Great fantasy reading!

“The concern seems to be greatest the closer you get to the coast” says Doering who says the concern seems to be “We’re introducing risk but we’re not really bringing enough benefits to those communities.” - in other words, pay them more and they will shutup and go away.

Well I for one m very skeptical..
even a small spill will be disastrous..
but unless the First Nations people want it stopped, you can bet it will happen...

...a spill like when a few drops comes out of the hose at the gas station when you are filling up your car? Seriously, listen to yourselves, you're all hypocrites.

There is 55,000 miles of oil pipelines in the US alone. outside of selling off our oil seems a safe system of transportation to me.

Please be careful with who you call hypocrites, gamblor. Do you mean that people who use oil and its byproducts are hypocrites because they accept low standard transportation systems like a bunch of patsies? Well, in that case you are right.

But there are those who want better standards and quite rightfully so. There are not that many MAJOR spills. There is virtually no chance of a spill happening all along the line. However, the chance of a spill happening somewhere along the line, plus the portion of shipping from Rupert, is fairly high. High enough that we ought to know what is in place to prevent spills from happening for situations likely to be encountered and what are the cleanup methods in place for when they happen.

Without getting too exotic and looking at past spills the world over or the USA or even Embridge's poor record, let's just look at this one.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070725/spill_environment_070725/20070726?hub=Specials

3 years ago in Burnaby. Over 200,000 litres in one location. That is quite a few more than just "drops out of the hose at the gas" as you like to put it.

The article then goes on to talk about a spill of 29,000 the year before in Squamish. And 1,000 litres in Burrard inlet in the same year.

We then go to who pays. "Dickie said Canada's laws are at least a decade behind those of other countries." in that regard.

"Starting in 1995, the United States requires the responsible party to pick up all the clean-up costs, including wildlife rescue. Ships coming into a U.S. port must make arrangements with both a spill control company and an oiled wildlife response firm.

"Canada's rules don't require companies to pay for the cost of saving wildlife except in the narrow case of species at risk, she said. In Europe, the responsible party must pay for everything."

So what does the average person on here really know about the number of spills, where they occurred, what were the damages, who paid (as in the taxpayer for example as opposed to the people using the product through a few cents more at the pump for that coverage).

So here is the part about the few drops from the hose at the service station.

"While newsworthy spills are relatively few in number, small ones are common events. In a 2005 online article, Environment Canada reported at least 12 SPILLS PER DAY OCCUR IN CANADA. At least one of those occurs in navigable waters."

We are talking about the newsworthy ones, and we are talking about the whole transportation system that is associated with this new proposed line, especially the part that is in Canada.

So, if you and others like yoou want to shove the whole question of standards under the rug, be my guest. I, and several others chose not to. We do not need to be called hypocrites or any other names. We are free to do as we please, as are you.

I will not stoop so low as to call you and others like you naive and uninformed, however. That will not accomplish a thing.