Northern Gateway

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Justin Trudeau, MP ‏@JustinTrudeau 8m Northern Gateway puts the coastal economy and the environment at risk. This is no place for a pipeline. Mr. Harper should reject it.

So much for my bleeding heart Liberal tendencies.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Well this should go over well on this board...

Justin Trudeau, MP ‏@JustinTrudeau 8m Northern Gateway puts the coastal economy and the environment at risk. This is no place for a pipeline. Mr. Harper should reject it.

I will give him one thing...referencing the "coastal economy" is a shrewd political move to counter Harper's (correct) point that Gateway is good for the economy.

I wonder how big the "coastal economy" that would be threatened by a spill is anyways.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

I will give him one thing...referencing the "coastal economy" is a shrewd political move to counter Harper's (correct) point that Gateway is good for the economy.

I wonder how big the "coastal economy" that would be threatened by a spill is anyways.

http://www.kitimat.ca/EN/main/busine...t-economy.html

Kitimat industries have produced up to 11% of BC's annual manufactured exports and shipped up to 5% of annual BC exports. Between 1990 and 2000 over $15 billion in trade was produced at or exported from Kitimat.

Not sure why they use such old stats. I can only assume because they've gone down. Still, it seems the answer would be "significant".

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

If they approve it it has to comply with the 209 conditions. They can't cherry pick which conditions, it's either all or nothing, or send it back for further consideration to the NEB.

Could they not add more? Or only the NEB can do that?

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by nik-

http://www.kitimat.ca/EN/main/busine...t-economy.html



Not sure why they use such old stats. I can only assume because they've gone down. Still, it seems the answer would be "significant".

A lot of those exports are lumber and aluminum. I don't know if a spill would have a last impact on those industries. It's the fishery and tourism that has the most to lose.

[nik-]

I would assume a spill in or near the port would effectively shut it down for a while. Lasting no, but it's an impact for sure.

[Madman]

660News Calgary @660News
BREAKING: Federal government approves Northern Gateway pipeline. The approval comes with 209 conditions.

[flylock shox]

No surprises there.

Now the interesting part begins. I'm most keen to see how united the various First Nations will or won't be in their opposition. Still plenty of hurdles before this thing gets done.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Well this should go over well on this board...

Justin Trudeau, MP ‏@JustinTrudeau 8m Northern Gateway puts the coastal economy and the environment at risk. This is no place for a pipeline. Mr. Harper should reject it.

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Trudeau's actually been very clear about his opinion on Northern Gateway for awhile now.

Yep, we already knew this. One of the reasons Trudeau wants Keystone XL is so that he's not forced to support Northern Gateway to not tank the economy.

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

Nothing but political posturing for votes. Environmental groups don't create jobs, and don't provide revenue for the government. Trudeau knows what keeps this country running economically.

He also knows that Northern Gateway is a vote loser, despite oil's importance to the economy. Harper knows it too, but his approving it is a good use of political capital - even though Harper may be going into debt as far as that's concerned.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

A lot of those exports are lumber and aluminum. I don't know if a spill would have a last impact on those industries. It's the fishery and tourism that has the most to lose.

I thought the Rio Tinto smelter was no longer operational for some reason.


Warning: pure cocktail napkin math to follow..

So going by those old numbers posted above and assuming they've dropped, call it $1 billion per year of economic export activity.

Add in a billion dollars of cleanup costs for one year (pure rounded up assumption on my part) and we're talking a $2 billion event.

Call a major spill a 1 in 50 year event and discount at 10% and its about a $400 million present cost.

...seems like a reasonable toll for the benefactors of the pipeline (Oil companies, pipeline companies, Alberta, Feds, etc.) to pool together on.

[/cocktail napkin math]


I fully support the creation of a cleanup fund, so long as the money actually goes into a discrete reserve fund and not into the general coffers of the BC government.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

I thought the Rio Tinto smelter was no longer operational for some reason.


Warning: pure cocktail napkin math to follow..

So going by those old numbers posted above and assuming they've dropped, call it $1 billion per year of economic export activity.

Add in a billion dollars of cleanup costs for one year (pure rounded up assumption on my part) and we're talking a $2 billion event.

Call a major spill a 1 in 50 year event and discount at 10% and its about a $400 million present cost.

...seems like a reasonable toll for the benefactors of the pipeline (Oil companies, pipeline companies, Alberta, Feds, etc.) to pool together on.

[/cocktail napkin math]


I fully support the creation of a cleanup fund, so long as the money actually goes into a discrete reserve fund and not into the general coffers of the BC government.

