250 News - Your News, Your Views, Now

October 27, 2017 7:22 pm

Environmentalists Hot Over Trans Mountain Approval

Thursday, January 12, 2017 @ 5:56 AM

Vancouver,  B.C.- Environmental and First Nations  groups are expressing their  anger  over  news the Province of BC has  approved  the Trans Mountain Pipeline Project.

“How can a government so blatantly align itself against the wishes and interests of its own citizens?” said Peter McCartney, Wilderness Committee Climate Campaigner. “Right when we need our leadership to stand up to Alberta and Ottawa, they buckle like a cheap lawn chair.”

The issuing of an environmental certificate for the project  faces 37  conditions from B.C,  these conditions are  in addition to the 157 the National Energy Board attached to its approval of the project.

McCartney  says  the fight  to stop the project will continue “It’s very clear the west coast has rejected Kinder Morgan,” said McCartney. “For many British Columbians, stopping this pipeline is a New Year’s resolution they have no intent to break.”

Stand.earth is also  echoing  McCartney’s comments. “The simple fact is that this project has failed at least three of Christy Clark’s own ‘Five Conditions’” says Karen Mahon National Director of Stand.earth ” There is no way to safely clean up a spill of this type of oil, at least 59 First Nations are opposed to this pipeline, and the economic risks outweigh the rewards.”

Mahon says the 37 additional conditions  added  do little to protect the public ““For example requiring another study into whether or not dilbit sinks will do little to reassure anyone that it safe to allow massive increases in oil tanker traffic in BC’s waters.”

WestCoast Environmental Law  says the  37 conditions  added by the Province do nothing to mitigate the risks of the project.  In a release  West Coast Environmental Law points to one condition which  would require Kinder Morgan to “provide clean drinking water to communities whose water is poisoned by a Kinder Morgan spill.”  The release  goes on to say  the announcement is another reminder that environmental  laws need  significant improvement “to protect the interest of present and future residents of British Columbia. It ignores the First Nations that have barred the project in their own laws. Like Enbridge Northern Gateway, we expect that First Nations and community opposition will not allow this project to proceed.”

The Tsleil-Waututh Nation has already indicated it will be examining  legal options to stop the pipeline . Spokesperson  Charlene Aleck  says consultation with First Nations was inadequate “”One thing is clear they are trying to force a dangerous project on many thousands of people that really do not want it, that is not a recipe for success”.  Aleck  says regardless of the  issuing of an environmental  assessment certificate  the pipeline will never  be built.




“How can a government so blatantly align itself against the wishes and interests of its own citizens?”

I’m all for the pipeline. Not sure why this guy thinks he can speak for me.

    Me too. It’s great news.

all the “FEES” have been paid so who is really surprised

I’m all for this pipeline. If it means jobs for Canadians and BC’ers then let’s get the thing built already.

I could give two craps about what other “minority” groups think.

This may come as a shock to some of the posters on this site, but I would suggest that those groups who want these types of projects built because of the jobs they produce are in fact the **real minority groups**. How many people will actually get a job from these projects??

So one could say that those opposed to these projects dont give two craps about what the **minority group** that will get a job thinks.

In fact one could go further and state that those who build these projects just for the jobs (This includes our Government) and for the profits for foreign business ie: Chinese, Korean,. Japanese,Malaysia, USA, are perhaps out of line, and perhaps they need to look in other places for their jobs.

Having said that, we do need to look at these projects, and if necessary build them with all the safety factors in place. Canada cannot survive at this point in time without major exports.

We painted ourselves into this corner over the years, and it will take years for the paint to dry, so that we can get out.

Flooding agriculture land, and polluting the ground, and oceans is not a solution, to our problems,in fact it only makes our problems worse.

Environmentalists, and those in favour of these projects for the jobs, are in fact both cut from the same cloth, because neither puts forward any solutions, they only want to protect their side of the arguments.

    Good post, Palopu.

    So haw many jobs would make you happy?

    Lets build a refinery would produce more jobs right? Well the invro nuts would go nuts over that. Also don’t forget dear leaders carbon tax. That should work out well for jobs.

    You want jobs have a look into how many are employed in the against everything foreign funded lobby.

    I say build it, that will employ real people not fake people. Oh while its being built the protests will also keep fake people employed. Well some will be employed, most sucking off real people.

    There are alternative solutions being brought forward Palopu. Just yesterday the Canadian Center for Policy Alternatives recommended “investments be made in renewable electricity generation – so solar, wind and geothermal energy. Those are investments that can be made in different parts of the province.”

