GLG
Well-Known Member
It's in the FAQ....... http://www.discoverylng.com/project-details/faq/ But the quick answer is yes.
Something Wicked This Way Comes - ON THE LINE
- Thread starter Englishman
- Start date
B.C. worries oil spill would ‘overwhelm’ resources
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ll-would-overwhelm-resources/article13944672/
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ll-would-overwhelm-resources/article13944672/
Theb55
Active Member
An LNG plant in Terrace is VERY risky. The hills and mountains suggest significant plate tectonic activity and that raises the spectre of tsunamis. Given we are in the window of the big one, those concerns must be factored in and yet, I see little, if any thought addressing those issues.
tincan
Well-Known Member
http://www.timescolonist.com/green-...y-to-assist-northern-gateway-project-1.611976
Green Party Leader Elizabeth May claims leaked documents to be revealed today will show the federal government is spending taxpayer dollars to assist Enbridge’s Northern Gateway Project.
The controversial oil pipeline proposal would deliver diluted bitumen from Alberta’s oilsands to a port at Kitimat, where it would be loaded onto tankers for delivery to customers in Asia.
The documents — in condensed form — were to be released at 10 a.m. today at a press conference with Oak Bay-Gordon Head Green MLA Andrew Weaver at the Hotel Grand Pacific in Victoria. They are a “smoking gun” and will show that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans is running a so-called Northern Gateway Project for the purpose of researching what diluted bitumen does in an oil spill, essentially subsidizing research Enbridge failed to do to satisfy the province, said May.
Environment Canada, meanwhile, is spending tens of millions to enhance navigational meteorological reports for the route from Kitimat and through Hecate Strait specifically for supertankers with oil, claims May.
Green Party Leader Elizabeth May claims leaked documents to be revealed today will show the federal government is spending taxpayer dollars to assist Enbridge’s Northern Gateway Project.
The controversial oil pipeline proposal would deliver diluted bitumen from Alberta’s oilsands to a port at Kitimat, where it would be loaded onto tankers for delivery to customers in Asia.
The documents — in condensed form — were to be released at 10 a.m. today at a press conference with Oak Bay-Gordon Head Green MLA Andrew Weaver at the Hotel Grand Pacific in Victoria. They are a “smoking gun” and will show that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans is running a so-called Northern Gateway Project for the purpose of researching what diluted bitumen does in an oil spill, essentially subsidizing research Enbridge failed to do to satisfy the province, said May.
Environment Canada, meanwhile, is spending tens of millions to enhance navigational meteorological reports for the route from Kitimat and through Hecate Strait specifically for supertankers with oil, claims May.
Whole in the Water
Well-Known Member
Shameful collusion between the Harper govt and big oil. I hope the Green party makes a huge stink about this and wakes the public up as to what is going on here.
Sickening to see tax supported govt agencies doing the work that big oil is either too cheap or stupid to figure out how to do and/or they just don't care enough to do to meet basic govt requirements... truly disgusting!
Sickening to see tax supported govt agencies doing the work that big oil is either too cheap or stupid to figure out how to do and/or they just don't care enough to do to meet basic govt requirements... truly disgusting!
Englishman
Well-Known Member
AND they are spending all this taxpayer money before the Joint Review Panel has even reported back. Clearly Harper thinks the JRP process is meaningless and without any merit and he intends to make a decision in cabinet whatever the outcome of the JRP. How cynical and undemocratic! If he does that and tries to give Northern Gatway the go ahead he will expose himself as a malevolent autocrat/dictator and will ignite a wall of opposition in BC. And that could in fact be his undoing......history teaches us these kinds of people always overreach themselves eventually.
