The UCP Alberta Government - Threatens to Turn off Oil Taps

[BPA]

4 minutes ago, canuckistani said:

Risk is nearly non-existant, as its virtually one of the safest industrial persuits of mankind ( shipping of oil). The articles are not scientific, they are simple opinion pieces. 

Opinion pieces?  Really?   These articles outline past oil spills in BC and AB.  How is that an opinion piece??

 

Granted tanker oil spills have declined (just read up on that) that only 3 tanker spills last year resulting in 700 tonnes of oil in the water.   So I'll give you that.  But you are also ignoring pipeline oil spills.  There are numerous pipeline oil spills in US,  so it does happen.

 

AND still no where that says AB will help in any way for any clean up cost.

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, BPA said:

Opinion pieces?  Really?   These articles outline past oil spills in BC and AB.  How is that an opinion piece??

 

Granted tanker oil spills have declined (just read up on that) that only 3 tanker spills last year resulting in 700 tonnes of oil in the water.   So I'll give you that.  But you are also ignoring pipeline oil spills.  There are numerous pipeline oil spills in US,  so it does happen.

 

AND still no where that says AB will help in any way for any clean up cost.

don't get caught in this game. The risks are real. 

[canuckistani]

1 minute ago, BPA said:

Opinion pieces?  Really?   These articles outline past oil spills in BC and AB.  How is that an opinion piece??

100 L of spill due to operational error. Do you know what is the PSI of a standard dilbit pipeline ? Do you know how tiny a spill of 100L is ? And explain to me why AB should pay for an operational error in BC ? 

1 minute ago, BPA said:

 

Granted tanker oil spills have declined (just read up on that) that only 3 tanker spills last year resulting in 700 tonnes of oil in the water.   So I'll give you that.  But you are also ignoring pipeline oil spills.  There are numerous pipeline oil spills in US,  so it does happen.

 

AND still no where that says AB will help in any way for any clean up cost.

Explain to me why AB should be on the hook for pipeline spills in BC, when its BC's job to enforce regulations and safety standards on its territory. AB is not the one issuing permits, issuing safety certificates for construction projects in BC. Its BC's responsibility. AB has responsibility towards marine clean-up but unless we want AB to regulate the pipelines construction, management and manning it, it shouldn't have to pay for a spill in BC anymore than BC has to pay for a spill in AB. 

 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

1 hour ago, kingofsurrey said:

too funny.... i am pretty sure BC libs ruled bc for a bit...

 

You are showing your ignorance and prejudice

What does that have to do with anything. 

 

Your stupidity is showing.....

[kingofsurrey]

27 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

What does that have to do with anything. 

 

Your stupidity is showing.....

You have Dilbit between your ears......

[BPA]

1 hour ago, canuckistani said:

100 L of spill due to operational error. Do you know what is the PSI of a standard dilbit pipeline ? Do you know how tiny a spill of 100L is ? And explain to me why AB should pay for an operational error in BC ? 

Explain to me why AB should be on the hook for pipeline spills in BC, when its BC's job to enforce regulations and safety standards on its territory. AB is not the one issuing permits, issuing safety certificates for construction projects in BC. Its BC's responsibility. AB has responsibility towards marine clean-up but unless we want AB to regulate the pipelines construction, management and manning it, it shouldn't have to pay for a spill in BC anymore than BC has to pay for a spill in AB. 

 

So BC assumes all the clean up responsibility even though they do not want the pipeline??? 

 

Yep.  That's really fair.

[canuckistani]

1 minute ago, BPA said:

So BC assumes all the clean up responsibility even though they do not want the pipeline??? 

 

Yep.  That's really fair.

1. You didn't answer my question - why exactly should AB pay for pipeline issues in BC, when its BC, not AB, that is issuing & overseeing its construction and employment/safety standards are set by WorkSafeBC and not AB ?? Do we pay for spillage of a pipeline in Manitoba or Quebec ? If not, then why should another province pay for spillage of a pipeline here ? 

