The Conservatives should make the polluter pay- Mandatory insurance - Oil spills can

[Goober]

The Conservatives should make the polluter pay- Mandatory insurance - Oil spills can run into billions.
What has been proposed in the past leaves the taxpayer on the hook

Canada’s environmental protection must keep pace with economic development | Full Comment | National Post

If two weeks in China teaches you anything, it is the perils of growth-at-all-cost. Lack of environmental protection there has left much of the country facing what Internet users are calling “airpocalypse.”

The latest report by the environment commissioner does not suggest Canada is anywhere close to China’s level of ecological degradation, but Scott Vaughan said he is concerned environmental protection is failing to keep pace with economic development.

“It’s clear there is a natural resources boom … Maybe it’s time for a boom in terms of environmental protection to protect Canadians’ health and to protect the Canadian economy,” he said.

Specifically, he pointed to gaps in environmental safeguards such as the low level of inspections in major resource projects; continuing government tax incentives that support fossil fuel extraction; slow progress in establishing marine protection areas; and, a lack of co-ordination between East Coast petroleum boards and the federal government if they had to respond to a major oil spill. In that case, the Canadian Coast Guard has no mandate to respond to a major oil spill, he said.

This pointed out Canada’s nuclear industry is liable for just $75-million in the event of an accident, which is minuscule compared to Germany, where liability for operators is $3-billion, and Japan, where liability is unlimited and operators must carry insurance of $1.5-billion. Similarly, offshore oil and gas liability is limited to $30-million to $40-million, compared to $249.8-million in Britain.

Stephen Harper replied the polluter pay principle remains at the centre of his responsible resource development agenda and more action will be taken in the future.

Legislation to increase liability to $650-million has been introduced in previous parliaments and Peter Kent, the environment minister, said work is under way to address the financial assurances issue.

 

[mentalfloss]

Mulcair was saying this at the beginning of his term.

 

[Goober]

Mulcair was saying this at the beginning of his term.

The laws regarding oil spills ave been on the books for decades. Google the Irving spill - oil barge sunk off PEI.
We have been laggards to say the least.
I do not recall Mulcair speaking directly to to points in the OP. Does not mean he did not, just that I do not recall him specifically commenting on costs etc from oil spills.

 

[damngrumpy]

I do recall Mulcair addressing the issue but I don't remember all the details either.
This government won't be doing any such thing though, the western oil crowd is
the very smiley group that ensured he came to power. Our wonderful PM is the
guy they will turn to, to force the pipeline down BC's throat if we don't simply roll
over and allow it to go ahead. I hope the people of BC fight this thing to the end.
Not just because its a bad thing for BC but for us to stand up for our right as a
Province. No Christie Clarke is not standing up for BC she merely put a price on
the environment. We should not be shipping energy to Asia to have them use our
energy to compete for manufacturing jobs around the world. Building up a serious
threat to our security is madness at best. Send the pipeline East/West and take
care of our own market first. What ever spills from the tap could go to America if
they have the cash to pay for it.
America has its own oil and gas granted let them uncap it and use it for their own
development. They have been sitting on their own reserves for years and using ours
and everyone else's and that is somehow a good thing. If we adopted that policy it
would be terrible for some reason. We have to think about our own interests now
and in the future. Selfish, maybe but a nation should look after itself first and the world
later.

 

[L Gilbert]

The Conservatives should make the polluter pay- Mandatory insurance - Oil spills can run into billions.
What has been proposed in the past leaves the taxpayer on the hook

Canada’s environmental protection must keep pace with economic development | Full Comment | National Post

If two weeks in China teaches you anything, it is the perils of growth-at-all-cost. Lack of environmental protection there has left much of the country facing what Internet users are calling “airpocalypse.”

The latest report by the environment commissioner does not suggest Canada is anywhere close to China’s level of ecological degradation, but Scott Vaughan said he is concerned environmental protection is failing to keep pace with economic development.

“It’s clear there is a natural resources boom … Maybe it’s time for a boom in terms of environmental protection to protect Canadians’ health and to protect the Canadian economy,” he said.

