Northern Gateway

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Trumbull

I have pride for where I came from, not being prejudiced after your "dat's racist" tirade are we?

If you're going to be nationalistic, you get to carry the baggage and the barbs that come with it.

[ranchlandsselling]

Originally Posted by rubecube

If you're going to be nationalistic, you get to carry the baggage and the barbs that come with it.

Really? German people can't be proud without being reminded of the Nazi's?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by ranchlandsselling

Really? German people can't be proud without being reminded of the Nazi's?

Sure they can, but every country has their things they get ribbed for. If I make a vaguely colonial comment and someone makes a "typical English" crack, it kinda comes with the territory.

[ranchlandsselling]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Sure they can, but every country has their things they get ribbed for. If I make a vaguely colonial comment and someone makes a "typical English" crack, it kinda comes with the territory.

Fair enough, maybe throw in a smiley next time for those of us so sensitive to not differentiate between being an ass and making a wise crack.

[19Yzerman19]

Today, we unequivocally reject the Harper Government’s decision to approve the Enbridge Northern Gateway tanker and pipelines project and First Nations will immediately go to court to vigorously pursue all lawful means to stop the Enbridge project.

As they should, I'm 100% in favour of this. If they can convince a judge that there's a legal reason this project should not be built, based on Aboriginal rights or otherwise, that's totally legitimate.

The other stuff I'm hearing about illegally interfering with the project as a means of protest? Not so much.

[CaptainCrunch]

Well I guess the alternative if this doesn't go through is to just build a bunch more rail lines and trains to get the oil through to the port.

Right now its not only impacting our ability to get the product out to the market, but because of the rail usage its screwing over the Alberta farmers trying to get their wheat out to markets.

so if they want to tie this up in court, then its time to expand the railroad infrastructure.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

Suncor, CNRL and another major (soon to come) will all be reducing their greenhouse gas emissions immensly in the next 1-5 years.

Microwave-like technology? Are the early pilots looking good?

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Well I guess the alternative if this doesn't go through is to just build a bunch more rail lines and trains to get the oil through to the port.

Right now its not only impacting our ability to get the product out to the market, but because of the rail usage its screwing over the Alberta farmers trying to get their wheat out to markets.

so if they want to tie this up in court, then its time to expand the railroad infrastructure.

Which means more impact on the environment in every way. Not to mention the negative economic impacts.

Opposing the pipeline(s) is an incredibly shortsighted environmental position.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Which means more impact on the environment in every way. Not to mention the negative economic impacts.

Opposing the pipeline(s) is an incredibly shortsighted environmental position.

I'm also of the opinion that it's tad immoral to export your environmental debt to other countries. If we as North Americans are going to be the prime consumers of oil, then we should be shouldering a reciprocal amount of the environmental burden of doing so.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Which means more impact on the environment in every way. Not to mention the negative economic impacts.

Opposing the pipeline(s) is an incredibly shortsighted environmental position.

I completely agree, but at some point if this thing drags through the courts or delays for year after year they're going to have to look at short term alternatives.

Right now the only alternative is rail or truck.

Right now, with there only really being 4 provinces in Canada in Alberta, Sask, BC and NL that are have provinces, and with Ontario on the verge of being a economic disaster, the last thing that this country should be doing is constricting the economies of the have provinces.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I'm also of the opinion that it's tad immoral to export your environmental debt to other countries. If we as North Americans are going to be the prime consumers of oil, then we should be shouldering a reciprocal amount of the environmental burden of doing so.

Definitely agree. We should be promoting domestic sources of oil as much as possible where we have stringent environmental regulations and oversight on development.

Importing oil or supporting further production from places like Libya, Africa and Venezuela where there are literally zero considerations for environmental impacts, let alone their human rights records is morally bankrupt. We should be developing as much of our petroleum resources as possible here in Canada.

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by Trumbull

Which will be irrelevant and not appease any of those opposed to it whatsoever, therefore they should be ignored and promptly removed by whatever force necessary if dumb enough to attempt to stop the pipeline from being built.

Pretty much. "Environmentalists" ignore anything positive coming out of the industry because it doesn't fit their tiny world view of sunshine and flowers. Also their financial interests are in keeping Canada stagnant while the saudis make all the money off oil.

[Tron_fdc]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Definitely agree. We should be promoting domestic sources of oil as much as possible where we have stringent environmental regulations and oversight on development.

Importing oil or supporting further production from places like Libya, Africa and Venezuela where there are literally zero considerations for environmental impacts, let alone their human rights records is morally bankrupt. We should be developing as much of our petroleum resources as possible here in Canada.

Or at least suspending/capping their production until they can prove that the extraction methods comply with US/Canadian standards.

I had to sign off on a bunch of "conflict mineral" sheets the last few months that certified I wasn't using illegally mined minerals in steel production. It's commonplace with diamonds and expanding to steel making, why shouldn't it include oil? Or do we just accept oil as being too large a resource to control, thereby turning a blind eye to questionable (unethical) means of extraction?

I admit I don't know much about worldwide O&G production, but isn't that a legitimate question?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Tron_fdc

Or at least suspending/capping their production until they can prove that the extraction methods comply with US/Canadian standards.

I had to sign off on a bunch of "conflict mineral" sheets the last few months that certified I wasn't using illegally mined minerals in steel production. It's commonplace with diamonds and expanding to steel making, why shouldn't it include oil? Or do we just accept oil as being too large a resource to control, thereby turning a blind eye to questionable (unethical) means of extraction?

I admit I don't know much about worldwide O&G production, but isn't that a legitimate question?