seascene
Crew Member
Nightmare scenario. A tanker disaster from Enbridge pipeline and ocean current changes brought about by ocean warming brings the north pacific gyre (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8heSH6k7Bbo) to the BC coast about the same time. CBC also reported that the Japanese are dumping radio active water into the ocean as a result of their nuclear reactor meltdown. I have heard one of the founders of Greenpeace living on the north coast near Alert Bay has already detected this. Closer to home, my summer vacation was spent sailing from Vancouver up to the north end of the Broughton’s. I had no idea of the extent of the industrialization of this coast from acquaculture. And yet, opponents of the destruction have been called a “gang”. The gang should refer to the people destroying this coast for profit of the few. I read this recently: “Intensive fish farms release enormous quantities of organic waste (fecal material) and contaminated water into the natural environment around the farm sites. Every day, all the salmon farms in Scotland put together produce as much excrement as the 600,000 inhabitants of Edinburgh. As a result, the surrounding waters see accelerated, chaotic algae growth, which can prove deadly for certain marine animals and indirectly constitute a danger to humans, who end up eating contaminated shellfish. When an ecosystem has become too compromised, the farm is simply moved elsewhere” Jobs from acquaculture are fine but take this industry off the ocean to land systems. If we have borrowed the environment from the kids being born today, their future looks bleak.
cuttlefish
Well-Known Member
Englishman
Well-Known Member
Feedback from FN chief on Harper's "Ministerial Offensive"
At the 11th hour Harper has ordered his Ministers to meet with BC FN so he can say he "consulted". Like Chief Philip says it has an ominous feel to it...in which case a lot of BC citizens are going to be in the streets in protest....
http://www.vancouverobserver.com/en...phillip-urges-british-columbians-take#previmg
At the 11th hour Harper has ordered his Ministers to meet with BC FN so he can say he "consulted". Like Chief Philip says it has an ominous feel to it...in which case a lot of BC citizens are going to be in the streets in protest....
http://www.vancouverobserver.com/en...phillip-urges-british-columbians-take#previmg
GLG
Well-Known Member
[h=1]Clark, Redford move closer to pipeline agreement[/h]Sep. 29 2013
B.C. Premier Christy Clark says her province is moving closer to an agreement with Alberta that would lay a path for oil sands bitumen to reach B.C. ports.
A series of high-level meetings are under way to discuss how the two provinces can open up the path to B.C.’s coasts, and then Asian markets. An agreement is not imminent, but officials for both the provinces are working on a framework to address B.C.’s five conditions.
“I get more confident about that as the weeks pass,” Ms. Clark said in an interview. “We are engaged at the highest level of the bureaucracy, the deputies are meeting about the five conditions and talking about how we can meet them together.”
The Premier’s comments mark a significant change in tone from just a year ago, when Ms. Clark and Alberta Premier Alison Redford emerged from a Calgary meeting and told reporters their discussions were “frosty.”
Talks between Alberta and B.C. were stuck in political stalemate after Ms. Clark demanded a “fair share” of the financial benefits stemming from any oil sands pipeline crossing her province, along with other environmental and First Nations conditions being met.
At the time, Ms. Redford rejected the B.C. demands, suggesting that it was a grab for Alberta’s royalty revenues. But Ms. Clark later clarified that her idea for a “fair share” of the benefits was not intended as a royalty grab, that there were other avenues to meet her conditions.
Fast-forward to the B.C. election last May – where Ms. Clark’s Liberals won a surprise victory against their NDP challengers – and a friendly summit in Kelowna this June, and the two premiers seem to be working hard to show the relationship has begun anew.
“There is a real appetite in Alberta, and I’m really pleased about the direction that this is going. Now we see the federal government really stepping up and wanting to meet their pieces of the five conditions.”
The Premier said progress in the talks is confirmation that the B.C. conditions are “tough, but fair and clear.”
For Alberta’s part, the province’s Energy Minister Ken Hughes was equally optimistic, if short on details about the nature of the talks. With B.C. looking to make the most of its natural gas reserves by encouraging exports to Asia – and Alberta hoping to do the same for both its oil sands bitumen and natural gas – Mr. Hughes said Alberta and B.C. have a lot in common. He said the “mutual understanding” of each other’s ambitions and opportunities is growing, and it doesn’t hurt that B.C. Natural Gas Development Minister Rich Coleman once lived in Alberta and “actually understands us, which is helpful.”
But he said there’s a lot of work to do. “There are many aspects to the relationship between Alberta and British Columbia,” Mr. Hughes said. “What you will see if there are results out of this is progress on specific projects that we can all support.”
