Using the latest figures from the Canadian Petroleum Products Institute and the Conference Board of Canada, they are as follows:
•
Irving Oil, Saint John, N.B., 300,000

•
Ultramar, Levis, Que., 265,000

•
Imperial Oil, Edmonton, 185,000

•
Suncor, Edmonton, 135,000

•
Suncor, Montreal, 130,000

•
Imperial Oil, Nanticoke, Ont., 120,000

•
Imperial Oil, Sarnia, Ont., 120,000

•
North Atlantic Refining, Come-By-Chance, Nfld., 115,000

•
Shell, Scotford, Alta., 100,000

•
Consumers’ Co-Op, Regina, Sask., 100,000

•
Imperial Oil, Dartmouth, N.S.; 89,000

•
Suncor, Sarnia, Ont., 85,000

•
Nova, Sarnia, Ont.; 78,000

•
Shell, Sarnia, Ont., 75,000

•
Chevron, Burnaby, B.C., 55,000

•
Husky, Lloydminster, Ata., 29,000

•
Suncor, Mississauga, Ont., 15,600

•
Moose Jaw Refining, Moose Jaw, Sask., 14,000

•
Husky, Prince George, B.C., 12,000.


Virtually all of the crude oil used in refineries west of Sarnia comes from Canada. Because of the vast distances involved, costs, complexities and environment issues in running pipelines across this country, crude oil used in the eastern refineries comes from offshore, a limited amount from Canada’s offshore wells, but the majority comes from foreign countries.

The sources of the foreign oil are: Algeria (17,942 cubic metres per day), United Kingdom-North Sea (15,370), Nigeria (11,835), Norway (11,483), Saudi Arabia (10,922), Iraq (6,376), Venezuela (4,218), Mexico (4,089), United States (1,857) and 29,999 cubic metres a day is purchased on the open market from other sources.

In the last year for which it has complete figures, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers reports 35.7 per cent of the refinery capacity in the country was used to produce gasoline, 23.9 per cent for diesel, 12.8 per cent for fuel oil, 4.6 per cent for petrochemical feedstock and 4.2 per cent for aviation fuel.

Something to think about? In the last 40 years, 31 refineries have been closed across the country.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-dr ... le2377049/

[maple leaf]

Valero,the worlds largest independent refiner,is rubbing their hands together at the prospects of getting their hands on Canadian bitumen ,if the pipe line is ever built to the Gulf of Mexico,as they stand to make billions off our oil. Not saying building refineries is the magic solution to not building the Enbridges pipeline full of bitumen .But I do believe that as long as it looks to the big oil companies that they will get their way and be able to push through the line with backing from the Feds and no opposition from the Clark government standing up for BC.Then they have no incentive to find other solutions to make there billions of billions of dollars.Take the pipeline off the table ,then they will find a better way,and that way may be more costly to the oil giants but has to be better for BC and BC,s future.Pimping out your own daughter for crack money is not the answer in developing the oil industry.


http://www.desmogblog.com/valero-positi ... l-pipeline

[The Green Barbarian]

Valero,the worlds largest independent refiner,is rubbing their hands together at the prospects of getting their hands on Canadian bitumen ,if the pipe line is ever built to the Gulf of Mexico,as they stand to make billions off our oil. Not saying building refineries is the magic solution to not building the Enbridges pipeline full of bitumen .But I do believe that as long as it looks to the big oil companies that they will get their way and be able to push through the line with backing from the Feds and no opposition from the Clark government standing up for BC.Then they have no incentive to find other solutions to make there billions of billions of dollars.Take the pipeline off the table ,then they will find a better way,and that way may be more costly to the oil giants but has to be better for BC and BC,s future.Pimping out your own daughter for crack money is not the answer in developing the oil industry.


http://www.desmogblog.com/valero-positi ... l-pipeline

I honestly didn't understand most of what you are saying. A better way to do what? What are you talking about? Valero is a public company. Their mandate, like all public companies, is to make their shareholders money. If they don't access Canadian bitumen, they'll get it via some other means. And what relevance does Valero have to the discussion of the Enbridge pipeline anyway? That pipeline is being built to transfer bitumen to the coast, where it will be shipped to Asia. The Keystone Pipeline debate is a whole different issue. Rather than just posting snippets from blogs written by clued-out NDP cheerleaders, why don't you think about what you are cutting and pasting?

[maple leaf]

I honestly didn't understand most of what you are saying. A better way to do what? What are you talking about? Valero is a public company. Their mandate, like all public companies, is to make their shareholders money. If they don't access Canadian bitumen, they'll get it via some other means. And what relevance does Valero have to the discussion of the Enbridge pipeline anyway? That pipeline is being built to transfer bitumen to the coast, where it will be shipped to Asia. The Keystone Pipeline debate is a whole different issue. Rather than just posting snippets from blogs written by clued-out NDP cheerleaders, why don't you think about what you are cutting and pasting?

I realize that there is probably limited space within your sheltered little world to understand everything .You are the one that was complaining about those wanting to stop the pipeline, and having no other solutions to having it built,in order to distribute the oil.
Bitumen is bitumen ,weather it flows out of the end of a pipe in Texas or out of the end of a pipe in Kitimat.If Valero can see the pot of gold at that end of the pipe .What is our problem.It is the same pot at Kitimat's end or at the origin of the pipe line,or anywhere in between.
Take the pipe line out of the equation and the oil giants will find a better way to deal with their oil, that won't destroy BC in the process like the currant plan of the pipe line and tankers undoubtably will destroy BC .If building refineries turns out to be a better way than the pipeline, (to get the oil to market ) then good or if they come up with a different solution better yet,But as long as the pipe line idea is on the table they will never come up with a better way.