    We are already behind the rest of the world in switching to alternative energy, that form of energy is the future and we need to stop electing government that continue to be bought and paid for by the fossil fuel industry. There is no long term future in that energy source.

      The Canadian Center for Policy alternatives is a nutbar organization. Is this the group that pays you BH?

      We are already behind the rest of the world in switching to alternative energy?

      Of course we are!!

      We are blessed with an abundance of low cost and reliable energy sources, including oil, natural gas, coal and hydro-electricity! Why on earth should we be in a hurry to rush towards unreliable and expensive alternative energy sources at this point in time?

      Other countries do not have the luxury of the abundance of energy sources that we have and as such, they have no option but to move towards alternative energy sources, regardless of the unreliability and excess cost of those sources!

      I would rather that we continue to use our existing energy sources while taking a rational approach to transitioning to alternative energy sources!

      Why the rush? There is no reason or need to rush, unless of course you believe in unproven man-made climate change?

      Yes! We are behind the rest of the world in switching to alternative energy.

      You know what else we are behind the rest of the world in? Producing greenhouse gases!

      We also happen to be behind a lot of asian countries in rice production…

      Not in greenhouse gas emissions per-capita LittleBirdie, Canadians produce more greenhouse gases per person than any country, anywhere in the world.

      ht tp://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/uploads/per_capita_emissions.png

      Yeah, but our forest make us a net CO2 absorber – we take in more than we emit.

      Not that it matters in the slightest.

      Yes but Canada leads all other countries in deforestation… thereby significantly reducing Canada’s carbon sink ability… not that it matters in the slightest!

      ht tp://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/09/05/canada-deforestation-worst-in-world_n_5773142.html

      You should know better than to trust the Huff Po for facts. Not only that, maybe you should polish up your reading comprehension skills.

      The article doesn’t say Canada leads all other countries in deforestation, it says “The country now leads the planet in the degradation of untouched forests” and “Most logging done in Canada is still to this day done in virgin forests.” Meaning we shouldn’t be logging untouched forests? Many other countries in the world have been logging for centuries and some are already on their 5th cut, having long ago cut all virgin forests. We’re still on our first cut, and we aren’t de-foresting, we replant.

      The claim that “The interior of British Columbia has seen widespread forest loss” is absolutely false. They’re looking at us from satellites and seeing new cut blocks and assuming they aren’t replanted. Bull!

McCartney? Never heard of the guy before! He certainly does not have my permission to include me in his pronouncements.

Our resources have to reach export markets somehow or we will be in even deeper trouble. Stringent conditions (almost 200) are in place and those have to be met before anything happens.

When the “Enviro’s” and First Nations give up everything oil then I may have some respect for them and their cause. If these groups are so anti pipeline why don’t they shut the gas off to their house this morning as it is brought to their house via pipeline!!

This McCartney guy isn’t probably getting enough greenbacks to stoke his ego. Seems the bottom line is money once all said and done. Get on their high horses unril somebody is waving the almighty buck, then get off their horses and melt into,the sunset.

Every time someone spends a dollar outside of Canada or buys something sourced outside of Canada, we must sell something to get that dollar back or the country would go broke. Natural gas and oil are two products we can sell. Where do you think the government gets the money to give FN a free ride.

Canadian Jobs? I understand that Kinder Morgan will use scores of temporary foreign workers.

    You need facts.

    Really Imorge? And you know this how? Canadians are well known for building energy infrastructure. With the current slump in the energy sector, I highly doubt there is a need to bring in foreign workers. But I guess it fits the anti-pipeline narrative.

    Sounds like union fear mongering to me.

Aside from the usual singular focus on ‘jobs’ as being the major reason this project is so advantageous, what REAL long lasting advantages does it hold for BC? Versus other, non-environmentally destructive disadvantages? We’ll get some tax money from it, no doubt. But will that tax money ever fund all the increased costs that are surely to come as a result of building it? Because when it’s being built, just like any other mega-project, the prices of everything we consume are going to be increased.

Businesses will be happy because they’ll get to book larger profits. But not for long. Because the increase in prices will be followed by a cry for an increase in wages, and the costs of everything will rise, as we climb back aboard the same old inflationary treadmill to nowhere.