Ms. Clark and Prime Minister Stephen Harper met in B.C. two weeks ago where they discussed the future of oil pipelines, a prelude to a high-profile federal effort to build support within B.C. for both Enbridge’s Northern Gateway pipeline proposal, and the plan to twin the existing Kinder Morgan line. That federal push also includes sending deputy ministers from Ottawa to meet with native leaders in an effort to forge a new relationship.
However, federal Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver told reporters in Calgary earlier this month it was up to Alberta and B.C. to sort out whether B.C. gets its special conditions met. Ms. Clark insists her conditions are not intended to try to prevent economic development. “We’re seeing the rewards of sticking to our guns on that because the rest of the country, increasingly, is coming to accept that these conditions can be met.”
Environmental economist Andrew Leach – who holds the Alberta School of Business Enbridge professorship in energy policy – said B.C. has a right to make sure environmental and spill risks brought on by an crude pipeline are fully addressed, and covered. However, he said putting restrictions on which products from other provinces can be shipped through B.C. is “dangerous territory” for the free movement of goods in Canada. “It just becomes a huge economic cost to everyone,” he said.
Sad day for Canada as the petro girls care not for the children.
GLG
And in other news......
BC government gives 116 million to the Oil and Gas industry
VANCOUVER — The B.C. government has approved $115.8 million in tax breaks under its royalty credit program to support natural gas drilling while producers continue their attempts to develop a liquefied natural gas export industry, the province announced Monday.
The royalty credits will go to companies that are expected to spend $320 million building 12 different infrastructure projects — either resource roads or local pipelines to connect gas wells to the distribution system and pay off in through future royalties, Rich Coleman, Minister of Natural Gas development said in a news release.
Coleman made the announcement on a day when the province was being pulled in different directions over LNG development with environmental groups publishing a new report that says B.C. risks losing the ability to claim the province will produce “the cleanest LNG in the world,” if it doesn’t adopt policies to reduce its carbon footprint.
In his news release, Coleman said B.C. is creating jobs through the development of a new export industry and the credit program “is helping us build the capacity we need to make B.C. a world leader in natural gas supply and export.”
B.C. announced in February that it would extend the royalty program with a 12th-annual installment worth up to $120 million. The projects approved in the 2013 edition will be built mostly in the Montney shale formation located north of Fort St. John.
To date, the royalty program has seen energy producers spend up to $1.9 billion on 78 road and 140 pipeline projects that have supported $6 billion in drilling activity.
However, Clean Energy Canada, on Monday, released a prescription for B.C. to be a leader in clean LNG. It urges the province to require that the carbon dioxide from gas deposits that have large amounts of the element be captured and reinjected below ground at the wellhead.
It also pushes the province to prefer the use of electricity to power the plants, rather than direct-drive compressor systems that rely on burning natural gas, which would give the renewable electricity sector a role in the industry.
“If the government intends to develop this new industry, it needs to ensure that it does so with the smallest possible impact on communities, other sectors and ecosystems,” Merran Smith, director of Clean Energy Canada at the environmental group Tides Canada.
The Clean Energy report compared LNG plants in Australia where companies that are involved in B.C. proposals are already operating plants with similar technologies with two of the so-called “cleanest,” low greenhouse-gas-producing plants in Norway and Australia.
In its report, Tides estimated a so-called “off-the-shelf” plant could have carbon dioxide emissions of up to 0.96 of a tonne of carbon dioxide per tonne of LNG produced versus 0.33 of a tonne C02 for the Statoil Snohvit project in Norway and Australia’s Gorgon plant, a joint venture between Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell and Exxon Mobil.
© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun
As it gets a bit warmer and warmer.....
B.C. Premier Christy Clark says her province is moving closer to an agreement with Alberta that would lay a path for oil sands bitumen to reach B.C. ports.
A series of high-level meetings are under way to discuss how the two provinces can open up the path to B.C.’s coasts, and then Asian markets. An agreement is not imminent, but officials for both the provinces are working on a framework to address B.C.’s five conditions.