Specifically, he pointed to gaps in environmental safeguards such as the low level of inspections in major resource projects; continuing government tax incentives that support fossil fuel extraction; slow progress in establishing marine protection areas; and, a lack of co-ordination between East Coast petroleum boards and the federal government if they had to respond to a major oil spill. In that case, the Canadian Coast Guard has no mandate to respond to a major oil spill, he said.

This pointed out Canada’s nuclear industry is liable for just $75-million in the event of an accident, which is minuscule compared to Germany, where liability for operators is $3-billion, and Japan, where liability is unlimited and operators must carry insurance of $1.5-billion. Similarly, offshore oil and gas liability is limited to $30-million to $40-million, compared to $249.8-million in Britain.

Stephen Harper replied the polluter pay principle remains at the centre of his responsible resource development agenda and more action will be taken in the future.

Legislation to increase liability to $650-million has been introduced in previous parliaments and Peter Kent, the environment minister, said work is under way to address the financial assurances issue.

Personally, I don't see the reason behind caps on liabilities.

If an excavator screws up and causes property damage because of operator misuse or abuse, why would or should the manufacturer or mechanic be liable for any restorations?

In the case of an oil spill caused by a company's faulty equipment or handling, why should any other concern be liable. F'n idiocy.

 

[relic]

Guess who will be stuck with the claenup bill,over and above the pathetic bit the company is required to pay? You,me,and likely our grandchildren.There's a big difference between 75 million and the 40 billion it cost to "clean up" the Gulf there a couple of years ago.

 

[taxslave]

I do recall Mulcair addressing the issue but I don't remember all the details either.
This government won't be doing any such thing though, the western oil crowd is
the very smiley group that ensured he came to power. Our wonderful PM is the
guy they will turn to, to force the pipeline down BC's throat if we don't simply roll
over and allow it to go ahead. I hope the people of BC fight this thing to the end.
Not just because its a bad thing for BC but for us to stand up for our right as a
Province. No Christie Clarke is not standing up for BC she merely put a price on
the environment. We should not be shipping energy to Asia to have them use our
energy to compete for manufacturing jobs around the world. Building up a serious
threat to our security is madness at best. Send the pipeline East/West and take
care of our own market first. What ever spills from the tap could go to America if
they have the cash to pay for it.
America has its own oil and gas granted let them uncap it and use it for their own
development. They have been sitting on their own reserves for years and using ours
and everyone else's and that is somehow a good thing. If we adopted that policy it
would be terrible for some reason. We have to think about our own interests now
and in the future. Selfish, maybe but a nation should look after itself first and the world
later.

Us working people WANT the pipelines and ports. It is only you idle rich that don't want any economic activity.

 

[darkbeaver]

Yeah! "make the polluter pay" wow what an innovative idea.
Canada’s environmental protection must keep pace with economic development

The model of economic development employed in the free west is based largely on ignoring the environment except for annual innovative ideas like consultant studies which probably go to the lowest bidder. Until the heading reads' Economic development must keep pace with environmental protection' expect more studies. Dreamers

China will teach us how to knit socks and cobble boots.

 

[petros]

Who picks up the cost of a plane crash?

 

[karrie]

I for one would much prefer to pay for the cost of clean up at the end, via gov taxes to cover cleanup costs, or in fines levied against the company to cover cleanup costs.


By paying at the beginning, via insurance, we add yet another set of pockets we have to pay to line. So, rather than taxes or gas prices going up $.05 cents, let's say, per Canadian to cover a cleanup, our gas prices will go up $.07, to ensure that the insurance companies profit too.

Thanks but no thanks.

 

[taxslave]

Last time a fuel truck flipped over on the highway it cost the company quite a bit of change in clean up costs. Don't know how much directly and how much insurance covered.

 

[petros]

Last time a fuel truck flipped over on the highway it cost the company quite a bit of change in clean up costs. Don't know how much directly and how much insurance covered.

Have you notice the increase of surface bulk storage tanks at gas stations these days?

How many insurance compaines are up to their tits in debt and other liabilities since 08?

Insurance is basically gambling with somebody ele's money and then jacking off the dog to feed the cat until a claim is paid off.