Fine while the project is ongoing. But what happens when it’s done? Those prices will STAY high. But the wages to pay them? Where will they come from then? The NEXT mega-project? How many can we build on the promise that someone else, somewhere else, will buy all the stuff they put on the market? Before they can’t, and the whole thing comes crashing down?

Socredible, your inflationary logic is not applicable to this project. The ability to export a product that is currently bottlenecked and receiving a substantially lower price because of that is not inflationary. This project being judged solely on whats in it for BC does not adequately consider the benefits to the nation as a whole. The energy sector has provided substantial revenue to federal and provincial coffers. That can’t be a side bar in the debate. How else will Quebec subsidize tuition and daycare through equalization if the sector is losing money?

    Dow7501, it WILL most certainly be ‘inflationary’, as is every mega-project. The money to build it will be paid out long before a drop of oil flows through it for sale. That money will be taken back in consumer product prices on the market here now, raising those prices, since the upper limit of prices is always governed roughly by the quantity of money available to meet them. And that quantity has just been increased. Surely we in BC, where we have had an enormous number of mega-projects since the 1960’s, should have learned by now the financial downsides of them, and if those who’d lead us were truly ‘financially’ smart, made arrangements to far better mitigate them. Do we have to have another repeat of what inflation can do to a government, as happened in 1972 with WAC Bennett’s, before we smarten up? I surely hope not, but….

      Socredible, you seem to be under the belief that what you learned in your economic classes actually explains global economics. Having taken more than my share of them and been involved in markets my adult life, I have concluded that economist are the only “experts” that have never been right. I wish we could predict an outcome by plugging variables into a formula.

      That aside, I am just not rationalizing your contention these projects are somehow economically bad. Since I wasn’t in BC when these past mega-projects where built, perhaps some examples of what happened in real terms would help me.

      Dow7501, I personally don’t care whether the pipeline is built or not. If it is, I seriously doubt there’ll be any major problems from it leaking. The increase in tanker traffic might pose some added risks, but I’m sure there are many other places in the world where navigation is far more congested with tankers coming and going than what’s going to be the case here. What I DO object to is the effect these kinds of projects have on the price of consumer goods here in BC. They invariably RAISE them. And that’s not really any advantage to anyone. It was reported widely that the export of oil offshore brings in $ 6 a barrel more than the export of oil south to the USA via other pipelines, etc. If that’s the case, then why doesn’t the government of BC put an export tax on that oil? Not to use the proceeds for general revenue, but to use it for a REBATE on fuel or other consumer purchases here in BC? This way WE would get some REAL advantage for the risks we’re taking.

      So following your logic, if we had no resource industry in BC, we would all be better off.


people should focus on making sure of safety on land and sea, hold company and Governments accountable now put their money and safety infrastructure in place while being built. Fighting to stop it waste of time and money. Also work on pressuring companies and Governments on refining our product for long term jobs and benefits.

Well, a lot a naysayers out there. But I support the pipeline, it appears to be the safest way to move oil from one part of the country to another. It allows oil to be exported. instead of it all going to the states at a discounted rate.

I want Canada, BC and Alberta, get revenues from their resources, so that we can maintain our high standard of living. If we did not sell our resources, we will all be working for $15 an hour. half starved, and no vacations. This includes a majority of government employees as well. So think about it.

I would rather see the oil transported in the pipelines than CN or by truck.

If Trudeau really was about the world environment, we would have a oil line to feed the Irving refineries. It is a way smaller foot print, than oil coming from the middle east.

So this fee we are charging Trans Mountain. Is it really going into a fund for emergency work? or is it going to slip into general revenues.

This carbon tax, is this used for anything to improve the environment, or is it just a deterrent from our dependency on cheap oil. I don’t care if 60% of the carbon tax, was actually used for something to wean us off of oil technology. but I don’t want it all for just general revenues.

Royalties collected from the oil. A percentage of this should be set aside for a legacy or heritage fund. LOOK at Norway, I want this country to be in that position in 30 years. We can do it. but need more than a prince charming to do this, or he needs to see that vision. I am not a Justin fan, but he did the right thing allowing the pipelines to go thru. Northern Gateway was the sacrificial lamb. Can’t have it all. Enbridge and the partners will likely get a few dollars for the Feds failing to do their job, unless it was tied in with Line 3 upgrader, which it would make sense from a political point.

    Forget the Norwegian model . The difference between canada and Norway is that Norway owns their oil , canada doesn’t . Norway also puts realistic price on its oil/gas . We on the other hand don’t .

