Kinder Morgan Pipeline Talk

[chon derry]

36 minutes ago, mightycpc said:

Like many here I left a weak BC economy to a thriving Alberta economy. Now I'm an investor and wish the same opportunities to continue for younger people. 

 

I understand you dream of taxing the flow of goods across territory. That doesn't happen in any country on earth. Maybe your idea will catch on.

 

 

Yes be careful what you post because it shows to two oil refineries a few miles south happily shipping oil "through hazardous waters" . But it's bringing wealth to the US so it's ok. 

 

Be careful what you post. Unbelievable. I guess your salmon are being scared to death at the thought of an extra boat floating by every day...lol.  The article points to the BC fishing industry as the culprit. SHUT IT DOWN!   But really, these fisheries are probably dying because of the billions of tons of raw toxins British Columbian's have been spewing into the ocean continuously for decades. You don't care about the environment, you just care about virtue signaling at crumpet parties.

go away!  edit happy to hear you don't live in B.C. anymore 

[kingofsurrey]

BC Coastal waters and our coastal communites are not for SALE.

 

If Albertan oil patch workers lose some income and have to downsize from a Ford 350 to a Ford  150..... life will go on. 

 

[JM_]

12 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

I am actually impressed with how far to the right Notley is leaning lately.  She's showing herself to be more conservative than the current manifestation of the current conservative party with how she's handling this situation.  Less rhetoric more action

 

But I am interested in seeing Kenney's response which has actually been woefully silent except to yet again point fingers.  This is a guy with a shoddy track record that screwed over a good deal of Albertans and Canadians with this handling of the TFW files and his allowance of TFWs to enter and work while thousands were thrown out of their positions

 

And he stands a bloody good chance of winning in Alberta based on two things.  1.  He's not an NDP and 2. He's a Conservative

 

He's shown no platform, has shown no ideas, has no plan to slow spending except slash everything and he might win.  As a person who enjoys the political theater and is convinced that the electorate cannot be more stupid than they show themselves to be, I expect the electorate in Alberta to surprise me yet again by voting him in without a second thought because the NDP is so bad for...well, I don't know.  Aside from the catch up spending to cover bills not paid since Klein they've not been bad for the province.

 

its a personality cult in AB in the sense that whoever embodies and oozes the most "conservativeness" will win. Details don't matter there. They had 40 years of wasteful spending, massive healthcare blunders, and little diversification under the PCs and it didn't matter. Now that religion and so-called financial conservatism are merged there's just no chance for anyone else to win.

 

I think Notley is fighting to avoid a total sweep at this point, she has no hope of winning a government. 

[-DLC-]

19 minutes ago, mightycpc said:

Like many here I left a weak BC economy to a thriving Alberta economy. Now I'm an investor and wish the same opportunities to continue for younger people. 

 

I understand you dream of taxing the flow of goods across territory. That doesn't happen in any country on earth. Maybe your idea will catch on.

 

 

Yes be careful what you post because it shows to two oil refineries a few miles south happily shipping oil "through hazardous waters" . But it's bringing wealth to the US so it's ok. 

 

Be careful what you post. Unbelievable. I guess your salmon are being scared to death at the thought of an extra boat floating by every day...lol.  The article points to the BC fishing industry as the culprit. SHUT IT DOWN!   But really, these fisheries are probably dying because of the billions of tons of raw toxins British Columbian's have been spewing into the ocean continuously for decades. You don't care about the environment, you just care about virtue signaling at crumpet parties.

So it's all about $$ to an Alberta guy.  Well guess what, that's you, not me.  And I have different priorities...I live a simple/modest life and my first concern is the health of my children....needing fresh air, water and good (local) food.  Places to unwind where they can see nature and really destress.  Those things money can't buy or replace once we destroy them.

The rest is all just noise from someone who doesn't give a rat's behind about this coast except using it to pass dirty crud through.  So, in the event there WAS an incident, who'd be on the hook?  Answer that before anything else about $$ is relevant.  Those who want to reap the benefits don't want to discuss the "what if's" adequately.

