Why can't the terminal and trade all be done by rail... sure it would cost more (for the exporters), but why not get a head start on the engineering needed to make it happen. The way I see it is that in ten years time the Mackenzie delta will be the new oil sands project for Canada... we will have two choices either we ship product out through the arctic ocean or we find a way to price in a system of sending it south by truck/rail via Whitehorse-PG-Edmonton-Kitimat.

IMO we should be looking at the bigger longer term picture than just this pipeline's needs for the Alberta oil sands. If we are the driver of the new infrastructure mandated by environmental concerns, then we will be in the drivers seat for the gateway to Mackenzie Delta massive oil reserve developments in the coming decade. This alone could catapult PG from a backwater to a major industrial hub of not just Northern BC, but the world.

I support the natives on this one at this point.

Isn't rail even more dangerous than pipeline??
I'm glad the natives have their say, because I think they bring up some very valide points. However, I think the land belongs to all people in the province, not just the natives. It is no longer "their" land. Things have changed in the last 100 years and you can't go back. This whole native issue has become unreasonable. I believe we should acknowledge their heritage - same as anyone else. It's time all peope not just native people start facing the reality. The land can't be just given back and the natives are not going to go back to their "old ways". They need to look at new ways and we need to quit saying they are special. Whites were born here as well and all people should have equal rights.

Either that... or they fully embrace their heritage and keep their land as theirs, use only the tools they had 100 years ago to fish hunt and live and not the tools the white man put in his hands, and quit sucking tax dollars from the government and start paying taxes for their land. I pay property tax why the hell shouldn't they, if it is truly 'their' land.

"He (David Luggi) pointed to the Alcan agreement which gave that company the rights to the Nechako River water flows. It is his opinion that the controlled flows have had a disastrous effect on the sturgeon and salmon populations and only Alcan has benefited."

That is incorrect. Alcan benefited, but so did the province of B.C., Canada and all the people living here, including the natives.

Tens of thousands of well paid direct and indirect jobs in Kitimat and surrounding area were created, the province collected hundreds of millions (or more) in taxes as did the federal government since the construction of Kemano and Kitimat started in the early fifties.

The many billions of dollars that have been provided (and are still being provided annually) for the budget of the federal Indian Affairs department (7 or 8 billion every year) surely must come from somewhere: From taxes collected from business activities and from the hard work done every day by working Canadians.

Those dollars don't appear out of thin air like magic!

Some people ought to look around a bit and get and put two and two together.

"Whites were born here as well and all people should have equal rights."

Exactly!!! And it is for that reasons that we owe them the time and the opportunity to listen to them and take their concerns as seriously as any other person. While they may only have 5% or so of the provincial population, they have more like 10% in this part of the province and into the 20% and 30% as you get to the smaller communities. They are not arguing on the gorunds of that it is their land and that they do not want this kind of encroachment on it and what they say must be done. They are arguing for some very legitimate concerns.

"It is no longer "their" land". Actually, depending on how you look at it, that is not quite accurate.

"not going to go back to their "old ways"."

Again, that can mean living without modern conveniences. In that case, it is true. However, it means more than that.

I suspect that the Aboriginals get more support in the urban south than they do here.

"Alcan benefited, but so did the province of B.C., Canada and all the people living here, including the natives."

I could argue that "Alcan" has not benefitted. How can a non-person benefit? Those who benefitted include those you listed, but also those who had/have shares in Alcan and have been getting money from that.

Perhaps the First Nations and Aboriginals should receive direct payment from such companies by giving them meaningful shares in the companies and the feds giving the companies an equal tax break to the amount the First Nations will be paid dividends. That way the feds are not in the money laundering business and the First Nations will have a say in the operations of the companies.

BTW, we are not unique. These "struggles" are going on all over the world. In the northern part of the world, the situation with the Sámi of "Lapland" which crosses 4 countries, is an interesting one to study.

Look at the issues with as little prejudging as possible, that is the least the current generation of the inhabitants of this territory when Champlain founded Quebec City deserve.

BTW, that part of the country is still French, even after the English defeated them in battle.

Anyone want to start that argument?

Companies do not have to provide capacity for First Nations groups, that is the responsibility of government. Obviously there is an obligation to consult and companies should exercise a great degree of due diligence, but ultimately the land is owned by the Crown.

Chief Luggi said in today's Citizen that using rail to transport oil was also out of the question. So, we are set up for a confrontation which the First Nations dont want oil sent over their territories by any means and on the coast, the environmentalists are opposing tanker traffic. Enbridge is in for quite a battle, which I dont know if they will win.