      Before the righties go nuts again . I could not care less how much money gets put into pipeline or anything else in the sector . I accually hope they put all their funds into it because that will make the inevitable crash much more spectacular. 30 years ? What a fantasy . The only reason oil is a fifty +- is price and supply fixing . What a laugh .

      Still waiting?

      The market sets prices ataloss. Didn’t you read that chapter in Turner’s book?

      OPEC and Russia have a production cut quota agreement in place , hence price fixing as a result of production cutbacks . It’s a good thing too for the fossil shills . If it were not for cutbacks/threat of cutbacks , oil would be a great deal lower than it is . Btw Garth doesn’t care much about oil . He’s into the money .

      Price fixing is why oil is only one third the price it was ten years or so ago? Yeah, that makes sense. (rolls eyes)

Why is the media not singing about all the negative publicity about Jane Fonda’s visit to Fort Mac. Why is the media catering to the environmentalist.

I really get a kick out these environuts that think they have the right to speak for all British Columbians!
I would suggest that if you took a PROVINCE WIDE poll this project would get at least a 55% approval rating!
Now what i find really interesting is that the very people that rail against everything energy related can not even live by their own ridiculous standards.
I haven’t see any one of these people that truly walks the walk rather than just talking the talk.
They travel around,,obviously powered by oil and gas, heat their homes, run their lights, yet all the while complaining about the sources of that energy.
The supreme Hypocrite is none other than David Suzuki though. to him the environmental movement is nothing more than a cash cow!

    The more prominent the environmental activist, the larger their personal carbon footprint. They don’t really believe all the BS they preach, it’s all political.

One way we could save the environment is to reduce the global population. We wouldn’t need to exploit resources to the extent we do, if there weren’t so many of us.

Maybe next time there’s a tsunami, or hurricane, or earthquake, we don’t send any aid, we just let people die. And whatever we do, quit sending food to Somalia.

And maybe we do what China did, and just tell people, don’t care about your religion, you can have just one kid.

Let’s get really harsh and get the world population down to three billion. Then the resource to person ratio will be so advantageous we can do everything environmentally friendly. Let’s quit fooling ourselves, people are the cause, less people are the solution.

Ironically, one of the groups so opposed to resource development happens to be the only group in Canada whose birthrate is high enough their population grows. Wonder how we’re going to pay for all their needs when all we’ve got to trade is – well, I guess nothing, because no resource extraction is ever approved by this group.

Come on left wing, be honest, just tell us which 3 billion people you want dead, so we can save the planet.

    A far better way to ‘save the environment’ would be to make the current financial system FULLY ‘self-liquidating’. Which it currently is not, or we wouldn’t be seeing the exponential rise in debt that we do.

    That’s not all that hard to do. Right now, as a component of every price of every article for sale to us as consumers, are charges for ‘capital depreciation’. It’s entirely right and proper from any sane accounting perspective that these charges be made, someone has to pay them, or ‘investment’ would be a losing proposition.

    But looking at the situation in its entirety, while we’re charged for ‘capital depreciation’ in prices, there currently is no way to FULLY credit us with ‘capital APPRECIATION’, which, unless the word ‘progress’ is meaningless, must always be greater.

    In the world as it is, ‘capital costs’ are constantly advancing at a faster pace than ‘labor costs’ as we become ever the more efficient. Capital costs are PAST labor costs. The ‘money’ that made them up, money that was for the most part made as new creations of bank credit issued as loans, was spent as received. But when spent it didn’t liquidate THOSE costs, it carried them forward to be recovered from FUTURE prices. Then the only way those future prices can be met is to repeat the whole process, only on an ever expanding scale. This is not sustainable.

Wow, take a poll, or exterminate a third of the world’s population, are just some of the wacky suggestions. No need to bother with any of that. This pipeline expansion project will not being going through, as there is no “social license” for it… end of story!

So whine, bitch, and complain all you want, it will not change that inevitable outcome. The world is moving towards alternative energy and that is where we need to go.

    It Shall come to Pass, and ye Shall Whine and Beotch Some More! LOL!

    I’m curious. We import fresh fruit, vegetables, from the US. We get most of our consumer goods from China. What do you propose we give them in exchange? I haven’t seen a positive remark from you on any proposed new resource extraction program, and you’ve soundly condemned current resource extraction whether it be logging, mining, oil and gas. It’s freezing outside, and I’m glad someone drilled a gas well decades ago. What is your solution to get the resources necessary to end child poverty, fund the full education wishlist, free medical for all, welcome all and every refugee who wants to come here.

