So which LNG plants will be going ahead and in what order in BC?

411 posts / 0 new
Last post
jerrym

Premier Clark's former husband is not the only Liberal party connection involved in Pacific Future Energy's refinery proposal, which is looking for billions in financing. There is a whole cabal of Liberals working for the firm. 

 

Quote:

A team of former federal Liberal backroom strategists has partnered with a technology startup specialist and an executive from a Mexican-owned telecom with adream of building a $10-billion oil refinery on B.C.'s north coast.

Pacific Future Energy's proposal, like B.C. newspaper baron David Black's 2012-hatched Kitimat Clean, relies on both approval and construction of the contentious Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline. Both are looking for billions in financing, but the June 10-announced bitumen refinery bid claims it would be powered by a combination of natural gas and renewable energy.

The federal Conservatives are expected to announce its decision on Northern Gateway any day now. If approved, opponents have vowed to fight it in court.

Mark Marissen, a one-time lobbyist for Enbridge, is listed as executive vice-president of communications and research on Pacific Future Energy Corp.'s masthead. Marissen and Premier Christy Clark were once married, and share joint custody of a son. Marissen worked on Clark's 2013 election campaign, leading Clark to make the extraordinary pledge not to be involved in any cabinet discussion or decision about oil refineries.

It is not clear when Clark found out about Pacific Future Energy. She told reporters at a news conference yesterday that she learned the "proposal was going to become something real last week" and then contacted Paul Fraser, conflict of interest commissioner, for advice. ...

The company's executive vice-president of government and regulatory affairs is Jamie Carroll, a lobbyist with Ottawa-based Tactix. Carroll resigned as national director of the Liberal Party of Canada in October 2007. Most recently, he was chair of Joyce Murray's leadership campaign. His bio says he has "focussed principally on the defence, mining, oil and gas, telecommunications, pharmaceutical and gaming sectors since leaving government." ...

Vice-president of Indigenous Partnership is Jeffrey Copenace, the former deputy chief of staff to ex-Assembly of First Nations national chief Shawn Atleo and an ex-aide to Prime Minister Paul Martin. ...

Roop Virk is the Chilliwack-based chief of staff. The former policy chair for the federal Liberals in B.C., Virk worked with Marissen on Stéphane Dion's winning Liberal leadership campaign. Virk attended a posh Christmas party thrown by Marissen for a close circle of Liberals last December at the Glowbal Restaurant in Yaletown.

Virk has occasionally written letters to the editors of B.C. newspapers, not identifying his party affiliation, but boosting Clark and her policies on resources. "Despite what some folks seem to think, the real job creators and revenue generators in this province continue to be our natural resource sectors of mining, forestry, oil, gas and coal," said Virk's May 21, 2014 letter to The Province. ...

 

http://www.thetyee.ca/News/2014/06/11/Who-is-Behind-New-Oil-Refinery-Bid/

 

 

 

jerrym

So much for Deputy Premier Coleman's assurances that BC's fracking industry is the best in the world. His accusation that all the fracking researchers are doing is looking for more money is an accusation worthy of Harper and the federal Cons: when the facts are not on your side, attack the person rather than deal with the issue.

Afterall, which is more important, BC's Christy Clark sacntified natural gas industry or people's safety and lives, especially if they are First Nations?

Quote:

Last month, B.C. deputy premier Rich Coleman dismissed concerns raised by the scientific fracking panel that Dusseault sat on, saying B.C. carries out fracking as well or better than anybody else in the world.

Coleman suggested that researchers calling for more research were looking for a way to get more work for themselves.

 

http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Leaking+natural+wells+spew+methan...

 

Quote:

Toxic waste water equal in volume to 24 World Trade Center towers has been injected into a single 46-year-old natural gas well in northeastern British Columbia, says a report for the Fort Nelson First Nation done by the University of Victoria’s Environmental Law Centre. More than 41 billion litres of water too contaminated for surface disposal has been injected into the well — identified as Well #2240 — since 1968.

“Because waste water is not tracked after disposal,” the study says, “the fate of this massive quantity of waste water is unknown.”

