|
berenzen posted:Yeah, it's legal, it's underhanded as poo poo, but it is legal. If it does go through, it'll basically cripple Vancouver, as a substantial amount of fuel for the Vancouver airport comes from Edmonton. You're an actual loving idiot. It's not even remotely legal and is going to get instantly challenged and shot down.
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 02:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 01:21 |
|
|
JawKnee posted:yeah I meant worldwide Bunker fuel leaks are not unique to Oil tankers, so stopping oil shipment altogether will not stop leaks of that nature. as for cargo spills? Quick 30s google and I can find of the cargoship off new zealand that cause pretty large havoc to the new zealand coastline back in 2011.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 02:53
|
|
|
so, 1? to how many oil spills?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 02:54
|
|
|
Have a handy list of spills in BC between 1988 and 2016.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 02:56
|
|
|
Horgan can’t do anything about the current tanker traffic. He can obstruct the pipeline twinning. He doesn’t even need to block it; time is on his side. He just needs to delay it until the investors blink as they already are doing. The economics of the pipeline are not there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 02:57
|
|
|
McGavin posted:Just FYI this analogy you're trying to make here is retarded. Who can really know what's in a massive variety of shipping containers vs an entire hold filled with bitumen. It could be even worse. You just don't know. So quit being a bitch and lets jam this straight with more tankers already.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 02:59
|
|
|
Nuclear, not oil.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 02:59
|
|
|
Oil might be worse than what's currently there so let's just give oil a chance. Am I doing this right? Sorry if I'm not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 03:02
|
|
|
What if the tanker was full of Albertans.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 03:18
|
|
|
Stickarts posted:What if the tanker was full of Albertans. You can't refine Albertans.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 03:20
|
|
|
I mean ships have fuel in them so you can't object to ships full of fuel on your coast My car has an explosive airbag so I don't see why you're objecting to me filling the trunk with dynamite, officer
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 03:20
|
|
|
berenzen posted:as for cargo spills? Quick 30s google and I can find of the cargoship off new zealand that cause pretty large havoc to the new zealand coastline back in 2011. Would you say dangerous cargo makes up a large percentage of Vancouver port traffic? Maybe have a peek here first https://www.portvancouver.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/2017-Stats-Overview-1.pdf
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 03:30
|
|
|
Argas posted:You can't refine Albertans. But if they fall into the ocean then the world is a better place.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 03:37
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
very happy to see the news about Bissonnette's favourite tweets (mostly Ben Shapiro) has been picked up by some quasi-popular American commentators https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/985950418307084288 https://twitter.com/VicBergerIV/status/986028318372876289
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 03:40
|
|
|
Wasn't Ben Shapiro the one who was also a transphobic rear end in a top hat, and nearly got beaten up by a trans woman for being a massive prick? How I wish that woman followed through on the threat...