    And I stand by my remark. More people, more problems. Each individual who enters this world wants to consume. Consumption creates demand, demand creates carbon. We can’t even convince a certain segment of the population not to blow themselves up in shopping areas, how do you convince people to consume less so there can be more of us?

    BH, the world is moving towards alternate energy, but it will be a very slow process, like decades! In the meantime the world will still be consuming vast amounts of crude oil. For transportation (trucks, airplanes, diesel powered trains, container ships…) and for milions of plastic based products, for clothing and least but not last for medicines.

    There will always be a need to pump crude out of the ground and transport it as safely as possible to refineries!

    Obstructing the export of this valuable resource to other countries is a counterproductive effort! How are we going to pay for the things we must import, like fruits and vegetables in the winter?

    Also, Alberta has a right to have transprovincial access to ports on the west coast! We are one country and we must act accordingly! Alberta has the kind of government you ought to support instead of doing the opposite.

      PG, you must know by now you can’t use logic with BH.

      Alberta has the kind of government we ought to support? Sorry, the NDP are a part of the cause of most of our economic problems.

    Posted by BeingHuman

    This pipeline expansion project will not being going through, as there is no “social license” for it… end of story!

    Yer right, but yer wrong. It won’t be built because of all the delays and roadblocks thrown in front of it by environuts, FNs and lefty politicians that will delay, delay, delay just like they did with LNG.

    There is social license for it, meaning the majority of people support the idea. When Dix came out against it, that’s what lost him the election last time around.

    Posted by BeingHuman

    The world is moving towards alternative energy and that is where we need to go.

    No, the world is moving toward more and more fossil fueled energy. Only the western, capitalist democracies are punishing themselves for using fossil fuels (aka for being successful).

Good for Kinder Morgan. After the Endbridge fiasco and the ongoing LNG joke, BC needs this. There a lot of pissed off people down the hwy 16 corridor. Nothing but empty promises from the premier and every oil and gas company that everyone will get rich. PEople from all walks of life invested in new hotels, gas stations and sights for HUGE work camps. For what?

It will be a great project for jobs. There will be pipeline jobs, construction jobs and lots of new “jobs” for Greenpeace, Stand and whatever environmental organization is against it.

For those people talking about giant multinational oil companies, maybe they should also look on the other side. Greenpeace, Living Waters and Stand are not mom and pop operations. For Greenpeace alone, their paid staff is over 2400 and their budget was $379 million as of 2011.

I am for the pipeline as this was the most efficient, least environmentally damaging of the two proposals. The one change I would suggest would be to move the pipeline terminal down towards Roberts Bank to ensure tankers dont have to navigate the tricky Burrard Inlet. Otherwise go for it and the money that is pumped into the economy can assist research and development into alternative energy.

And for those talking about electric vehicles, our city owned Nissan Leaf has almost no range in the cold temperatures. Would you like your produce delivered in a vehicle with limited range of 100 or so km in winter?

    Actually the the Leaf, a taxpayer funded toy, in cold weather can only make it from downtown to the uni with the heater and wipers turned off.

Not to mention these “minority groups” need vast amounts of money in order to fund their social programs. Where does it all come from? Us. Taxes, taxes, and more taxes. Pretty hard to support the welfare state without them.

We need to kick the liberal BS agenda to the curb.

Two years ago, the City of Burnaby asked Insights West to conduct a poll of its citizens to determine what support it had in “opposing” the Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion project. The poll results were no surprise, as nearly 70% of Burnaby residents supported the Mayor and Council of Burnaby’s continued opposition of the Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion project. So again, it must be reiterated, this pipeline expansion project has no “social license”, and without that social license, it will not happen.

On a side note, now that Christy Clark has given the project a green light to proceed, with conditions, watch her and the BC Liberals lose the next election. Why? Because almost 3 million people (60% of BC’s population) live in the lower mainland and they do not want this pipeline project. Gee, I wonder who they will be voting for now in the upcoming election.

    So BH in your world its fine for the unicorn seekers down south to block the rest of BC and Alberta. You gotta be part of the snowflake generation.

      Well said indeed! The concept of *co-operation for the Common Good* is not on the agenda of some activists.

      Of course those close to the proposed pipeline route are NIMBY fans! Did anybody expect otherwise?

