Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Kinder Morgan Pipeline Talk


kingofsurrey

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

Ya but you have to be seen in it.:lol:

That’s the tough part. It makes for awkward conversation when you’re driving around with your girlfriend or, worse yet, your mom and you have to explain to them why these hordes of random women are throwing their panties at your car. “It’s just the Yaris, babe. I swear I don’t know these women.” 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Sean Monahan said:

That’s the tough part. It makes for awkward conversation when you’re driving around with your girlfriend or, worse yet, your mom and you have to explain to them why these hordes of random women are throwing their panties at your car. “It’s just the Yaris, babe. I swear I don’t know these women.” 

tiny small car makes you look like a big ripped dude.......    that's probably what is happening.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

interesting.....

 

CN Rail planning pilot plant to create oilsands bitumen pucks that are easy to ship and float in water.

 

CALGARY — Canadian National Railway Co. says it is planning to build a pilot plant worth up to $50 million next year to create pucks made of oilsands bitumen to transport by rail and ships to customers around the world.

 

https://edmontonjournal.com/transportation/rail/cn-rail-lining-up-pilot-plant-partners-to-make-oilsands-bitumen-pucks/wcm/beb31ad3-1364-4c27-b4dc-bad74ce75434

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They want to be able to make a whopping 50,000 barrels per day? What's supposed to happen to the other 1mil plus that is produced per day? I like this idea and it's been fun to watch, but it is not going to end up being worth it. It will cost too much to amount made and won't go very far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, MikeyBoy44 said:

They want to be able to make a whopping 50,000 barrels per day? What's supposed to happen to the other 1mil plus that is produced per day? I like this idea and it's been fun to watch, but it is not going to end up being worth it. It will cost too much to amount made and won't go very far.

And again has to be shipped by rail which is terrible for CO2 emmisions. Compared to pipelines that have next to no green house gas effect in transferring the oil. I find it very strange that so many pro environment posters are championing this idea. It just goes to show how they are so bought in to the idea that pipelines are evil, that there willing to get behind something thats worse for climate change. 

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

And again has to be shipped by rail which is terrible for CO2 emmisions. Compared to pipelines that have next to no green house gas effect in transferring the oil. I find it very strange that so many pro environment posters are championing this idea. It just goes to show how they are so bought in to the idea that pipelines are evil, that there willing to get behind something thats worse for climate change. 

Ah,... maybe you are missing the point that this product will float in case of a spill......

 

A dirty bitumen spill in Van harbour will be catastrophic to our local environment/ economy...... with LONG LONG term negative consequences....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:

Ah,... maybe you are missing the point that this product will float in case of a spill......

 

A dirty bitumen spill in Van harbour will be catastrophic to our local environment/ economy...... with LONG LONG term negative consequences....

Ah maybe your missing the point that shipping by rail is really bad for CO2 emissions.  You know the cause for global warming.   

 

Great, this product has potential to help in the “unlikely” event of an oil spill, while greatly increasing the amount of green house gasses......Slow clap...do you really know what you stand for anymore?

 

Tell me. What happens to marine life when the glaciers melt, sea levels rise and water temperature heat up?  Glad you ok with increasing climate change damage, but hey as long we don’t use pipelines right? 

 

Like i said before. I find it strange that anyone who considers them self pro environment could be for this.  This is the perfect example on how American money has got you so brainwashed thinking pipelines are evil, you don’t even realize that the alternative you are suggesting is far worse for global environment.  

 

 

If people truly cared about the environment they would be pushing pipelines ASAP. It’s not even comparable how much better pipelines are for mid stream emissions.

 

We should also be encouraging Canada (a environmental regulated country) to increase production so that others can become less dependent  on oil from un-regulated countries. We need to be proud of our country and proud of our oil.  You never hear praise about projects like shell quest. You just hear biased negative spins that has our own Canadians turning on our selfs. It’s down right embarrassing. 

Edited by ForsbergTheGreat
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kingofsurrey said:

Ah,... maybe you are missing the point that this product will float in case of a spill......

 

A dirty bitumen spill in Van harbour will be catastrophic to our local environment/ economy...... with LONG LONG term negative consequences....

can you stop making a fool out of yourself by passing off your extremely limited scientific knowledge to compare the scientifically determined impact of various proposed systems ?!?

Here's a simple exercise for you - in matters of science, unless you possess high level education or professional expertise, do not form strong opinions on the topic. Not that hard to do, right ?

