Northern Gateway "flawed,” 300 scientists tell Stephen Harper


mentalfloss
#1
Northern Gateway "flawed,” 300 scientists tell Stephen Harper

Weeks before the federal government’s deadline to announce a decision on Enbridge’s Northern Gateway project, 300 scientists are urging Prime Minister Stephen Harper to reject the findings of the panel that recommended approving the pipeline, calling them “flawed” and unscientific.

The issue isn’t the just pipeline itself, say the authors in a letter signed by researchers from a wide cast of disciplines, including Canada Research Chairs, former government scientists, and scholars from the U.S., U.K. and elsewhere.

Their critique centres on evidence being weighed by the Harper government: the findings produced by the Northern Gateway project Joint Review Panel, a board set up to assess the environmental impact of the pipeline, which, if built, would transport 500,000 barrels of crude daily from Alberta’s oilsands to the B.C. coast.o

In December, the panel recommended approving the pipeline as long as 209 conditions are met.

“There have been references to the review being science-based,” said Eric Taylor, a University of British Columbia zoology professor and letter co-author. “We thought we should test that assumption by looking at the joint review panel report almost as we would a scientific publication, to see if it was rigorous.”

They found it to be lacking.

The risk-benefit analysis of the pipeline, they say, factors in the economic benefits of global markets, but describes only local and regional environmental risks and does not take into account the global effects of greenhouse gas emissions.

The review panel also concluded that marine mammals in B.C. waters would not suffer, while recovery plans for at-risk Pacific species including whales, otters, and sea lions specifically mention vessel collisions and industrial noise as threats.

The scientists also said the panel took some of the pipeline proponents’ evidence without question, such as claims that the consequences of an oil spill would not be widespread or permanent, when the behaviour of bitumen in marine waters is uncertain. In other areas, they said, the panel failed to meet the threshold of “justification, transparency, and intelligibility” that is expected of administrative tribunals.

Northern Gateway "flawed,” 300 scientists tell Stephen Harper
 
Corduroy
+3
#2
Alternate headling: 300 scientists think Stephen Harper gives a **** what they think.
 
petros
+2
#3
That's too bad. It going ahead whether they like it or not.
 
mentalfloss
#4
Yea, who needs science anyway.
 
petros
#5
You don't.
 
mentalfloss
#6
You don't.
 
petros
+1
#7
Of course not. What is whale or two worth when divied up by 36Million over 41.5 years, .000006¢? Big deal.
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
+1
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Yea, who needs science anyway.

Junk Science absolutely.
 
Walter
#9
Is that 300 of the 97% kind of scientist? Publish their names so we can verify that they actually said what the article says.
 
Cliffy
Free Thinker
+3 / -1
#10
With something like 87% of British Colombians opposed to this travesty, there will be blood shed on that pipeline. Phuque that abortion called the oil sands and the international oil cartels that are pushing it.
 
petros
+1
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

With something like 87% of British Colombians opposed to this travesty, there will be blood shed on that pipeline. Phuque that abortion called the oil sands and the international oil cartels that are pushing it.

LOL.......you're funny.

Quote: Originally Posted by WalterView Post

Is that 300 of the 97% kind of scientist? Publish their names so we can verify that they actually said what the article says.

300 Ufologists.
 
Cliffy
Free Thinker
+2 / -1
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

LOL.......you're funny.

Too bad you and Wally don't have a sense of humour.
 
petros
+1
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Too bad you and Wally don't have a sense of humour.

I do. You make laugh all the time.
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
+2
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

With something like 87% of British Colombians opposed to this travesty, there will be blood shed on that pipeline. Phuque that abortion called the oil sands and the international oil cartels that are pushing it.

Anyone standing between working people and our paycheques wil be sheding blood all right. We are going to build this thing and anyone not liking it can either leave or become part of the roadbed.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+2
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

With something like 87% of British Colombians opposed to this travesty, there will be blood shed on that pipeline. Phuque that abortion called the oil sands and the international oil cartels that are pushing it.

Sorry Cliff, I hate to tell ya but there are no Starbucks anywhere close to it... Might wanna let your warriors in on that little detail.

Sorry bud
 
Tecumsehsbones
+4
#16  Top Rated Post
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Northern Gateway "flawed,” 300 scientists tell Stephen Harper

Weeks before the federal government’s deadline to announce a decision on Enbridge’s Northern Gateway project, 300 scientists are urging Prime Minister Stephen Harper to reject the findings of the panel that recommended approving the pipeline, calling them “flawed” and unscientific.

The issue isn’t the just pipeline itself, say the authors in a letter signed by researchers from a wide cast of disciplines, including Canada Research Chairs, former government scientists, and scholars from the U.S., U.K. and elsewhere.