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 03:54
|
|
|
Powershift posted:I've found a solution i think will work for everybody. Minor problem, you're going through Williston Lake, which is the reservoir for a huge hydro dam, and is significantly above sea level so you're gonna drain it. Clearly you need a bunch of massive locks to put Rideau and Welland to shame.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 04:11
|
|
|
I'd say all the fuckin mountains are a minor problem too
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 04:20
|
|
|
Look loving up an entire lake is totally worth it for the critical economic success of Canada as a nation
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 04:27
|
|
|
Arivia posted:Look loving up an entire lake is totally worth it for the critical economic success of Canada as a nation It also provides the majority of BC's power but we could just power the province by burning the spills along the shores of the new canal
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 04:36
|
|
|
berenzen posted:Yeah, it's legal, it's underhanded as poo poo, but it is legal. If it does go through, it'll basically cripple Vancouver, as a substantial amount of fuel for the Vancouver airport comes from Edmonton. I haven't read this law yet, but there is literally a clause in the BNA that says you can do all sorts of stuff to natural resources exports from your province but you aren't allowed to discriminate between provinces when you do it. Like, somehow trying to ask the supreme court for clarification on how overlapping jurisdictional powers interact is a loving constitutional crisis but flaunting an explicit clause in one of the constitution acts is all 'lol take that hippies'
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 04:45
|
|
|
Squibbles posted:It also provides the majority of BC's power but we could just power the province by burning the spills along the shores of the new canal That's, uh, not true. It's a good chunk but not even close to a majority. It generates 13,000 gwh annually, and the province overall generates 43,000 gwh annually. Like, come on thread, maybe stay away from spouting fake "facts". vvvv nah they were specifically talking about williston lake which is the WAC Bennett dam CLAM DOWN fucked around with this message at 05:20 on Apr 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 04:58
|
|
|
I think they meant hydro dams in general
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 05:12
|
|
|
Guys it's critical for our nation to spend tax money on subsidizing highly flammable shantytowns in North Shithole, Alberta so that foreign investors can make handsome profits pumping and shipping toxic sludge to China. Send in the troops.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 05:17
|
|
|
Reince Penis posted:It's interesting to me that you think your posting isn't derivative and pedantic. The pedant in me wants to know how I'm being derivative.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 05:38
|
|
|
I'm from Alberta, I'm an NDP voter, and I'm as socialist as they come. I definitely feel conflicted over the environment/economy issue. Climate change is coming, and it may already be too late. I don't know. We elected an NDP government after decades of capitalist shills, we put in a weak rear end carbon tax, we are shutting down our coal plants, we are trying to change for the better. It can't happen over night. What I do know is that the economy of the planet flat out relies on oil, lots of loving oil, dirty CO2 spilling poo poo. We're all hooked like addicts. Changing this isn't easy, and may very well be impossible. Alberta produces a lot of dirty loving poo poo oil, and it's driving our economy. When oil crashed our economy went to poo poo, just like our oil. Jobs disappeared over night, jobs for everything, not just oil sands jobs. Everybody got hit. poo poo sucked hard, lots of people moved away, or went deeper into debt. People in Alberta don't really have much of a choice, make poo poo, lots of it, or make nothing. When other provinces attack our main source of income, we feel threatened, for good reason. And you know what, it feels like we're surrounded by hypocrites. We make a lot of money, dirty money, and the rest of the country benefits, while constantly berating us for it. Yes, most of us Albertans don't understand exactly how transfer payments work, but we know it benefits other provinces over us. It seems the people who berate us the most seem to be benefiting the most. Sure, let's shut down the tar sands, and turn Alberta into a rural wasteland, but the rest of country will be poorer from it too. Shut down a pipeline that we all thought was good to go, great pragmatism there. I'm sure the capitalist overlords give a poo poo, they'll find another way to move poo poo oil around. ' You know what BC, you're benefiting from poo poo oil wealth just like the rest of the planet. Where do you think all this foreign wealth comes from? poo poo oil, that's what, poo poo oil in poor countries feeding growing global economies. Growing economies hiding their wealth in your real estate. People say China is driving your housing bubble, well that's one big rear end CO2 emitter right there. You're making money off of this, lots of money, money that pays for alternative energy investment. Everything is reliant on this polluting poo poo oil. And after all this, you whine about us trying to cut out poo poo oil products to your province? Suddenly you need it? Is it only fine when you have a couple layers