And that would be the best place for him. A great lesson for the next generation of what a sell out is. I’d be surprised if he recognizes himself in the mirror anymore.

“…that to do so would very well see him return to being the “leader of the Opposition” .”

If and when he realizes that he is headed that way no matter what we may have a problem. His parting gift to us may be a highly unwanted one.

Don’t worry, when the report is submitted, Harper and Clark will be on the same page, we will get some money safeguards will be there on paper and the pipeline will move forward. The only reason she had lake make the statement was to protect her by-election win.

Alison Redford has her claws out. BC is exposed to 70% of land risk and 100% of water risk of a spill plus a majority of river crossings yet Redford says in the article:

“If the B.C. government wants financial compensation for the environmental risk it would be assuming, it will have to come from some place other than royalties.

“It’s just a non-starter,” Ms. Redford said.”

There are 3 other major points on the compass,better start looking at them as the one that points W from Bruderheim is just a non-starter.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/after-bc-election-redford-hopes-pipeline-fight-wont-get-uglier/article12301012/

As her by-election will likely be in the lower mainland you would think that it would be the Kinder-Morgan project that would be in her sights if that was the case.
But I think that Chrisy is smarter than that and has seen what happens when you pander to the Greens in an election campaign in a desperate attempt to garner their vote(right Adrian?)

Why would the price at the pumps increase?

Want to have a decrease in pump prices, get rid of the carbon tax scam.

Ms. Redford seems to think that there is only one direction on the compass: West!

Someone should point out to her that she can send her bitumen North, South and East! Especially to Canada’s East – to replace imported oil!

This is a good opportunity to establish the fact that bullying is a non-starter!

Harper will be around as PM for a long time to come. Simply because when all the facts are faced there’s no one in Opposition right now to replace him.

Tom Mulcair has the same problem Adrian Dix has. If he could learn to keep his mouth shut and let people pissed off with the Conservatives vote NDP simply because they’re NOT the Conservatives his Party might have a chance. But he can’t do that. He has to start telling everyone what a vote for the NDP would really mean. And every time he reminds people of THAT, more of his support will evaporate.

And young Trudeau? What has he ever done except make everyone think he’s a complete ass, just like his old man was? All ‘style’ with no ‘substance’ ~ at least none of the visible ‘substance’ we should be looking for in a PM.

He’ll prostrate himself to the ‘financial interests’ just as his daddy did. Who do you think killed the idea of the BC government having a 25% equity stake in the Bank of British Columbia, back when it was proposed one be chartered? To provide a BC based financial institution with a credit granting policy attuned to BC’s economic needs? PET, that’s who. And if you think Harper’s a ‘dictator’ just go back and look at what daddy Trudeau wanted to do in regards to centralising power in Ottawa.

While you delude yourself Trudeau junior will be on your side against those big bad oil companies, he’ll be picking your pocket at the pumps every time you fill up, and forcing you further into debt personally just to live.

We should hear about the Keystone pretty soon and if it goes ahead, this will give us one outlet for Alberta oil however it will not get us a better price. Twinning the Kinder Morgan line to Vancouver will also get us more capacity but again will probably not get us a better price for oil unless we find other markets.

We should keep in mind that this oil is sold by the very people who get it out of the ground, and if they want to sell it to their own refineries in the USA that is where it will go.

The idea that these companies will sell all this oil to refineries in China while their own refineries in California, Texas, etc; go short of oil is just plain foolish.
They make their money selling gas to the US consumer, and therefore cheap oil for refineries means huge profits in gas sales.

There is a huge and complex structure in place when in comes to oil, oil sales, and ownership of oil, and I would suggest that most Canadians, and certainly most people from BC (myself included) don’t know what the hell they are talking about when it comes to oil.

We manufacture diddly squat in BC. Without exports of all commodities we would be dead in the water. This includes oil and gas. So it behooves us to find a safe way to move our products to market.

Totally agree with you steph99. The Northern Gateway is the only intelligent route for the Alberta crude. Does anyone with half a brain want an equivalent pipeline going through Quebec? Not on Harpers watch you can bet. Harper will declare Gateway in the national interest (which it is) and guarantee BC the funds to clean up from any tanker spill (unlikely event anyways) and Redford will cut BC in for a piece of the royalties…after the by-election of course.

U.S. has plenty of their own oil in Texas and in the Bakken field in North Dakota. Pipe the oil to Ontario. Flat land, accessible terrain, reduced seismic risks, existsing refineries, and Canadian jobs paying Canadian Taxes supporting the Canadian economy. Maybe we should reduce our dependence on Middle East oil.