“I get more confident about that as the weeks pass,” Ms. Clark said in an interview. “We are engaged at the highest level of the bureaucracy, the deputies are meeting about the five conditions and talking about how we can meet them together.”
The Premier’s comments mark a significant change in tone from just a year ago, when Ms. Clark and Alberta Premier Alison Redford emerged from a Calgary meeting and told reporters their discussions were “frosty.”
Talks between Alberta and B.C. were stuck in political stalemate after Ms. Clark demanded a “fair share” of the financial benefits stemming from any oil sands pipeline crossing her province, along with other environmental and First Nations conditions being met.
At the time, Ms. Redford rejected the B.C. demands, suggesting that it was a grab for Alberta’s royalty revenues. But Ms. Clark later clarified that her idea for a “fair share” of the benefits was not intended as a royalty grab, that there were other avenues to meet her conditions.
Fast-forward to the B.C. election last May – where Ms. Clark’s Liberals won a surprise victory against their NDP challengers – and a friendly summit in Kelowna this June, and the two premiers seem to be working hard to show the relationship has begun anew.
“There is a real appetite in Alberta, and I’m really pleased about the direction that this is going. Now we see the federal government really stepping up and wanting to meet their pieces of the five conditions.”
The Premier said progress in the talks is confirmation that the B.C. conditions are “tough, but fair and clear.”
For Alberta’s part, the province’s Energy Minister Ken Hughes was equally optimistic, if short on details about the nature of the talks. With B.C. looking to make the most of its natural gas reserves by encouraging exports to Asia – and Alberta hoping to do the same for both its oil sands bitumen and natural gas – Mr. Hughes said Alberta and B.C. have a lot in common. He said the “mutual understanding” of each other’s ambitions and opportunities is growing, and it doesn’t hurt that B.C. Natural Gas Development Minister Rich Coleman once lived in Alberta and “actually understands us, which is helpful.”
But he said there’s a lot of work to do. “There are many aspects to the relationship between Alberta and British Columbia,” Mr. Hughes said. “What you will see if there are results out of this is progress on specific projects that we can all support.”
Ms. Clark and Prime Minister Stephen Harper met in B.C. two weeks ago where they discussed the future of oil pipelines, a prelude to a high-profile federal effort to build support within B.C. for both Enbridge’s Northern Gateway pipeline proposal, and the plan to twin the existing Kinder Morgan line. That federal push also includes sending deputy ministers from Ottawa to meet with native leaders in an effort to forge a new relationship.
However, federal Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver told reporters in Calgary earlier this month it was up to Alberta and B.C. to sort out whether B.C. gets its special conditions met. Ms. Clark insists her conditions are not intended to try to prevent economic development. “We’re seeing the rewards of sticking to our guns on that because the rest of the country, increasingly, is coming to accept that these conditions can be met.”
Environmental economist Andrew Leach – who holds the Alberta School of Business Enbridge professorship in energy policy – said B.C. has a right to make sure environmental and spill risks brought on by an crude pipeline are fully addressed, and covered. However, he said putting restrictions on which products from other provinces can be shipped through B.C. is “dangerous territory” for the free movement of goods in Canada. “It just becomes a huge economic cost to everyone,” he said.
Sad day for Canada as the petro girls care not for the children.
GLG
And in other news......
BC government gives 116 million to the Oil and Gas industry
VANCOUVER — The B.C. government has approved $115.8 million in tax breaks under its royalty credit program to support natural gas drilling while producers continue their attempts to develop a liquefied natural gas export industry, the province announced Monday.
The royalty credits will go to companies that are expected to spend $320 million building 12 different infrastructure projects — either resource roads or local pipelines to connect gas wells to the distribution system and pay off in through future royalties, Rich Coleman, Minister of Natural Gas development said in a news release.
Coleman made the announcement on a day when the province was being pulled in different directions over LNG development with environmental groups publishing a new report that says B.C. risks losing the ability to claim the province will produce “the cleanest LNG in the world,” if it doesn’t adopt policies to reduce its carbon footprint.