And that's the problem that I see right now, the protesters don't care on a global sense, they don't go after the Venezuela's and the Middle Eastern States for their environmental record or human rights records, and they certainly don't care about the mega carriers bringing Oil into Canada and the U.S.

I guess its easier to protest our energy industry,

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

And that's the problem that I see right now, the protesters don't care on a global sense, they don't go after the Venezuela's and the Middle Eastern States for their environmental record or human rights records, and they certainly don't care about the mega carriers bringing Oil into Canada and the U.S.

I guess its easier to protest our energy industry,

Well yeah, it is. Kinda a no-brainer. But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. What are Canadian protesters going to do about Saudi oil policy? Really? Your example has about the same sense as a 5 year old arguing, 'it's not fair'. Maybe it's not, but does that change the conversation, or the importance of cleaning it up here?

The only thing they can do, is attack it from the demand side, which they are trying to do with green initiatives. Which the government seems to be working against. So we can sell our oil. So really, the best place to protest IS here.

And guess what? If demand does go down, that will affect change everywhere. Little by little, it will help.

Lastly, once there is change in places we can affect change, it makes it easier to affect change in other places. We've seen that will all other sorts of humanitarian and environmental change. It may not be as fast or as dramatic as you want, but it happens.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Daradon

Well yeah, it is. Kinda a no-brainer. But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. What are Canadian protesters going to do about Saudi oil policy? Really? Your example has about the same sense as a 5 year old arguing, 'it's not fair'. Maybe it's not, but does that change the conversation, or the importance of cleaning it up here?

The only thing they can do, is attack it from the demand side, which they are trying to do with green initiatives. Which the government seems to be working against. So we can sell our oil. So really, the best place to protest IS here.

And guess what? If demand does go down, that will affect change everywhere. Little by little, it will help.

Lastly, once there is change in places we can affect change, it makes it easier to affect change in other places. We've seen that will all other sorts of humanitarian and environmental change. It may not be as fast or as dramatic as you want, but it happens.

How exactly is opposing pipelines attacking the demand side of this issue?

Creating larger demand for much worse sources of oil by reducing Canadian supply seems to be rather counterproductive doesn't it?

One thing Canadian protesters could do is refuse to use oil sourced from Countries with much worse environmental, social, and human rights records than Canada. That would mean stopping Canada's importation of foreign oil. And it would also mean building a large trans-Canada pipeline to be self sufficient.

[Trumbull]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

Pretty much. "Environmentalists" ignore anything positive coming out of the industry because it doesn't fit their tiny world view of sunshine and flowers. Also their financial interests are in keeping Canada stagnant while the saudis make all the money off oil.

It was pretty clear there were no changes to the deal that could happen that would ever appease environmentalists, so that's when you ignore them and move forward without their input.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

How exactly is opposing pipelines attacking the demand side of this issue?

Creating larger demand for much worse sources of oil by reducing Canadian supply seems to be rather counterproductive doesn't it?

One thing Canadian protesters could do is refuse to use oil sourced from Countries with much worse environmental, social, and human rights records than Canada. That would mean stopping Canada's importation of foreign oil. And it would also mean building a large trans-Canada pipeline to be self sufficient.

I'm probably not explaining my thought properly.

First I'll just address your last comment. I'm not sure how Canadian protesters could pick and choose where the country gets it's oil from. The only thing they can do is address how much is used and/or sold.

I'm not sure it's a zero sum game as you imply. I don't think that reducing our output automatically increases how much we bring in, keeping our, and the worlds, net usage the same. It may in the very short term, but markets adjust, habits change.

By protesting oil industries and thus oil use in general it forces the government to change it's strategies. It's slows production and use of oil, and more importantly, it's educates people. Alternatives are explored, new technologies are researched and improved, habits are changed.

The policies we have right now are in place because the oil industries have the politicians in their pockets. An example (outside of oil) that happened just this week was Boeing's stock dropping 3% just because Eric Cantor lost his election. Companies fortunes are tied to the regulations (or lack their of) and the policies they get from the governments in charge.

If Canadians don't ask for change. Things won't change. However, protesters can affect change in the voters, in the government, heck, maybe even in the companies themselves. Shoot, look what's happened because of votes attached to green movements down south when it comes to the Keystone Pipeline.

There's no reason Canada can't move to a more balance and more renewable energy policy.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by Daradon

By protesting oil industries and thus oil use in general it forces the government to change it's strategies. It's slows production and use of oil, and more importantly, it's educates people. Alternatives are explored, new technologies are researched and improved, habits are changed.

As long as someone else in the world is willing to give us money for oil, that's all a bunch of nonsense.

Wishful thinking and fairy dust solutions like you propose amount to farts in the wind.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Daradon

Well yeah, it is. Kinda a no-brainer. But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. What are Canadian protesters going to do about Saudi oil policy? Really? Your example has about the same sense as a 5 year old arguing, 'it's not fair'. Maybe it's not, but does that change the conversation, or the importance of cleaning it up here?

The only thing they can do, is attack it from the demand side, which they are trying to do with green initiatives. Which the government seems to be working against. So we can sell our oil. So really, the best place to protest IS here.

And guess what? If demand does go down, that will affect change everywhere. Little by little, it will help.

Lastly, once there is change in places we can affect change, it makes it easier to affect change in other places. We've seen that will all other sorts of humanitarian and environmental change. It may not be as fast or as dramatic as you want, but it happens.

I see the protesting as a waste though, even agreeing with all the benefits of the protests you list above its a waste of protesting resources. Protest against polution that cant be exported.

Target coal power plants in Canada. That would be a real way for Canada to meet ghg targets and a real way for Canads actions to reduce world wide CO2 production.

We have a limited number of people who are willing to go out and protest and they are protesting inefficiently.