 

Your opinion means little to me here in beautiful BC.  This is MY home and I'm not running away to chase dreams based on dollars...I am happy right here.  And this is worth more than any dollar amount you can put on it.   

http://www.macleans.ca/economy/a-b-c-pipeline-spill-would-be-inevitable-but-who-would-pay/

[mightycpc]

34 minutes ago, chon derry said:

go away!  edit happy to hear you don't live in B.C. anymore 

What are you talking about? What did I post that was incorrect. Do you think Canadian oil is killing salmon?

[kingofsurrey]

3 minutes ago, mightycpc said:

What are you talking about? What did I post that was incorrect. Do you think Canadian oil is killing salmon?

If you don't see the connection..... i  can't be bothered to point it out.   

 

Canada biodiversity is doomed  - is it a result of a poor canadian education system or  is  just laziness of canadians that refuse to get informed...

[mightycpc]

Just now, kingofsurrey said:

If you don't see the connection..... i  can't be bothered to point it out.   

 

Canada biodiversity is doomed  - is it a result of a poor canadian education system or  is  just laziness of canadians that refuse to get informed...

You can't be bothered because you can't do it.

[-DLC-]

17 minutes ago, mightycpc said:

What are you talking about? What did I post that was incorrect. Do you think Canadian oil is killing salmon?

"Alberta's environment is cleaner than BC's"

http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/provincial/environment.aspx?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

 

 

 

There's a nifty table in there too:  "Bottom ranked Alberta & Saskatchewan Do Poorly On Most Indicators Of Environmental Performance"

[Ryan Strome]

59 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Do people really think No Platform Kenney would have been better at this issue with his track record?

They do.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

12 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

So it's all about $$ to an Alberta guy.  Well guess what, that's you, not me.  And I have different priorities...I live a simple/modest life and my first concern is the health of my children....needing fresh air, water and good (local) food.  Places to unwind where they can see nature and really destress.  Those things money can't buy or replace once we destroy them.

The rest is all just noise from someone who doesn't give a rat's behind about this coast except using it to pass dirty crud through.  So, in the event there WAS an incident, who'd be on the hook?  Answer that before anything else about $$ is relevant.

 

 

That has been answered over and over but people ignore it because fear mongering biased articles create a louder buzz. 

 

Canada has a strict governed act. The marine liability act and Canada shipping act

 

First they go after the owner of the ship. They are legally obligated to have 150M in insurance in order to transport oil through our waters.  If the damages exceeds their insurance they then go after the international oil pollution fund and it’s supplementary fund which provides up to 1.36 billion. These funds are all levies paid by oil companies that ship oil over water. Finally Canada also has its own fund called Canada’s ship source oil pollution fund also levies paid by oil companies. Which would contribute up to another half billion. These funds are all in place In case a spill happens. 

 

So who’s on the hook? Oil companies are. 

[mightycpc]

34 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

"Alberta's environment is cleaner than BC's"

http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/provincial/environment.aspx?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

 

Cherry picked items comparing a potential economic powerhouse that feeds a nation to a dead economy that relies on selling it's land to foreigners to keep running.  But kudos for the research.

 

Apparently Courtenay BC claims the dirtiest air in Canada. Only one small Alberta town in the top ten. 

 

http://www.besthealthmag.ca/best-you/health/the-worst-canadian-cities-for-air-pollution/view-all/

 

[-DLC-]

43 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

 

That has been answered over and over but people ignore it because fear mongering biased articles create a louder buzz. 

 

Canada has a strict governed act. The marine liability act and Canada shipping act

 

First they go after the owner of the ship. They are legally obligated to have 150M in insurance in order to transport oil through our waters.  If the damages exceeds their insurance they then go after the international oil pollution fund and it’s supplementary fund which provides up to 1.36 billion. These funds are all levies paid by oil companies that ship oil over water. Finally Canada also has its own fund called Canada’s ship source oil pollution fund also levies paid by oil companies. Which would contribute up to another half billion. These funds are all in place In case a spill happens. 

 

So who’s on the hook? Oil companies are. 

All long, costly processes.  Come on now, the amount they cover is no where NEAR what's needed in the event of a spill.  Funds are partially in place, but inadequate.  "Millions are nothing"...