 

2. I don't want bike lanes in downtown. Why do i have to pay for their installation again ? Yep, really fair on me. I don't want to restore trees in Stanley Park hit by lightning. Why do i have to pay for them ? Yep, really fair. I don't want the ferries. I don't use the ferries. Why do I have to pay for them ? Really fair, right ? I could go on. The same argument as to why I have to pay for stuff i don't really care for, when the government has decided to pay for it, applies to why BC should not shirk its responsibilities towards national development and national policies. This is not BC's and, its Canada's. The entire point of BC's existence, is expedient governance. BC does not grant me citizenship, Canada does. BC does not grant me healthcare, Canadian constitution does. BC does not authorize my travel document ( passport), Canada does. 

 

Just like my individual wants do not exempt me from my national responsibilities, same applies to BC. And if BC still wants AB to pay for any pipeline spillage, then BC should get 0% revenue from it, should have no authority to dictate terms for construction & upkeep of the pipeline in its territory and defer to AB, as well as let AB set worksafe policies on sites to do with the pipeline. If you don't want responsibility, you get no power either. 

 

[BPA]

55 minutes ago, canuckistani said:

1. You didn't answer my question - why exactly should AB pay for pipeline issues in BC, when its BC, not AB, that is issuing & overseeing its construction and employment/safety standards are set by WorkSafeBC and not AB ?? Do we pay for spillage of a pipeline in Manitoba or Quebec ? If not, then why should another province pay for spillage of a pipeline here ? 

 

2. I don't want bike lanes in downtown. Why do i have to pay for their installation again ? Yep, really fair on me. I don't want to restore trees in Stanley Park hit by lightning. Why do i have to pay for them ? Yep, really fair. I don't want the ferries. I don't use the ferries. Why do I have to pay for them ? Really fair, right ? I could go on. The same argument as to why I have to pay for stuff i don't really care for, when the government has decided to pay for it, applies to why BC should not shirk its responsibilities towards national development and national policies. This is not BC's and, its Canada's. The entire point of BC's existence, is expedient governance. BC does not grant me citizenship, Canada does. BC does not grant me healthcare, Canadian constitution does. BC does not authorize my travel document ( passport), Canada does. 

 

Just like my individual wants do not exempt me from my national responsibilities, same applies to BC. And if BC still wants AB to pay for any pipeline spillage, then BC should get 0% revenue from it, should have no authority to dictate terms for construction & upkeep of the pipeline in its territory and defer to AB, as well as let AB set worksafe policies on sites to do with the pipeline. If you don't want responsibility, you get no power either. 

 

You're probably correct that BC should be responsible for any oil spills in BC.

 

So in that case, perhaps it's best for BC to NOT have the pipeline because any revenue generated from the pipeline will probably be not enough to cover the costs of the clean up. 

 

I usually try to obtain all the facts before making a decision.   You just literally made it for me.  You made me go to the NO PIPELINE side.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 2, 2019 by BPA

[canuckistani]

5 minutes ago, BPA said:

You're probably correct that BC should be responsible for any oil spills in BC.

 

So in that case, perhaps it's best for BC to NOT have the pipeline because any revenue generated from the pipeline will probably be not enough to cover the costs of the clean up. 

 

I usually try to obtain all the facts before making a decision.   You just literally made it for me.  You made me go to the NO PIPELINE side.

BC shouldn't stand in the way of Canada's development and economic interests, due to random cases of 2-3 buckets of oil spilled at the terminals. BC getting to opt out of a national interest project makes as much sense as me getting to opt out of a project in BC's interest. We are not a seperate country to have such sovereign rights/demands. 

[Ryan Strome]

1 hour ago, BPA said:

So BC assumes all the clean up responsibility even though they do not want the pipeline??? 

 

Yep.  That's really fair.

Polls suggest otherwise.

[Ryan Strome]

2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

don't get caught in this game. The risks are real. 

He certainly has a way in some discussions with me but in their discussion he is bang on. What if a BC line has a spill in Alberta? Will you guys pay for it? Omg you will have yet another tax in BC to pay for it.

[JM_]

25 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

He certainly has a way in some discussions with me but in their discussion he is bang on. What if a BC line has a spill in Alberta? Will you guys pay for it? Omg you will have yet another tax in BC to pay for it.

actually I think we just need to have more insurance to cover spill costs, maybe paid based on something objective like percentage of royalties received by all oil and gas activity. So for sake of argument (I haven't looked up the firm #'s) say 50% paid by the feds, 12% by AB, 13% by BC, etc. Like a partnership approach. 