But, floss, they're not pipeline scientists. There's no such thing as pipeline science. We know this because no university offers a degree in pipeline science. And geologists, metallurgists, physicists, and chemists cannot possibly offer any useful insights on pipelines because they're not pipeline scientists. Therefore, any criticism of any pipeline proposal is junk science by unqualified incompetents who are being paid off by the ultra-rich and ultra-powerful green lobby, which is maliciously bent on taking the bread out of the mouths of poor, humble, hardworking, mom n' pop multinational oil companies who cannot hope to match the sheer wealth and power of the green lobby.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#17
Awwww... You feeling a little poorly 'cause of the mean ole pipeline?
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
+3
#18
Consider this: Oil is going to flow to ports. Pipe, train or truck. Take your pick.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+3
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Consider this: Oil is going to flow to ports. Pipe, train or truck. Take your pick.


His warriors will make sure that doesn't happen... Only enough oil will flow through to keep their SUVs running and that's it!
 
petros
+1
#20
The warriors are worried they'll have no excuse to not work.
 
mentalfloss
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by TecumsehsbonesView Post

But, floss, they're not pipeline scientists. There's no such thing as pipeline science. We know this because no university offers a degree in pipeline science. And geologists, metallurgists, physicists, and chemists cannot possibly offer any useful insights on pipelines because they're not pipeline scientists. Therefore, any criticism of any pipeline proposal is junk science by unqualified incompetents who are being paid off by the ultra-rich and ultra-powerful green lobby, which is maliciously bent on taking the bread out of the mouths of poor, humble, hardworking, mom n' pop multinational oil companies who cannot hope to match the sheer wealth and power of the green lobby.

Ha!

Best post of the thread.

So much win.
 
Cliffy
Free Thinker
#22
Retired sea captain: Don't be fooled by Harper's pipeline plans



I've sailed every part of this coast, seen just about every kind of storm, squall or system, and I've experienced every kind of tide, current or cycle imaginable. With this in mind I believe I am qualified to ask the simplest of questions: Why would anyone in their right mind ever consider the proposition of running supertankers through the seascape around Kitimat?
Every skipper would describe the conditions in B.C. as "unpredictable." This aptly pertains to anywhere along our coast but gains special meaning when applied to the labyrinth of inlets and islands along the route out of Kitimat. There are simply too many variables at play to guarantee safety, and there have been only too many wrecks to prove it. These include the carcass of the U.S. Warship M.S. Zalinski currently leaking its 700 tons of fuel oil into the estuary, and the ill-fated Queen of the North that sunk as recently as 2006.




more: Retired sea captain: Don't be fooled by Harper's pipeline plans | rabble.ca (external - login to view)
 
petros
+2
#23
Cliff.

How many bauxite bulkers have went down in those waters on their way to the recently expanded aluminum smelter?

Are you aware of the ship traffic the will be in and out of those waters when the Asia Pacific Gateway port is complete?

No one at the lunatic pow wow made mention? Nothing on YouTube either? Why not?

BC already spent the money the Feds paid to build this entire system. It's too late.
 
Dixie Cup
Libertarian
+2
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

With something like 87% of British Colombians opposed to this travesty, there will be blood shed on that pipeline. Phuque that abortion called the oil sands and the international oil cartels that are pushing it.



Of course they are. Where do you think all the ecco's are getting their funding form? The fact of the matter is that pipelines are safer now than they've ever been and nothing can be done without the what, 209 recommendations being put in place first.


But, I suppose if BC'ers are so anti pipeline, the trains will just have to increase their loads of oil. Sigh - now THAT's a disaster waiting to happen fer sure!


JMHO
 
damngrumpy
No Party Affiliation
#25
Enbridge started by trying an end around the truth and they have no credibility
I am hoping they don't get this thing off the ground. Kinder Morgan I have no
problem with but this outfit is reckless at best incompetent at worst.
Yes BC folks are opposed to this potential threat and when the election comes
if Harper insists on pushing it he will lose a lot of votes maybe that is a good thing
in itself
 
Dixie Cup
Libertarian
#26
[QUOTE=Cliffy;1932624]Retired sea captain: Don't be fooled by Harper's pipeline plans



I've sailed every part of this coast, seen just about every kind of storm, squall or system, and I've experienced every kind of tide, current or cycle imaginable. With this in mind I believe I am qualified to ask the simplest of questions: Why would anyone in their right mind ever consider the proposition of running supertankers through the seascape around Kitimat?
Every skipper would describe the conditions in B.C. as "unpredictable." This aptly pertains to anywhere along our coast but gains special meaning when applied to the labyrinth of inlets and islands along the route out of Kitimat. There are simply too many variables at play to guarantee safety, and there have been only too many wrecks to prove it. These include the carcass of the U.S. Warship M.S. Zalinski currently leaking its 700 tons of fuel oil into the estuary, and the ill-fated Queen of the North that sunk as recently as 2006.