      People who oppose fossil fuels are doing so for *the common good* of everyone on this planet. The science is undeniable, our continued use of fossil fuels is warming our planet. Soon we will reach a tipping point and no amount of carbon gas reduction strategies will work.

      So who is being greedy here, and who is acting on behalf of the *common good*?

      People who oppose fossil fuels are gullible fools who’ve been sucked in by a scam. And every one of them uses and is dependant on them, including you.

    About 48% of Americans voted Trump. I wouldn’t count on voters doing what you would expect. In fact IMHO the BC Liberals keep winning because the NDP can only agree on compromise leaders vs winnable leaders. So if you dont like the Liberals blame the left. They’re the ones who can’t get their act together.

I was just thinking about this as I drove back form Vanderhoof this afternoon:
How many non-Liberal and Liberal ridings will this pipeline pass through, from the beginning in Alberta to the terminal in Burnaby.

Yet, the proposed pipeline from Alberta to Eastern Canada, which is going through much safer terrain, is basically at a standstill. How many non-Liberal and Liberal ridings would this proposed pipeline pass through?

Just wondering….maybe he only listens to the concerns of those who voted for him.

    Safer terrain? The Canadian Shield is not safer terrain, there are thousands of lakes and rivers in the way

Does anyone know , how old the much maligned Nissan Leaf that someone in government owns/controls is ? The crying about it never ends . Where could one find out about it ? Is it for sale ? Does anyone use it ? How many kilometres are on it ? Is it due for a new battery ? Could the engineering department have the old battery ? Is it at the uni were it is said to live ?

    “The Nissan Leaf (Electric Car) Program began with the purchase of the electrical vehicle in July of 2012. Four
    partner organizations signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and have been sharing use of the Leaf since
    then. The partners are City of Prince George, Regional District of Fraser Fort George, Northern Health Authority and
    the University of Northern British Columbia.

    The Nissan Leaf is an efficient fleet vehicle that produces zero-emissions, supports several of the City of Prince
    George environmental policies and initiatives, and requires minimal financial upkeep.

    The Leaf has been underutilized by all partners. To address this, the City plans to conduct an internal education
    campaign and to introduce online scheduling sign-up for its use in an effort to encourage City staff to use the Leaf
    for short trips around town, such as, meetings and site visits. Increasing the length of time from three months to six
    months and adjusting the schedule for opportunity to use the vehicle during warmer seasons will help to increase
    usage. Using the Nissan Leaf to carpool will greatly contribute to the City’s Climate Action Plan, City Fleet Idling
    Policy, and the Energy Efficiency and GHG Reduction Policy. The Nissan Leaf seems suited for stop-start driving but
    is not ideal for driving over 80 km per charge – particularly in winter months. The Nissan Leaf is an asset to the City
    of Prince George fleet and can be further utilized by a more City Staff given prior trip planning.

    The MOU partnership expires in July 2016 and is due for renewal. Staff recommends that Council receive this report,
    and endorse the continuation of the MOU partnership for the Nissan Leaf for another 4-year term in July 2016 with interested partners.”

      Thank axman . I wonder if it was endorsed till 2020. It’s a Nissan . It’s old tech . It a poor example of an Ev and not worthy of PG . They should buy a tesla as the mayor’s ride . You see a line up of people wanting to use it .

      Agreed Ataloss, new technology is more than twice as efficient over that old Nissan Leaf. The 2017 Chevrolet Bolt gets 200 miles per charge in favourable conditions, about 150 miles per charge in lower temperatures. More than enough mileage per charge to meet 70% of people’s driving needs.

      True , but , I think a tesla is more classy and its aspirational . Tesla is like Mac and gmfdtnhvw are PC .

      The Tesla is one hot car to drive, and looks good too. Get the sports model and every government employee will be lining up to use it. And US government subsidies means American taxpayers pay for half the cost.

      ht tp://princegeorge.ca/cityhall/mayorcouncil/councilagendasminutes/Agendas/2016/2016-12-05/documents/Attch_Nissan%20Leaf%20MOU%20Final%20Signed%20Copy%20-%20Sept%202016.pdf

      ht tp://princegeorge.ca/cityhall/mayorcouncil/councilagendasminutes/Agendas/2016/2016-04-11/documents/Attch_Nissan_Leaf_RTC_Briefing_Notes.pdf

      Actually surprised you don’t remember commenting on the article to renew the Leaf 9 months ago Ataloss…
      ht tps://www.250news.com/2016/04/12/turning-over-a-new-nissan-leaf/

Comments for this article are closed.