Is there any hope of a middle ground on pipelines in BC?

[JM_]

Now that my "who are you going to vote for" thread has played itself out (congrats Green-DPs) I thought I would start a new thread on something a little less controversial... pipelines. There are other project specific threads, but I'd like this one to be specifically on the idea of whether or not there is any hope of a consensus on the issue. 

 

I'm concerned that the rigid stance on pipelines, on both sides, is going to lead to some very big and potentially irreparable rifts both within BC and between provinces. 

 

So, is there any hope for reaching some kind of middle ground on this issue? 

[inane]

Doubt it. You either think we need them or you don't. It's not like you can only half do them or do them but make them smaller or something. It's all or nothing. 

 

 

[Warhippy]

Yes.  Pipelines WILL happen in BC

 

Why?  Horgan has a lot of promises to pay for.  He can dangle the promise of party status to Weaver and more all for the low cost of getting a pipeline that is already existing upgraded.  No tearing up of lands and at the benefit of the entire country.

 

He also then has the ability to give Notley a small leg up in the upcoming Alberta election by giving her the ability to say Pipelines X and Y are started and we're just waiting on trudeau to approve Line east.  Meaning a western canada governed by leftists supported by a centrist federal government

 

An NDP provincial government in Alberta and a Liberal government in Ottawa getting pipelines built when over a decade of combined Conservatives couldn't would almost ensure her at least a boost in support pre election.

 

Don't doubt for a second Horgan is no different than the rest in that he will not bite the hand that feeds and needs the $$

[nux_win]

It's not really something that you can compromise on.  You either build one or you don't.

 

My take on pipelines is that one should only protest against them if you don't drive a car (for many years I didn't use any motorized transport so I was against that kind of thing but now that I drive occasionally, I'm going to have to shut up occasionally).  People are far too fixated on supply when there is an equally big issue of demand.  Can't have your protest cake and eat it too.  GCG!

[Nuxfanabroad]

Is this where we insert the 'Milkshake' meme?

 

Silly humans gotta' FF!

[kingofsurrey]

27 minutes ago, nux_win said:

It's not really something that you can compromise on.  You either build one or you don't.

 

My take on pipelines is that one should only protest against them if you don't drive a car (for many years I didn't use any motorized transport so I was against that kind of thing but now that I drive occasionally, I'm going to have to shut up occasionally).  People are far too fixated on supply when there is an equally big issue of demand.  Can't have your protest cake and eat it too.  GCG!

Yah and you can only post about deteriorating air quality in the Eastern Fraser Valley if you don't actually breathe or consume oxygen......

 

That argument doesn't hold up, sorry. 

People are allowed to hold whatever opinion they want, thats whats make Canada and discussion forums great......

 

[nux_win]

1 minute ago, kingofsurrey said:

Yah and you can only post about deteriorating air quality in the Eastern Fraser Valley if you don't actually breathe or consume oxygen......

 

That argument doesn't hold up, sorry. 

People are allowed to hold whatever opinion they want, thats whats make Canada and discussion forums great......

 

I never said that people can't have opinions, I'm just implying that it is perhaps a bit hypocritical for someone to protest against something that they use themselves.  The fact that air quality is so bad in the Fraser Valley is the reason why we might need to re-think our burning of fossil fuels for transportation.  Breathing is not a choice.  Burning oil is.  It's so much easier to point the finger at others instead of looking at one's own actions.  So what is your opinion on pipelines, I couldn't tell from post.  Go for it, let us know what you think.  GCG!

[kingofsurrey]

51 minutes ago, nux_win said:

I never said that people can't have opinions, I'm just implying that it is perhaps a bit hypocritical for someone to protest against something that they use themselves.  The fact that air quality is so bad in the Fraser Valley is the reason why we might need to re-think our burning of fossil fuels for transportation.  Breathing is not a choice.  Burning oil is.  It's so much easier to point the finger at others instead of looking at one's own actions.  So what is your opinion on pipelines, I couldn't tell from post.  Go for it, let us know what you think.  GCG!