It warns that B.C.’s regulatory framework governing safe disposal of the more than 100 billion litres of such contaminated waste water generated during B.C.’s rapidly expanding fracking operations to recover natural gas is “clearly inadequate” and says regulation lags behind standards in the United States, Europe and Australia.

The assertions contradict B.C.’s minister of natural gas, Rich Coleman, who said in March that the province leads in safe, responsible natural gas development and has some of the world’s strictest rules for water use and protection. Coleman said water used in fracking is carefully monitored by the B.C. Oil and Gas Commission.

However, the report says that when it asked about a specific annual test for well integrity required under provincial regulations, researchers were told the commission was reviewing all 110 disposal wells to determine when the mandatory test was last done.

“Serious questions have been raised about B.C.’s retreat from vigorous environmental regulation efforts over the last decade,” the report says. Since 1998, it notes, Ministry of Environment staff has been reduced by 25 per cent; between 2001 and 2008 mine inspections decreased by 50 per cent; and a 2009 review showed environmental convictions dwindling to the fewest in 20 years. ...

The process can mean repeat injections of up to 20,000 cubic metres of hydraulic fluid into a well. Most fracking fluid remains in the well, but significant quantities of contaminated water flow back out during production. This toxic fluid sometimes brings up natural radioactive material.

One New York state study found radioactivity in fracking waste water at 267 times the level considered safe for human consumption. Other studies found several cancer-causing contaminants in fracking waste water. The report cites arsenic, lead, hexavalent chromium, barium, chloride, sodium, sulfates, boron, benzene and radioactive agents.

The Fort Nelson First Nation is worried because three of British Columbia’s four major shale gas plays occur within its territory.

Planned expansion to achieve B.C.’s liquefied natural gas strategy will require fracking operations there to increase 600 times. ...

“These wells are typically old wells whose integrity and operation are poorly monitored,” the report says. Concerns include surface spills during re-injection; improper seals in old cement around well casings permitting toxic leaks into shallow aquifers; migration of water upward from deep wells to contaminate shallow and surface groundwater travelling through subterranean rock layers.

Fracking and disposal well injection may also trigger small earthquakes and more sub-surface fractures by which contaminated water can migrate away from injection sites.

“Although B.C. currently regulates some aspects of waste water disposal wells, the regulatory framework is insufficient,” the study says. “Current legislation must be strengthened to provide adequate assurances that disposal wells will not contaminate drinking water and surface water systems.”

It calls for the province to beef up legislation governing disposal methods and structural, hydro-geological and environmental integrity for disposal sites; safe location of disposal sites away from potential contamination of ground and surface water; long-term monitoring and compliance enforcement and a robust emergency response plan.

http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Fracking+waste+water+being+injected+i...       

jerrym

dp

jerrym

It's not an accident that Christy Clark seems far from endorsing Northern Gateway. It could intefere with her ability to get her centrepiece LNG plants up and running.

Some First Nations people are starting to suggest that if she goes along with Northern Gateway, the BC Liberals can also face full opposition from BC First Nations to her own LNG projects. While the First Nations have not decided to take this route, it is being discussed and Christy therefore does not want to get the thing that helped her win the election in danger. 

Quote:

The battle over Northern Gateway could spill into B.C.’s emerging liquefied natural gas sector if First Nations withdraw or temper their support for LNG projects to press the provincial government to block the Enbridge pipelines.

And while such a strategy has not been formally developed – and might not be fully endorsed even if it does take shape – any wavering toward a “yes” from the B.C. government on Northern Gateway could spell trouble for other major projects, including 13 LNG proposals now in varying stages of development. ...

“If [the province] wavers, then I think there could be a potential domino effect on any other major project – whether those are LNG, mining or pipelines,” Terry Teegee, Tribal Chair with the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council, said on Wednesday. ...

While that provincial stance would appear likely to scuttle the project, there is uncertainty whether B.C.’s position could change.

“Are they going to hold to their word?” Mr. Teegee said. “If that’s not the case, that could sour the relationship between us [First Nations] and the province.”

There has been some talk among First Nations groups about linking LNG support to the Northern Gateway debate, said Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs.