Gus:"Perhaps the First Nations and Aboriginals should receive direct payment from such companies by giving them meaningful shares in the companies and the feds giving the companies an equal tax break to the amount the First Nations will be paid dividends."

We all live in the same society which functions with all the trappings that we are used to (and which keep us alive, in many instances) in this 21st century. We all ought to be treated the same. I would be disadvantaged and discriminated against unfairly by the special scheme you are suggesting.

In other words, forget it, as far as I am concerned.

Our modern society requires the extraction of resources such as oils, metals and minerals. Not forget the generation of electricity.

That is what puts the asphalt on the roads. That is what powers up the toaster, the microwave and the computer. Oh, not only that, and it powers up the operating room when we need a life saving operation.

Only if we choose a lifestyle of 200 years ago (without most of the above and all the other conveniences) can we preach about the evils of modern life.

Should we go about using the resources of the world in a responsible and least polluting manner? Absolutely.

Can we simply say let's not use any? No, only if we agree to live in caves and hunt and fish for sustenance. There aren't enough caves and wild game and fish around to keep very many of us alive.

A pipeline is one way to transport raw materials. A railroad is another method. Railcars regularly FALL OFF the rails and into lakes and rivers, don't they?

We must choose the least dangerous method and everybody's input and suggestions are important.

"“People love to recreate in this region, there are about 1,000 rivers and creeks that this pipeline has to cross to get to Kitimat, for me, the risks are too high.” David Luggi says if people don’t care about the risks, “try putting some 10W30 on your trout next time.”"

There are hundreds of pipelines in this world that cross rivers and creeks and some are even laid on the floor of seas and lakes. If they are constructed properly they don't cause any problems.

Everybody likes to recreate but how much recreation can one afford if one does not have a job?

Enough money to grease the skids [pay off some politicans] and the pipeline will go throuigh over any and all objections. Still think some people were compansated [bought]for the BC rail deal.

The Tribal Chief raises valid and reasonable concerns. They should be considered.

We have environmental catastrophes all over the country to remind us of what not to do.

>> These catastrophes were not unavoidable, they were the cheaper alternative to doing it right.

Lets not forget this pipeline is to be built to export oil, it is not for our own use. This oil will be used in countries that are taking away our jobs and now we will give them more of our resources. What will we get in return? What will be the payback? Is it worth the risk for export? I am just throwing some thoughts out there.

downnotout,

you make a very interesting point about BC Rail. There was money, visible and invisible, vanishing and still to be realized, in that deal with CN which is still sealed and secret.

Check out The Legislature Raids at http://bctrialofbasi-virk.com/ for news of Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm who will be presiding at a conference in Vancouver Supreme Court tomorrow about how things are going (or not going) in the BC Rail Trial.


And why are we discussing OIL, for gosh sakes! With only a few years of life left in this gasping old environment, should folks spend that precious time roaring around in Hummers made in China?

Jobs? Like, casinos provide "jobs" too, but not such a great life. Just sayin', one bad choice always seems to lead to another bad choice.

This isnt about addressing concerns. It sounds like a reasonable thing to do but there was no discussion being asked for herer. The chief says no and thinks that should be that. SOunds like a veto to me.
I do wonder what some people think we are going to do for a living. I dont rely on the tourist industry for my living, thank god. Those of you who want to, knock yourselves out. Maybe non natives ought to be thinking more about OUR children if we want them to have a future here. No wait, we are all going to retire to the south and live off of the stock market (read usury built upon resource extraction and near slavery conditions in the third world).

"the environmentalists are opposing tanker traffic"

Look back in history and you will find that when Alaska was proposing to build a pipeline to the coast and then send it south via Tanker traffic, there was a protest sent to the USA signed by most if not all Canadian parliamentarians of all parties. The reason was because it was a disaster waiting to happen along the Canadian coast.

The main one did happen with the Exxon Valdez in Alaskan waters.

Please do not blame aboriginals, please do not blame environmentalists ..... if anything that has changed since then is the due diligence of people sitting in parliament of whatever stripe they happen to be. They have a higher responsibility than many to walk the fine line between economic development and environmental concerns.

Remember, spills cost money too in addtion to damage.

In the matter of 1,000 years or more, that kind of damage is likely just a blip. Become lax and increase such incidents 10 times and even 100 times the world over, and it might have a bit more meaning. Certainly for those people that wish to enjoy the fruits of their labour right now.

Imagine a spill off Long Beach .. or Victoria and the Islands. People will be pissed then and it won`t be the Aboriginals that will be your main problem.

Ship Your Crude Oil Products on CN’s PipelineOnRail™
Today, when oil sands producers need to transport crude oil products, they look for unprecedented connectivity, scalability, flexibility, reliability and speed – all with minimum impact on the environment. We offer a viable solution called CN's PipelineOnRail™.

