Kinder Morgan versus Northern Gateway

[Glacier]

I have long since held the position that Northern Gate was the better environmental choice. However, the Tide pod challenged environmental group funded from US backers protested this project, so it never had social license. Science, facts, reason, and even money take a backseat to "social license" every time.

The reason Kinder Morgan is worse and more dangerous is that the traffic level is far, far greater. Plus the narrow bridges. Here you go: https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/b ... e35043172/

[stevenpeternash]

Kinder Morgans safety track record should be taken into account more. Like the pipeline outside Hope BC that is less then 2ft underground,told to me by the Kinder Morgan rep that was freaking out for having a bucket truck up on an easement. His words were" we know the pipe is only 2 ft underground here and we will be sending a test bung through the pipe asap to see if you have damaged it". This same guy showed up on my worksite a few weeks later claiming i had actually exposed and broken the pipeline in the spot i was working, at that moment ,because their high tech helicopter had seen the exposed pipe i was trying to hide.....it was a discarded telephone pole in the ditch, had been there for decades i think. Also have they fixed the pipeline leak in Coquitlam yet, i know it was leaking for about a year last time i heard anything. And none of the Kinder morgan safety issues have anything to do with the danger of extra volume of oil tankers along our coast. The americans dont want it going south either, they know its a disaster waiting to happen, "when" not if is the question. Back to no pipeline/no enviromental disaster potential....especially with a company with such a poor record already.

[Dangler]

Only those who have never spent any time on the waters off northern BC think that Northern Gateway was a better choice than Trans Mountain. Those waters are so hazardous that they are well-known around the world as a place to avoid.

And btw, the Northern Gateway pipeline route crossed so much terrain that is inaccessible to spill response that even a minor leak would turn into a disaster.

[Cactusflower]

Only those who have never spent any time on the waters off northern BC think that Northern Gateway was a better choice than Trans Mountain. Those waters are so hazardous that they are well-known around the world as a place to avoid.

And btw, the Northern Gateway pipeline route crossed so much terrain that is inaccessible to spill response that even a minor leak would turn into a disaster.

Neither of those projects should have been approved. Why should B.C. put its environment and economy at risk so that Communist China and the multinational Alberta oil corporations can make a bundle? Are the Federal and Alberta governments getting their palms greased by Big Oil?

[seewood]

Only those who have never spent any time on the waters off northern BC think that Northern Gateway was a better choice than Trans Mountain. Those waters are so hazardous that they are well-known around the world as a place to avoid.

And btw, the Northern Gateway pipeline route crossed so much terrain that is inaccessible to spill response that even a minor leak would turn into a disaster.

Spot on. Apples and oranges in my opinion...

[Cactusflower]

Only those who have never spent any time on the waters off northern BC think that Northern Gateway was a better choice than Trans Mountain. Those waters are so hazardous that they are well-known around the world as a place to avoid.

And btw, the Northern Gateway pipeline route crossed so much terrain that is inaccessible to spill response that even a minor leak would turn into a disaster.

Spot on. Apples and oranges in my opinion...

Apples to apples, in my opinion.

[hobbyguy]

Fundamentally the TMX creates no new environmental disruption. Existing route. Plus the shipping lanes are much better controlled, the infrastructure to support the marine safety is better, especially as US marine infrastructure is there for back up. Additionally, the waters involved already have very significant tanker traffic, and that has been done without incident. Plus, like it or not, the waters of Burrard inlet already suck (just the storm sewer automobile oil runoff and sulfur dust ensure that, let alone the uncontrolled sewage Vancouver drops in there).

The NGP has none of those factors.

[George+]

Nice of you to write off all of Burrard Inlet.

Tell that to the municipakities and indigenous people.

Same for Howe Sound?

Same for Juan de Fuca Strait?

That would be about half of B.C. Tourism!

[hobbyguy]

Nice of you to write off all of Burrard Inlet.

Tell that to the municipakities and indigenous people.

Same for Howe Sound?

Same for Juan de Fuca Strait?

That would be about half of B.C. Tourism!

One day you will actually research something and post from a position of knowledge. Nah.

I know Burrard inlet very well, and Indian Arm. I said nothing about Howe Sound, which while it has issues, is entirely unrelated to the conversation.

As far as Juan De Fuca goes, thousands of tankers have passed through there without a single incident and many more still do. Alaska to Ferndale etc. Familiar with the massive refinery at Cherry Point?

In other words, comment when you have something to contribute. The city of Vancouver is well known for not upgrading its sewer systems. Care to go swimming in False Creek George?

[Cactusflower]

^^Great! I finally found someone who knows all about Burrard Inlet. Now tell me, HG, what IS that goop that the news media keeps showing on the news hour every time the KMX is the subject. You know, right beside the dilbit pipes reaching out into the inlet?

[hobbyguy]

^^Great! I finally found someone who knows all about Burrard Inlet. Now tell me, HG, what IS that goop that the news media keeps showing on the news hour every time the KMX is the subject. You know, right beside the dilbit pipes reaching out into the inlet?

Sewage sludge from the outfalls of the City of Vancouver mostly. There is a storm sewer outfall just west of the Ironworkers bridge, and whenever it rains heavily (which it does a LOT in Vancouver) the sanitary sewers overflow into the storm sewers, combine with the street runoff (oil, powdered rubber, anti-freeze drips etc.) and pour out of there in a gawdawful stinky mess. When the tide in coming in, that gets carried into the tidal rapids of the second narrows (quite a boat ride at full rip) and gets churned into a frothy sludge. The rapids stop short of where the KM terminal is, and the surface sludge created builds up as scum in quieter waters, like the back eddy where the tankers load. That spot was chosen for the tanker facility because it is out of all the currents and winds.

[Urban Cowboy]

*removed*

[Cactusflower]

^^Great! I finally found someone who knows all about Burrard Inlet. Now tell me, HG, what IS that goop that the news media keeps showing on the news hour every time the KMX is the subject. You know, right beside the dilbit pipes reaching out into the inlet?

Sewage sludge from the outfalls of the City of Vancouver mostly. There is a storm sewer outfall just west of the Ironworkers bridge, and whenever it rains heavily (which it does a LOT in Vancouver) the sanitary sewers overflow into the storm sewers, combine with the street runoff (oil, powdered rubber, anti-freeze drips etc.) and pour out of there in a gawdawful stinky mess. When the tide in coming in, that gets carried into the tidal rapids of the second narrows (quite a boat ride at full rip) and gets churned into a frothy sludge. The rapids stop short of where the KM terminal is, and the surface sludge created builds up as scum in quieter waters, like the back eddy where the tankers load. That spot was chosen for the tanker facility because it is out of all the currents and winds.

Or maybe it's simply a good spot to hide the dilbit leaks/spills among the sewage.

[hobbyguy]

^^ nope. You gotta figure in the coal dust, the sulfur dust, and the even the grain dust. Burrard inlet is a very dirty place place now.

[Urban Cowboy]

*removed*