“That consideration has been expressed – however, it hasn’t been widely embraced as a negotiating position at this point,” Mr. Phillip said.

The main venue for opposition to Northern Gateway is likely to be the courts, where at least five Northern Gateway-related actions are underway, Mr. Phillip added. ...

For B.C., more jobs and economic benefits are associated with its emerging LNG sector than with Northern Gateway, said Werner Antweiler, a professor with the Sauder School of Business at the University of British Columbia.

“There would be a very strong interest on the side of the provincial government to accommodate the northern communities, and in particular the aboriginal communities that are opposed to Northern Gateway,” Prof. Antweiler said. “There is some potential that communities opposed to the pipeline could leverage their support for LNG to convince the provincial government to tread carefully in moving forward on Northern Gateway.”

Such a pattern is not likely to emerge right away but could come into play if other avenues of opposition don’t work, he added.

The LNG sector also has support from First Nations groups that might not want to jeopardize agreements and investment to date.

“There’s a big, big difference between the way LNG is being developed and the way Enbridge approached things,” said Karen Wristen, executive director of Living Oceans. “The LNG producers went to the First Nations first and they offered them meaningful participation in the projects. Not all of [First Nations] took that up but some of them did – so some of those projects will be in a good position to go ahead.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/bcs-lng-ambitions-g...

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Mass opposition to Squamish LNG plant sparks calls for citizens' vote

A Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) project in the backyard of Vancouver – the tourist-friendly Squamish district on the way to Whistler – was angrily opposed by more than one hundred residents outside a city hall meeting earlier this week.

The showcase led one sympathetic Squamish councillor – Patricia Heintzman – to voice the need at the council meeting for a citizen's vote on the future of the $1.6 billion Woodfibre LNG project.

“I’ve been on council for almost nine years, and I’ve never received letters like we do on LNG," said Heintzman in a later interview with the Vancouver Observer.

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/mass-opposition-squamish-lng-plant...

 

quizzical

 Squamish has the first and only Tesla car electrical station how does fracking and LNG fit into a eco model??????????

jerrym

Christy Clark's pipedream of a "trillion dollar" economy is economically trashed in this article. 

 

Quote:

During B.C.’s 2013 election campaign, at a conference of energy economists in Washington, D.C., I spoke about how one of our politicians was promising huge benefits during the next decades from B.C. liquefied natural gas exports to eastern Asia. These benefits included lower income taxes, zero provincial debt, and a wealth fund for future generations. My remarks, however, drew laughter. ...

Why this reaction? The painful reality is that my economist colleagues smirk when people (especially politicians) assume extreme market imbalances will endure, whereas real-world evidence consistently proves they won’t. For B.C. Premier Christy Clark to make promises based on a continuation of today’s extreme difference between American and eastern Asian gas prices was, to be kind, laughable.

For many years, natural gas prices differed little from one region to another. But the shale-gas revolution in the U.S. in the past decade created a glut, causing rock-bottom prices in North America. Meanwhile, prices in eastern Asia were pegged to the price of oil, which has risen. These two trends led to a price divergence starting in 2008. ...

If that difference was to hold for several decades, producers could earn sufficient revenues from Asian sales to cover shale gas extraction, pipeline transport, cooling to liquid in LNG plants, shipment across the Pacific, healthy profits, and billions in royalties and corporate taxes. That’s an attractive image in an election. But it can quickly become a mirage as gas markets behave like markets.

In competitive markets, a price imbalance triggers multiple profit-seeking actions, which work to eliminate the difference — usually sooner than expected — by those hoping to benefit from it. In this case, there are many potential competitors for the gas demands of China, Japan and their neighbours. China can invite foreign companies to help develop its massive shale gas resources. It can buy from Russia, which has enormous gas resources. It can also buy from other central Asian countries, such as Kazakhstan. It can also encourage a bidding war between prospective LNG suppliers from many parts of the world, some of which will have lower production costs than B.C.

The result will push down the price in eastern Asia. As was easily predicted by my smirking colleagues, it’s already happening. Unofficial reports put the price of a recent gas contract between China and Russia at $10.50 per million British Thermal Units, far below the peak Asian price, and close to (if not below) the cost of sending B.C. gas to China. At this price, there will be no government royalties, no lower income taxes, no debt retirement, no wealth fund. Maybe no LNG plants.