PipelineOnRail™ is an economically sound, surprisingly fast way to ship crude oil products within Alberta, to the rest of Canada, the U.S. Midwest, the Gulf coast, and other export markets.

Connect to your markets in North America and overseas
It goes beyond reach, to true connectivity. Our pipeline on rail is already in place. There is no need to wait for new infrastructure or invest in it. And because our pipeline runs on our rails, it's multi-directional.

CN offers the most extensive network to and from the oil sands regions of Peace River, Athabasca, Cold Lake and Saskatchewan. This outstanding connectivity is complemented by our transcontinental network. It reaches into markets throughout Alberta, the rest of Canada, the U.S. Midwest and Gulf coast. Add the power of our alliance partners and you have access to the majority of refining and terminal capacity on the U.S. Gulf coast.

Expand your horizons and use our unparalleled port connections on three coasts to support your inernational trade initiatives.

Get the capacity you need to match your volume requirements
Scalability is a key benefit of our PipelineOnRail™. It means that we offer you capacity made to order to meet your volume requirements.

We have the capacity to move crude oil products on our network today. You can start with as few as 1,000 barrels a day. We can grow together to as many as 200,000 barrels per day or more.

We already move diluent, pipe, aggregate, steel, cement, sulphur, and petroleum coke into and out of the oil producing regions of western Canada. We're presently developing solutions for transporting CO2. We really are the total transportation solutions provider for the oil sands industry.

We deliver your crude oil products responsibly
Running a safe operation without anyone getting hurt and without damaging the environment is a top priority at CN. That philosophy is reflected in every aspect of our business, including our partnership in Responsible Care®.

Our safety initiatives extend to the railcars on our tracks. The double-hulled railcars we will use for the PipelineOnRail™ meet stringent safety specifications. Testing for strength and durability makes us confident of their integrity for the long term. We never compromise on safety. A continuing focus on reducing our greenhouse gases has produced impressive results. Today, we can ship one tonne of freight 197 kilometres on just one litre of fuel. When you choose CN's PipelineOnRail™, you choose to ship cleaner and greener.

Take advantage of the flexibility of PipelineOnRail™
Because our PipelineOnRail™ is flexible, we can deliver to any point on our network or interchange with other railroads. We're multi-directional, so you can ship to one destination or half a dozen.

Product segregation is another plus. You can ship a variety of crude oil products with virtually no possibility of cross contamination – even reload railcars with diluent for a return move.

When you use CN's PipelineOnRail™, you move the volume you want, where you want, when you want. That's true flexibility.

We speed your crude oil products to market
We can deliver your crude oil products from Alberta to the U.S. Gulf coast up to five times faster than you might expect. Thanks to our precision railroading model, you'll get reliability, velocity, time, and value for money. Our PipelineOnRail™ is ready to benefit you today.

Contact CN's PipelineOnRail™ expert
If you need a transportation solution for the shipment of your crude oil products, contact our PipelineOnRail™ expert, Randy Meyer, at 403-299-0660 or send him an email.

Rail is a good solution. Existing right of way. Increase capacity on the track for future growth after oil .... and that time is not that far off. Support from First Nations required for that ... I doubt it.

Oil is transported by rail in many other countries. Special tanker cars built for that. Spills .. yes, but small compared to sea going vessels and even small for serious ruptures on pipelines.

In case anyone is interested in the far bigger picture, have a look at this article.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/francis/archive/2009/04/09/cn-s-pipeline-on-rails.aspx

Look at the dollars. A big surprise to me at least. This is big money. Give PG an extra 5 cents of that and we can be out of the red and into the black very quickly.

"Currently, pipelines charge C$17.95 per barrel to ship oil from Alberta to the gulf coast."

So now we have an interesting debate.

1. shipping by rail means a doubling of track = construction jobs all the way down the line.

2. Shipping by rail = on going additional operational and maintenance jobs along the line.

Number 2 is probably similar to the pipeline situation.

Number 1 may be the same number of construction jobs as a pipeline.

The rail is flexible and any track capacity increase means other goods can be delivered in that fashion - such a chips along the line from small chipping operations close to where the dead pine is being removed, local trucking and then onto rail cars to feed mills wherever they may be - pulp, cogen, pellets, syngas, etc. etc.

Pipeline is short lived, another corridor with little alternate use in the future.

Get First Nations out of your mind and think outside the box about which one of these will actually help the economic development of the region the transportation corridor passes through the most in the short and the long term.

BC mary google oil seeps, here is one site,http://www.newkerala.com/nkfullnews-1-38158.html. Much more oil seeps naturally than is spilled.

I got oil seeping ou in my backyard .....

There is tons seeping out of the banks of the Fraser each day.

All very natural.

You can drown in water. But, without water we would not have life on this earth, at least not the kind we know.

It is my belief that everything in and on the earth is for the use of everyone on this planet. Some of us are responsible for sharing what we have with those who don't have. That is pretty much why many of us have jobs by the way.

We need to have jobs so we can provide for our families. Unfortunately, there are those who just want a share of everything and don't want to do anything for it.

There may come a time when one of the groups will stop all development for one reason or another. Natives, Environmental, Labour or lack of labourers, Government or Corporations who have just given up trying to develop our resources in this province.

Eventually, the money supply will also dry up. Because businesses, who provide all of the jobs, all of the money and all of the risk to develop any product or service will just go elsewhere.

When they leave, we can all go back to our heritage. Whatever that may be and forget about any future financial contributions to our lifestyles.

Does Carrier Sekani have any solutions? Or, are they just saying no?

Solutions to what? Someone wants to move oil from Alberta Tar Sands to the users of the oil. Moving it west is only one of the options. Not only that, but it is not the exclusive movement.

Moving oil to other countries is much like selling logs to other countries. There is no value added other than a few short term construction jobs and a smaller number of maintenance jobs.

The pipe is not manufactured in BC. Neither is most of the construction equipment. The bulk of the money to put such a line in place is spent elsewhere.

People are upset at the Canfors of the world abandoning the communities. What about a pipeline owner?

Gus I'm glad to see you're on board. I like the rail idea much more as a potential solution for a number of reasons.

I think the spills would be much more limited and instantly identified. Huge important issue for me. One look at how much the Salmon Valley River moved this year and I'm not convinced any pipeline in BC is truly safe.

Exporting oil via pipeline has next to zero multiplier effect on our local economy and thus the big dollars mentioned are only a fraction of the real value it brings to our economy. We will gain a few construction jobs and thats it.

A railroad solution builds on our infrastructure that can be used and utilized for a vast range of future sustainable diversification. A pipeline is a dead end project for a single captive use.

The Mackenzie delta is now considered the worlds largest untapped source of oil and gas. This will be the next oil sands scale of project in the world with tens of billions invested in the coming couple of decades to extract that oil. PG needs to become the focal point for that development with the extension of the BCR Dease Lake line through to Whitehorse and Alaska. If we expand that line north we capture all the industrial development of the Mackenzie delta... and if we already are a shipping center for oil/gas on rails, then we become the center for shipping all that product south from the Arctic and the spin off to PG would be in the tens of billions and our population would likely grow five fold to meet the demand.

A pipeline kills PG's strategic advantage IMO.

Also if its for the export market then why not have them incur the cost of developing our infrastructure like our rail transportation network with many spin off benefits.

Giving them the cheep option short changes the potential of this region, solely to provide cheep resources to foreigners.

Furthermore if we leverage our support for CN over Enbridge we might be able to get CN to use PG as its base of operations for construction and maintenance of the special rail cars required for this kind of service... they will need thousands of those and it would mean thousands of jobs that are PG's for the taking IMO... if we were to use our leverage to make CN's dream become a reality. Clearly their eye is on the potential for the west coast route and we are the leverage point for that strategy. Far far more benefits to PG getting on that train, then on the pipeline IMO. We would also be central to the Mackenzie Delta development when it comes.

In addition to the potential to leverage our city as the key center for the biggest transformational economic development to North America since the computer put Silicon Valley on the map... we would also then see our local refinery having a bevy of sources for crude, rather than the current monopoly pipeline source, and as a result we should likely have the lowest cost energy in North America with the added supply competition.

Time Will Tell

The pipeline at this point IMO is akin to a PG bi-pass for any further future economic development.

The pipeline can be detoured around sensitive areas at additional cost. They just want the shortest, most direct route for the sake of cheapest cost. Putting pipelines into dirt and aggregate makes spill cleanup much easier and less costly than running it through waterways. Dirt contains spills, water spreads them like wildfire. There are solutions - $.

yo, guys, in this whole pipeline vs rail debate, why do you think that PG has anything to say in the matter? I enbridge propsing that as an alternative or are you all just in favour of govt control of how oil is shipped? Is there reason to believe that the company (or some other) wont just ship it south by pipeline and then west to port?
Maybe you are figuring on using the natives self interest for your own purposes? Besides, i thought the chief said no to rail as well...

And by the way, i always put 30 weight on my trout....where do people come up with these rediculous statements?

I prefer synthetic, it doesn't leave an aftertaste.