canuckistani Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 Just now, chon derry said: I think the point being a floundering ship couldn't possibly respond to any protocol ,other than S.O.S. Sure. If a ship is floundering because of poor maintenance record, the blame falls on Vancouver port authority in failing to implement safety standard. if the ship is floundering due to weather conditions - again the blame falls on Vancouver Port Authority for giving it exit permit. I am not interested in local NIMBY-ism. Its clear to me that the environmental catch-phrase is invoked by those who profit from BC's tourism and fisheries industry, as transport industry is in direct clash with them. We are Canada. Not BC or Alberta - those designations are there only for expedient government. Ottawa should simply assess who loses out more in this conflict of interest and the industry that employs more people and puts more revenue in coffers of Ottawa should be the one that is backed. Simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 (edited) 20 hours ago, Ryan Strome said: Both sides are saying things that aren't needed. It's no debate Alberta oil benefits all Canadians in many ways. If people like @kingofsurrey had his way where would governments get all the lost revenue from? And how would we replace the thousands of jobs and the 10s of thousands of trickle down jobs? People are very frustrated right now because we are getting so little for our oil because of a lack of pipelines. The money lost to the US is insane, nearly a hundred billion. Pretty sure that money is needed for our vets, seniors, military, defecit, etc. Btw the world will be here in a hundred years. Don't believe Gore and his ice caps stories. He sure made himself look stupid. I hear you, I understand that some are frustrated. I am not opposed to people making money but slinging mud at fellow Canadians is not the way to garner support. It happens a lot here on CDC too, I'm just not a tribalism guy. There has to be a solution here that everyone can live with. You folks in this thread are well versed. I'm sure if I read through this thread the obvious questions must be tackled ...will the coast be safe? who will pay for any clean up? If the coast line is all of Canada's then is the oil all of Canada's too? or, is that just Alberta's resource? what is the proposed revenue sharing? I need to do my research and catch up. I don't know what Al Gore says, haven't heard his spiel so can't comment on how stupid he looks. However, I never said the world wont be around in a hundred years. I said ' the world as we know it'. But, I will save this thread my thoughts on that as my theory is it will be essentially death by a thousand cuts. More along these lines https://futurism.com/stephen-hawking-humanity-only-has-100-years-left-on-earth-before-doomsday Edited December 18, 2018 by bishopshodan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyBoy44 Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 Al is 100% cereal about all of this 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chon derry Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 5 minutes ago, canuckistani said: Sure. If a ship is floundering because of poor maintenance record, the blame falls on Vancouver port authority in failing to implement safety standard. if the ship is floundering due to weather conditions - again the blame falls on Vancouver Port Authority for giving it exit permit. I am not interested in local NIMBY-ism. Its clear to me that the environmental catch-phrase is invoked by those who profit from BC's tourism and fisheries industry, as transport industry is in direct clash with them. We are Canada. Not BC or Alberta - those designations are there only for expedient government. Ottawa should simply assess who loses out more in this conflict of interest and the industry that employs more people and puts more revenue in coffers of Ottawa should be the one that is backed. Simple. I am on the fence on this whole issue , with the endbridge proposal their own forecast timeline was 1 spill every 10,000 years wow , KMs forecast was 1 spill every 473 years ? pretty arbitrary numbers you would think that 2 corporations would get their stories strait no? to their own detriment this left people untrusting of both companys I just read a story regarding oilsands and how it needs an 'Anthony bourdain seal hunt' truth in facts person to step up , somebody impartial knowledgable to tell it like it is , because as it stands these corporations cant be trusted , btw look up the anthony bourdain seal story and how it relates to all of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 Just now, chon derry said: I am on the fence on this whole issue , with the endbridge proposal their own forecast timeline was 1 spill every 10,000 years wow , KMs forecast was 1 spill every 473 years ? pretty arbitrary numbers you would think that 2 corporations would get their stories strait no? Their stories are straight. Probability of spill depends on the level of technology involved, which in turn is dependent on the cost analysis of the project tendered. Norway ships its entire oil via under-sea pipeline from its offshore rigs to the coast, for international shipping. They use multiple layers of coaxial piping to mitigate spill by a factor of 10,000 over industry standard piping. For them, the cost is worth it - because replacing broken pipeline on the North Sea floor is extremely cumbersome and expensive - even with its shallow depth. However, one thing for sure is certain - the whole tanker going Kerblooey and spilling oil in Georgia Strait is massively overstated and based on fear-mongering nonsense, partly due to BC's nimby-ism. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chon derry Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 2 minutes ago, canuckistani said: Their stories are straight. Probability of spill depends on the level of technology involved, which in turn is dependent on the cost analysis of the project tendered. Norway ships its entire oil via under-sea pipeline from its offshore rigs to the coast, for international shipping. They use multiple layers of coaxial piping to mitigate spill by a factor of 10,000 over industry standard piping. For them, the cost is worth it - because replacing broken pipeline on the North Sea floor is extremely cumbersome and expensive - even with its shallow depth. However, one thing for sure is certain - the whole tanker going Kerblooey and spilling oil in Georgia Strait is massively overstated and based on fear-mongering nonsense, partly due to BC's nimby-ism. one thing that happened after the japan tsunami was the debris field after , and to this day its still washing up , so no matter where a ship enroute KM dock or any where in between, where do you think the oil would end up? , now its an international concern . dec 25th 1979 Christmas day MV VESSEL LEE WANG ZIN departs prince rupert 5 hrs into voyage ship breaks in 2 ,all hands lost merry Christmas, weather in pnw cant be underestimated and there really is nothing NOTHING you can do against mother nature. NOTHING! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 10 minutes ago, chon derry said: one thing that happened after the japan tsunami was the debris field after , and to this day its still washing up , so no matter where a ship enroute KM dock or any where in between, where do you think the oil would end up? , now its an international concern . dec 25th 1979 Christmas day MV VESSEL LEE WANG ZIN departs prince rupert 5 hrs into voyage ship breaks in 2 ,all hands lost merry Christmas, weather in pnw cant be underestimated and there really is nothing NOTHING you can do against mother nature. NOTHING! 1979 we didn't have satellite telemetry to see weather 200kms ahead. Now we do. Shipping is not rocket science and those who think that a oil spill disaster has any greater odds than them winning the lottery, simply do not know the facts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chon derry Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 6 minutes ago, canuckistani said: 1979 we didn't have satellite telemetry to see weather 200kms ahead. Now we do. Shipping is not rocket science and those who think that a oil spill disaster has any greater odds than them winning the lottery, simply do not know the facts. Heres another fact ,when the wind is howling 120 KMs and a ship travelling at 8 kns its pretty hard to alter course , and weather turns up a lot faster than any departed ship can circumnavigate around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chon derry Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 (edited) 1979 2018 what ever the year any ANY MAN MADE ship in distress cannot get out of the potential disaster. weather forecasting , mechanical failure , human error , no amount of technological advancement stands a chance., when the sh.t hits NONE . similar to a brand new GMC pick up ,when a component fails its never simple technology is complicated , 1 little thing electrical thing reliant on another component fails your done . see the BC ferry horseshoe bay docking incident , where mechanical/electrical/ human error all played a role in what happened. Edited December 18, 2018 by chon derry 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 12 minutes ago, chon derry said: Heres another fact ,when the wind is howling 120 KMs and a ship travelling at 8 kns its pretty hard to alter course , and weather turns up a lot faster than any departed ship can circumnavigate around. You don't know how weather radars work, do you ? Have you seen one in action or built one ? Simple yes/no please. There is a reason why the same exact weather affecting Sea of Okhotsk - actually worse, since the Pacific north east is far colder and stormier than pacific north-west, has not seen a single oil tanker departing the Sakhalin terminals go kaput. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johngould21 Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 Have they recovered any of that tanker spill off the coast of NFLD? Haven't heard a word about it at all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 9 minutes ago, chon derry said: 1979 2018 what ever the year any ANY MAN MADE ship in distress cannot get out of the potential disaster. weather forecasting , mechanical failure , human error , no amount of technological advancement stands a chance., when the sh.t hits NONE . similar to a brand new GMC pick up ,when a component fails its never simple technology is complicated , 1 little thing electrical thing reliant on another component fails your done . see the BC ferry horseshoe bay docking incident , where mechanical/electrical/ human error all played a role in what happened. translation: i have no idea how this technology works, so i am going to fear-monger against it, like every single person who doesn't understand said piece of technology. Neither am i bothered to look up HOW these exact scenarios are played out in other parts of the world. Because research is a pain in the butt. Here are some facts for you: Sakhalin-II is operational, shipping crude and LNG for nearly 20 years now. Sea of Okhostk is colder than the pacific north-west and one of the stormiest parts of the world ( due to it sitting right next to the COLDEST air mass on the planet north of Antarctica - by the Verkhoyansk range). The ships all have to navigate the extremely close together, strewn-around islands of the Kuril Island chain. Ships being screwed due to weather : zero. Technology. It works to solve problems mother nature throws up. Has been working for approx. 50,000 years, will continue to work. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chon derry Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 Just now, canuckistani said: You don't know how weather radars work, do you ? Have you seen one in action or built one ? Simple yes/no please. There is a reason why the same exact weather affecting Sea of Okhotsk - actually worse, since the Pacific north east is far colder and stormier than pacific north-west, has not seen a single oil tanker departing the Sakhalin terminals go kaput. I drove truck and was a hwys forman and had to use recent sattilite technology in the application of pre salting roads @ 1,000 per 10yd load , I also have owned river boats cabin cruisers so i'm pretty up on apelco/ raymar/ radar , plotters ,sounders in the spring i'll selling my house and keeping the town house going back into chartering in a bigger capacity in my retirement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 Just now, chon derry said: I drove truck and was a hwys forman and had to use recent sattilite technology in the application of pre salting roads @ 1,000 per 10yd load , I also have owned river boats cabin cruisers so i'm pretty up on apelco/ raymar/ radar , plotters ,sounders in the spring i'll selling my house and keeping the town house going back into chartering in a bigger capacity in my retirement. Ok. Well i've worked for Kelvin Hughes- one of the industry forefronts for shipping radar. What your boats or even the fanciest of yachts use, versus what commercial tankers/container ships use, is the difference between a ford mustang and a M-1A1 Abrams. Do some research please. If Russians can ship ship after ship of petroleum products through colder, rougher seas for 20 years and still not have a SINGLE incident, the doom-n-gloom of Canadian fear-mongers need some solid facts. Which they do not have. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chon derry Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, canuckistani said: Ok. Well i've worked for Kelvin Hughes- one of the industry forefronts for shipping radar. What your boats or even the fanciest of yachts use, versus what commercial tankers/container ships use, is the difference between a ford mustang and a M-1A1 Abrams. Do some research please. If Russians can ship ship after ship of petroleum products through colder, rougher seas for 20 years and still not have a SINGLE incident, the doom-n-gloom of Canadian fear-mongers need some solid facts. Which they do not have. the one thing that would stop 'fear mongering' would be some un exaggerated info emanating from these corporations they could to their own benefit stop the down play as well ,because as it is you and I can argue until were blue in the face and that doesnt change the mistrust that exists with this issue. Edited December 18, 2018 by chon derry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 Just now, chon derry said: the one thing that would stop 'fear mongering' would be some un exaggerated info emanating from these corporations they could to their own benefit stop the down play as well ,because as it you and I can argue until were blue in the face and that doesnt change the mistrust that exists with this issue. I highly doubt it has anything to do with corporate vs public mistrust, since the same public also trashes NEB and various government assessments. Its like conspiracy theorists - people with zero skill or education in the topic are interested in defending their ideologies and if proven wrong, everything that proves them wrong is also 'bought and paid for'. Here's a novel idea - unless you are qualified on the topic, don't form strong opinions on the topic. Simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chon derry Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 1 minute ago, canuckistani said: I highly doubt it has anything to do with corporate vs public mistrust, since the same public also trashes NEB and various government assessments. Its like conspiracy theorists - people with zero skill or education in the topic are interested in defending their ideologies and if proven wrong, everything that proves them wrong is also 'bought and paid for'. Here's a novel idea - unless you are qualified on the topic, don't form strong opinions on the topic. Simple. after the endbridge EA and community discussions that were held here, I can tell you that it has everything to do with corporate/ public mistrust. all the way along route , so the virtual strait line of 'northern gateway' was no co-incidence unless you beleave that the circumnavigation around 'enviromentally sensitive areas was in fact a VIRTUAL STRAIT LINE LOL. the map that they used which conveniently left banks island and all the other islets (navigational hazards ) left out of the "plan" fooled nobody , but then you wouldnt expect a bunch of suits from alberta to pull the wool over the eyes of experienced coastal people ,would you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 2 hours ago, Dash Riprock said: Why? You don't care about your tax dollars, if you did, you'd be begging for pipelines. Ottawa would be so flush with money if we had all the pipe we needed. there's better returns than AB oil right now, so why would I put my money there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 2 hours ago, Ryan Strome said: ya that pesky worst recession in nearly a century may have played a role. that only accounts for 50/160 billion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Ryan Strome said: But considering Albertans make significantly more than the rest of Canada, especially Quebec and BC then I guess Alberta does more. You are a smart guy Jimmy, how come when a situation like this happens ottawa pulls out all the stops to fix it? Alberta is the economic driver of Canada and Alberta is the richest province in Canada. You may not like that and thats fine but it is the case. BC is insignificant to Ottawa Alberta is not. Quebec is only significant to Ottawa because of their seat count. No "Alberta" doesn't. Its taxpaying citizens don't. Multinational corporations do. No, it isn't the "economic driver". Jesus. Oil is roughly 8-12% of Canada's GDP for the entire country. Our economy is still growing despite AB oil prices being in the toilet. Edited December 18, 2018 by Jimmy McGill 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts