First Nations pipeline has a plan to get around B.C. oil tanker ban


Hoid
#31
Did you know that you have been wrong about a pipeline through BC from the beginning? (and still are)

To do one there will have to be meaningful consultation with First Nations and real scientific inquiry into the effects on marine life.
 
petros
+4
#32
Meaningful?

Does that mean without any Sierra Club or Suzuki Foundation lawyers doing the talking on behalf of the 20 or 30 upset FNs?
 
petros
+2
#33
Marine aspects are done and it cost BC Ferries a couple sailings a day.

Noisier than tankers so they have to slow down. Awesome huh?
Last edited by petros; Mar 26th, 2019 at 02:39 PM..
 
Hoid
#34
You don't have to understand what meaningful means. That is not required.

And no, the science behind the tanker traffic increase has not been done.
 
petros
+3
#35
I don't have to? Then how would I know they were meaningful?

Tankers are different than other ships? They have unique hulls and engines?
 
Hoid
#36
All specified by the Federal Court of Appeal months ago.

If you want your questions answered that would be a good place to start.

I find myself disinclined to discuss this matter with someone who is willfully ignorant of the subject. I get nothing out of an exchange with someone who knows so little.
 
petros
+2
#37
Did you sleep through Feb?

www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5028051


All done.
 
petros
+2
#38
The regulator published a report Friday after it was ordered to reassess the $7.4-billion pipeline expansion from Alberta to the coast, including the impact of increased oil tanker traffic on the region's endangered killer whale population.

The project would cause "significant adverse environmental effects" on the southern resident killer whale population, and while a worst-case spill from the pipeline or an oil tanker is not likely, "the effects would be significant," said Robert Steedman, the NEB's chief environment officer.

"While these effects weighed heavily in the NEB's reconsideration of project-related marine shipping, the NEB recommends that the government of Canada find that they can be justified in the circumstances, in light of the considerable benefits of the project and measures to mitigate the effects," Steedman said to reporters in Calgary.
 
Twin_Moose
+1
#39
Quote: Originally Posted by Hoid View Post

Did you know that you have been wrong about a pipeline through BC from the beginning? (and still are)
To do one there will have to be meaningful consultation with First Nations and real scientific inquiry into the effects on marine life.

In the beginning it was Clark trying to get her hands on Ata's royalties, she used spill concerns as a blackmail tactic, when she gave the go ahead it got out of her control and spread into her pet LNG project and Site C dam.
 
petros
+3
#40
Horgan gave 3 options to Weaver and said "pick one". He chose TMPL.
 
MHz
#41
The only reason Alberta was left out is they would have said the taps are controlled by the Dutch owned oil companies and that you need a client before you need to build a port. We have 1 client and we will only ever have 1 client, get used to it.
 
MHz
#42
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Palliser and Kelsey surveyed on taxpayer and not HBC and North West Company's dime?

Alternative History for sure.

Try seismic lines through the whole NWT. Probably helped the World Bank decide where to look for diamonds first so who got the data dummy??
 
Twin_Moose
+2
#43
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

Try seismic lines through the whole NWT. Probably helped the World Bank decide where to look for diamonds first so who got the data dummy??

Do you think it was the world bank that found the Diamonds in PA or was it somebody that picked up a shiny rock at the City Dump?
 
MHz
#44
This has what to do with pipelines??

I think you are a fuktard and you keep proving it with every troll post you attempt to make.
 
Twin_Moose
+2
#45
Just responding to your post so I guess you are looking into a mirror when you made your post
 
MHz
#46
Quote: Originally Posted by Twin_Moose View Post

Just responding to your post so I guess you are looking into a mirror when you made your post

As usual you are 100 years too far in the past.
 
petros
+1
#47
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

Try seismic lines through the whole NWT. Probably helped the World Bank decide where to look for diamonds first so who got the data dummy??

Palliser and Kelsey did seismic?
 
Twin_Moose
+1
#48
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

As usual you are 100 years too far in the past.

For the PA Diamond discovery?
 
Hoid
#49
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

The regulator published a report Friday after it was ordered to reassess the $7.4-billion pipeline expansion from Alberta to the coast, including the impact of increased oil tanker traffic on the region's endangered killer whale population.
The project would cause "significant adverse environmental effects" on the southern resident killer whale population, and while a worst-case spill from the pipeline or an oil tanker is not likely, "the effects would be significant," said Robert Steedman, the NEB's chief environment officer.
"While these effects weighed heavily in the NEB's reconsideration of project-related marine shipping, the NEB recommends that the government of Canada find that they can be justified in the circumstances, in light of the considerable benefits of the project and measures to mitigate the effects," Steedman said to reporters in Calgary.

subject to 156 conditions and 16 recommendations.
 
petros
+1
#50
But still a go.

Dismantling a beaver dam on your property requires permits and conditions.

Big deal.
 
Hoid
#51
No - not a go.

Not a go in 2016.

Not a go in 2017.

Not a go today.
 
Hoid
#52
and btw, this new pipeline proposal only further validates BC current court battle over the Environmental Management Act.

Kinder (and Alberta) are arguing that as the TM is the only pipeline to the coast the Act would only apply to it and therefore that they are being targeted.

This new proposal would also fall under the authority of the Act and therefore disproves the claim being made.

So if its a serious proposal it will help BC in court
 
taxslave
#53
Quote: Originally Posted by Hoid View Post

All specified by the Federal Court of Appeal months ago.
If you want your questions answered that would be a good place to start.
I find myself disinclined to discuss this matter with someone who is willfully ignorant of the subject. I get nothing out of an exchange with someone who knows so little.

So you will go through life willfully ignorant.
 
taxslave
+1
#54
Quote: Originally Posted by Hoid View Post

and btw, this new pipeline proposal only further validates BC current court battle over the Environmental Management Act.
Kinder (and Alberta) are arguing that as the TM is the only pipeline to the coast the Act would only apply to it and therefore that they are being targeted.
This new proposal would also fall under the authority of the Act and therefore disproves the claim being made.
So if its a serious proposal it will help BC in court

What will help BC is getting rid of the two retards in Victoria so we can build pipelines like the majority of taxpayers want. What school kids think isn't important.
 
MHz
#55
'so we can build pipelines like the majority of taxpayers want'
To where, Jack's castle in the sky?
 
Hoid
#56
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

So you will go through life willfully ignorant.

I go through life unwilling to accept willful ignorance.

A plain as day concept that it beyond you.
 
taxslave
#57
Quote: Originally Posted by Hoid View Post

I go through life unwilling to accept willful ignorance.
A plain as day concept that it beyond you.

You may be unwilling but you are definately ignorant of reality. Now run along little biy the adults are having an inteligent conversation here.
 
pgs
#58
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

What will help BC is getting rid of the two retards in Victoria so we can build pipelines like the majority of taxpayers want. What school kids think isn't important.

Sadly the latest polling has Horgan winning a majority . No election in sight mind you .
 
petros
+1
#59
Quote: Originally Posted by pgs View Post

Sadly the latest polling has Horgan winning a majority . No election in sight mind you .

Expect to get get a slough of Dipper MPs this fall. Trudeau isn't "trending" in BC.
 
pgs
+1
#60
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Expect to get get a slough of Dipper MPs this fall. Trudeau isn't "trending" in BC.

Yea I am not sure what will happen in B.C. federally . Probably equal numbers of NDP , Liberal and PC . Greens may not even elect Ellie May .