Northern Gateway

[smoothpops]

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.

hmmm I wonder what would happen if all those farmers banded together and sold their wheat as a collective. Surely there must have been a way for grain farmers to compete with the oil industry for ability to ship large amounts. hmmmm, nothing comes to mind. maybe i'll invent it...i'll call it...the Canadian Wheat...Collective! farmers will love that idea, but just to be safe i'll pay them a % upfront and make them an average more of $13.35/tonne, only a fool would vote against that. they'd keep my collective around forever.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by smoothpops

hmmm I wonder what would happen if all those farmers banded together and sold their wheat as a collective. Surely there must have been a way for grain farmers to compete with the oil industry for ability to ship large amounts. hmmmm, nothing comes to mind. maybe i'll invent it...i'll call it...the Canadian Wheat...Collective! farmers will love that idea, but just to be safe i'll pay them a % upfront and make them an average more of $13.35/tonne, only a fool would vote against that. they'd keep my collective around forever.

That all sounds great, but what about the consumers who buy wheat, and the foods that are made from wheat?

[smoothpops]

[QUOTE=SebC;4808987]That all sounds great, but what about the consumers who buy wheat, and the foods that

As for my post, I really just wanted to point out that one can't vote conservative into office with the mandate to make the cwb irrelavent, support them scraping the board, and then use the plight of wheat farmers in your argument to make you argument for pipelines. That's just not fair.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by smoothpops

As for my post, I really just wanted to point out that one can't vote conservative into office with the mandate to make the cwb irrelavent, support them scraping the board, and then use the plight of wheat farmers in your argument to make you argument for pipelines. That's just not fair.

It's totally fair. Scrapping the wheat board is a move that favours consumers that is consistent with free market economics. Permitting pipelines is a move that favours farmers (among others) that is also consistent with free market economics.

[smoothpops]

Exactly, and the railways have the right to choose the bigger contract to ship (oil industries vs independent wheat farmers). They could have been a collective, but instead the cwb was broken up fine. Just don't make arguments regarding not being able to ship their grain if you voted to break up the cwb. That's all I'm saying.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by smoothpops

Exactly, and the railways have the right to choose the bigger contract to ship (oil industries vs independent wheat farmers). They could have been a collective, but instead the cwb was broken up fine. Just don't make arguments regarding not being able to ship their grain if you voted to break up the cwb. That's all I'm saying.

Why would a collective be more competitive against oil companies for shipping rights? Price of wheat doesn't change.

Your argument makes no sense. The best solution for everyone is more pipelines to ship oil, leaving rail freight to ship other goods.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Why would a collective be more competitive against oil companies for shipping rights? Price of wheat doesn't change.

Your argument makes no sense. The best solution for everyone is more pipelines to ship oil, leaving rail freight to ship other goods.

??? Wheat is a commodity.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Barnes

??? Wheat is a commodity.

Oil is a commodity.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by smoothpops

Exactly, and the railways have the right to choose the bigger contract to ship (oil industries vs independent wheat farmers). They could have been a collective, but instead the cwb was broken up fine. Just don't make arguments regarding not being able to ship their grain if you voted to break up the cwb. That's all I'm saying.

No they don't. Under the Canada Transportation Act, railways have a common carrier obligation to accept traffic presented to them. They can't pick and choose what to take. The closest they can come is up the rates for customers they don't want to bother with, but to counter act that shippers can file against them under the CTA.

As the situation developed the railways were just saying "I'm so sorry its 'cause they grew more than expected and weather was so bad and we're busy we swear". So the feds responed by ordering them to ship the grain or face fines.

http://www.thestar.com/business/2014...ace_fines.html

With millions of tonnes of grain stuck on the Canadian Prairies, the federal government is taking the rare step of ordering the railways to get the bumper crop moving or face stiff fines.

In Winnipeg, Transport Minister Lisa Raitt announced that a cabinet order issued Friday requires Canadian National Railway and Canadian Pacific to each move at least 500,000 tonnes of grain, or 5,500 rail cars, a week.

If the railways don’t comply, they could face fines of up to $100,000 a day.

[OldDutch]

Originally Posted by fotze

They should let new lines go in if they agree to shut in the old much scarier ones that are running. I know all my oldass lines scare the hell out of me a billion times more than the new ones we build.

That is interesting to hear. I worked at one of the big pipelines, closely with the PLM lead and they actually said the opposite. They were saying their 90's vintage gives them the most headaches because they started to use different material makeup of the pipe. I can't remember why but maybe it was cheaper and lighter, and claimed to last longer.

They told me that the 50's stuff while not totally reliable was relatively rock solid. Only reason I remember that conversation is that it really surprised me. Maybe what they meant is overall life is better, but now the old stuff is corroded and needs to replacing? This was a few years back.

