So 50,000 liters spills on the ground In a remote area where only the pipeline is, what's the impact?
Posted via RS Mobile

Source: Transportation Safety Board of Canada - Pipeline Investigation Report P07H0040

You can also read more here: Environmental Emergency Management Program - Burnaby Oil Spill

:lawl:

:suspicious:

http://investnorthwestbc.ca/uploads/...dge/Photo1.jpg

How so? There's no scenario where this gets approved by ANY level of government that doesn't make Enbridge 100% responsible for cleanup costs of a pipeline spill.

Where the big question lies is with responsibility for tanker spills, as technically once it's out of the pipeline, it's not Enbridge's problem any more. The push is to make them SIGN ON for most or all of that responsibility.

That pipeline was very safe until a bunch of apes decided to dig it up with an excavator. How the engineering firm and contractor weren't deemed negligent in this will forever be something I do not understand.

Thankfully you liberal folks can now use this to bash "unsafe" pipelines for the rest of eternity.

Siiiiighhhh...

The bottom line is you either build the pipe line and sell oil to the east for full price

Or you build one to the states and sell the oil for a quarter of the price
Posted via RS Mobile

I should be clear....I am not 100% against these pipelines. There is risk with every reward and these pipeline have the potential to bring huge rewards to the province. I just don't think our risk is worth the reward at this point.

We keep hearing that this will "bring jobs to BC", but how? how many? how will this effect our oil and gas prices? how will this revenue help BC? where will the money be going?

This benefits all of Canada signigicantly from a financial perspective in the short and long term. You were able to locate pipeline rupture investigation reports on the interwebz, surely you can locate info on the financial benefits this pipeline offers to Canadians... or maybe you just don't want to?

I think the question is whether 1 billion in liability is enough. I would like to hear some comments from real actuary on that.

Marine time insurance and liability is also missing from the discussion.

Honestly they should just build the damn thing to end up Prince Rupert. Cheap asses want to save money on extra 200km of pipeline.

Straight from their website:

-With a capital cost of $6.5 billion, Northern Gateway will create over 3,000 construction jobs and 560 long-term jobs here in B.C. The $32 million per year earned will benefit individual families and communities. Property tax revenues will increase by $36 million annually. [Are these contracts going to be awards to local companies or to the lowest bidder?]

-Northern Gateway will generate $1.2 billion in tax revenue for British Columbia and $4.3 billion in labour-related income over the next 30 years. Over the same time period, the project will contribute $270 billion to Canada’s Gross Domestic Product.

-First Nations and Métis communities were offered equity agreements giving them a 10% stake in the pipeline. In addition, $300 million in estimated employment and contracts adds up to $1 billion in total long-term benefits for Aboriginal communities and businesses.

I'm obviously pro-pipeline, to me it's a non issue, trains and trucks are not a solution.

What is an issue, is the terminal and the ships. IMO all the media pissing and moaning about the pipeline should be traded for pissing and moaning about ocean transport, and the measures put in place to prevent and mitigate the impact of an incident.

Well in Vancouver, we always have the stereotype we have an over abundance of liberal arts people who only know policy and complain. Heck even on RS.. how many people can weld properly?

Laying down pipeline is quite task specific. I would imagine engineering firms like AECom will take up some work. People on the ground? It will be a mix like current tar sands right now?

What is sad is the First Nations could have gotten training out of the building of this (much like the skyscraper building in NY the last century).. but everyone is so concentrated in saying no than to think.

We don't have enough trained people who are willing to do the work.

This is sad, but true.

The work for mainline construction would not be awarded locally, it would go to the big firms based out of Alberta.. but much of the workforce will be from BC. No local BC pipeline companies can handle a big inch mainline project like the NG.

Fabrication work associated with valve and pump stations would be awarded locally, probably 50% of better as BC fab rates are lower than Alberta anyway.

Civil work for access/pioneer and stations would probably be awarded 100% to BC companies, depending how the scope is broke out.

Engineering firm I have no idea who it is, probably Calgary office though... for some reason I think it's Worley Parsons.

... All of the above is based on my experience, I work for TCPL so I'm not exactly "in the loop" on this work.

All 3 may happen. 1 to Irving refinery back east, 1 to USA and 1 to BC. I just counted about 202 under construction or awaiting approval oil sand projects (sagd or mine sites) in alberta.

I have worked for seaspan and as far as I know there have been no oil barge incidents, or major incidents of any kind. The same can't be said for bc ferries. How many hard dockings have they had? Don't forget about the ferry with 200000+ litres of fuel on the bottom of the ocean. Why don't we ban bc ferries or cruiseships?

Straight from the federal government website
Facts and Figures
•More than 192,000 temporary foreign workers entered Canada in 2011. The overall total includes about 70,000 foreign workers whose employer required an LMO from HRSDC and close to 120,000 who did not require an LMO.
•In 2011, more than 29,000 temporary foreign workers made the transition to permanent status.

Going on behind the scenes foreign people are taking Canadian jobs and we are going to be exporting raw materials.

I currently work in a SAGD plant near fort mcmurray and what Hondaracer says is entirely true. If you spill 1L on a concrete floor (easily cleanable), you would think somebody got murdered. All sorts of paperwork and investigation. However SAGD has a very small physical footprint compared to mining techniques. I'd say Costco and its parking lot takes up more space than my plant. 90% of the water is reused and pressures are limited to avoid cracking the formation. It's not good for the environment (what is?) but its 1000 times better than mining IMO.

Clean natural gas is burned to produce dirty oil to be put in our cars. If our cars were fueled by natural gas instead of gasoline emissions could be dropped almost 50%. If every vehicle stored its braking energy via a hydraulic accumulator or electric charging a further ~30% reduction could be made.

Think about the wind up cars you had as a kid.

Unless you wipe your butt with leaves and paddle your homemade canoe everywhere and eat seals you are part of the problem. Pretty much all of us.

Take the fact that pretty much all British Columbians are settler immigrants and have no historical ancestral connection past 100-150 years (2-3 generations at most) to this land, I dont see how the ZioAmerican empire can be stopped in its exploitation of resources and destruction of the land for its one world government ambitions.

QFT, it's insane, oil can be just oozing out of the ground into ditchwater and thats fine, but if a drop of oil falls off your dipstick and hits the ground you'll most certainly be crucified for abusing the environment.

You must be a really interesting person.

Anyone watch Gold Rush on discovery? Todd Hoffman and crew spill like 55 gallons of hydraulic fluid in the Amazon jungle an know one cares.

Oh you can bet that environmentalists were boarding planes to go protest, but then someone told them that the flights they would take to go protest would cause more harm to the environment then the spill did, so they are walking there. Thats why they aren't there yet.

http://pix.echtlustig.com/1308/65-wat.jpg

This is the sad truth... or more to the point, who are will to go work in the middle of butt-fuck-nowhere without demanding massively higher pay. Which is why companies in the north are big on foreign workers: it's not so much that they'll work for less than "industry standard" so much as that they'll actually work for a decent rate instead of trying to rape the company in the ass just because it's "in the boonies".

i'm not sure if i'm misunderstanding your question here, but the environment? possible water sources? ecosystems? etc. :badpokerface:

But like I said in my first post, the absolute destruction of the areas they are actually mining is far worse than any spill would ever be
Posted via RS Mobile

lol ..wat.. :fulloffuck:

A pipeline failure is a drop in the bucket. what else is there to understand?
Posted via RS Mobile