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

Warhippy

Members
  • Posts

    41,307
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    83

Everything posted by Warhippy

  1. Says the guy living in a province that cries about separating every 2nd day? How's that "firewall" going for you again Not forming a country with US states, forming a soveriegn country. The proposed country of or area of Cascadia would comprise California, Oregn, Washington State, BC, The Yukon and Alaska. But I personally don't much want California.
  2. Seattle has one of the best economies on the west coast due to its ports, its aerospace facilities, Boeing and financial sector. Vancouver has...a port system. Period. Like that's it honestly
  3. I love the idea, but I don't want California much at all. California alone would comprise almost 4 times the population of BC and with it the massive social headaches, crime and current associated debt that comes with it.
  4. I understand those facts, but if there was a higher capacity for storage and refining than light sweet would still be the most sought after for refining. Due to technology and current uses those refineries for heavy sit half full and it's more a might as well instead of this is a good thing
  5. No. There is no reason the lower mainland should be as expensive as it is. I've lived in some of the biggest cities in North America. It has very little aside from mountains to justify the expense The cost associated with vancouver is artificial as there is no economy to back it up in comparison to San Francisco, Seattle, Los Angeles, New York or even Toronto. All places with beaches great cities and amazing local economies. Take away ports and real estate and Vancouver is little more than a service industry town with a rotting interior. Vancouver should be far closer to seattle in terms of cost in all honesty but it isn't.
  6. Well...in my past I certainly fell for that line and belief. Turns out they're not so pretty once you take them swimming most of the time
  7. Yes I did. But to claim it is in higher demand than sweet crude is a laugh. The word glut is essential because it means that while sweet crude deposits are still in high demand there is no place to put them. it doesn`t mean demand is lower it just means infrastructure doesn`t exist to keep it therefore they pick up the slack in heavy instead You know better than that man
  8. He can't. Because it isn't true. Like even a little bit Sweet light crude will always be in the highest demand http://blogs.platts.com/2017/08/14/light-sweet-crude-barrel-glut/
  9. I look at people who use this argument the same way I do people who cry about losing their guns when people mention gun laws or controls.
  10. Actually...not entirely true. with Gazprom and Rosneft's Siberian fields set to finish their lines later this year Northern China will be able to supply much of its country and people with LNG and oil far cheaper and far more readily than they would shipping from canada https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-silkroad-russia-pipelines/china-to-complete-russia-oil-gas-pipeline-sections-by-end-2018-vice-governor-idUSKBN18819I Added the ports in vladivostock that have been upgraded from Gazprom and Lukoil they can now also service much of Japan as well http://www.sakhalin-oil-gas.com/blog/oil-gas-sakhalin-russia/post/id/7837_Asia-Pacific-Markets-and-Russian-Companies https://www.hydrocarbons-technology.com/projects/vladivostok-lng-project-primorye-territory/ Now factoring in North eastern Austrila's massive beds for LNG and their final assurance in the PNG pipeline as well as their soon to be built new facilities and almost the entire asian pacific region has very ready easily accessible and far cheaper forms of obtaining lng and oil from literally their own back yards than they do shipping drops from canada http://theconversation.com/heading-north-how-the-export-boom-is-shaking-up-australias-gas-market-52963 https://www.pipeliner.com.au/2016/03/16/png-gas-project-linking-australia-to-gas-and-the-pipeline-industry-to-prosperity/ Canada is essentially 10-15 years behind the world in both terminals and extraction but also in shipping abilities. This isn't a Horgan fault a Notley fault or even a Trudeau fault. This has been coming since the 80s when the Mulroney government all but said we'll just ship out raw and buy back finished It has little to do with red tape and more to do with lowering prices and far easier modes of transport in other parts of the world. Why spend dollars to make dollars when you can spend pennies and make them instead