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, canuckistani said:

can you stop making a fool out of yourself by passing off your extremely limited scientific knowledge to compare the scientifically determined impact of various proposed systems ?!?

Here's a simple exercise for you - in matters of science, unless you possess high level education or professional expertise, do not form strong opinions on the topic. Not that hard to do, right ?

Really don't get your point.  Perhaps you need to slow down  or stop typing from the cab of your F 350 .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Ah maybe your missing the point that shipping by rail is really bad for CO2 emissions.  You know the cause for global warming.   

 

Great, this product has potential to help in the “unlikely” event of an oil spill, while greatly increasing the amount of green house gasses......Slow clap...do you really know what you stand for anymore?

 

Tell me. What happens to marine life when the glaciers melt, sea levels rise and water temperature heat up?  Glad you ok with increasing climate change damage, but hey as long we don’t use pipelines right? 

 

Like i said before. I find it strange that anyone who considers them self pro environment could be for this.  This is the perfect example on how American money has got you so brainwashed thinking pipelines are evil, you don’t even realize that the alternative you are suggesting is far worse for global environment.  

 

 

If people truly cared about the environment they would be pushing pipelines ASAP. It’s not even comparable how much better pipelines are for mid stream emissions.

 

We should also be encouraging Canada (a environmental regulated country) to increase production so that others can become less dependent  on oil from un-regulated countries. We need to be proud of our country and proud of our oil.  You never hear praise about projects like shell quest. You just hear biased negative spins that has our own Canadians turning on our selfs. It’s down right embarrassing. 

Increased tanker traffic in Vancouver harbour with tankers of bitumen is simply a risk too large for us here in the lower mainland to take a chance on....

So sorry but i am a no for your Bitumen Pipeline terminal expansion in my backyard....

 

Increased Pipeline capacity is all risk and no reward for the people of BC.   

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:

Increased tanker traffic in Vancouver harbour with tankers of bitumen is simply a risk too large for us here in the lower mainland to take a chance on....

So sorry but i am a no for your Bitumen Pipeline terminal expansion in my backyard....

 

Increased Pipeline capacity is all risk and no reward for the people of BC.   

 

 

So the you agree with @ForsbergTheGreat thats it's never been about the environment for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ryan Strome said:

Do you think criticising someone for owning a 100,000 vehicle makes any sense?

I think the point of it is....  most people realize that the majority of posters here supporting the potential destruction of Vancouvers harbour...... are the same people that profit from their over paid jobs in the patch.     Many of us do not profit from big oil and so we have a much more well rounded opinion of the  benefits and costs of any expanded terminal / tanker traffic in Vancouver harbour. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

So the you agree with @ForsbergTheGreat thats it's never been about the environment for you?

I have always posted here my first choice is for the dirty bitumen to stay in the ground where it belongs....

Edited by kingofsurrey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, kingofsurrey said:

I think the point of it is....  most people realize that the majority of posters here supporting the potential destruction of Vancouvers harbour...... are the same people that profit from their over paid jobs in the patch.     Many of us do not profit from big oil and so we have a much more well rounded opinion of the  benefits and costs of any expanded terminal / tanker traffic in Vancouver harbour. 

Wow!!

Never thought I would hear you say that. All Canadians need to make more money, I thought you and I agreed on that. As someone who has spent my whole adult life in the industry, I don't think we are overpaid. When was the last time you were outside for 12 hours in minus 40 and the only thing to keep you warm is a steamer wand?

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:

Really don't get your point.  Perhaps you need to slow down  or stop typing from the cab of your F 350 .

The point is pretty well stated. If you are a science illiterate, don't take strong stances over what is more eco-friendly and what isn't. I have an engineering degree, been in the field of science for 20+ years and its very rare i will have a strong opinion on whether option A is more eco-friendly than option B. So that should give you a barometer on how nonsensical your opinion is on the topic. How does it not bother you to say option A over option B, when you can't even do basic calculus ? Heck, even if i plugged the data into a linear matrix system and tried to solve, the results will be all over the place. 

A fool only knows what he knows and pretends to know more. A wise person knows what he know but knows very well what he does not know. Be a wise person, not a fool. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:

I have always posted here my first choice is for the dirty bitumen to stay in the ground where it belongs....

Stop driving your car before you make hypocritical statements. And if dirty bitumen is coming out of the ground anyways, its better to put it inside a pipeline than on a rail-cart. In every which way - safety, ecological footprint and reliability. If you cannot see this, you are 100% disqualified from talking about crap you don't even understand the basics of. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...