The concern is that none of those benefactors are the BC public, and they're the ones who are going to shoulder most of the burden if there is a spill.

As previously mentioned, this is a long ways from being over. We can probably expect a referendum in BC and then some drawn out court battles.

[Tinordi]

For something in the vital economic interest of Canada a meek 4 paragraph press release with no other press conference says alot to how much this Government is actually distancing itself from this debacle. What a bunch of clowns.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

For something in the vital economic interest of Canada a meek 4 paragraph press release with no other press conference says alot to how much this Government is actually distancing itself from this debacle. What a bunch of clowns.

The vital economic interest of Canada and the vital political interest of the party do not coincide.

That's a reality that applies to all of the parties, but the Cons are the ones in power so they can't posture against it.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by rubecube

The concern is that none of those benefactors are the BC public, and they're the ones who are going to shoulder most of the burden if there is a spill.

As previously mentioned, this is a long ways from being over. We can probably expect a referendum in BC and then some drawn out court battles.

Good call, I missed them. As they receive some of the revenue and knock on economic benefits they should be in there as well.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

Good call, I missed them. As they receive some of the revenue and knock on economic benefits they should be in there as well.

I know much of the concern here has been whether or not there will truly be a lot of knock on economic benefits. Sure there will probably be an increase in jobs when construction starts, but how many of those are likely to last once the pipeline is completed?

Honestly, I don't have a strong opinion on the whole thing. It's just been very poorly sold to British Columbians.

[Tinordi]

Either way, they're running as fast as they can from this approval. They wont even face the pubic on it hiding behind a press release. You can pretty much rest assured that this never gets built. Only 1 of Christy Clark's 5 conditions has been met and the others likely never will be. BC has to issue about 60 licenses and approvals for it to be built. Stopping it is well within it's legal powers. There is at least 5 years of Supreme Court challenges from FNs to gum it up. There's a federal election and another provincial election to come. And there's likely now a referendum in BC.

Dead.

It didn't have to be that way, but this government just doesn't operate in that fashion.

[Flash Walken]

Can you explain what you mean by "it didn't have to be this way"?

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

I think most people recognize this for what it really is, and that this approval probaly has more to do with getting Keystone built than it does actually buidling this line.

I think most people understand that Keystone is probalby the better option, however, with NG approved, there is now at least the potential for an alternative. That not only puts a little pressure on the US to approve/totally build Keystone, but it also gets the ball rolling should an alternative be necessary.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Either way, they're running as fast as they can from this approval. They wont even face the pubic on it hiding behind a press release. You can pretty much rest assured that this never gets built. Only 1 of Christy Clark's 5 conditions has been met and the others likely never will be. BC has to issue about 60 licenses and approvals for it to be built. Stopping it is well within it's legal powers. There is at least 5 years of Supreme Court challenges from FNs to gum it up. There's a federal election and another provincial election to come. And there's likely now a referendum in BC.

Dead.

It didn't have to be that way, but this government just doesn't operate in that fashion.

Lets be honest, there was always going to be fierce opposition regardless. With the environmental groups having the oilsands in their crosshairs they were always going to push hard to oppose. No one could have sold this where the majority would be satisfied.

[Tinordi]

It didn't have to be this way because the government didn't need to make this a wedge issue between its base and other parties. It poisoned the well immediately saying that anyone who was against this project was a foreign funded radical who hated Canada. Instead of being, a responsible measured government, they hunkered down on the only strategy they know which is partisan pit fighting. A real government would have NOT taken a stand on it and would have let the merits of the project speak for itself. That way the decision to approve or not would not have been this moronic 2 year long piece of theatre that was a foregone conclusion.

They could have also done a number of things, such as honestly build bridges. They could have satisfied their duty to consult with First Nations instead of outsourcing the messiest bits to Enbridge. But again, the mouth foaming herd that is this government's base would never accept an honest attempt at negotiating and conciliation with FNs and this government has shown since it was voted in that when push comes to shove they will always appease the base or at least not directly thumb their nose at them.

They could have honestly dealt with the GHG emissions which is the backbone of the environmental movement's opposition. Back in 2007 they could have followed through on their own plan to regulate GHGs from oil and gas removing an important leg of the stool of opposition. They could have proactively put money to actually developing a "world class" monitoring and spill prevention system before it was in the late stages of consideration by the NEB. What they did was ad hoc and hamfisted reactionary response to some pretty legitimate science on the inadequacy of spill prevention and impacts of spills that were coming out of the testimoney in the JRP.

Basically everything this group of yokels has done has simply mirrored the adage of using tactics in the place of strategy. They can't see beyond the lobby of the base's AGM.