If any LNG plants are built in B.C., they will likely be constructed and operated as cheaply as possible, which will put the lie to another promise of Clark’s. In a province with legislated targets for reducing carbon pollution, she promised B.C. would have “the cleanest LNG produced anywhere in the world from well-head to waterline.”

As it turns out, this promise is easy to verify. Experts know the cleanest LNG in the world is the Snovit project in Norway, which emits 0.35 tonnes of CO2 per tonne of LNG. The under-construction Gorgon facility in Australia will match it.

But, public documents indicate British Columbia’s proposed LNG industry will be three times worse, producing one tonne of CO2 per tonne of LNG. Were three such facilities built as proposed, they would bring oilsands-scale carbon pollution to B.C., doubling our current emissions and making it impossible to meet our legislated targets.

We could build the cleanest LNG systems in the world. This would require reducing methane leaks from processes and pipelines, capturing and storing carbon pollution, and using renewable energy to produce electricity for processing and cooling natural gas, as Clean Energy Canada has recently showed.

But this is unlikely, especially as those Asian gas prices fall. So brace yourself for another barrage of Orwellian doublespeak from government and industry, in which cleanest means dirty, great public wealth means modest private profits, and revised climate targets mean missed climate targets. No doubt my economist colleagues will be amused. But should they?

http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Opinion+another+pipe+dream/100560...

 

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Dump out of Kitimat, New York hedge fund tells Apache

A New York hedge fund, also known as an aggressive activist investor, which just bought a huge stake in Apache, is urging the company to get out of the Kitimat LNG project.

Numerous media reports say that Jana Partners recently bought a one billion dollar stake in the Houston and Calgary based oil and natural gas producer.

Bloomberg reports that Jana is a $10 billion hedge-fund firm run by Barry Rosenstein “known for pushing corporate managements to make changes”

According to both Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal, Jana wants Apache to get out of LNG projects in both Canada and Australia and concentrate on the United States. Bloomberg says

Jana said it has “engaged in discussions with management” and urged Apache to sell its international businesses to focus on U.S. shale opportunities, exit its investment in liquefied natural gas, and be more forthcoming about how much oil and gas lie beneath its holdings in West Texas’s Permian basin, among other demands.

http://nwcoastenergynews.com/2014/07/22/6619/dump-kitimat-york-hedge-fun...

KenS

The confirming evidence is growing for my earlier prediction:

That as the proponents back away and/or distance themselves from their projects, and the pricing pressure grows, Christy Clark will ratchet back the various revenue streams government expects to get.

It seems like Petronas will go ahead no matter the international market conditions. The reasons the project works for them are much more complex and opaque. No other project is in that position.

There will be all manner of shell games for Christy Clark to maintain that the projected revenue streams are far more than what the liars know they really will be.

jerrym

The BC Liberals have just signed a Temproary Foreign Worker Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with China allowing it to bring in Chinese TFWs to build the LNG plants in the province. This is part of attempt to keep wages down by bringing in TFWs as Clark has promised to avoid the rise in wages that occurred in Australia during its fossil fuel boom.

Quote:

British Columbia Premier Christy Clark, supported by a delegation of top cabinet ministers and petroleum leaders, has persuaded the Canadian government to declare that the LNG sector is a potential “nation-builder” which could create 100,000 jobs.

Although the accord signed in Ottawa earlier in April is non-binding, it includes a commitment to promote the active use of temporary foreign workers, TFW, which could ease one of the deepest concerns among investors in the industry. ...

She told the Vancouver Sun that British Columbia is trying to “avoid what happened in Australia,” where wage inflation caused by a shortage of skilled works has caused project cost overruns.

http://www.petroleumnews.com/pntruncate/421227875.shtml

 

Quote:

B.C. and China have inked a new agreement that will see the two governments work to allow foreign workers into the province if needed to help build a liquefied natural gas industry.

The provincial government and the People’s Republic of China signed the non-binding memorandum of understanding this week, which pledges co-operation and information sharing to help develop B.C.’s LNG industry. ...

NDP critic Shane Simpson said he thinks B.C. is getting desperate to finalize some LNG plants amid increasing global competition for LNG facilities.

“We don’t see anything here that says we’re going to reinforce the need to make sure British Columbians get the work and benefit,” Simpson said.

“There’s a throwaway line about local jobs, but what it says is we’re going to do anything and everything we need to do to make sure you’ve got the temporary foreign workers if you need them and want them.”

http://www.vancouversun.com/China+agree+allow+foreign+workers+help+build...

 

 

KenS

KenS wrote:

There will be all manner of shell games for Christy Clark to maintain that the projected revenue streams are far more than what the liars know they really will be.

Where is the BC NDP on this these days?

Still barely willing to barely obliquely mention that the figures might be a bit cooked? Unwilling to flat out say the empress has no clothes, for fear of possibly maybe being portrayed as sort of 'anti-development?

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..the ndp are better re the energy issues than they were while under dix. the movements have forced the ndp to take stronger positions. and although sometimes weasel words are used they have come out against site c. which is going to be a power source for the fracking/lng industry. and a huge financial burden for the people of bc. this is a huge project that must be stopped and is being stopped by 1st peoples. the ndp are coming at this from way behind. they have no plan for a different economy. and they have come out against the oil pipelines as well. this is good. the important thing is the movements.

..i posted this in the pipeline thread a short while ago and i believe we can learn from it.

quote:

"Teachings of the canoe traditional law say to take a little and leave a lot," Frank quotes from the summit. Applying this law to economic development would make sure there is always something to go back for — and something to share.

"We recognize the journey these people have made to be with us," he tells me. "This is our own journey to develop relations of reciprocity."

Bella Bella, a remote island community of 1,600 people, is hosting several thousand guests from all over the continent who honoured the invitations, and challenges, to attend the gathering. Arriving here was a massive undertaking in all respects. I am awed by how these Nations have united to make it happen.

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/blogs/healthy-oceans-blog/2014/07/enbridge-or...

jerrym

KenS wrote:

KenS wrote:

There will be all manner of shell games for Christy Clark to maintain that the projected revenue streams are far more than what the liars know they really will be.

Where is the BC NDP on this these days?

Still barely willing to barely obliquely mention that the figures might be a bit cooked? Unwilling to flat out say the empress has no clothes, for fear of possibly maybe being portrayed as sort of 'anti-development?

 

Horgan just reshuffled the shadow cabinet this week. According to Vaughn Palmer, senior political columnist in the BC media and no great friend of the NDP, he expects the NDP to be much more active in their opposition in the fall, once the summer doldrums are over. We shall see. Palmer's article can be found below.

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Vaughn+Palmer+Opposition+prepares+join+...

KenS

I can see that the NDP may be stronger in general as opposition. But I dont see anything in there, nor have I heard anything else, to indicate, the NDP might go more for the jugular on the unravelling claims of riches from LNG and fracking.

Seems to me Horgan hinself is pretty entrenched in being careful not to dash the hopes that those claims stoke.... to stay carefully on the side of only questioning the extreme depth of the fantasies and the PR purposes that serves for the BCLibs. "Can this government deliver the LNG goodies for us?" Etc.

I know it was never in the realm of possibilities that he and the NDP were going to become strong critics of the schemes. But is there reason to see there may be some kind of substantively different tacking?

KenS

V

KenS

V

KenS

 

Quote:

The B.C. Oil and Gas Commission, which regulates the natural gas sector, says they have a good handle on the issue of leaking wells.

The provincial agency says it has robust regulations and processes in place for detection, measurement and assessment of any possible leaks. Problems must be measured and reported to the commission. ...

Compare the impression given their to the actual 'handle' and 'regulations' they have.

There is no routine measurement to check for leaking. Period.

IF a problem comes to the attention of a company it is then required to put in place measures for detection and assessment.

 

Quote:

Last month, B.C. deputy premier Rich Coleman dismissed concerns raised by the scientific fracking panel that Dusseault sat on, saying B.C. carries out fracking as well or better than anybody else in the world.