Hah. Very true.  Good points 

 

Actually i am against the pipeline. 

[JM_]

For me its about risk, there is some if we allow kinder morgan and there is risk if we don't. If you walk down to English Bay tomorrow you will be able to count anywhere from 15-30 different types of tankers, with one or two being oil tankers. 

 

We have no safety system to speak of to handle an accident from any one of these, and that should scare people. Thats not going away regardless of KM.

 

We also risk prolonged battles with first nations and other provinces, mostly AB but others as well that will lose out on revenue.

 

If we get an actual "world class" safety system then I support it. It mitigates the risk of all those other ships, and KM is literally just 1 - only 1 - tanker per day. Seems reasonable to me. But its going to come at a cost, probably some unfortunate first nations battles. 

 

But if we can get that safety system in place I think we can get a majority of people on board for at least the Kinder Morgan project. 

 

 

[kingofsurrey]

1 minute ago, S'all Good Man said:

For me its about risk, there is some if we allow kinder morgan and there is risk if we don't. If you walk down to English Bay tomorrow you will be able to count anywhere from 15-30 different types of tankers, with one or two being oil tankers. 

 

 

For me it is risk vs reward.

 

I see Risk with an expanded KM pipeline but i do not see any significant reward for BC.

So i am a NO on this one.   

 

How about building a refinery here in BC that provides long term high paying jobs... That would be game changer and make the project / risks potentially more  worthwhile to BC citizens.

[Warhippy]

3 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said:

For me its about risk, there is some if we allow kinder morgan and there is risk if we don't. If you walk down to English Bay tomorrow you will be able to count anywhere from 15-30 different types of tankers, with one or two being oil tankers. 

 

We have no safety system to speak of to handle an accident from any one of these, and that should scare people. Thats not going away regardless of KM.

 

We also risk prolonged battles with first nations and other provinces, mostly AB but others as well that will lose out on revenue.

 

If we get an actual "world class" safety system then I support it. It mitigates the risk of all those other ships, and KM is literally just 1 - only 1 - tanker per day. Seems reasonable to me. But its going to come at a cost, probably some unfortunate first nations battles. 

 

But if we can get that safety system in place I think we can get a majority of people on board for at least the Kinder Morgan project. 

 

 

I find it remarkable we had sucha  prop pipeline government for 16 years yet they failed to have any kind of quality control and mitigation system in place myself

[JM_]

Just now, Warhippy said:

I find it remarkable we had sucha  prop pipeline government for 16 years yet they failed to have any kind of quality control and mitigation system in place myself

I dont. Go too far conservative and they don't care about the environmental risks. I don't find it surprising at all that the federal Liberals are the ones who may actually get the project finished. 

 

Now that Clark is toast, and how she went out, its pretty clear she was simply hedging her bets in the media (the 5 conditions thing) but wasn't going to do one single thing to get any of it in place, including safety. 

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:

For me it is risk vs reward.

 

I see Risk with an expanded KM pipeline but i do not see any significant reward for BC.

So i am a NO on this one.   

 

How about building a refinery here in BC that provides long term high paying jobs... That would be game changer and make the project / risks potentially more  worthwhile to BC citizens.

But 1 billion for a new safety system - don't you see that as a reward? Think of all that other non-oil related tanker spill risk that it will help protect against. 

 

I do like the idea of a refinery somewhere around PG. 

[Violator]

On 6/30/2017 at 9:49 PM, Warhippy said:

I find it remarkable we had sucha  prop pipeline government for 16 years yet they failed to have any kind of quality control and mitigation system in place myself

Probably based on the fact that most governments don't want to invest in things until it's to late.look at how the liberals have been scrambling over the last five years trying to get people trained up in the trades to build all of this oil and gas industry infrastructure and plants but now none of that stuff will ever happen because of adversity.

[clam linguine]

On 6/30/2017 at 9:49 PM, kingofsurrey said:

For me it is risk vs reward.

 

I see Risk with an expanded KM pipeline but i do not see any significant reward for BC.