capitalist bullshit keeping the poo poo oil off your hands? Two NDP goverments actually have an opportunity to make a real change for the better. We are wasting time and political capital on stupid grandstanding bullshit. Instead of starting a trade war over the poo poo oil we all need to survive we should implementing smart changes for the future. Invest in alternative energy with the profits of poo poo oil, so we can ween ourselves off of it, invest in better regulations, better engineered projects. Real progressive poo poo. But no, let's just make Alberta poor, so everyone with a brain leaves for greener pastures, and the rurals can take over again. I'm genuinely interested in the holes in this rant, or arguments against this sentiment, because it's generally what most people I've talked to in Alberta feel like. I'm probably not going to have a chance to reply, as I've got a lot work on my plate. I will definitely lurk the replies, and maybe use them to change some minds in this province.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:03
|
|
|
My quick take is I cannot see how a new pipeline would be conducive towards getting Alberta to transition away from oil.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:13
|
|
|
Yeah Alberta is really the victim here. BC's not even stopping any existing pipelines or shipments, everything is just going the same as it was yesterday, but suddenly it's armageddon and economic catastrophe and bailouts. Kinder Morgan's just issued some random May deadline and now it's emergency parliament sessions this and constitutional crises that. Trudeau and AB are getting played like a fiddle. Scorchy fucked around with this message at 06:22 on Apr 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:16
|
|
|
Argas posted:My quick take is I cannot see how a new pipeline would be conducive towards getting Alberta to transition away from oil. I think it would increase our government revenue, which would allow us to invest in more alternative energy projects. In turn that would provide good clean energy jobs, while making our economy less reliant on oil as a whole.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:19
|
|
|
T8R posted:I think it would increase our government revenue, which would allow us to invest in more alternative energy projects. In turn that would provide good clean energy jobs, while making our economy less reliant on oil as a whole. Surely there are better alternatives to oil transport than constructing a brand new thing that'll take decades to make back what it cost. Edit: To phrase it better, surely there's a solution that doesn't require a huge investment in infrastructure that has oil as its sole use. Something that could remain after our reliance on oil drops. Argas fucked around with this message at 06:27 on Apr 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:25
|
|
|
eXXon posted:Guys it's critical for our nation to spend tax money on subsidizing highly flammable shantytowns in North Shithole, Alberta so that foreign investors can make handsome profits pumping and shipping toxic sludge to China. Send in the troops. T8R posted:I think it would increase our government revenue, which would allow us to invest in more alternative energy projects. In turn that would provide good clean energy jobs, while making our economy less reliant on oil as a whole. More like take the revenues and cut corporate taxes or issue a cheque to everyone. When the gently caress has Canada ever invested money in a blue sky project and not just plugged money in to whatever industry project du jour? We have the most loving coastline of any country in the world and tidal energy start-ups have to go begging for money and attention in the UK because no one gives a poo poo about them here. cowofwar fucked around with this message at 06:35 on Apr 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:33
|
|
|
I've tried to write something out three times now but I keep falling back onto wanting to tell Albertans to gently caress off and stop whining. Yeah, we're all hypocrites because some of us don't want to use dirty oil. I'd rather we use nuclear energy but our province decided to shut a whole bunch of plants down, but you don't see an entire province screaming about the death of our way of life any time someone even remotely suggests closing another plant.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:33
|
|
|
Let's make an exhaustive list of all of the wonderful clean energy projects that the hysterical children involved in making this decision have actually committed to fund. Then let's work out what the odds of them actually following up on these promises that they haven't even made yet are. Even better, assuming this pipeline ever gets built, work out how likely it is that Notley will still be premier by then.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:33
|
|
|
Scorchy posted:Yeah Alberta is really the victim here. It's not necessarily about being the victim. We know the tar sands is polluting the environment, but it really does seem to us that it's all we've got. People generally get defensive about doing bad things, especially when they feel they don't have a choice. Essentially in the minds of Albertan's the Kinder Morgan expansion was set in stone and good to go, suddenly it's not. Perhaps its a fault of the conservative media here, but people are confused and upset over it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:34
|
|
|
T8R posted:We are wasting time and political capital on stupid grandstanding bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:36
