Ryan Strome Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 2 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said: You are correct. Very ignorant choice of words on my point. Lots of great people working in the oil industry and many are working to move it forward. People have the right to work in whatever industry they choose to . By all accounts the Canadian Oil industry is greener than most other countries... and by what people say it is getting greener all the time. People do need to earn a decent income and oil industry jobs pay liveable wages. The issues are complex. Hopefully some kind of middle ground can be found and maybe technology will produce clean (cleaner) energy sooner than later... Thank you. Stick to this argument please. Your concern is understood but there are many other concerns globally with respect to the environment. China and the U.S are major concerns are they not? China is far worse than the tar sands, why not complain about China? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 5 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: Thank you. Stick to this argument please. Your concern is understood but there are many other concerns globally with respect to the environment. China and the U.S are major concerns are they not? China is far worse than the tar sands, why not complain about China? This is only an argument if human caused climate change is not an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 14 hours ago, Ryan Strome said: The should be Premier!! Shouldn't we phase out oil? Why is that a bad thing? We are phasing out asbestos, we've phased out PCB's, etc. Oil is a toxic, finite resource, isn't phasing out our reliance on a toxic, finite resource a smart thing? That doesn't mean completely eliminate nor does it mean tomorrow or next year or next decade. But shouldn't phasing it out be the goal given what we know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 10 minutes ago, inane said: Shouldn't we phase out oil? Why is that a bad thing? We are phasing out asbestos, we've phased out PCB's, etc. Oil is a toxic, finite resource, isn't phasing out our reliance on a toxic, finite resource a smart thing? That doesn't mean completely eliminate nor does it mean tomorrow or next year or next decade. But shouldn't phasing it out be the goal given what we know? I just posted his tweet and I voted wildrose. So I wish they won. Even Notley criticized jt's comments as surprising as that may be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 8 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: I just posted his tweet and I voted wildrose. So I wish they won. Even Notley criticized jt's comments as surprising as that may be. Ok so you posted his tweet but disagree with it? If so, weird but ok. If you do agree with it, then comment on my comment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Standing_Tall#37 Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 39 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said: You are correct. Very ignorant choice of words on my point. Lots of great people working in the oil industry and many are working to move it forward. People have the right to work in whatever industry they choose to . By all accounts the Canadian Oil industry is greener than most other countries... and by what people say it is getting greener all the time. People do need to earn a decent income and oil industry jobs pay liveable wages. The issues are complex. Hopefully some kind of middle ground can be found and maybe technology will produce clean (cleaner) energy sooner than later... I would hope for that, there's got to be contingency though. If all of a sudden tomorrow, gas was unavailable at any pump... well how long would 95% of humanity survive? A week...maybe a month. Most likely not a year. If there's no fuel to power tractors to produce crops, semi's to transport food, no oil in trains, no jet fuel... how much food do you think could be transported/produced? It'd be nice to see green energy everywhere but judging by how useless most people are when it comes to producing off of their own land, I don't think society would survive. I hope changes are coming but I know it could be a 50-100 year process. Also, you said you'd love for grand kids to see beautiful bc...how much of it have you seen & what parts are your favourite just out of curiosity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 11 minutes ago, inane said: Ok so you posted his tweet but disagree with it? If so, weird but ok. If you do agree with it, then comment on my comment? Of course I agree with him. However I have stated that it's obvious we will transition and move to greener solutions in the future but that will be long after jt's tenure. See my post in the tar sands thread-page 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 10 minutes ago, Standing_Tall#37 said: I would hope for that, there's got to be contingency though. If all of a sudden tomorrow, gas was unavailable at any pump... well how long would 95% of humanity survive? A week...maybe a month. Most likely not a year. If there's no fuel to power tractors to produce crops, semi's to transport food, no oil in trains, no jet fuel... how much food do you think could be transported/produced? It'd be nice to see green energy everywhere but judging by how useless most people are when it comes to producing off of their own land, I don't think society would survive. I hope changes are coming but I know it could be a 50-100 year process. Also, you said you'd love for grand kids to see beautiful bc...how much of it have you seen & what parts are your favourite just out of curiosity? +1 to this post. Most don't think how much oil affects everything in our daily lives. I hope he doesn't take his grand kids to any of B.C's clear cuts. For some reason B.C environmentalist don't seem to concerned with chopping down tree after tree. You ever see the Prince George clear cut? You can see it from space... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 4 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: Of course I agree with him. However I have stated that it's obvious we will transition and move to greener solutions in the future but that will be long after jt's tenure. See my post in the tar sands thread-page 1. So you agree with jt then, we have to start phasing them out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 Just now, inane said: So you agree with jt then, we have to start phasing them out. Well yes but kos seems to think it's over night which isn't the case. Nor will JT decide for us. The transition will be made when new technologies are introduced. Canada needs to be investing in greener alternatives and be a world leader in this initiative. Sadly all we hear is just talk and no money, and at this point we are falling way behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 Also I don't agree with Jt!! This has been known for years. It's not like he is some genius that made us open our eyes. Will we transition away from chopping down trees? That would also hurt Ontario so I doubt jt says anything right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clam linguine Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 11 hours ago, kingofsurrey said: I am very involved with and interested in preserving the Fraser river salmon. Its not about us... its now about what we can leave for our grand kids when we are gone..... We are destroying our eco systems and environment. The Canadian dollar is worth 75 cents because oil is only $50 a barrel. Without an oil industry, CAD is worth 15 cents . Your grand children will be working 12 hours a day for $4 an hour. Also notice there are not many wind mills in Mexico. Wildlife habitat is my main issue too. You are barking up the wrong tree worrying about pipelines and Canadian oil. 1 hour ago, inane said: Shouldn't we phase out oil? Why is that a bad thing? We are phasing out asbestos, we've phased out PCB's, etc. Oil is a toxic, finite resource, isn't phasing out our reliance on a toxic, finite resource a smart thing? That doesn't mean completely eliminate nor does it mean tomorrow or next year or next decade. But shouldn't phasing it out be the goal given what we know? Phasing out oil is different than phasing out Canadian oil. There is an over abundance of oil in the world. Only curbing the use of oil will curb the use of oil...sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 51 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: Also I don't agree with Jt!! This has been known for years. It's not like he is some genius that made us open our eyes. Will we transition away from chopping down trees? That would also hurt Ontario so I doubt jt says anything right? 54 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: Well yes but kos seems to think it's over night which isn't the case. Nor will JT decide for us. The transition will be made when new technologies are introduced. Canada needs to be investing in greener alternatives and be a world leader in this initiative. Sadly all we hear is just talk and no money, and at this point we are falling way behind. I guess I don't get your contradiction here. Or you're taking kos extreme position as though he speaks for everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 8 minutes ago, inane said: I guess I don't get your contradiction here. Or you're taking kos extreme position as though he speaks for everyone. Nope I'm saying his extreme position isn't realistic, nor should jt be seen as some environmentalist genius which kos made him out to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Standing_Tall#37 Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 1 hour ago, Ryan Strome said: +1 to this post. Most don't think how much oil affects everything in our daily lives. I hope he doesn't take his grand kids to any of B.C's clear cuts. For some reason B.C environmentalist don't seem to concerned with chopping down tree after tree. You ever see the Prince George clear cut? You can see it from space... Lol I'm from the area originally actually my hometown is south of there and worse, cuz there used to be 8-10 major sawmills where I come from not to mention a plywood mill, 2-3 pulp mills and a mdf mill. So I was raised with forestry and farming being the main lifelines for locals. And I know first hand how much the goods supply the metro areas down south. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Standing_Tall#37 Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 17 minutes ago, clam linguine said: The Canadian dollar is worth 75 cents because oil is only $50 a barrel. Without an oil industry, CAD is worth 15 cents . Your grand children will be working 12 hours a day for $4 an hour. Also notice there are not many wind mills in Mexico. Wildlife habitat is my main issue too. You are barking up the wrong tree worrying about pipelines and Canadian oil. Phasing out oil is different than phasing out Canadian oil. There is an over abundance of oil in the world. Only curbing the use of oil will curb the use of oil...sorry. Until there is a one world order and no nationalism or conflicting views or religions the dependency on oil will be huge. With more and more of the worlds populations wanting more luxury in life, the demand will only go up. Rather than bitch about oil and complain about the environmental effects I wish more people could present/invent alternatives and try to put them in play. That's really the better mindset I think personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 55 minutes ago, Standing_Tall#37 said: Until there is a one world order and no nationalism or conflicting views or religions the dependency on oil will be huge. With more and more of the worlds populations wanting more luxury in life, the demand will only go up. Rather than bitch about oil and complain about the environmental effects I wish more people could present/invent alternatives and try to put them in play. That's really the better mindset I think personally. The world is changing. We need to be ahead of the change... Ringling Bros. circus closing after 146 years http://www.cknw.com/2017/01/15/ringling-bros-circus-closing-after-146-years/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sameer666 Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 1 hour ago, Ryan Strome said: Nope I'm saying his extreme position isn't realistic, nor should jt be seen as some environmentalist genius which kos made him out to be. I'm not a fan of Trudeau, but I voted for him because I was tired of Harper, and thought he was the best bet to beat him. I've read your posts the last couple pages criticizing him for this statement, and just like inane, I need to point out your contradiction here. No one is saying Trudeau is a genius. We all accept oil needs to be phased out over time. There is no reason why this statement by him should be turning into a big deal. He's not trying to suddenly phase it out. I don't know what everyone's problem in Alberta is, as he just approved the pipeline. It's pretty clear he understands how dependent the Alberta economy is on it, and also pretty clear he has a good idea in terms of the timeline to phase oil out. I don't know why this is turning into a partisan issue. There are much more things to argue about Trudeau with if you just want to be partisan for the sake of being partisan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 On 1/13/2017 at 9:54 PM, Attila Umbrus said: The one positive out of this is the fact that the new line will be made with newer and better materials and welding techniques. The old line has been in the ground since the 50's and what has been happening to those old lines is that they can't handle the stress load of ground movement over time. The pipe was less "flexible" back then. But with changes in metallurgy and welding materials and practices they can make a pipeline that can handle way more stress load than the old lines of the 50's. Yes they will flow both lines at the same time, but this is also about getting ready to eventually phase out their old 50's line. To me they are handling this the proper way. Kinder Morgan does not want a line break to happen at all. Once a line gets that age all you can do is dig up sections and replace what you can as it fails. This way they can decommission the line properly when the time comes and continue to flow through the new line. There are lots of companies doing lots of shady things, but I do like how Kinder Morgan has engaged the public right from the get go and let them know of their intentions. It's the way it should be done. But a lot of big oil companies just use the "big stick" method and just beat you with it till you submit to their project. I haven't bothered to comment much in this thread, because (predictably) a lot of people are treating it as a black and white situation, where there really should be a significant amount of grey... However, after reading your posts , I'd like to welcome you to the boards and thank you for offering a balanced point of view to such a polarizing situation. One suggestion, if I may: Try and separate your posts into paragraphs. You have some excellent points, but as someone who's been here for many years, I can tell you that a lot of people won't bother to read what looks to them like a "wall of text". (Even if it is a small, Un-Trump-like wall) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 11 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said: The world is changing. We need to be ahead of the change... Ringling Bros. circus closing after 146 years http://www.cknw.com/2017/01/15/ringling-bros-circus-closing-after-146-years/ No big deal. There's a new one opening up in 5 days.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.