Top Players Discuss Shipping Alberta's Oil to East Coast of Canada

[FishNmemories]

"With Keystone and Gateway in political limbo, pipeline advocates turn to Canada’s East Coast"

seems like top analysts and former BOC Governor David Dodge think its a good idea to move Alberta's Bitumen through pipelines to eastern canada where Irving oil refineries already exist...I'm ok with this concept

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news...bo+pipeline+advocates+turn/6653222/story.html

 

[Drewski Canuck]

What would really, REALLY help, is if the BC land claims were dealt with for once and for all. This has been outstanding for a century, and now is creating economic chaos as any group trying to do development in BC has to accommodate too many competing FN interests, and often over the same piece of Crown land(ie: Okanagan bands).

What if a Highway right of way could be used, as that is already in place? There would be no demand for consultation, and onorous conditions to abide by and accommodate. However, such routing cannot be done. The end result is a loss of jobs and business opportunities for BC, which it really could use right now.

Many groups in BC could care less if the pipelines are not built to the BC Coast. However, what if the government money dried up and these groups would have to raise their own money, would that change their tune?
The groups along the McKenzie valley pipeline route are pretty upset that they will not get a pipeline to build, tax, maintain, any time soon. Make it too difficult and an opportunity is lost.

If jobs and business opportunity is not important to BC, then the west coast route is a non issue. Funny part is how many skilled trades have had to leave BC for Alberta and Saskatchewan for work, and likely will never return. Those who are left in BC carry more per capita tax based with less abilty to do so.

The people along the proposed eastern route will wecome the opportunities that are coming their way.

Simply enough, realize what you are getting and what you are giving up. THEN, don't complain about how hard you have it.

Drewski

 

[salmonkiller01]

What would really, REALLY help, is if the BC land claims were dealt with for once and for all. This has been outstanding for a century, and now is creating economic chaos as any group trying to do development in BC has to accommodate too many competing FN interests, and often over the same piece of Crown land(ie: Okanagan bands).

What if a Highway right of way could be used, as that is already in place? There would be no demand for consultation, and onorous conditions to abide by and accommodate. However, such routing cannot be done. The end result is a loss of jobs and business opportunities for BC, which it really could use right now.

Many groups in BC could care less if the pipelines are not built to the BC Coast. However, what if the government money dried up and these groups would have to raise their own money, would that change their tune?
The groups along the McKenzie valley pipeline route are pretty upset that they will not get a pipeline to build, tax, maintain, any time soon. Make it too difficult and an opportunity is lost.

If jobs and business opportunity is not important to BC, then the west coast route is a non issue. Funny part is how many skilled trades have had to leave BC for Alberta and Saskatchewan for work, and likely will never return. Those who are left in BC carry more per capita tax based with less abilty to do so.

The people along the proposed eastern route will wecome the opportunities that are coming their way.

Simply enough, realize what you are getting and what you are giving up. THEN, don't complain about how hard you have it.

Drewski

Short term employment opportunities will be lost if the pipeline is not built in B.C, but the longterm goal of saving the enviroment from potential spills is priceless. Supplying China with cheap oil is just using our natural resources for a short term gain. We could create MORE long term jobs by buying Made in Canada products instead of cheap offshore crap. Pretty bad when you buy a table made of canadian wood but it is made in china.

 

[FishNmemories]

What would really, REALLY help, is if the BC land claims were dealt with for once and for all. This has been outstanding for a century, and now is creating economic chaos as any group trying to do development in BC has to accommodate too many competing FN interests, and often over the same piece of Crown land(ie: Okanagan bands).


What if a Highway right of way could be used, as that is already in place? There would be no demand for consultation, and onorous conditions to abide by and accommodate. However, such routing cannot be done. The end result is a loss of jobs and business opportunities for BC, which it really could use right now.

Many groups in BC could care less if the pipelines are not built to the BC Coast. However, what if the government money dried up and these groups would have to raise their own money, would that change their tune?
The groups along the McKenzie valley pipeline route are pretty upset that they will not get a pipeline to build, tax, maintain, any time soon. Make it too difficult and an opportunity is lost.

If jobs and business opportunity is not important to BC, then the west coast route is a non issue. Funny part is how many skilled trades have had to leave BC for Alberta and Saskatchewan for work, and likely will never return. Those who are left in BC carry more per capita tax based with less abilty to do so.

The people along the proposed eastern route will wecome the opportunities that are coming their way.

Simply enough, realize what you are getting and what you are giving up. THEN, don't complain about how hard you have it.

Drewski

I agree with you on the 1st statement, but how long it takes to settle all FN claims is up to the Province of BC and the Federal Government. And yes, it causes me considerable unrest. But court cases involving FN's rights are presently still being debated and decided.