 

[Goober]

Who picks up the cost of a plane crash?

Plane crashes do not run into 100 million or a couple of billion.

 

[petros]

Plane crashes do not run into 100 million or a couple of billion.

“It’s going to be an expensive claim,” said Stephen Riley, executive director of Global Aerospace Underwriting Managers Ltd., which has 7.5 percent of the plane’s coverage.“This will be the largest loss to the insurance market arising from an aircraft accident since that loss in late 2001,” when a flight from AMR Corp.’s American Airlines crashed in Queens, New York killing 265 people and costing about $600 million, he said.

Ful story http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=arLJ560WUeSk

More than the record 600Million? That doesnt sound cheap.

I hope you realize insurance companies have caps and govt backing when the cap is surpassed?

 

[captain morgan]

Who picks up the cost of a plane crash?

How about tornadoes, hurricanes, floods and ice storms?

Plane crashes do not run into 100 million or a couple of billion.

Pipelines don't run into people either.

 

[petros]

Pipelines cmpanies don't own tanker ships.

 

[captain morgan]

Pipelines cmpanies don't own tanker ships.

Hundreds of car accidents across the country everyday... Lots of those result in transmission fluid, oil, rad fluid leaking all over the place.... Who pays for the heinous enviro damage as it leaks into the water table and harms billions of plants, animals and people?

I say we charge Tim Hortons for the costs as lots of folks drive with their coffee

 

[petros]

If you're going to gamble on disaster, sell short on Westjet over 24 months.

They are due...

WestJet has not had any fatal aircraft accidents. According to Wikipedia, the
incidents that they have had are:

In November 2003, a WestJet Boeing
737-700 aircraft carrying 57 passengers including crew, had to return to
Calgary, seven minutes after taking off when one of its turbofan engines failed.
The plane landed without incident.

In June, 2006, a WestJet Boeing
737-700 aircraft carrying 103 passengers including crew, had to return to
Vancouver, thirty five minutes after taking off due to the failure of one of the
flight control systems. The plane landed without incident.

In August,
2007, a WestJet Boeing 737-700 aircraft carrying 136 passengers, including crew,
had a close call at Los Angeles International Airport. A WestJet plane arriving
from Calgary nearly collided with a Northwest Airlines airplane that was taking
off from a parallel runway. The plane took off without incident.

On
September 6, 2007, a WestJet Boeing 737-700 aircraft en route to Halifax from
Calgary encountered sudden turbulence just north of Sudbury Ontario, causing a
sharp drop which injured 9 passengers. The plane carried on to Halifax and
landed without incident.

On February 17, 2008, a WestJet Boeing 737-700
aircraft over-ran runway 07 at Ottawa (CYOW) and slid into a snowbank. No
injuries were reported and the Transportation Safety Board of Canada is
investigating the cause.[20]

On April 18, 2008, a WestJet Boeing 737-700
aircraft en route from Hamilton to Calgary carrying 106 people including crew
had to make an emergency landing at Winnipeg International Airport because of a
potential hydraulic issue. No one was injured and the plane landed without
incident.

On August 29, 2008, a WestJet aircraft developed engine
problems after taking off from Calgary International Airport heading to Winnipeg
and was forced to make an emergency landing after one of the engines shut off.
The plane turned back and landed without incident.

I say we charge Tim Hortons for the costs as lots of folks drive with their coffee

And litter clean up. Spring is coming. Millions of tossed away cups will be emerging from the snowbanks.

 

[captain morgan]

If you're going to gamble on disaster, sell short on Westjet over 24 months.

They are due...

Interesting stat... I'm going to keep an eye out (not being morbid or anything)

And litter clean up. Spring is coming. Millions of tossed away cups will be emerging from the snowbanks.

That's a double-double risk...... Think of all the people that will be scanning the ditches while driving highway speed in an attempt to identify the cups that haven't had the rim rolled-up yet.

Think that we can get the gvt to hold the forestry and paper-cup companies responsible for this?

 

[Goober]

How about tornadoes, hurricanes, floods and ice storms?



Pipelines don't run into people either.

Exxon Valdez