Christy hasn’t been elected and prior to the Liberal win she was the most unpopular. Now she is popular?

Anyone that thinks a tanker spill is unlikely is part Ostrich!

I understand the concern about the risk associated with the pipeline. I also feel that BC has an obligation to act in the National interest.

But we need to retool equalization “provincial welfare” so that the east cannot continue to live of the hard work and sacrifice of the west.

Then we can have a discussion. As long as Quebec and the Maratimes benefit from Northern Gateway there is nothing to discuss. Remove them from the equation and we can talk.

Maybe after all this B.C. crap is settled then the lefties and enviros can start raising a fuss over tanker traffic and such on our east coast. We are better than they are. Aren’t we?

Funny how Clark ran a campaign labelling Dix as the candidate of NO. No Northern Gateway pipeline, no fracking, no Kinder Morgan, no this, no that. And she was the great saviour of jobs and industry.
Now that the electon is over, Clark is saying No Northern Gateway. A load of crap, similar to No HST from the Liberals. Remember that one?
She is simply positioning herself to try and win a by-elecion. Once that vote is over, her 5 conditions will suddenly have been met and Enbridge will proceed.
Trust what comes out of Clark’s mouth? I don’t think so.
Besides, the final decision on Enbridge is Ottawa’s, not Clark’s.

“U.S. has plenty of their own oil in Texas and in the Bakken field in North Dakota. Pipe the oil to Ontario”

Won’t happen. The campaign against the pipeline going through BC would be but a mere prelude to the opposition that would be faced if it was proposed to run it along the shores of the worlds largest repository of fresh water . . .

Where do the large refineries in Ontario get their oil from now? Pipelines, tankers via the Great Lakes. These waterways are already jeapordized, as is the Kinder Morgan route to Vancouver. Inaccessible mountains, sparsely populated wilderness, and watersheds feeding into one of B.C.s last great Salmon Rivers make NG a much harder sell, in my opinion. I believe the resistance to the eastern route would be much, much less, and the support much greater. Canadian resources, Canadian jobs.

The US is working on becoming energy self-sufficient. This is to be achieved by fracking for natural gas on a mammoth scale. They don’t count their imports of oil from Canada as coming from a foreign country. Hillary Clinton said so when she visited Alberta not too log ago. We have been pre-empted, apparently.

Eastern Canada gets its oil from Venezuela, mostly. China has a large stake in the Alberta bitumen sands. Govsux has the right idea. Why are we importing oil from another country when we have a huge surplus here which is apparently desperately (!) looking for a market?

There are already pipelines in Ontario and Quebec running West. The industry said they can be used to pump the other way to the East.

Since there is little to nothing in this deal for B.C. at least the rest of the country could benefit by insisting on using our own resources first!

Where is the leadership and an indication of being less spineless?

I could be wrong (and please correct me if I am), but I would think that most of the refineries in eastern Canada are serviced from offshore oil and that the pipelines would be running west from the Atlantic. If that were the case, they certainly would run near Lake Ontario and Lake Erie, but that would be it.

To the best of my knowledge, there are no pipelines along the north shore of Lake Superior or Lake Huron/Georgian Bay. This northern shore area is virtually exactly what you described in your post govsux. It’s inaccessible, it’s sparsely populated wilderness and it has watersheds feeding into pristine environments. No it doesn’t have the mountains that BC does and there are no wild salmon, but from an ecological point of view, it’s probably more dynamic just given the sheer size of the lakes and the size of the watersheds that you encounter. When I drove across that area I was simply blown away by it. It is massive and there were more large rivers dumping into Lake Superior than what you would see driving from PG to Prince Rupert.

I agree that the area around the GTA and the route to Montreal and beyond is one thing. On the other hand, that particular area of Ontario where a new pipeline would have to go is raw and for the most part untouched. It’s also the headwaters of the Great Lakes. When you are sitting on the shore of Lake Superior looking out across the waters, you may as well be on another planet.

You are right in that there is already development and shipping traffic on the Great Lakes, but that’s not tar sands oil either. I don’t think it matters where they want to put this, it’s going to be a TOUGH sell.

Here is an interesting map:

http://www.capp.ca/getdoc.aspx?DocID=209479

Meisner: “Prime Minister Harper is aware that if he were to alienate the people of this province , the strong grip the Conservatives enjoy could evaporate in a moment. “

Kind of like the predictions provincially that the BC Liberals support had evaporated before the last election? Oops, that didn’t happen.