So i am a NO on this one.   

 

How about building a refinery here in BC that provides long term high paying jobs... That would be game changer and make the project / risks potentially more  worthwhile to BC citizens.

Yes, it is very unfair to BC..  Why should goods from other places traverse over BC roads, railways, and especially airspace, without being taxed. Actually people should be taxed too, unless they are coming into the province to spend lots of money.  Maybe we should make an exception for americans and their stuff because they might retaliate. Alberta and other provinces would never dare consider restricting the flow of goods into BC. lol

 

[JM_]

1 hour ago, clam linguine said:

Yes, it is very unfair to BC..  Why should goods from other places traverse over BC roads, railways, and especially airspace, without being taxed. Actually people should be taxed too, unless they are coming into the province to spend lots of money.  Maybe we should make an exception for americans and their stuff because they might retaliate. Alberta and other provinces would never dare consider restricting the flow of goods into BC. lol

 

its not really about taxation though its more about sharing the risks and rewards of the project appropriately. If there's a spill or tanker disaster, none of that is washing up on the shores of Calgary. A lot of the rhetoric out of AB simply wants to gloss over that risk, Harper tried that for nearly a decade and probably did more to harm future projects than any other single factor. If Harper had built a marine safety centre 1st back in 2006 we'd probably have a line in place already. 

 

 

[Warhippy]

On 6/30/2017 at 8:51 PM, S'all Good Man said:

I dont. Go too far conservative and they don't care about the environmental risks. I don't find it surprising at all that the federal Liberals are the ones who may actually get the project finished. 

 

Now that Clark is toast, and how she went out, its pretty clear she was simply hedging her bets in the media (the 5 conditions thing) but wasn't going to do one single thing to get any of it in place, including safety. 

It shouldn't be a left/right thing at all.  We saw what happened when a few thousands litres of bunker hit the bay.

 

If anyone wanted/wants this pipeline done this is the one thing that should have been in place before papers were signed.  Would have gotten the moderates off the fence for sure and even quieted some of the extreme anti pipeline crowd

[Warhippy]

On 6/30/2017 at 8:53 PM, S'all Good Man said:

But 1 billion for a new safety system - don't you see that as a reward? Think of all that other non-oil related tanker spill risk that it will help protect against. 

 

I do like the idea of a refinery somewhere around PG. 

PG?  Why?  Do it 30 minutes east of Prince Rupert.  They've the area for it for sure and it's away from the hills, tsunami risks and major rivers.  If they were smart they'd have tried to centralize all of it to one of the safest ports on the western coastline

[Warhippy]

2 hours ago, S'all Good Man said:

its not really about taxation though its more about sharing the risks and rewards of the project appropriately. If there's a spill or tanker disaster, none of that is washing up on the shores of Calgary. A lot of the rhetoric out of AB simply wants to gloss over that risk, Harper tried that for nearly a decade and probably did more to harm future projects than any other single factor. If Harper had built a marine safety centre 1st back in 2006 we'd probably have a line in place already. 

 

 

I think for a lot of us it was that $75(ish) billion estimate that saw Alberta get half, the Feds get half and BC get something like 2 billion over 40 years.

 

THAT is a slap in the face when we were taking all the risk.  Those are/were the northern gateway numbers but man what a joke, sport fishing paid off better in 3 years than the risk of a pipeline over 35-40 years and that was a big no for a lot of people

 

End result is this pipeline WILL get completed, it has too for Horgan to pay for his promises and for Junior to have any hope of wooing votes out of Sask and Alberta

[kingofsurrey]

10 hours ago, Warhippy said:

 

End result is this pipeline WILL get completed, it has too for Horgan to pay for his promises and for Junior to have any hope of wooing votes out of Sask and Alberta

If this Pipeline is completed it will result in the biggest mass arrests of peaceful protesters in BC history / maybe Canadian history. 

 

This will dwarf the  Clayoquot sound protests that happened in the past.   

 

The potential destruction of Vancouver harbour is not worth it, and Vancouver Citizens will not have this project shoved down their throats.