I am in no way countering what you are saying as I no longer work with pipelines, and may not be remembering correct, but I just found it interesting that I have heard both sides now.

Either way, perspective is needed. Pipeline is the safest most reliable way to move the product, and make no mistake it is going to move somehow. Since moving back to the producer side I have really seen how smart these guys are with getting their product to market.

[IntenseFan]

So what's the CP consensus as to whether this thing ever gets built, NEB and cabinet approval notwithstanding.

Enbridge just came out and said it would be at least a year before any preparatory work on the route started (that puts it off to Summer, 2015 at earliest). Then the civil disobedience is bound to ramp up.

Also, we have an election in 2015 that Justin Trudeau simply cannot lose at this point. I believe him when he says he'll kill the approval, despite the billion dollar lawsuit against the government that will result. It is something his voter base desperately wants him to do.

To my mind, we will never see this thing get built.

[Jiggy]

Originally Posted by fotze

They should let new lines go in if they agree to shut in the old much scarier ones that are running. I know all my oldass lines scare the hell out of me a billion times more than the new ones we build.

Which lines? I know their building a new line 3 and a new 6b has already been built.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by IntenseFan

So what's the CP consensus as to whether this thing ever gets built, NEB and cabinet approval notwithstanding.

Enbridge just came out and said it would be at least a year before any preparatory work on the route started (that puts it off to Summer, 2015 at earliest). Then the civil disobedience is bound to ramp up.

Also, we have an election in 2015 that Justin Trudeau simply cannot lose at this point. I believe him when he says he'll kill the approval, despite the billion dollar lawsuit against the government that will result. It is something his voter base desperately wants him to do.

To my mind, we will never see this thing get built.

I believe 100% that it will get built.

I also believe that Enbridge and those shipping on the pipe will be forced to build it to the highest possible standards and have a rock solid spill mitigation plan/equipment/fund on the coast.

[IntenseFan]

^ Well one cannot fault your optimism Frequitude. I hope you are right. But I see some huge obstacles lining up against this. I would use the phrase "insurmountable".

[Senator Clay Davis]

The fact the Harper Government went into hiding immediately after the approval was announced leads me to believe not even they think it'll ever get built. But they had to approve it or Keystone would also be DOA. Approving Northern Gateway was more about getting Keystone approved than anything else. I'd say there's probably about a 20-30% chance Northern Gateway ever gets built.

[bizkitgto]

Originally Posted by IntenseFan

So what's the CP consensus as to whether this thing ever gets built, NEB and cabinet approval notwithstanding.

Enbridge just came out and said it would be at least a year before any preparatory work on the route started (that puts it off to Summer, 2015 at earliest). Then the civil disobedience is bound to ramp up.

Also, we have an election in 2015 that Justin Trudeau simply cannot lose at this point. I believe him when he says he'll kill the approval, despite the billion dollar lawsuit against the government that will result. It is something his voter base desperately wants him to do.

To my mind, we will never see this thing get built.

If Gateway doesn't go ahead (and I hope it does!), I'm sure Kinder-Morgan's project will. They already have the right of way, and twinning a line should be much easier to approve. Gateway appears to be stuck in politics for now....


**************
EDIT: I think there's 100% chance Gateways gets built sometime in the next 25 years

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

I believe 100% that it will get built.

This pipeline is a far better alternative than shipping crude by rail.

I would expect Enbridge to move on the 10% Aboriginal equity number to alleviate some of those concerns.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

The fact the Harper Government went into hiding immediately after the approval

I have zero issue with this. Would you feed someone a poop sandwich, stick around for a bit and ask them how it tastes? Of course you wouldn't.

Inter-provincial infrastructure is an absolute f*u*kshow in this country.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

I believe 100% that it will get built.

I also believe that Enbridge and those shipping on the pipe will be forced to build it to the highest possible standards and have a rock solid spill mitigation plan/equipment/fund on the coast.

Final answer?

http://www.vancouversun.com/touch/story.html?id=9970838

OTTAWA — The Supreme Court of Canada, in the most important aboriginal rights case in the nation’s history, ruled that the Tsilhqot’in First Nation has title – or owns – 1,750 square kilometres of land in south central B.C.

The landmark ruling will provide a clear and less onerous roadmap for all unresolved land claims in B.C. and throughout Canada involving First Nations seeking to negotiate modern treaties – or to fight for their land rights in court.

“Aboriginal title confers the right to use and control the land and to reap the benefits flowing from it,” Justice Beverley McLachlin ruled in the 8-0 decision.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Final answer?

http://www.vancouversun.com/touch/story.html?id=9970838

There is this though:

However, the ruling also made clear that economic development on title land can continue – either with consent, or if there is no consent when the Crown has proven that the project has a “compelling and substantial” public interest.