If this pipeline is approved, it will quickly be forgotten and then there will be some other cause to fight.

Sarnia, via the Great Lake States. The lake is already jeapordized. I hold a fair volume of Enbridge stock( relative to my holdings), so I would probably profit from NG. I just think there are options.

http://blogs.ubc.ca/mliew/2012/09/09/northern-gateway-pipeline/

Probably not best for my personal interests, but possibly for the greater good. No?

In a trading world, the predicted highest net value governs, even if that involves planning 20 to 40 years into the future with more and more risk of not getting the net return that was planned.

Running these companies is no different than running cities. The same people with the same mindsets do it.

Everyone thinks the world continues a they know it.

It does not!!!

This pipeline has turned into an emotional cat fight. At some point Harper will have no choice to take a side if she is re-elected in the upcoming by election and if she does not change her views afterwards.

Will Harper alienate his power base in Alberta? I don’t think so. Just look at how Trudeau is acting opposing the abolish-ment of the Senate because of Quebec over-representation in it.

The interests of power base in province take precedence.

Large ships have been running Douglas channel since the fifties with no issues that I can find. The tankers will be under much more ridgid control and much safer design.

“Sarnia, via the Great Lake States”

Yes, I could see that as it would utilize existing pipeline infrastructure.

“Just look at how Trudeau is acting opposing the abolish-ment of the Senate because of Quebec over-representation in it”

Quebec is not over-represented in the Senate. Even if Senate seats were allocated based on population, which they aren’t, Quebec would wind up with 24 seats, the same as what they have now.

Any grievance that BC or Alberta has with their share of Senate seats should be tabled with Saskatchewan, Manitoba and the Maritimes. I’m sure all of those other English speaking Provinces would gladly open up the Constitution and give up their excess seats. Ontario probably would as well since they are under-represented based on population.

Ben, you should arrange an interview with 580 CFRA here in Ottawa to give them some information from the local side of things. They just had an open air segment where they were basically accusing BC of being hypocrites and not being a good partner of the country for being against the pipeline.

In a nutshell, their position would appear to be that an existing natural gas pipeline poses the same risks as a new tar sands pipeline and that if the former already exists, the latter should be a no-brainer. I don’t even think they understand the difference between the two. Keep in mind that this is the official right wing radio station for the Ottawa area, so their position will have some bias to it.

JB:”If this pipeline is approved, it will quickly be forgotten and then there will be some other cause to fight”

Not really!

It will be off the table UNTIL the first huge leak occurs! Then it will be front and centre! We will be on the hook!

I would venture to say that all the people who care enough about the issue to comment on it while it is being under consideration regularly vote in elections and are by no means triflers.

The other media country wide is also full of comments and discussions about this, so I don’t think that it will “simply be forgotten!

And, you are correct, there are other urgent issues to tackle, like intentional water medication/degradation, GMO manipulations and a host of others! Some people go through life oblivious to what goes on around them, others are the movers and shakers who do give a darn and eventually make a significant difference. These people cannot be dismissed because history proves that they changed human society for the better.

Not too long ago smoking in hospital rooms was approved by those who should have known better, as was lead in paint and gasoline, not to mention DDT and second hand smoke.

NMG: ” Keep in mind that this is the official right wing radio station for the Ottawa area, so their position will have some bias to it.”

A right wing radio station? Horrors! Is that anything like our national taxpayer-funded left-wing station, the CBC?

“Some people go through life oblivious to what goes on around them, others are the movers and shakers who do give a darn and eventually make a significant difference.”

And some want to make a mountain out of every molehill and everything is a conspiracy theory. Pretty soon, it all just becomes noise.

Pipelnes aren’t a new concept. They might be for the people of this region, but believe me, they’re not new — and they’re the safest way to transport oil and gas. If there’s no good reason to stop the project, it will be approved.

“A right wing radio station? Horrors! Is that anything like our national taxpayer-funded left-wing station, the CBC”

Nope, I actually find the CBC to be fairly balanced. Many CFRA commentators are so right wing that they actually believe the ruling party in BC is comprised of Liberals, LOL ;)

I wonder if NMG has investments in tinfoil.

“Nope, I actually find the CBC to be fairly balanced.”
Really? During the last election I thought Adrian Dix had purchased the CBC – lol

“I wonder if NMG has investments in tinfoil”

No, I don’t believe that my funds have any holdings in Rio Tinto Alcan. I do have a nice aluminum fishing boat though, does that count?

