Hurricane Katrina
Firestone recall on tires that explode at speeds over 80 km/h
The Conservatives should make the polluter pay- Mandatory insurance - Oil spills can
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
Hurricane Katrina
Firestone recall on tires that explode at speeds over 80 km/h
Is a pipeline? It wouldn't have happenend if there was a pipeline from Alaska to Puget Sound.
The point is that caps are to low. Should the company be responsible for all costs. Yes.
Moving goal post Goobs.
Do you fly Westjet? No fatalities yet in 17 years. Why? We build better, easier to maintain things than 50 years ago and human error is being heavvily reduced and impacting R&D, QC and safety records?
Digital is everywhere. Even in pipelines.
Do you fly Westjet? No fatalities yet in 17 years. Why? We build better, easier to maintain things than 50 years ago and human error is being heavvily reduced and impacting R&D, QC and safety records?
Digital is everywhere. Even in pipelines.
My questions are:
- Which companies take the responsibility?
- Why limit it to a few select industries?
Yup. The taxpayer should pay for oil spills because, heaven forbid, those holding shares in oil companies should take a cut in the dividend cheques.
2000: 7,513 barrels. Enbridge reported 48 pipeline spills and leaks, including a spill of 1,500 barrels at Innes, Sask.
2001: 25,980 barrels. Enbridge pipelines reported 34 spills and leaks, totalling 25,980 barrels of oil, including a January spill from Enbridge's Energy Transportation North Pipeline that leaked 23,900 barrels of crude oil into a slough near Hardisty, Alberta, and a September spill of 598 barrels in Binbrook, Ont.
2002: 14,683 barrels. Enbridge reported 48 oil spills and leaks, totalling 14,683 barrels, including a leak of 6,133 barrels in Kerrobert, Sask. in January; a seam failure in May that spilled 598 barrels in Glenboro, Man.; and a pipeline rupture into a marsh west of Cohasset, Minn. To prevent 6,000 barrels of crude oil from reaching the Mississippi River, Enbridge set the oil on fire.
2003: 6,410 barrels. Enbridge pipelines had 62 spills and leaks, totalling 6,410 barrels, including a January spill of 4,500 barrels of oil at the company's oil terminal near Superior, Wisc., and a June spill of 452 barrels of oil into Wisconsin's Nemadji River. In April, an Enbridge gas pipeline exploded, levelling a strip mall in Etobicoke, Ont. and killing seven people.
2004: 3,252 barrels. Enbridge pipelines had 69 reported spills, totalling 3,252 barrels of oil, including a February valve failure in Fort McMurray, Alta. that leaked 735 barrels of oil.
2005: 9,825 barrels. Enbridge had 70 reported spills, totalling 9,825 barrels of oil.
2006: 5,363 barrels. Enbridge had 61 reported spills, totalling 5,363 barrels of oil, including a March 613 barrel spill at its Willmar terminal in Saskatchewan and a December spill of 2,000 barrels at a pumping station in Montana.
2007: 13,777 barrels. Enbridge had 65 spills and leaks, totalling 13,777 barrels of oil, including a January pipeline break near Stanley, North Dakota, which spilled 215 barrels of oil; two pipeline incidents in January/February in Clark and Rusk Counties in Wisconsin which spilled 4,200 barrels of oil; and an April spill of approximately 6,227 barrels of oil into a field down-stream of an Enbridge pumping station at Glenavon, Sask. In November, an Enbridge pipeline carrying bitumen to U.S. Midwest markets exploded near Clearbrook, Minn., killing two workers.
2008: 2,682 barrels. Enbridge had 80 reported spills and leaks, totalling 2,682 barrels of oil, including a January incident at an Enbridge pumping station at the Cromer Terminal in Manitoba that leaked 629 barrels of crude; a February incident in Weyburn, Sask., which leaked 157 barrels; and a March spill of 252 barrels of oil in Fort McMurray, Alberta.
2009: 8,441 barrels. Enbridge had 103 reported oil spills and leaks, totalling 8,441 barrels, including a pipeline incident at the Enbridge Cheecham Terminal tank farm that spilled 5,749 barrels of oil near Anzac, Alberta; a spill of 704 barrels in Kisbey, Sask.; and a spill of 1,100 barrels at Odessa, Sask.