Now this I could likely get behind if this is the case. I too would object. I have no idea of what the coast line is like. If this is the reason for the protest, then damn it, say so. If there is an issue with the location of the terminal - say so and demand that the location be changed to a more practical location. But don't go on about anti oil - OMG.


This whole thing is pissing me off now. Maybe the pipeline should go in a more southerly direction. I vaguely remember hearing about an existing pipeline that goes either through or around Vancouver - why not piggy back on that? There's never been an issue with that pipeline.


Talk about misdirection. This is insane!!


JMHO
 
Cliffy
Free Thinker
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by Dixie CupView Post

Now this I could likely get behind if this is the case. I too would object. I have no idea of what the coast line is like. If this is the reason for the protest, then damn it, say so. If there is an issue with the location of the terminal - say so and demand that the location be changed to a more practical location. But don't go on about anti oil - OMG.


This whole thing is pissing me off now. Maybe the pipeline should go in a more southerly direction. I vaguely remember hearing about an existing pipeline that goes either through or around Vancouver - why not piggy back on that? There's never been an issue with that pipeline.


Talk about misdirection. This is insane!!


JMHO

Tankers are the main reason this pipeline has so much resistance, that and it goes through so much wilderness. Enridge has a a very bad rep for pipeline safety. So just about everyone who lives on the route, natives and non-natives, is opposed.

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Cliff.

How many bauxite bulkers have went down in those waters on their way to the recently expanded aluminum smelter?

Show me a comparison to the sizes of bauxite tankers and the super oil tankers going through those waters.
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

With something like 87% of British Colombians opposed to this travesty, there will be blood shed on that pipeline. Phuque that abortion called the oil sands and the international oil cartels that are pushing it.


Who is this "87%" comprised of? No one asked me or anyone that I know!

Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpyView Post

Enbridge started by trying an end around the truth and they have no credibility
I am hoping they don't get this thing off the ground. Kinder Morgan I have no
problem with but this outfit is reckless at best incompetent at worst.
Yes BC folks are opposed to this potential threat and when the election comes
if Harper insists on pushing it he will lose a lot of votes maybe that is a good thing
in itself


First of all I think British Columbians have to figure out if the pipeline and tankers are a benefit, IF DONE PROPERLY. Once that hurdle is figured out then strict rules have to be in place so that it so it operates properly 100% of the time and obviously that means lots of watch dogs and fail proof mechanisms in place. Can all that happen and the operation still be profitable? There's the answer. Oh yeah and don't forget the cost of ample insurance. If Embridge can't be trusted to deliver properly are there other outfits who can?
Last edited by JLM; Jun 15th, 2014 at 09:50 PM..
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
+2
#29
Bring on the pipelines! ! Empty the starbucks! Release the krakin!
 
petros
+1
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpyView Post

Enbridge started by trying an end around the truth and they have no credibility
I am hoping they don't get this thing off the ground. Kinder Morgan I have no
problem with but this outfit is reckless at best incompetent at worst.
Yes BC folks are opposed to this potential threat and when the election comes
if Harper insists on pushing it he will lose a lot of votes maybe that is a good thing
in itself

It's a done deal. BC already took the money 10 years ago. This is Chretiens puppy Harper is just caring for the pooch until the next PM.

Did you look into Conoco yet?

Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

Who is this "87%" comprised of? No one asked me or anyone that I know!




First of all I think British Columbian have to figure out if the pipeline and tankers are a benefit, IF DONE PROPERLY. Once that hurdle is figured out then strict rules have to be in place so that it so it operates properly 100% of the time and obviously that means lots of watch dogs and fail proof mechanisms in place. Can all that happen and the operation still be profitable? There's the answer. Oh yeah and don't forget the cost of ample insurance. If Embridge can't be trusted to deliver properly are there other outfits who can?

Ever seen the refineries in Puget Sound fed with Alaskan oil. How does the oil get into Puget Sound?

Quote: Originally Posted by Retired_Can_SoldierView Post

Bring on the pipelines! ! Empty the starbucks! Release the krakin!

There is already too much crackin' in BC. One of the most cracked out and jib rat infested places on the planet. Sh-t I almost forgot one of the highest density of indoor weed that sucks up more of their energy than heavy industry and none of it taxable.

Deadbeats the whole bloody hypocritical lot of them.

Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Tankers are the main reason this pipeline has so much resistance, that and it goes through so much wilderness. Enridge has a a very bad rep for pipeline safety. So just about everyone who lives on the route, natives and non-natives, is opposed.


Show me a comparison to the sizes of bauxite tankers and the isuper oil tankers going through those waters.

Wilderness? Are you serious?
Volume princess. It's all about volume.
 

Similar Threads

36
Northern Gateway not a sure thing, Harper says
by mentalfloss | Jan 14th, 2014
14
Northern Gateway may be a Railroad
by jjaycee98 | Jan 30th, 2012
25
Sign Reads "Stephen Harper Eats Babies."
by the caracal kid | May 2nd, 2006
no new posts