BC Election issues

Discuss the upcoming elections here.
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 60162
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: BC Election issues

Post by The Green Barbarian »

neilsimon wrote:No surprises there. Let me help you:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/environment


That doesn't help, as it gives no context. Both you and George's responses are (no surprise) completely and utterly worthless. And I wasn't talking to either of you anyway.
LET'S GO BRANDON!

Justin Trudeau is a blight on our once great country.
User avatar
neilsimon
Generalissimo Postalot
Posts: 852
Joined: Aug 13th, 2015, 7:35 am

Re: BC Election issues

Post by neilsimon »

The Green Barbarian wrote:
neilsimon wrote:No surprises there. Let me help you:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/environment


That doesn't help, as it gives no context. Both you and George's responses are (no surprise) completely and utterly worthless. And I wasn't talking to either of you anyway.


This is a public forum, of course you are talking to us, to everyone in fact. If you want to have a private conversation, there is a PM system.
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 60162
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: BC Election issues

Post by The Green Barbarian »

neilsimon wrote:
This is a public forum, of course you are talking to us, to everyone in fact. If you want to have a private conversation, there is a PM system.


Anyway, Hobby, could you answer the question instead of the Insane Clown Posse that is trolling me right now? What is this sound ideological reason you speak of? I am curious.
LET'S GO BRANDON!

Justin Trudeau is a blight on our once great country.
hobbyguy
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 12613
Joined: Jan 20th, 2011, 8:10 pm

Re: BC Election issues

Post by hobbyguy »

The Greens ideological reason for wanting to kill the K-M pipeline is environmentalism. That is, after all, their core principle. That makes it sound from their perspective and matches with their ideals.

Whether or not that core ideology is pragmatic or achievable or encompasses a large enough context to be realistic is another discussion.

I personally do not agree with all that the hard core environmentalist stance encompasses. It is a question of balance.

I also happen to believe that there is a strong possibility that K-M will be unable to get enough final commitments from shippers to cover the most contentious part of the expansion project - tankers. It is more likely that the project will morph into one where the bulk of the additional capacity will go directly by pipeline to refineries like Cherry Point. That's where the current demand is. Volumes out of Alaska supplying the Pacific northwest refineries are in decline. They want Alberta product.

IF the K-M morphs the direction I see it potentially going, then economics - not ideology - will drive a balance that is better than what we are currently looking at. Some increased tanker traffic, but not near the original forecast, better marine safety, and pipelines feeding Albert product directly to the refineries. The end result would be little or no net tanker traffic increase in the region as a whole (Orcas etc. don't even know international boundaries exist.).

Even if the K-M proceeds close to original plan, the enhanced marine safety we are getting out of the deal, coupled with the north coast tanker ban (going through parliament now), is a big win for BC. And we get $50 million + per year to help with other projects/services/programs. Construction jobs are a bonus, but if you add up the enhanced marine safety jobs, and the direct K-M jobs, it is a plus as well (if not a big number).

That's where I see the hard line environmentalists going off the rails. Not taking a broad enough perspective. Black and white ideological approaches almost always fail to do that. In this case, I think the environmentalists have most likely already won, but they can't see it because of ideological blinders.
The middle path - everything in moderation, and everything in its time and order.
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 60162
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: BC Election issues

Post by The Green Barbarian »

hobbyguy wrote:The Greens ideological reason for wanting to kill the K-M pipeline is environmentalism. That is, after all, their core principle. That makes it sound from their perspective and matches with their ideals.
.


I guess I will just never understand this way of thinking. Killing a pipeline just means that now the oil has to be hauled via train/truck/donkey cart. Killing a pipeline doesn't help the environment in any way.
LET'S GO BRANDON!

Justin Trudeau is a blight on our once great country.
User avatar
maryjane48
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 17124
Joined: May 28th, 2010, 7:58 pm

Re: BC Election issues

Post by maryjane48 »

theres no need to move unrefined oil anywhere . its done . better refine here and sell to ourselves .
User avatar
Merry
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 13007
Joined: Nov 2nd, 2008, 11:41 am

Re: BC Election issues

Post by Merry »

If new refineries were built in Alberta do you honestly think the Eco-nuts and NIMBY's would then drop their opposition to pipelines?