The standard refrain: we ensure 'best practices'.

Which is the best practices oil companies are willing to do. [If a jurisdiction were to demand more, there will be no oil and gas industry work.]

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..look at the work that is being done by bby city hall. fighting kinder morgan tooth and nail. the mayor vowing to lay down in front of a bulldozer. and the community is behind the council. this is ndp. can we expect that from the provincial party? the party needs to talk to people. not as someone who wants to negotiate between people and corps but as a party who is genuinely concerned and for the sake of people who will be harmed by these projects. and is willing to take on their fight.

..otherwise support for no pipelines and site c dam is all i expect today. and that's ok in the broader struggle.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..and the struggle is broad. and focused on solutions.

British Doctors Vote To Divest From Fossil Fuels

The British Medical Association (BMA) has voted to end its investments in the fossil fuel industry making it the first medical organization in the world to do so. It will look to instead invest in renewable energy.

The proposal to divest from fossil fuels was passed at the BMA's annual meeting in June. The organization is the representative body for UK doctors.

Simon Bullock, a senior campaigner for Friends of the Earth, said, “More and more institutions are divesting from fossil fuels as climate change impacts grow. It's fantastic that doctors are leading from the front on this critical public health issue.”

The motion was put forward on the basis that climate change presents “the biggest global health threat of the 21st century,” as described in a report by the UCL-Lancet Commission in 2009.

The BMA has become part of a growing movement of institutions to divest from the oil, coal and gas industries – joining 13 universities and colleges in the U.S. alone, 28 of the world's cities, 28 investment foundations and 41 religious institutions including the World Council of Churches, which announced its commitment to divestment earlier this month....

http://www.occupy.com/article/british-doctors-vote-divest-fossil-fuels

jerrym

KenS wrote:

I can see that the NDP may be stronger in general as opposition. But I dont see anything in there, nor have I heard anything else, to indicate, the NDP might go more for the jugular on the unravelling claims of riches from LNG and fracking.

Seems to me Horgan hinself is pretty entrenched in being careful not to dash the hopes that those claims stoke.... to stay carefully on the side of only questioning the extreme depth of the fantasies and the PR purposes that serves for the BCLibs. "Can this government deliver the LNG goodies for us?" Etc.

I know it was never in the realm of possibilities that he and the NDP were going to become strong critics of the schemes. But is there reason to see there may be some kind of substantively different tacking?

After the NDP lost last year's election following Dix's flip flop on Kinder Morgan, it became even more gun shy in addressing these issues. The flip flop resulted in a total wipeout in the Interior, except for its traditional Kootenays stronghold, as blue collar workers joined the traditional right wing coalition fearing that this would lead to loss of jobs for them. Unless the NDP addresses the employment question in a creative manner, especially in the Interior, it risks suffering the same fate in the future. It will tend to tread softly on these issues, although Horgan will tend to attack the Liberals on other issues with greater energy than Dix displayed. 

jerrym

KenS wrote:

I can see that the NDP may be stronger in general as opposition. But I dont see anything in there, nor have I heard anything else, to indicate, the NDP might go more for the jugular on the unravelling claims of riches from LNG and fracking.

Seems to me Horgan hinself is pretty entrenched in being careful not to dash the hopes that those claims stoke.... to stay carefully on the side of only questioning the extreme depth of the fantasies and the PR purposes that serves for the BCLibs. "Can this government deliver the LNG goodies for us?" Etc.

I know it was never in the realm of possibilities that he and the NDP were going to become strong critics of the schemes. But is there reason to see there may be some kind of substantively different tacking?