 

Quote

But what really scares B.C. is the ominous shadow of a nearly three-decades old marine disaster on the West Coast that is of an entirely different order of magnitude. The Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska’s Prince William Sound released 260,000 barrels of oil into the North Pacific in March 1989, contaminating a 2,000 km stretch of gorgeous coastline near Anchorage. The cost of cleanup for Exxon was US$3.5 billion (US$6.3 billion adjusted for inflation). Because the sound is in cold water, like Burrard Inlet, the organisms that break down oil were only partially effective and the spill was never fully cleaned up.

In the immediate aftermath, the tourism industry lost over 26,000 jobs and more than US$2.4 billion in revenue. An Alaskan court ordered Exxon to pay a further US$5 billion in punitive damages in 1994. After 14 years of lawsuits and appeals, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Exxon only owed US$507.5 million.

By comparison, the supertankers that will be loaded at the Westridge Marine Terminal will each carry about 575,000 barrels of oil—more than double the Exxon Valdez spill. With much higher marine traffic than exists today, what if two of these supertankers collide in the middle of the night and spew their combined cargo into the narrow straights of Burrard Inlet? The resulting environmental disaster would dwarf the Exxon Valdez and cost tens of billions of dollars.

In the event of an accident, Kinder Morgan has pledged to do no more than comply with federal laws, which stipulate that operators of a major oil pipeline in this country must have a minimum of $1 billion in financial resources available to cover liabilities related to a land spill. If a spill were to occur at the Westridge Marine Terminal, the same law would likely apply.

However, if a tanker were to have a spill in Burrard Inlet or Vancouver Harbour, the vessel owner would be the responsible party. With assistance from the International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds and Canada’s Ship-Source Oil Pollution Fund, that vessel owner would be expected to muster a maximum of $1.36 billion for a single spill, according to Kinder Morgan.

The Exxon Valdez oil disaster shows how woefully inadequate that sum of money would be. In the event of a major spill, taxpayers would likely be responsible for shouldering most of the cleanup cost, which could easily surpass $10 billion, according to the advocacy group CRED.

The Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill on the Gulf Coast in 2010 cost British Petroleum a total of US$62 billion. BP, whose net worth is about $100 billion, paid the full cost out of pocket. Kinder Morgan has nowhere near the financial resources of BP.

In its disclosure of responsibility, Kinder Morgan makes no mention of carrying liability insurance of any kind to cover the cost of a major spill. The likely reason is that insurers are unwilling to provide adequate coverage.

Kenneth Abraham, a leading insurance scholar and professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, says that since the mid-1980s the insurance industry has been reluctant to insure for property losses caused by pollution, and terrified of insuring against liability for pollution, including oil spills.

The result is a permanent mismatch between potential losses by pipeline operators such as Kinder Morgan and TransCanada, and the maximum protection they can obtain from insurance policies.

When a Montreal, Maine & Atlantic (MM&A) train loaded with crude oil jumped the tracks in Quebec’s Lac-Mégantic, the fiery explosions that resulted from the crash destroyed a portion of the town and killed 47 people. MM&A’s third-party liability insurance was worth just $25 million, a tiny fraction of the cleanup and rebuilding costs and compensation for victims. The Quebec government has submitted a claim against the rail company for more than $400 million.

MM&A has been granted creditor protection and is under court supervision while it deals with claims related to the derailment.

If the market is unwilling to adequately insure pipeline and oil tanker operators because their ventures are too risky, then they should not receive regulatory approval. Michael Greenstone, a professor of environmental economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, says that removing, or at least significantly increasing liability caps, is the most effective way of synchronizing the interests of the oil industry with that of the public.

He also argues that the industry should be required to either provide proof of necessary insurance or certificates of financial responsibility.

Kinder Morgan bears no liability for oil spills originating from a tanker that docks at its oil terminus, but this too should be changed, requiring the pipeline operator to share the liability as long as the tanker is in Canadian waters. This will provide a much needed incentive to ensure these supertankers, some longer than Vancouver’s tallest building, the 62-storey Shangri-La Hotel on West Georgia, are properly maintained and operated. The Exxon Valdez ran aground because its captain was reportedly intoxicated.