I think not.
"In a world swathed in political correctness, the voting booth remains the final sanctuary where the people are free to speak" - Clifford Orwin
Jx3
Übergod
Posts: 1164
Joined: Nov 2nd, 2011, 7:46 pm

Re: BC Election issues

Post by Jx3 »

maryjane48 wrote:theres no need to move unrefined oil anywhere . its done . better refine here and sell to ourselves .


I'm absolutely no expert on the petroleum industry so I'll avoid expressing any strong opinions one way or the other however I have genuinely wondered why we don't refine it and sell it here.

It doesn't seem to make much sense to me to import oil from the middle east while exporting our own oil. Perhaps Alberta oil isn't used for making of gasoline and diesel fuel? Honestly don't know.
Muzza
Generalissimo Postalot
Posts: 777
Joined: Jun 13th, 2014, 11:01 am

Re: BC Election issues

Post by Muzza »

Jx3 wrote:
maryjane48 wrote:theres no need to move unrefined oil anywhere . its done . better refine here and sell to ourselves .


I'm absolutely no expert on the petroleum industry so I'll avoid expressing any strong opinions one way or the other however I have genuinely wondered why we don't refine it and sell it here.

It doesn't seem to make much sense to me to import oil from the middle east while exporting our own oil. Perhaps Alberta oil isn't used for making of gasoline and diesel fuel? Honestly don't know.


http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-Gener ... ne-It.html

The cost of a new refinery is pegged at $10 billion, and would take years to construct. A new one hasn't been built in Canada since 1984, or in the United States since 1976, although new refineries are in the works in Michigan and Illinois. A couple of years ago, British Columbia newspaper mogul David Black raised a few eyebrows when he proposed to build a $25-billion refining complex in Kitimat, using feedstock moved through a pipeline built with supportive native groups -- many of whom oppose the current Enbridge proposal.

Another major issue is excess refining capacity. While Canada only refines about a quarter of the oil it produces, it refines more oil than it consumes. That means any newly constructed refineries would be refining oil for export, not for internal consumption.

Note that I heard that there may be a refinery being built in Alberta......
Muzza
Generalissimo Postalot
Posts: 777
Joined: Jun 13th, 2014, 11:01 am

Re: BC Election issues

Post by Muzza »

maryjane48 wrote:theres no need to move unrefined oil anywhere . its done . better refine here and sell to ourselves .



But, but, but..... you keep saying oil is dead. So why would you want to build a refinery??
User avatar
maryjane48
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 17124
Joined: May 28th, 2010, 7:58 pm

Re: BC Election issues

Post by maryjane48 »

use up our own supply until electric takes over . once electric semis start being used half the demand is gone .
Jx3
Übergod
Posts: 1164
Joined: Nov 2nd, 2011, 7:46 pm

Re: BC Election issues

Post by Jx3 »

Muzza wrote:http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-Gener ... ne-It.html

The cost of a new refinery is pegged at $10 billion, and would take years to construct. A new one hasn't been built in Canada since 1984, or in the United States since 1976, although new refineries are in the works in Michigan and Illinois. A couple of years ago, British Columbia newspaper mogul David Black raised a few eyebrows when he proposed to build a $25-billion refining complex in Kitimat, using feedstock moved through a pipeline built with supportive native groups -- many of whom oppose the current Enbridge proposal.

Another major issue is excess refining capacity. While Canada only refines about a quarter of the oil it produces, it refines more oil than it consumes. That means any newly constructed refineries would be refining oil for export, not for internal consumption.

Note that I heard that there may be a refinery being built in Alberta......


Thanks Muzza.

One thing still sticks out for me however; if we are refining more oil than we are consuming why are we still importing oil?
Jx3
Übergod
Posts: 1164
Joined: Nov 2nd, 2011, 7:46 pm

Re: BC Election issues

Post by Jx3 »

maryjane48 wrote:use up our own supply until electric takes over . once electric semis start being used half the demand is gone .


Electric semi's are one thing, I'll be impressed when I see an electric jet.
User avatar
maryjane48
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 17124
Joined: May 28th, 2010, 7:58 pm

Re: BC Election issues

Post by maryjane48 »

User avatar
maryjane48
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 17124
Joined: May 28th, 2010, 7:58 pm

Re: BC Election issues

Post by maryjane48 »

Return to “British Columbia Elections 2017”