Titanic clash looms over proposed Northern Gateway pipeline

[earth_as_one]

Back in the 1880's many people didn't see the point in building a railroad across Canada. It was expensive and the cost would not be recovered for a long time too. Yet that railway helped turn Canada into an independent nation, both economically and militarily.

Pipelines also are expensive, but they also create wealth and and generate economic activity. Canada has the second largest oil reserves after Saudi Arabia because of the tar sands. But that potential for wealth remains a potential, if we can't move oil from the tar sands to the oil consumers.

I am against the Northern gateway and Keystone projects for environmental reasons.

I support building a pipeline from Alberta to the Pacific or to the US as long as they do not cross pristine wilderness. My preference would be for Canada to export crude to the west coast. The natural gas pipeline to Kitamat isn't as big a deal as a crude oil pipeline. Natural gas spills will vaporize, with minimal contamination. Its far less a disaster to clean up than an oil spill, which can probably never be fully cleaned up. I think its a bad idea to build pipelines through parks and nature reserves. However a developed corridor already exists to Prince Rupert and oil tankers don't have to navigate a narrow fjord to get to the open ocean.

 

[petros]

A-P Gateway The Environment

Great-circle route.

 

[Durry]

I support building a pipeline from Alberta to the Pacific or to the US as long as they do not cross pristine wilderness. My preference would be for Canada to export crude to the west coast. The natural gas pipeline to Kitamat isn't as big a deal as a crude oil pipeline. Natural gas spills will vaporize, with minimal contamination. Its far less a disaster to clean up than an oil spill, which can probably never be fully cleaned up. I think its a bad idea to build pipelines through parks and nature reserves. However a developed corridor already exists to Prince Rupert and oil tankers don't have to navigate a narrow fjord to get to the open ocean.

Whew.....sure glad we got your opinion on the table, now we all know what we have to do to make things work!!

 

[earth_as_one]

Not everyone who is against these projects are "enemies" of development. some of us are against developing resources the cheapest most expedient way, without considering the long term environmental consequences.

 

[mentalfloss]

Not everyone who is against these projects are "enemies" of development. some of us are against developing resources the cheapest most expedient way, without considering the long term environmental consequences.

But if we don't do it right now the economy will blow up, you alarmist!

 

[earth_as_one]

This is a limited time offer, so buy now before this great offer ends

 

[Durry]

Not everyone who is against these projects are "enemies" of development. some of us are against developing resources the cheapest most expedient way, without considering the long term environmental consequences.

Well that's what the hearings are all about.
If you feel so strongly, why don't you add your name to the list of 4500 commenters and say your piece???
That's the democratic way,,,you know !!

 

[mentalfloss]

Well that's what the hearings are all about.
If you feel so strongly, why don't you add your name to the list of 4500 commenters and say your piece???
That's the democratic way,,,you know !!

Maybe he has?

 

[Durry]

Maybe he has?

Well, if he needs some help, maybe you could be a good Canadian and help him out a bit..

 

[earth_as_one]

Here is my written submission:

I support building a pipeline from Alberta to the Pacific coast as long as it does not cross pristine wilderness areas or require oil tankers to navigate long narrow fjords. Therefore I do not support this project "as proposed". Developed corridors already exist from Alberta to Prince Rupert and Vancouver. Oil tankers would have easy access to the open ocean from both locations. I understand that other routes would be more expensive. Enbridge should not have to pay the extra costs. I support the Canadian government providing assistance in the form of tax breaks and subsidies so that the cost of building this pipeline through a less pristine environment would be the same for Enbridge. Also I support the right of the people living in the area to veto a pipeline through their watershed. A pipeline should be a welcome economic bonanza for the local people, not an unwanted burden imposed on people against their will.

Joint Review Panel - Regulatory Documents

 

[captain morgan]

Does it help if the article was originally posted with Reuters?

Wow.. That's really sad MF.. Now you're resorting to nit picking who was the publisher of the article.

You've sunk to a new low.

Keep making lame excuses.

It really brings out your eye shadow.

I suppose that your turning red from embarrassment matches your blood-shot eyes.

 

[Durry]

Wow.. That's really sad MF.. Now you're resorting to nit picking who was the publisher of the article.

You've sunk to a new low.

I suppose that your turning red from embarrassment matches your blood-shot eyes.

...:lol:

 

[mentalfloss]

Wow.. That's really sad MF.. Now you're resorting to nit picking who was the publisher of the article.

You've sunk to a new low.

It must really upset you that the source of the article is Jefferey Jones.. a journalist for..

wait for it...


REUTERS


But, hey, I don't mind adding them to the list of environmentally funded think tanks you deplore like Globe and Mail and Macleans, lol

 

[captain morgan]

Sad buddy... Really sad

 

[Tonington]

That's a legitimate question, does condensate added to the bitumen make the product more corrosive than conventional oil? It shouldn't be open to speculation, if you're going to pipe something you should be able to say it's safe for the entire life cycle of the pipeline with some data in hand.

 

[petros]

They won't be piping bitumen.

 

[Tonington]

They won't be piping bitumen.

Well, Enbridge disagrees with you Petros:

Condensate will be delivered to Kitimat by tanker where it will be shipped via pipeline to Bruderheim. The condensate will then be mixed with the bitumen to create a product commonly called dilbit (diluted bitumen) for transport by a separate, larger pipeline, back to Kitimat. Typically the ratio of condensate to bitumen for pipeline transportation is in the range of 25-30% condensate to 70-75% bitumen.

Northern Gateway has assumed four standard crude oil commodities for transport in the pipeline: synbit, which is a blend of refined synthetic oil and bitumen; two types of dilbit (mixtures of condensate and bitumen); and synthetic oil. The storage tanks planned for Kitimat will be able to accommodate these products.

Answers to your questions - Northern Gateway

 

[petros]

create a product commonly called dilbit (diluted bitumen)

Read much?

 

[Tonington]

Read much?

That's a legitimate question, does condensate added to the bitumen make the product more corrosive than conventional oil?

They won't be piping bitumen.

Yes, do you?

Back peddle much?

 

[petros]

Do any other grades of oil get piped at the same time as the dilbit?