 

[Gnarcore]

44 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

He certainly has a way in some discussions with me but in their discussion he is bang on. What if a BC line has a spill in Alberta? Will you guys pay for it? Omg you will have yet another tax in BC to pay for it.

Well the TM line is federally owned.....so every Canadian should pay for any issues with it.

 

Bring back Energy East! That one actually made a ton of sense.  

Edited May 2, 2019 by Gnarcore

[Ryan Strome]

19 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

actually I think we just need to have more insurance to cover spill costs, maybe paid based on something objective like percentage of royalties received by all oil and gas activity. So for sake of argument (I haven't looked up the firm #'s) say 50% paid by the feds, 12% by AB, 13% by BC, etc. Like a partnership approach. 

 

I have always supported that idea.

Edit. Energy companies can pay more though.

Edited May 2, 2019 by Ryan Strome

[Ryan Strome]

4 minutes ago, Gnarcore said:

Well the TM line is federally owned.....so every Canadian should pay for any issues with it.

 

Bring back Energy East! That one actually made a ton of sense.  

It does for sure but Quebec doesn't want it and no Federal Party will take on Quebec.

[BPA]

26 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

actually I think we just need to have more insurance to cover spill costs, maybe paid based on something objective like percentage of royalties received by all oil and gas activity. So for sake of argument (I haven't looked up the firm #'s) say 50% paid by the feds, 12% by AB, 13% by BC, etc. Like a partnership approach. 

 

That would be a fair approach but I have yet to see any article stating that to be the case.

 

Instead, the pipeline is proposed to be shoved down our throats and BC picks up the oil spill tabs.

[Gnarcore]

8 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

It does for sure but Quebec doesn't want it and no Federal Party will take on Quebec.

My hope is the next Conservative majority forces it on them if it is still needed.  Our two Premiers had speeches today with Kenny talking about his Turn off the Taps acting like the TM line has an impact on our gas prices....it's the refinery closure south that is the issue right now. Then Horgan called out that point and talked about the coming lawsuit over constitutionality of the AB policy.  

 

This is about as interesting as inter provincial politics has been since Klein sent the homeless here on buses 

Edited May 2, 2019 by Gnarcore
grammar

[BPA]

1 hour ago, canuckistani said:

BC shouldn't stand in the way of Canada's development and economic interests, due to random cases of 2-3 buckets of oil spilled at the terminals. BC getting to opt out of a national interest project makes as much sense as me getting to opt out of a project in BC's interest. We are not a seperate country to have such sovereign rights/demands. 

Show me where an oil spill (on land and on water) that its a 2-3 buckets spilled.

 

If really for economic and national interest, then Canada should make refineries in each province.  It would create jobs, keep a valuable resource in Canada.  Make Canada less reliant on purchasing oil from elsewhere. 

 

Instead, it's sounding more like making a quick buck at the expense of BC environment. 

 

The proposed 8% of the pipeline profits will probably not be enough to cover any clean up costs.   Leaving BC taxpayers to pay for years to come.  Sorry.  I'm not keen on having my children pay for my generations mistakes.

[Ryan Strome]

@Jimmy McGill I'm actually suprised no one is talking about the education minister. I thought when I came in this thread after the swearing in it would be the discussion. Adriana Lagrange.

[canuckistani]

22 minutes ago, BPA said:

Show me where an oil spill (on land and on water) that its a 2-3 buckets spilled.

One of your link said 100L spilled...thats 2-3 buckets spilled. 

Quote

If really for economic and national interest, then Canada should make refineries in each province.  It would create jobs, keep a valuable resource in Canada.  Make Canada less reliant on purchasing oil from elsewhere. 

And how does that help us in exporting crude again ? In case you didn't know, most importing nations want to import crude oil instead of finished products, due to logistics of shipping. 

Quote

 

Instead, it's sounding more like making a quick buck at the expense of BC environment. 

Expense ? There is no 'expense' here- just fearmongering. The shipping of oil is as much at the 'expense' of BC's environment as the airport is at 'expense' of BC's environment. 

Quote

 

The proposed 8% of the pipeline profits will probably not be enough to cover any clean up costs.   Leaving BC taxpayers to pay for years to come.  Sorry.  I'm not keen on having my children pay for my generations mistakes.

8% pipeline profits are more than sufficient to cover a few buckets of spilled oil from pipelines here and there. 

Edited May 2, 2019 by canuckistani