I agree with Salmonkiller01, to build the pipeline will result in mostly short-term jobs and very few long-term jobs. However, when a oil spill happens its ill-effects will last centuries...ie, Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska.

And I have to ask you and here I am quoting you, " (you should have figured out I am a flatlander who spends 51 weeks a year dreaming about my annual Salmon pilgrimage)", are you still a flatlander?

If so, would you still come to BC to spend your money and your holidays if BC's coast were contaminated from an oil spill, like say in Nootka sound?

Its important to remember that people come to BC to vacation for its pristine Beauty and not to check out an oil hazard wasteland.

my .02

 

[FishNmemories]

drewski canuck

BTW IronNoggin posted the same link after I posted this one and there is some interesting comments there to enjoy as well

 

[Drewski Canuck]

As for short term economic impact, oil can only be sold and used once. Then its gone. As for buying Canadian, who is willing to pay $40.00 an hour when the chinese build the same toaster for $.40 an hour. Ain't gonna happen.

Drewski

 

[GLG]

DC
Who said that the short term jobs would go to Canadians?
Why do you think the 2012 fed budget relaxed the rules on foreign worker visas?
It even set out that you should pay them 15% less then the going rate.
China owned companies are lining up to build this god forsaken NGP pipeline of death.
Dig deeper and follow the money and you will see that the least served people are average Canadians.
Oil Companies and Government are the winners, the question is are they from China?
GLG

 

[salmonkiller01]

as for short term economic impact, oil can only be sold and used once. Then its gone. As for buying canadian, who is willing to pay $40.00 an hour when the chinese build the same toaster for $.40 an hour. Ain't gonna happen.

Drewski

i would!!!

 

[Drewski Canuck]

Of course we want a pristine BC. I also want my brothers to share somewhat in the wealth. The Peace Country oil will flow from Fort St. John and area, and will be exported sooner or later. It will flow no matter what, only question is where it will go.

Oil spill risk from oil sales is an equal risk to a shipping disaster, as that is the most likely source of a spill, yet shipping is an accepted industry to BC. Should we ban all terminal port traffic while we are at it as well? How about turning your back on the forestry industry because of the environmental impact. Every industry has risk and all risks have to be managed as best as possible.

When you think of short term jobs, the related industries will be around for 30 years. Maybe by then it won't matter as there will be an energy alternative. In the mean time I think of how tough things are in BC for employment, and how high taxes are. Something's gotta give for you people, and here is a chance.

Just saying that if you want to develop some employment and business, this is one way it can be done. As it stands, the Irving refineries down east are more than glad to take the oil, and the jobs that will be created as well.

Drewski

 

[GLG]

Here is the deal... Ship the oil to eastern Canada they need it as Canada currently imports 48% of is oil needs from the middle east. Stop the outflow of trillions of Canadian dollars to that trouble spot. Keep the money at home to help the Canadian economy. Spread the wealth from coast to coast not the oil on the left coast. If they want to export oil, the east coast is all setup to do so. Matter of fact the spill response is tested and proven. How do we know this? Because they just had a 30,000 barrel spill at the terminal that was contained at the tank farm. The Koreans on the east coast are running a tight ship and know how to handle oil.
GLG

 

[Rockfish]

Oil spill risk from oil sales is an equal risk to a shipping disaster, as that is the most likely source of a spill, yet shipping is an accepted industry to BC. Should we ban all terminal port traffic while we are at it as well?
Drewski

Your serious, you want to compare the cataclysmic destruction that oil tanker disasters on our Pacific coast would be, compared with say a ship fuel spill or some logs/lumber going into the water from a ship, washing up on a beach and being salvaged or cut up for fire wood. That’s like comparing a can of soda pop exploding on a super market floor with the destruction caused by the Tsunami and nuclear power plant disasters in Japan.

Two hundred super tankers a year travelling a very narrow dangerous route on a coast known as the graveyard of the Pacific for all the ships that have floundered, operated by foreign companies that will wave by by at the first sign of disaster, (not that any significant cleanup would even be possible) and compensation a joke or nonexistent.

All so that Big Oil can make money in the shortest time possible, while providing the least long term benefit possible, while BC takes most of the risk and gets virtually nothing for it.

Of course, when you put it that way it makes perfect sense to me.

Extract the oil more slowly (it’s a one time asset, they are not making more of it and it is not going down in value, so we don’t need a fire sale) keep it in Canada and possibly the US, and refine it here overtime to maximize long term benefit to the economy and our children with the least risk.

Unfortunately Big Oil wants a fire sale now and their bought and paid for politicians will accommodate them. When it’s gone they will move on.

 

[Gunsmith]

As per usual Big Oil never finishes the clean-up after their spill. The dirty work is left to those who depend on the land and ocean for life.