NMG: “Nope, I actually find the CBC to be fairly balanced.”

This explains why you find other stations to be ‘right wing’. Most other stations are right wing compared to the CBC.

NMG:”Quebec is not over-represented in the Senate”

“We have 24 senators from Quebec and there are just six from Alberta and British Columbia. It’s to our advantage,” Trudeau told a French newspaper.

Add population of BC and Alberta and you will get the population of Quebec. Add the senate seats by BC and Alberta together and you will get less than 50% of Quebec seats. Quebec is over-represented compared to BC and Alberta.

But the point was the provincial interests trumping the national interests.

“This explains why you find other stations to be ‘right wing’. Most other stations are right wing compared to the CBC”

Or, it could also be explained by the fact that I’ve listened to all of the local media outlets and noticed that this particular one happens to have commentators that display a relatively high level of support for right wing ideologies.

Nah, that would make too much sense I suppose ;)

Oil sands bitumen isn’t regular crude JB! The pipeline will not go through!

“Add population of BC and Alberta and you will get the population of Quebec. Add the senate seats by BC and Alberta together and you will get less than 50% of Quebec seats. Quebec is over-represented compared to BC and Alberta”

Yes, I understand the math. If, however, you add Saskatchewan and Manitoba into the mix, the Western Provinces have 24 seats, the same as Ouebec. If the Provinces don’t like the formula, they should re-open the constitution and deal with it.

Now that I think about it, maybe Ontario should be the one complaining seeing as how they have the same number of seats as all of the Western Provinces put together, yet they have 30% more people than all of them.

All of these darn inequities and yet everyone wants to take their anger out on Quebec, when it’s the Maritimes that are the major source of the inequity. No wonder Quebec is a little edgy on all of this stuff, LOL ;)

JB posted:”If this pipeline is approved, it will quickly be forgotten and then there will be some other cause to fight”.

Sort of like the win by the BCLiberals …. and the comments before the election that Clark was not an elected Premier – the notion at the time that she was not elected since she did not head up her government going into a general electtion.

Now that she did that, and anyone who understands how Premiers get elected in Canada, should have to cool it, they do not. This will go on till the next election.

The fight over the pipeline and coastal navigation by supertankers will continue even if they are all approved. Approval is of no real consequence. There will be continuous protests.

Do not forget tha USA has a part to play in coastal water shipping since there are shared waters out of Vancouver for any oil that moves oput of the lower mainland.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/us-concerned-about-oil-tanker-traffic-from-bc/article6989791

A legislative amendment proposed by Washington state Senator Maria Cantwell and signed into law by President Barack Obama a couple of weeks ago gives the U.S. marine safety agency six months to conduct a risk assessment of the planned expansion of oil pipeline capacity to the West Coast.

While several proposed projects would see oil from the Alberta oil sands brought to the B.C. coast for export primarily to China, the legislation deals specifically with tanker traffic out of the Vancouver area.

“According to reports, Canada is poised to increase oil tanker traffic through the waters around the San Juan Islands and the Juan de Fuca by up to 300 per cent,” said a statement issued by Ms. Cantwell’s office.

“A supertanker oil spill near our shores would threaten Washington state’s thriving coastal economy and thousands of jobs,” the Democratic senator said in the statement. “This bill will provide crucial information for Washington coastal communities by requiring a detailed risk analysis. …”

There are no supertankers allowed in the inland coastal waters of northwest Washington.

JB the pipeline is being built in an earthquake zone. Can they stand up to a earthquake? Plus when they had the ice storms back East and BC Hydro went out to help the manager of BC Hydro said that they were able to fix most lines in six weeks but if it happened in BC it would take six months of our geograph. So how long would it take to get to an oil leak?

“There are no supertankers allowed in the inland coastal waters of northwest Washington”

So how does the oil get shipped out of Cherry Point? Hint same route as the Vancouver tankers.

Kinder Morgan brought up a suggestion they could run a pipeline to Cherry Point if blocked out of Vancouver. Hey here is a thought maybe the US is thumping their Obama hairless chests at Canada to get the oil shipped out of Cherry Point thus getting the economic benefits.

Hey no one is biting about the decades of ship traffic hauling environmentally unfriendly product down Douglas channel without an incident that I can find.

NMG: “Or, it could also be explained by the fact that I’ve listened to all of the local media outlets and noticed that this particular one happens to have commentators that display a relatively high level of support for right wing ideologies. “

Uh, yeah. Whatever you say. If you don’t believe the CBC is left wing, there’s nothing more I can tell you.