  11. 100% agreed I cannot abide by the rolling over in that matter with the tough talk on BC. It is as divisive as anything the previous government said including the "build a firewall around alberta" The very idea of selling product out then buying it back refined at greater costs is beyond me. Had we an energy plan and viable refineries in each province and not seen the shutdowns over the past 30 years we'd see fuel prices at about $1.00 in Vancouver, even with the carbon tax and municipal levies. This would in turn lower the cost of everything via transport costs. Having that in place would have allowed us to focus on the real future which is in fact renewable energy and the mountain of jobs it is creating, 5 to 1 in oil exploration vs renewables. 5 jobs for every 1 person on a rig... Honestly man I know where I'd have put my money I'd actually read about the LOOP port system being built in conjunction with the new explorations in the permian basin in Texas https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-09-27/the-permian-basin-still-has-an-awful-lot-of-oil Formerly impossible to reach deposits and pockets left at 70% or more capacity were walked away from in the 60s and 70s. Some of the sweetest light crude on the planet just sitting there. It's a perfect storm honestly with a glut in the supply, the US not needing us anymore and us with no real refining capacity to meet our own needs. This has so very little to do with trudeau Notley, Horgan and everything to do with an utter lack of foresight over the last 30 years
  12. Be that as it may, the NEP would have saved this country a lot of grief and hardship and to now see various governments trying to enact bits and pieces of it is simply galling due to the cost and irony
  13. Just want to point out. That in 1981 Lougheed and Mulroney systematically discredited Pierre Elliott Trudeaus National Energy Plan. They called it socialist and swore that selling oil to other Canadians at below world prices was bad. That the government had and should have no affairs meddling in the provinces resources or creating crown corporations. Yesterday the Alberta government openly stated they would be willing to buy a large share in the Trans Mountain project and fund its completion. Today the feds are mulling over investing as well. Ironic no?
  14. Just because you're refusing to or utterly incapable of understand the point I am making doesn't make it invalid Have a good day
  15. It has everything to do with it and you're being intentionally obstinate to avoid admitting you might be infallible You must be fun at parties. You're literally incapable of admitting you might be wrong. Like at all aren't you? Abandoned mines, abandoned wells and companies simply declaring bankruptcy leave the taxpayer to pay the full amount. In canada our laws mean we cannot or will not go over the current legislated clean up threshold without a major court battle. Again this is not just opinion this is public knowledge and the citations for this are almost endless You're intentionally ignoring these simple facts, the ones that state and show historically VERY CLEARLY that companies can have and do simply walk away from their messes in Canada and consistently get away with paying the bare minimum in clean up and mitigation Argue that all you want, pretend somehow they're not connected that's fine. But don't keep pretending somehow you're smarter than everyone or infallible or never wrong. Because let's be honest. You do it frequently, your arrogance is entirely galling and you're not correct nearly half the time you pretend to be.
  16. $1.40 ish is my estimate, which is laughable because Vernon was I think at like $1.12 yesterday while we hit $1.36 No I am not trying to get you to vote any way other than what you believe would be the best actual candidate for your riding. But you cannot argue that Notley is doing everything she can for Alberta and Albertans and is far more effective than Redford ever was
  17. It bugs me to the core that the mayor of Montreal shut down line 3 so easily yet Trudeau is stating that this expansion to BC is the line in the sand. We need more pipelines. We need more refining capacity and we need better responses and mitigation not just promises and possible money that won't be spent. It's galling to know how openly bias that is when line 3 would have served this country FAR better than a simple line expansion I'll never argue that. I am very pro pipeline but I am more pro Canada and I do think Horgan is right in his requests but that this expansion should go through regardless at least while the research is going on. NAFTA, Mulroney and Lougheed screwed this country by scrapping the NEP and selling unrefined product south for less than Alberta would have been selling to Ontario. And it makes no fn sense to be buying oil from places with known humanitarian issues and having it shipped across the world at great cost while complaining that Albertas oilsand development is polluting the world. But I do agree with Horgan and he has every single right to demand proper legislation to ensure polluters pay the full amount, period. $1.5 billion is a pittance for a clean up fund for these companies. Not knowing how to properly clean up dilbit is another issue, information is gold. Then finally the pennies thrown to BC for taking the majority of the risk is insulting. Without question with Alberta having all the jobs BC deserves a far larger portion of the revenues as we take all the risk, get none of the good jobs or monies. Told ya man, I'm very centrist. I can argue both sides but at days end this pipleine WILL be built