Without these additional checks and balances, the moral hazard is transferred to taxpayers, who could find themselves on the hook for billions of dollars in the event of a major spill. Kinder Morgan might think twice about expanding Trans Mountain if it knew a spill might wipe it out financially.

The primary beneficiaries of the Trans Mountain pipeline are Houston’s Kinder Morgan, Alberta’s slumping oil sector, controlled by foreign multinationals such as Exxon and Shell, and export markets in Asia, primarily China. It does nothing to enhance Canada’s energy security, and very little to boost the Canadian economy.

It does, however, seriously imperil B.C., particularly its tourism sector, which employs over 127,000 people and contributes $7.7 billion to GDP. To say nothing of the potential damage to one of the world’s richest and most complex marine ecosystems, and a West Coast lifestyle to which ocean sports such as kayaking and wind surfing are considered sacred.

 

http://www.macleans.ca/economy/a-b-c-pipeline-spill-would-be-inevitable-but-who-would-pay/

[chon derry]

54 minutes ago, mightycpc said:

What are you talking about? What did I post that was incorrect. Do you think Canadian oil is killing salmon?

51 none hockey related post's  there should be a minimum requirement for new posters posting on a HOCKEY SITE to at least talk some hockey other wise you might viewed as a TROLL!

[ForsbergTheGreat]

14 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

All long, costly processes.  Come on now, the amount they cover is no where NEAR what's needed in the event of a spill.  Funds are partially in place, but inadequate.  "Millions are nothing"...

 

http://www.macleans.ca/economy/a-b-c-pipeline-spill-would-be-inevitable-but-who-would-pay/

You know what’s funny. I already had this typed up. 

 

If I had an agenda to push, why wouldn’t I post an Armageddon day scenario to spread fear about the big bad oil companies. It’s funny how the most commonly brought up spill that media loves to bring up is the Exxon Valdez.  The second largest oil spill in the history that happened 30 years ago, by a captain that was drunk, traveling “at head full”, outside of the normal traffic lanes (due to heavy ice), without coast guard approval or monitoring due to the ships radar being broken. So many safety standards were broken, standards that have being greatly increased over the last 30 years. 

 

But I guess if your agenda is to spread fear why wouldn’t you use that situation which is impossible to happen under today’s standards.  It really shows the goal of the media.  I mean if I didn’t know any better, I would be pissed about hearing that.  Luckily for me I do know better. I know to do my own research rather than just believing what the media puts out there. 

[chon derry]

1 hour ago, mightycpc said:

What are you talking about? What did I post that was incorrect. Do you think Canadian oil is killing salmon?

the one thing about the lousy relationship with the 2 province's would be all the pickup trucks with the deep freeze's in the back NOT coming out to the coast ,with their lousy driving habit's and even lousier boating  skill's.  notley follow's thru with all her 'black mail' threat's I have to ask myself , who's really going to look bad? ,and she talk's about the investment climate in B.C.?  she need's to pull her head out of her ...  there's no phone up there!

[-DLC-]

11 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

You know what’s funny. I already had this typed up. 

 

If I had an agenda to push, why wouldn’t I post an Armageddon day scenario to spread fear about the big bad oil companies. It’s funny how the most commonly brought up spill that media loves to bring up is the Exxon Valdez.  The second largest oil spill in the history that happened 30 years ago, by a captain that was drunk, traveling “at head full”, outside of the normal traffic lanes (due to heavy ice), without coast guard approval or monitoring due to the ships radar being broken. So many safety standards were broken, standards that have being greatly increased over the last 30 years. 

 

But I guess if your agenda is to spread fear why wouldn’t you use that situation which is impossible to happen under today’s standards.  It really shows the goal of the media.  I mean if I didn’t know any better, I would be pissed about hearing that.  Luckily for me I do know better. I know to do my own research rather than just believing what the media puts out there. 

I am fearful...it's not an agenda.

And things can/do go wrong, so to have an agenda to push through despite that...without having made sure that we address the "if's" in an adequate manner, seems worse.  We, the people who live here, are the ones with something to risk.  Things can go wrong, that's what the message is.  And, if/when they do, the people who will be directly impacted have the most at stake and therefore, deserve to be heard.  Before, not after.

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, mightycpc said:

Like many here I left a weak BC economy to a thriving Alberta economy. Now I'm an investor and wish the same opportunities to continue for younger people. 

You left BC.  Therefore you don't get a say what the province of BC does.  I understand there's a good chance you might even still own property here.  So you're little more than an arrogant hypocrite that thinks it's ok to tell others what to do because it's better than you.

 

Sorry cupcake, you're not now nor will you ever be that important

1 hour ago, mightycpc said:

 

I understand you dream of taxing the flow of goods across territory. That doesn't happen in any country on earth. Maybe your idea will catch on.

 

At what point in time did I say that?  Sorry I have gone through all of my posts and cannot find a single point in which I say that let alone hint towards that.  But keep making things up.  it works for you

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

 

its a personality cult in AB in the sense that whoever embodies and oozes the most "conservativeness" will win. Details don't matter there. They had 40 years of wasteful spending, massive healthcare blunders, and little diversification under the PCs and it didn't matter. Now that religion and so-called financial conservatism are merged there's just no chance for anyone else to win.

 

I think Notley is fighting to avoid a total sweep at this point, she has no hope of winning a government. 

Agreed.  Amazingly what you will see is within 3 years after she is out of the premiers office, the diversified portfolio Alberta holds after the move away from single resource reliance in the GDP will be paying huge dividends and who do you think will be taking credit for it?

 

1 hour ago, Ryan Strome said:

They do.

That's honestly really sad.

 

He has no platform, he has no plan and he has a terrible track record while in office.

 

You almost ask for what will happen really

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, mightycpc said:

Cherry picked items comparing a potential economic powerhouse that feeds a nation to a dead economy that relies on selling it's land to foreigners to keep running.  But kudos for the research.

 

Apparently Courtenay BC claims the dirtiest air in Canada. Only one small Alberta town in the top ten. 

 

http://www.besthealthmag.ca/best-you/health/the-worst-canadian-cities-for-air-pollution/view-all/

 

Calls a table stating evidence against his claims is cherry picked.

 

Cherry picks an article without any basis of fact just statements

[Warhippy]

18 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

You know what’s funny. I already had this typed up. 

 

If I had an agenda to push, why wouldn’t I post an Armageddon day scenario to spread fear about the big bad oil companies. It’s funny how the most commonly brought up spill that media loves to bring up is the Exxon Valdez.  The second largest oil spill in the history that happened 30 years ago, by a captain that was drunk, traveling “at head full”, outside of the normal traffic lanes (due to heavy ice), without coast guard approval or monitoring due to the ships radar being broken. So many safety standards were broken, standards that have being greatly increased over the last 30 years. 

 

But I guess if your agenda is to spread fear why wouldn’t you use that situation which is impossible to happen under today’s standards.  It really shows the goal of the media.  I mean if I didn’t know any better, I would be pissed about hearing that.  Luckily for me I do know better. I know to do my own research rather than just believing what the media puts out there. 

It is an inarguable statement when someone says that mining companies and industry in canada face some of the most lax policing for fine enforcement in the G7

 

With over $10 billion in public/taxpyayers dollars available for cleanup of abandoned mine sites alone it is a laughably common knowledge that shell companies simply declare bankruptcy to avoid paying these fines.  Albertas orphaned wells might even be worse for this practice.

 

The NOAMI foundation is a great place to start.

 

While the polluter pays method is in fact in place and while there are in fact small funds in place to mitigate clean ups; by and large the public almost always pays the brunt of the cost.

 

Kalamazoo alone was over a billion in a very safe waterway without tidal currents and with roughly a million gallons of oil spilled.  The average tanker carries over 2 million barrels.  At an average of 31 gallons per barrel.....one accident would eat that billion dollar fund in days.

 

Assuming of course Canada could force an international polluter to pay.