“Plus when they had the ice storms back East and BC Hydro went out to help the manager of BC Hydro said that they were able to fix most lines in six weeks but if it happened in BC it would take six months of our geograph”

No need to worry about that pg66, BC doesn’t get ice storms, LOL ;) Now avalanches on the other hand . . .

“If you don’t believe the CBC is left wing, there’s nothing more I can tell you”

Phew! And here I thought I was going to have to listen to you lecture me on the difference between “left wing” and “right wing”.

“JB the pipeline is being built in an earthquake zone. Can they stand up to a earthquake? Plus when they had the ice storms back East and BC Hydro went out to help the manager of BC Hydro said that they were able to fix most lines in six weeks but if it happened in BC it would take six months of our geography. So how long would it take to get to an oil leak?”

Earthquake zones, all of BC is an earthquake zone, should we shut down all existing pipelines? Have we had a leak ever from an earthquake?

Oil leak, that is where Clarke wants the conditions met. This pipeline if built would most likely be the safest on the world.

With the geography of BC we would not get an ice storm like Quebec.

World Class Safety ??? Enbridge??? Now that’s a laugh! : D

“Just last month, Enbridge was found breaking the National Energy Board safety rules at 117 of it’s 125 pumping stations across the country, but Enbridge says it’s not to blame.”

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2013/05/05/pol-enbridge-breaks-neb-safety-rules.html

And this same company wants to build a “safe” pipeline through pristine BC wilderness? Get Lost Enbridge!

“This pipeline if built would most likely be the safest on the world.”

Wow! Famous last words! The Titanic was promoted as the safest ocean liner in the world…that was a bit of an exaggeration too!

If the Titanic had hit the iceberg head on it would not have sunk.

Ah yes a news report from the CBC, very good.

With the proper oversite it will most likely be the safest.

I don’t really care if the pipeline is built or not, though the money would be nice. There is just a lot of misinformation about the pipe and tankers from the left and NGO’s.

seamutt wrote: “So how does the oil get shipped out of Cherry Point? Hint same route as the Vancouver tankers.”

When was the last time you heard of a supertanker going to the Port of Vancouver? Remember, I wrote supertanker, not all tanklers.

As a result of tanker accidents in the mid-1970s the Washington state Legislature in 1975 imposed a limit of 125,000 tonnes on tankers sailing east of Port Angeles into Rosario Strait and Puget Sound.

The Atlantic Richfield Co. appealed. A federal court quashed the law because a state can’t meddle with federal maritime regulations. However, the ban remained as a temporary federal rule because of strong public sentiment and political maneuvering by Sen. Warren Magnuson.

In 1982, the U.S. Department of Transportation made the demarcation line permanent 11 miles east of Port Angeles.

Smaller tankers carry less oil and are more maneuverable than the so-called “supertankers” forbidden from passing over the demarcation line.

Since the US relationship with its states is similar to the Canadian federal-provincial relationship, this is a precedent setting case for us as well. It is for this kind of reason I have stated on here that who cares who has jurisdiction on the BC coast. When push comes to shove, all the 100 year old laws in the world do not measure up to today’s notion of what is right and what is wrong.

Research ….. it is a fun exercise seamutt. Makes one more aware of the world around us. ;-)

seamutt wrote: “the money would be nice”

What money? That is one of the 5 points, remember. This is not a game for the weak.

Bitumen is not oil in the USA regulatory system, thus pipelines carrying Tar Sands Crude don’t pay into US Oil Spill Fund.

http://desmog.ca/2013/04/02/pipelines-carrying-tar-sands-crude-us-don-t-pay-federal-oil-spill-fund

One of those loopholes ……

BTW, Cherry Point receives most of the crude oil from the Alaska North Slope by tankers sized to go past the Port Angeles demarcation point. The rest of the crude comes from Alberta via a pipeline.

They are constructing a rail transfer facility to get Brakken oil from North Dakota.

[url]http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/STAGING/global_assets/downloads/A/abp_wwd_us_cherry_point_fact_sheet_june_2011.pdf

[/url]
Monitor shipping ports: http://www.fleetmon.com/en/ports/Cherry_Point_3918

In 2011, the total number of oil tankers in and out of the Port of Vancouver was 82. None of them were super-tankers and none of them operate without risk.

http://elizabethmaymp.ca/news/publications/articles/2013/04/15/reality-check-on-transport-canadas-claims-for-tanker-safety