  18. Sorry, had to add on am at work right now. It's only funny because you know I am correct but at the same time your personal interests and political leanings push you to the other side. Facts are everything in argument, opinion, arrogance or the like not so much. Notley just passed legislation to throttle oil and fuel to BC. How do you feel about that? https://globalnews.ca/news/4136652/alberta-cut-oil-to-bc-horgan-notley/?utm_source=GlobalBC&utm_medium=Facebook B.C. Premier John Horgan says he’s surprised and concerned that Alberta is preparing to pass legislation that could drive up the price of gasoline in British Columbia over an escalating pipeline feud. Alberta’s New Democrat government introduced Bill 12 Tuesday, the Preserving Canada’s Economic Prosperity Act. Alberta Premier Rachel Notley says the legislation gives her province the power to reduce oil flows to B.C., which could send gas prices in the province soaring. Horgan says he’s concerned Alberta’s provocative actions will have adverse consequences on B.C., which could include increased prices at the pump. Motorists in Metro Vancouver are already paying the highest prices in Canada at above $1.50 a litre. The dispute between B.C., Alberta and the federal government heated up Sunday when energy company Kinder Morgan announced it was scaling back on the federally approved $7.4-billion Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project because of opposition and delays within B.C
  19. You're doing it again. It's annoying. You're not always right. I'd enjoy it if you stopped pretending you were. The examples I gave were recent spills very recognizable. I can dredge up almsot 1100 more if you'd like that serve my purpose equally as well. You've yet to capably refute or prove wrong my statements about taxpayers footing the bill more often than not in incidents of spills, abandoned mines and wells.
  20. I guess you missed the "unreimbursed costs" part huh? You know, the part in which unless said company loses in courts it doesn't pay. The full cost of this cleanup exceeded over the amount Enbridge kicked in by all accounts and again you have yet to prove your statement in that taxpayers are not nominally and on average on the hook for environmental clean up costs when these accidents happen and these companies claim bankruptcy. Public did in fact pay the initial cost, public did in fact lose money after the court case. See abandoned mines. Abandoned wells. Bankruptcy to save costs. Without proof or counter proof it's little more than opinion. Again I am actually for this pipeline but am against lies and ignorance when people continue to deflect from the few very valid reasons that Horgan has brought up
  21. That is/was one of Horgans largest requests and is still his sticking point. Just because a political body says we have this (feds and BC both promised and made that statement numerous times over the last 5 years) doesn't mean anything Golden Boy stating we're making a $1.5 billion ocean protection plan without actually ever creating a plan doesn't mean anything Mitigation and having actual tangible proof and not just words are what people want. It takes exactly 1 accident and english bay and the entire vancouver coastline won't be the same And before anyone brings up seattle and the tri cities elliot bay channels is far wider and more accessible than vancouvers. https://www.google.ca/search?rlz=1C1GGRV_enCA751CA751&tbm=lcl&ei=UkLNWvGlGpGs8AP3r4DgCA&q=suncor+terminal+vancouver&oq=suncor+terminal+vancouver&gs_l=psy-ab.12...0.0.0.36371.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0....0...1c..64.psy-ab..0.0.0....0.z6LaJ_U6SLM
  22. The public paid for quite a fair amount of the initial clean up and is not guaranteed any proper reimbursement with Enbridge settling in court for $177 million . As for the lagrest inland spill, I might point out the deepwater horizon disaster in which BP settled for less than $20 billion but the cost estimates for cleanup and losses were tens of billions more and closer to $65 billion all told that was initially levied against BP https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/video/bp-settles-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-claim-for--18.7-billion-475386947960 http://www.noaa.gov/explainers/deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-settlements-where-money-went https://www.wpr.org/enbridge-reaches-177m-settlement-kalamazoo-spill Enbridge Energy will pay $177 million in fines, unreimbursed cleanup costs and safety measures for the 2010 Kalamazoo River spill in a settlement reached with the U.S. Department of Justice and Environmental Protection Agency. The company will pay $62 million in fines and $110 million in additional safety measures. Again it is inarguable to make a statement that the taxpayers do not end up eating the bulk of the costs of clean up and mitigation when the funds for cleanup are a pittance compared to the costs of the cleanup and the losses businesses and people are handed from them
  23. No? Huh... http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/tug-and-fuel-barge-runs-aground-near-bella-bella-1.3803295 Guess we just don't know better than you right?
  24. Unwarranted you say? Do tell why it is unwarranted for BC to get this money This should be a treat. I anticipate a no doubt well thought out response complete with cute anecdotes
  25. My favorite part of this stupid argument is the ignoring of 17 other jurisdictions in canada that do the EXACT same as though somehow some way Victoria is alone. Ignorance is bliss but stupidity is charming http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/sewage-pollution-wastewater-cities-1.3889072 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/raw-sewage-common-problem-examples-1.3258594
×
×
  • Create New...