In his news release, Coleman said B.C. is creating jobs through the development of a new export industry and the credit program “is helping us build the capacity we need to make B.C. a world leader in natural gas supply and export.”
B.C. announced in February that it would extend the royalty program with a 12th-annual installment worth up to $120 million. The projects approved in the 2013 edition will be built mostly in the Montney shale formation located north of Fort St. John.
To date, the royalty program has seen energy producers spend up to $1.9 billion on 78 road and 140 pipeline projects that have supported $6 billion in drilling activity.
However, Clean Energy Canada, on Monday, released a prescription for B.C. to be a leader in clean LNG. It urges the province to require that the carbon dioxide from gas deposits that have large amounts of the element be captured and reinjected below ground at the wellhead.
It also pushes the province to prefer the use of electricity to power the plants, rather than direct-drive compressor systems that rely on burning natural gas, which would give the renewable electricity sector a role in the industry.
“If the government intends to develop this new industry, it needs to ensure that it does so with the smallest possible impact on communities, other sectors and ecosystems,” Merran Smith, director of Clean Energy Canada at the environmental group Tides Canada.
The Clean Energy report compared LNG plants in Australia where companies that are involved in B.C. proposals are already operating plants with similar technologies with two of the so-called “cleanest,” low greenhouse-gas-producing plants in Norway and Australia.
In its report, Tides estimated a so-called “off-the-shelf” plant could have carbon dioxide emissions of up to 0.96 of a tonne of carbon dioxide per tonne of LNG produced versus 0.33 of a tonne C02 for the Statoil Snohvit project in Norway and Australia’s Gorgon plant, a joint venture between Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell and Exxon Mobil.
© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun
As it gets a bit warmer and warmer.....
aheny
Well-Known Member
Its important to keep the language accurate. I am not necessarily for or against any particular devolopment in BC, but I do like accuracy in discussions (media always misleads and sensationalizes). The government isnt giving 116M to the companies, they are allowing them to keep 116M of their BC profits in order to reinvest it in BC. As for bitumen, I definitely dont like the thought of it leaking in BC, but it has been flowing here for decades, filling a tanker ship every 4 days in burnaby.
We shouldnt kid ourselves. Every single drop of petroleum is going to be burned in the atmosphere, and converted to CO2. No matter what we want or what we say, its all going to China, to be burned at their environmental standards (which are actually improving at a much faster rate than americas, although it is still deplorable)
The Oil sands are getting developed, its going to china. Our only concern is do we want the pipes running through BC
We shouldnt kid ourselves. Every single drop of petroleum is going to be burned in the atmosphere, and converted to CO2. No matter what we want or what we say, its all going to China, to be burned at their environmental standards (which are actually improving at a much faster rate than americas, although it is still deplorable)
The Oil sands are getting developed, its going to china. Our only concern is do we want the pipes running through BC
Last edited by a moderator:
tincan
Well-Known Member
I think I've posted it elsewhere but thought there are some new articles she's put out in the past year so here is a link to Robyn Allan's website - http://www.robynallan.com/about/
I think her papers are a MUST READ for anyone interested in the pipeline debate/conversation. I have seen her speak live a couple of times and she is very impressive.
Bio:
Robyn Allan has held many executive positions in the private and public sectors including President and CEO of the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, Vice-President Finance for Parklane Ventures Ltd., and Senior Economist for B.C. Central Credit Union. Recently she provided written evidence on economic and insurance issues related to the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline Project currently before the National Energy Board. She was the Economic and Financial Adviser to the Barrett Commission of Inquiry into the Quality of Condominium Construction in British Columbia. She has taught Money and Banking, Public Finance and Micro and Macro Economics at the university level as well as written numerous articles for newspapers and magazines including the Globe and Mail, Financial Post, Business in Vancouver and Enterprise Magazine. Her first book, Quest for Prosperity: The Dance of Success, was published in 1995. She holds a Masters Degree in Economics from the University of British Columbia and The Canadian Securities Course designation.
You can contact Robyn through email robyn at robynallan.com
I think her papers are a MUST READ for anyone interested in the pipeline debate/conversation. I have seen her speak live a couple of times and she is very impressive.