|
|
|
T8R posted:It's not necessarily about being the victim. We know the tar sands is polluting the environment, but it really does seem to us that it's all we've got. People generally get defensive about doing bad things, especially when they feel they don't have a choice. cowofwar fucked around with this message at 06:41 on Apr 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:38
|
|
|
Argas posted:Surely there are better alternatives to oil transport than constructing a brand new thing that'll take decades to make back what it cost. Part of the issue to me is that this project was inherited from the previous government, with all the players already heavily invested. Backing down from it would be political suicide. It would make sense to continue it, so we don't lose business interests or swing votes. cowofwar posted:
Yes, this is generally what the government does, especially the previous PC dynasty. I suppose we should be thinking a fresh NDP government(that already raised taxes) would do things differently.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:40
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Our governments are such a loving joke that they latch on to industry projects as legacy projects instead of coming up with poo poo on their own. Socialized healthcare? Transport infrastructure? Nationalized energy generation? It's been done before, now some platitude mumbling chucklefuck turns up and asks the lobbyists what they've got for him to run on. Then they go all-in on that stupid loving corporate welfare project and roll it in to identity politics and end up poisoning the well and accomplishing nothing aside from buying some rich gently caress another yacht. At least it used to be a Canadian rich-gently caress, now it's some international consortium. Canada is falling over itself to get a mortgage to drive for uber and can't pause for long enough to actually develop a domestic strategy. Oh absolutely, but I can't find a solution to this problem. as it is heavily ingrained in global capitalism, and espousing it seems to make a lot of people tune out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:44
|
|
|
Do you actually believe that this ridiculous pipeline will bring a single fuckin cent into Alberta that would ever go towards any kind of forward thinking project, or are you just saying that that's what Albertans think?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:47
|
|
|
berenzen posted:So from 200 tankers a year to 1400 tankers a year. Vs. the 20000 other tankers that go through vancouver. It's hardly a 7x increase in overall tanker traffic. Referring to general cargo vessels as "tankers" is as wildly inaccurate as calling the tar bitumen sands "oil sands", especially if it's true that the bulk of exported dilbit ends up being refined into petroleum coke, a solid fuel substitute for thermal coal. Tankers are a special case. While it's true that a certain percentage of older cargo ships still use bunker fuel the International Maritime Organization just finished regulation changes that are going to make continued operation of these vessels difficult. (The screaming is delicious.) The current move to lighter distilates and LNG ship fuel is expected to accelerate, as well as a boom in business for the Bangaladeshi breaker beaches. Previous oil spills in B.C. in addition to the list posted above include the Nestucca Oil Spill, part of which came ashore in Barkley Sound at a time of year when nobody important was around to get grossed out by it. Bunch of oiled birds, but whatever. Number 8 Fuel Oil isn't dilbit in any case. Car spills? Been there, Done that. (300 Dodge Colts? The HORROR!) Personally, I do hope the Albertans find a way to turn off the taps, if only temporarily. It will sting like hell but might help more British Columbians think about our approach to a petroleum fueled economy, similar to the type of thinking Norwegians seem tp have done for years. I'm ambivalent about the pipeline itself, except that I believe that at some point Anglo-Saxons need to stop ripping off other people's lands and recognize the Indigenous right to say No. My opposition comes from working on the water all my life and understanding what people like Jack Devanney are saying. Devanney is (was?) an MIT professor with a PhD in marine architecture. He gets bonus points for building more Very Large Crude Carriers and Ultra Large Crude Carriers than most of us have owned cars. He's one of those who can, does, teaches, and writes textbooks about it. He's written a 400 page book called "The Tankship Tromedy" available for free download here. Read it and you too can smile everytime someone trots out that old "BUT DOUBLE HULLS!!!" chestnut. For you flatlanders coming out here to rent boats, here's some basic operating rules: 1) The pointy end is the bow (usually). 2) Keel down, mast up, water outside. 3) A large vessel may not proceed while encumbered by the debris of a smaller vessel tangled in her propellor. 4) "If ahead are red and green, steady your helm and go between."
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 01:21 |
|
|
Nobody (in a position of power at least) is saying shut down the tar sands. Alberta can keep doing what it's doing now. Use the revenue from oil to diversify the economy. If Alberta isn't making enough money from oil to do anything then that's maybe an indication that the relationship between the government and the oil industry is less than 50/50.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 06:50
|
|
