Your Support Shifting to Pipelines
Prince George, B.C. – The images are still vivid, the core of Lac Megantic Quebec leveled when a train hauling crude oil crashed and exploded in the centre of town killing 47 people; a fireball near Plaster Rock New Brunswick as a thick column of black smoke rose from the crude oil cars ablaze on the tracks, and a fire near Casselton North Dakota where yet another train hauling crude was in flames.
The fires , explosions and deadly results, have raised many questions about the shipping of crude on rail lines.
Transport Canada has announced there will be new requirements for oil tanker cars. The DOT 111 cars, which are said to have been vulnerable to leaks and explosions, will have to be made of thicker steel. Transport Canada issued a release, saying it is “working with all stakeholders involved in tank car design, manufacturing and use, as well as our colleagues in the United States government to determine what additional requirements would enhance the DOT 111 standard".
Northern B.C. has been very involved in the crude oil pipeline controversy as well, as Enbridge’s Northern Gateway twin pipeline has been approved by the Joint Review Panel for construction , as long as the long list of conditions has been satisfied. Federal Cabinet has yet to give the final stamp of approval. The track record for oil pipelines is not great ( Kalamazoo Michigan where a break in the pipeline resulted in the largest on-land oil spill in U.S. history) and the concerns about oil tankers along B.C.’s coastline are very real.
So while many were battling the pipelines, there was growing support for rail delivery of crude. In the wake of three tragedies in less than 6 months, 250News wanted to take your pulse on the matter to see if the mood was changing.
Simply put, we wanted to know, “If you had a choice, which method of moving oil to ports would you prefer?”
We know our survey is not scientific, but it shows, that of more than 2,300 votes, the support is swinging to pipelines with 61.3% (1424) saying they prefer to use pipelines, while 38.7% (901) said they would prefer to use rail to move oil to ports.
Comments
it was not a very accurate poll…
there was at least one choice missing….
DON’T MOVE OIL through province.
I will admit of the two choices pipekline is probably the safest means since CN has proven more times than I can count that they can not keep their trains on the tracks.
Great, just great. We have a choice between a rail company that has problems with derailments and an oil pipeline company that is totally irresponsible in maintaining their lines or properly cleaning up their resulting spills.
That’s a choice?
You know, this almost smells like a false flag event to force us to commit to the pipeline.
Like I said before, Tell them to tunnel about a mile underground and build their pipeline there. And while they’re at it, they could just keep on going out to beyond the inside passage or all the way to China!
Give More, how about we just dig a trench to Kitimat, and let it rip, the pipes going to leak anyway.
Pipelines are far safer than rail. People seem to be finally starting to realize it.
Also, much of this oil will be going to California.
I think we should have had the choice to move it by plane. How much oil could one of those water bombers carry? And it is been said that air is one of the safest ways to travel.
build the pipe line and quit your whining.
You can’t really compare the Lac Megantic incident to a derailment or whether rail is safer than pipelines. It was proven that the break was not applied by the engineer and it was parked on a hill. That is 100% human error. Chances are a pipeline incident will be either a structural failure or caused by mother nature in the form of an earthquake or some such thing. Its like comparing radishes to peas. A remote failure of a pipeline will most likely not be a direct result of 1 persons mistake.
Let’s stop making excuses, huh. There have been many other rail incidents this past year besides Lac Megantic.
Lets face it, our support is not shifting to pipelines. BCRacer and Give More have it right, and as I made comment earlier (which got removed), there should have been a third option: NO to oil transport by pipeline or rail.
Congratulations 250news, the most Tar Sands friendly poll I ever saw, Harper would be proud.
We might be able to stop a pipeline, but how do we stop the rail? They already have approval to ship by rail.
Nice poll.. what wiz bang came up with the it ?
Kind of like.. I am going to slap you.. you prefer backhand or forehand.. plain stupid
It is called reality, there is no third option. The railcards have already been ordered
IMO, Harper and Enbridge are like rapists, they just won’t take “NO” for an answer!
I didn’t vote, there was no box for none of the above….
Too bad ‘none of the above’ isn’t an option.
I welcome Harper trying to push through Northern Gateway! Like watching Napoleon march to Moscow or Waterloo!
Comments for this article are closed.