Bio:
Robyn Allan has held many executive positions in the private and public sectors including President and CEO of the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, Vice-President Finance for Parklane Ventures Ltd., and Senior Economist for B.C. Central Credit Union. Recently she provided written evidence on economic and insurance issues related to the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline Project currently before the National Energy Board. She was the Economic and Financial Adviser to the Barrett Commission of Inquiry into the Quality of Condominium Construction in British Columbia. She has taught Money and Banking, Public Finance and Micro and Macro Economics at the university level as well as written numerous articles for newspapers and magazines including the Globe and Mail, Financial Post, Business in Vancouver and Enterprise Magazine. Her first book, Quest for Prosperity: The Dance of Success, was published in 1995. She holds a Masters Degree in Economics from the University of British Columbia and The Canadian Securities Course designation.
You can contact Robyn through email robyn at robynallan.com
Cuba Libre
Well-Known Member
Hey-- No Worries-- Its a done deal. So ses the oil merchant...
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...to-be-running-by-2018-says-enbridge-1.1875899
So you can see that anyone objecting is just a bump in the pipeline because the oil barons say
Canada needs the pipeline.........
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...to-be-running-by-2018-says-enbridge-1.1875899
So you can see that anyone objecting is just a bump in the pipeline because the oil barons say
Canada needs the pipeline.........
fish4all
Well-Known Member
First Nations energy company floats oil refinery near Prince Rupert
http://commonsensecanadian.ca/first-nations-energy-company-floats-oil-refinery-near-prince-rupert/
http://commonsensecanadian.ca/first-nations-energy-company-floats-oil-refinery-near-prince-rupert/
Cuba Libre
Well-Known Member
Now this should get interesting....... Rich Colemans spiel on LNG is also very interesting. But what the comments section seems to be missed , is that the gas WILL be coming out of the ground. Dont believe that???? Well--- spend a little time in the Peace. Given a push and shove-- my choice would be for gas from BC to be processed... A ruptured gas pipeline or wrecked LNG tanker we can survive. A bitumen spill, however, would be devastating. Send that crap east. Just my opinion....
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
Don't worry, be happy. When they do not approve the pipelines then they will ship it by train.
They have already said so and just think about all the rivers that have train tracks on them.
They have already said so and just think about all the rivers that have train tracks on them.
Englishman
Well-Known Member
And yet there is also this.
http://commonsensecanadian.ca/VIDEO-detail/first-nations-ban-pipelines-bc-lng/
The pipeline battle lines are being drawn and it will be long and arduous fight because not every person, organisation, tribe, or nation can be bought. Some maybe, but never all!!
ziggy
Well-Known Member
I agree with you in part. Isn't Alaska oil being shipped via tanker and pipeline to the lower 48? Seems to me some of it right through Juan de Fuca? Wonder why there is so little environmental action on that front from those you mention. Still I'm not sold on a pipeline and think we have to be aware there is a lot of a international politics playing out here between China the USA and us.
Last edited by a moderator:
tincan
Well-Known Member
http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion...rowth+needs+steady+economy/8945111/story.html
"We will still need new mines and oilfields, but the more successful we are at reducing demand, the more these non-renewable resources will be available to benefit future generations. Projects like the Northern Gateway pipeline, which clearly have greater long-term risks than long-term rewards, simply should not proceed. Finally, we need realistic expectations about our potential LNG industry — slower, more-thoughtful development and broader provincial benefit for generations." -Ross Beaty
Opinion piece by your not-so-average tree hugger radical environmentalist who also happens to be one of Canada's most successful mining magnates.
"We will still need new mines and oilfields, but the more successful we are at reducing demand, the more these non-renewable resources will be available to benefit future generations. Projects like the Northern Gateway pipeline, which clearly have greater long-term risks than long-term rewards, simply should not proceed. Finally, we need realistic expectations about our potential LNG industry — slower, more-thoughtful development and broader provincial benefit for generations." -Ross Beaty
Opinion piece by your not-so-average tree hugger radical environmentalist who also happens to be one of Canada's most successful mining magnates.
Similar threads
