BurnabyJoe Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Some of the most powerful oil companies in the world are pushing to bring supertankers to B.C.'s coast. They would jeopardize the livelihoods of tens of thousands of British Columbians and the stability of the great bear rainforest and southern gulf islands ecosystems in the name of profit. We can hold them back and keep our water systems healthy and livelihoods secure, but it's going to take size and diversity. Please sign the petition at www.notankers.ca calling on the BC and Canadian government to halt oil tanker traffic expansion on B.C.'s coast. Save beautiful British Columbia! *Even if for some bizarre reason you don't find the environmental threat to be a big deal, a strong case can be made to keep our oil in our country for Canadians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FeStealth Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Some of the most powerful oil companies in the world are pushing to bring supertankers to B.C.'s coast. They would jeopardize the livelihoods of tens of thousands of British Columbians and the stability of the great bear rainforest and southern gulf islands ecosystems in the name of profit. We can hold them back and keep our water systems healthy and livelihoods secure, but it's going to take size and diversity. Please sign the petition at www.notankers.ca calling on the BC and Canadian government to halt oil tanker traffic expansion on B.C.'s coast. Save beautiful British Columbia! *Even if for some bizarre reason you don't find the environmental threat to be a big deal, a strong case can be made to keep our oil in our country for Canadians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Canada doesn't have the capacity to refine oil and it never will. Exporting it is the only option. I support this project... although I would prefer the Keystone XL line instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarzan Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Agree! Not enough of a market in Canada to justify the cost of research and extraction. This is just typical NIMBY (Not in my back yard) activity. Our entire economy and lifestyle is based on access to oil products and regardless of what new technologies are developed in the near future, will be for some time. Would it be better to imort by truck across the Rockies and through our National Parks all our needs? Maybe we could bring in Saudi tankers and off-load in Vancouver for Burnaby Joe. Does Joe want to pay $10 per litre if Iran closes down the Strait of Hormuz? Not a surprise this guy is from Burnaby. CIty folk love to holiday in the rural great outdoors and have all their oil, wood, food shipped into them on roads and trucks that rely on OIL!!!! I support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lateralus Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 1326940392' post=10333614'] Canada doesn't have the capacity to refine oil and it never will. Exporting it is the only option. I support this project... although I would prefer the Keystone XL line instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsedin33 Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I prefer we don't extract any of it. I know, we all use oil etc. OIl companies get stinking rich while our economy dwindles and our environment gets smaller and smaller. I doubt the people who will get richest even live here. So I say no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weber's Playoff Beard Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 No. I do not support the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Loungo Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-SN- Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Canada doesn't have the capacity to refine oil and it never will. Exporting it is the only option. Do you mind expanding on this? Canada has many refineries, at least two in BC. It's not a lost technology or anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonLever Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 <br />Do you mind expanding on this? Canada has many refineries, at least two in BC. It's not a lost technology or anything.<br /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
key2thecup Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Don't we already have supertanker's crusing down the BC Coast? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Bo7 Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I find it kind of ironic how people have no problem messing up places like Nigeria to get their oil, but as soon as people talk about oil pipelines in Canada and the US, everyone speaks out in horror. Just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
لني Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I am not sold on the whole "you use oil, and you are opposed to the oil sands (or pipeline) so you are a hypocrite" argument. I use oil, as does everyone. I try to limit my consumption, but I still use it every day. That said, I still am opposed to the pipeline(s), especially the Northern Gateway Project. Let me explain: If we do not allow oil sand expansion, we aren't going to run out of oil. One thing, and one thing only, will happen: prices will go up. Personally, even though I don't even earn enough money to get above the "poverty line", I am perfectly fine with paying more for oil and oil products if it means we can conserve our BC coast, and prevent global warming (let's not make this another GW debate though). So even though I use oil, and I contribute to the demand for oil, I would applaud a blockage of the Northern Gateway pipeline, and would welcome the slight increase in oil price that would come with it. Also, there is a big difference between shipping oil by truck or rail and shipping by pipeline and supertanker. If a truck/train crashes, it is a relatively small amount of oil being spilled that can be quickly cleaned up since it is accessible by road. Any potential crash of a supertanker would absolutely ruin our coast, and a pipeline leak would do the same for our rivers, and cleaning these things up is much more difficult because of the logistics involved. Using supertankers on that coast is absolutely insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucklehead Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 ^ Exactly. As clean oil goes we're right up there. If there was a Fair Trade type graph on gas pumps that showed the amount of environmental damage done extracting the oil from the various supplying countries,where do you think the public would want to buy their oil from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I am not sold on the whole "you use oil, and you are opposed to the oil sands (or pipeline) so you are a hypocrite" argument. I use oil, as does everyone. I try to limit my consumption, but I still use it every day. That said, I still am opposed to the pipeline(s), especially the Northern Gateway Project. Let me explain: If we do not allow oil sand expansion, we aren't going to run out of oil. One thing, and one thing only, will happen: prices will go up. Personally, even though I don't even earn enough money to get above the "poverty line", I am perfectly fine with paying more for oil and oil products if it means we can conserve our BC coast, and prevent global warming (let's not make this another GW debate though). So even though I use oil, and I contribute to the demand for oil, I would applaud a blockage of the Northern Gateway pipeline, and would welcome the slight increase in oil price that would come with it. Also, there is a big difference between shipping oil by truck or rail and shipping by pipeline and supertanker. If a truck/train crashes, it is a relatively small amount of oil being spilled that can be quickly cleaned up since it is accessible by road. Any potential crash of a supertanker would absolutely ruin our coast, and a pipeline leak would do the same for our rivers, and cleaning these things up is much more difficult because of the logistics involved. Using supertankers on that coast is absolutely insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carpe Diem Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 good for Alberta, bad for BC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OgS.MVP Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 *Even if for some bizarre reason you don't find the environmental threat to be a big deal, a strong case can be made to keep our oil in our country for Canadians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truculence Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 ^ Exactly. As clean oil goes we're right up there. If there was a Fair Trade type graph on gas pumps that showed the amount of environmental damage done extracting the oil from the various supplying countries,where do you think the public would want to buy their oil from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 What? Canada has numerous refineries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shift-4 Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Do you mind expanding on this? Canada has many refineries, at least two in BC. It's not a lost technology or anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.