2010: 34,122 barrels. Enbridge had 80 reported pipeline spills, totalling 34,122 barrels, including a January Enbridge pipeline leak near Neche, North Dakota of 3,000 barrels of oil; an April incident near Virden, Man. that leaked 12 barrels of oil into Bosshill Creek; a July pipeline spill in Marshall, Michigan that dumped 20,000 barrels of tar sands crude into the Kalamazoo River, causing the biggest oil spill in U.S. Midwest history; and a September pipeline spill of 6,100 barrels in Romeoville, Ill.
Total: 132,715 barrels of oil, more than half the Exxon Valdez spill of 257,000 barrels
Sources: Prince George Citizen (March 12, 2010); The Polaris Institute (May 2010); The Tyee (31 July 2010); Reuters (Sept. 10, 2010); Enbridge.com 2010; Vancouver Sun (May 10, 2011); The Globe & Mail (June 17, 2011); Dogwood Initiative
Yup. Propaganda. Damn greenie weenies!
A Decade of Enbridge Oil Pipeline Spills by Joyce Nelson, part of a feature Pipeline Safety, Dilbit, Captive Regulators and Smart Pigs coming in the March-April Watershed Sentinel
2000: 7,513 barrels. Enbridge reported 48 pipeline spills and leaks, including a spill of 1,500 barrels at Innes, Sask.
2001: 25,980 barrels. Enbridge pipelines reported 34 spills and leaks, totalling 25,980 barrels of oil, including a January spill from Enbridge's Energy Transportation North Pipeline that leaked 23,900 barrels of crude oil into a slough near Hardisty, Alberta, and a September spill of 598 barrels in Binbrook, Ont.
2002: 14,683 barrels. Enbridge reported 48 oil spills and leaks, totalling 14,683 barrels, including a leak of 6,133 barrels in Kerrobert, Sask. in January; a seam failure in May that spilled 598 barrels in Glenboro, Man.; and a pipeline rupture into a marsh west of Cohasset, Minn. To prevent 6,000 barrels of crude oil from reaching the Mississippi River, Enbridge set the oil on fire.
2003: 6,410 barrels. Enbridge pipelines had 62 spills and leaks, totalling 6,410 barrels, including a January spill of 4,500 barrels of oil at the company's oil terminal near Superior, Wisc., and a June spill of 452 barrels of oil into Wisconsin's Nemadji River. In April, an Enbridge gas pipeline exploded, levelling a strip mall in Etobicoke, Ont. and killing seven people.
2004: 3,252 barrels. Enbridge pipelines had 69 reported spills, totalling 3,252 barrels of oil, including a February valve failure in Fort McMurray, Alta. that leaked 735 barrels of oil.
2005: 9,825 barrels. Enbridge had 70 reported spills, totalling 9,825 barrels of oil.
2006: 5,363 barrels. Enbridge had 61 reported spills, totalling 5,363 barrels of oil, including a March 613 barrel spill at its Willmar terminal in Saskatchewan and a December spill of 2,000 barrels at a pumping station in Montana.
2007: 13,777 barrels. Enbridge had 65 spills and leaks, totalling 13,777 barrels of oil, including a January pipeline break near Stanley, North Dakota, which spilled 215 barrels of oil; two pipeline incidents in January/February in Clark and Rusk Counties in Wisconsin which spilled 4,200 barrels of oil; and an April spill of approximately 6,227 barrels of oil into a field down-stream of an Enbridge pumping station at Glenavon, Sask. In November, an Enbridge pipeline carrying bitumen to U.S. Midwest markets exploded near Clearbrook, Minn., killing two workers.
2008: 2,682 barrels. Enbridge had 80 reported spills and leaks, totalling 2,682 barrels of oil, including a January incident at an Enbridge pumping station at the Cromer Terminal in Manitoba that leaked 629 barrels of crude; a February incident in Weyburn, Sask., which leaked 157 barrels; and a March spill of 252 barrels of oil in Fort McMurray, Alberta.
2009: 8,441 barrels. Enbridge had 103 reported oil spills and leaks, totalling 8,441 barrels, including a pipeline incident at the Enbridge Cheecham Terminal tank farm that spilled 5,749 barrels of oil near Anzac, Alberta; a spill of 704 barrels in Kisbey, Sask.; and a spill of 1,100 barrels at Odessa, Sask.
