Tug-and-barge fuel shipments through B.C.'s Inside Passage 'a disaster waiting to hap

Tugcapitan said:
As for world class oil spill response, as far as I know even with the best of the best, a 50% recovery rate is about the best one could expect.
We need to concentrate on keeping it on the vessels, by the time it hits the water it's too late. Maybe it's time to retire old construction technology that still plys our coast and invest in proper equipment. Companies won't do it unless its mandated as it costs big bucks. Have the right people running these sensitive things and make them less suceptable to catastrophic failure. Then ENFORCE it. That would be a valuable announcement in my opinion. We'll see later today what "big" marine safety changes are coming.....
Click to expand...
http://www.meridianenergygroupinc.com/meridian-energy-ceo-nd-refinery-operational-2018/ Interesting to see what is going on here in terms of World Class. I think this is the way to go as a spill will not be nearly as disasterous as Raw Bitumen which sinks and cannot be recovered. It will also ensure our crude is refined the most up to date standard ensuring the least amount of smog is returned from China back to us via the trade winds and best financial return for our resource to the Canadian Coffers. Why is this not being explored?
 
No Tanker Ban in Trudeau’s $1.5-Billion Coastal Protection Plan
Plan ‘heartening,’ says Heiltsuk councillor; NDP MP critical.
xJeremy-with-National_square_thumb.jpg.pagespeed.ic.Fz2V3UZb4F.jpg
By Jeremy J. Nuttall Today | TheTyee.ca
http://thetyee.ca/News/2016/11/07/No-Tanker-Ban-Trudeau-Plan/
 
Sheeesh. Someone take that link button off him.

We can't talk about an issue with a linker.

It's past the stage where I don't even read the headline. Just see the bold heading and disregard. Come on man, we want to hear what you have to say, not what someone else has written.
 
Last edited:
Eastmon said:
Sheeesh. Someone take that link button off him.

We can't talk about an issue with a linker.

It's past the stage where I don't even read the headline. Just see the bold heading and disregard. Come on man, we want to hear what you have to say, not what someone else has written.
Click to expand...
paid per link lol
 
agentaqua said:
That's why the Enbridge tanker PR think tank "width to channel width ratio" was a purposely misleading metric to gauge transit risk - the laden tanker turning radius (~2km) was the biggest risk they didn't want to talk about - especially through the twisty Whales Channel. Those tankers have to keep going at a certain minimum speed in order to keep their rudder functional - and shift that momentum. Not to mention that the effects of wind on light tankers (i.e. no cargo - big windage area) - and that the wind funnels and shears coming both along channels (esp. Douglas - @65+kts in the winter), but also up through mountain passes at higher velocities.
Click to expand...

I actually agree with their risk analysis regarding channel width. I understand the preffered route would actually be through Lewis channel not Whale. Lewis is over a mile wide (Whale is a mile wide), and even though there's a big turn around the top end of Gill island, it's 2 miles wide there.
Tankers go through the considerably more tidal second narrows bridge almost daily, and that's less than 140 meters wide....
 
You have to wonder if the northern tanker ban is simply the precursor for increased southern tanker activity. Northern Gateway shuts down and Kinder Morgan ramps up.
 
ziggy said:
You have to wonder if the northern tanker ban is simply the precursor for increased southern tanker activity. Northern Gateway shuts down and Kinder Morgan ramps up.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I have been thinking, Ziggy...
 
Tugcapitan said:
I actually agree with their risk analysis regarding channel width. I understand the preffered route would actually be through Lewis channel not Whale. Lewis is over a mile wide (Whale is a mile wide), and even though there's a big turn around the top end of Gill island, it's 2 miles wide there.Tankers go through the considerably more tidal second narrows bridge almost daily, and that's less than 140 meters wide....
Click to expand...
You were right TC. Lewis was the preferred route...
http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/documents...-_Overview_and_General_Information_Marine.pdf

Quite a twist for potential supertankers though - going out at the bottom of Douglas, into Wright Sound and across the traffic North/South, around the tip of Gil, and down through Lewis (Fig 2-3, p.20)...
 
Last edited:
might go buzz around it and take some pics this weekend..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

OldBlackDog
B.C. group wants to kill seals to save whales.
Replies
0
Views
448
OldBlackDog
OldBlackDog
A
B.C. orders clean-up of decaying and abandoned cannery at Namu
Replies
1
Views
746
Capt_Ed
Capt_Ed
Lipripper
B.C.'s salmon feedlots need to be closed
Replies
1
Views
754
Whole in the Water
Whole in the Water
Derby
VAFFC Proposal to Ship Jet Fuel into the Fraser River for YVR
Replies
6
Views
1K
notmebud
N
MILLERTIME
10 key Island issues
Replies
4
Views
1K
MILLERTIME
MILLERTIME
Back
Top