2010: 34,122 barrels. Enbridge had 80 reported pipeline spills, totalling 34,122 barrels, including a January Enbridge pipeline leak near Neche, North Dakota of 3,000 barrels of oil; an April incident near Virden, Man. that leaked 12 barrels of oil into Bosshill Creek; a July pipeline spill in Marshall, Michigan that dumped 20,000 barrels of tar sands crude into the Kalamazoo River, causing the biggest oil spill in U.S. Midwest history; and a September pipeline spill of 6,100 barrels in Romeoville, Ill.
Total: 132,715 barrels of oil, more than half the Exxon Valdez spill of 257,000 barrels
Sources: Prince George Citizen (March 12, 2010); The Polaris Institute (May 2010); The Tyee (31 July 2010); Reuters (Sept. 10, 2010); Enbridge.com 2010; Vancouver Sun (May 10, 2011); The Globe & Mail (June 17, 2011); Dogwood Initiative
Yup. Propaganda. Damn greenie weenies!
Could be, but that is a loaded question as the cost will be different every time.... But I (personally) do agree that the polluter should pay.
Now, lets also look at what they should be held responsible for and who should be on the hook. The Gulf oil spill got charged back to BP.. In my eyes, that was the result of the contractors (Haliburton & Transocean) as well as the US Regulators.... BP hired these 3 parties (not gvt mind you) because they are experts in their fields and well, the Feds 'signed-off' on the work.
So my question is: Why did BP get hung out to dry while the folks that did the actual work (read: damage) get off scott free?
A more direct example; companies like TCPL or Enbridge also have big issues, and while they are (and definitely should) be on the hook, what about the actual P/L construction companies?
All I'm really saying is that I don't think that this issues is entirely as cut and dry as we think
Good thing all those antiquated lines are now owned just a handful of companies who will close them when the fat lines go through through. Some are older than you Cliffy.
They don't have to take a cut.
Even the environmentalists can't and won't get off the petroleum teat. They'll happily pay the inflated prices.
Why not? The tax payer is on the hook for healthcare despite the horrendous decisions made by people... I don't see any move to hold Rotten Ronnies fully liable for the heinous damage caused by the supply of their products
They really are weenies, aren't they?... Glad that you're finally seeing the light
Green wants us to go Nat Gas. Even I've been snooping around for gas laundry driers and a stove and range to take advantage of the Govt Green rebates. BIG savings over electricty and it's green.
If Socialist Greens want to partially fund a new dryer and the appliance I've wanted for quite sometime (cooking with gas rocks) then so be it. I'll play your green game and go for NG if you're paying me.
Sweet!
Hey Pete, what-say you and I get some of this land from ole Cliffy here and start a business getting rid of used oil, transmission fluid and radioactive waste.... Just drill a hole and pour it down.
In the current system, if a large spill occurs, taxpayers are going to foot the bill. Effectively the Canadian government is acting like an insurance company for free.
So if taxpayers are already assuming the liability, why aren't we charging for that service?
Government insurance isn't new:
Manitoba Public Insurance > Insurance
So rather than expensive insurance premiums which are just added to the retail price of the product, meaning that the taxpayers for the most part are paying the cleanup costs how about the pipeline companies post an irrevocable letter of credit for say 1 billion with the government? We use this method all the time for bidding jobs instead of bonding.
So, we're already doing something, but now you want to add a new layer of profit grabbers to the equation.
Given our petroleum addiction, what that will mean is.... prices of petroleum go up to compensate for their added cost. The 'insurance company' will require a whole new layer of administrators who will cost wages. And then in the end, when a clean up happens, it will still cost the taxpayer near the same amount it always did, because more than half of what was collected by the gov. was mismanaged and paid out via wages, building costs, etc..
It makes zero sense other than to try to prove a point
No moving posts. The caps are ridiculous. You know that as well as I do. Human error - go to the transcripts of the Enbridge spill in the US a couple of years back - Control room in Edmonton was a disaster in management - in training - in response - in everything they were supposedly trained to do. Technology did not help- massive human erros by a number of people- They fuked up royally.