After the NDP lost last year's election following Dix's flip flop on Kinder Morgan, it became even more gun shy in addressing these issues. The flip flop resulted in a total wipeout in the Interior, except for its traditional Kootenays stronghold, as blue collar workers joined the traditional right wing coalition fearing that this would lead to loss of jobs for them. Unless the NDP addresses the employment question in a creative manner, especially in the Interior, it risks suffering the same fate in the future. It will tend to tread softly on these issues, although Horgan will tend to attack the Liberals on other issues with greater energy because of his personality than Dix displayed. 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

I don't believe for a minute that the Kinder Morgan announcement changed a significant number of voters minds.  The NDP ran a campaign that specifically offered very little except more of the same. No vision and no hope for the most marginalized. The Liberals offered a pony and cake and ice cream for everyone so the people who voted for them in the past said pass the cake.  The NDP did not attract any new voters because it was to busy trying to seak to voters who have voted for other parties in the past. They promised not to spend too much money on social programs or raise taxes much and alwys, always we'll balance the budget first.

The NDP rightly claims it started the gas industry in this province and they have always pointed to that as evidence of their growing industrial jobs. The Liberals LNG strategy was brilliant because to completely attack it the NDP would have had to attack its own industrial legacy.

jerrym

Whether it was the flip flop on Kinder Morgan or the vacilliating image Dix project because of the flip flop, it was at this point that a substantial portion of the NDP support drained away, especially in the Interior, where it was nearly wiped out. The party is very nervous about addressing the fossil fuel issue because of this. However, if it does not address the issue of employment in the Interior, where many communities are very dependent on one or two industries, the odds are very high it will lose the next election. 

jerrym

Ironically, global energy investment may well be pointing in the right direction for the NDP. As concern over climate change has increased, annual global investment in renewable energy also increased from $6 billion in 1995 estimated to $17 billion worldwide in 2002.

It then increased to $244 billion in 2012, an increase in renewable energy spending by a factor of 14.3 in the 2002-2012 decade and by a factor of 40.7 between 1995 and 2012. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_commercialization

This represents an increase in renewable energy spending by a factor of 14.3 in 2002-2012 decade and by a factor of 40.7 between 1995 and 2012.

jerrym

Renewable energy also generates far more employment for the same amount of investment. 

Quote:

According to an analysis of 13 independent reports and studies of the clean energy industry by UC Berkeley’s Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory (RAEL), renewable energy technologies create more jobs per average megawatt (MW) of power generated, and per dollar invested in construction, manufacturing, and installation when compared to coal or natural gas. Over the course of a 10-year period the solar industry creates 5.65 jobs per million dollars in investment, the wind energy industry 5.7 jobs, and the coal industry only 3.96.1 In the case of coal mining, wind and solar energy generate 40 percent more jobs per dollar invested.

http://greenforall.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/job-creation...

 

The growing global shift away from fossil fuels towards renewable energy could provide both a economic and employment growth strategy for the NDP if it can build a forceful message on this. 

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

jerrym wrote:

Whether it was the flip flop on Kinder Morgan or the vacilliating image Dix project because of the flip flop, it was at this point that a substantial portion of the NDP support drained away, especially in the Interior, where it was nearly wiped out.

I calll spin on that. Show me the stats that prove that theory.  It ia a convenient theory for the right wing of the NDP which will of course in the next election try to be even more centrist to attract all those BC Liberal voters.

The BC Liberal vote from the 2009 elecction increased by about 44,000 the NDP voter grew by 14,000. Where do you get this idea that NDP voters voted Liberal. It seems clear the NDP just didn't get people excited enough to come out and vote but it did not lose votes in this election. For your theory to be true their actual vote would have dropped significantly but it increased.  Not only that the NDP seat total only dropped by two seats.

jerrym

kropotkin1951 wrote:

 Show me the stats that prove that theory.

 

As you no doubt know, stats do not prove theories, only provide evidence in support or against them (mathematical theorems provide proofs). Lets first of all look at Christy's own words on Dix's flip flop and how it affected the Liberals. What happened is not as straight forward as one might think.

Quote:

The NDP policy flip-flop on Kinder Morgan’s pipeline plans in the middle of the 2013 provincial election campaign has been written into the history books as a fatal miscalculation. But Premier Christy Clark revealed Saturday that her own B.C. Liberal strategists were so rattled by the move, they wanted her to follow suit. ...

Halfway through the 2013 campaign, the NDP seemed comfortably ahead of the Liberals and felt their biggest threat came from the B.C. Green Party. So Mr. Dix marked Earth Day in Kamloops where he abandoned the “matter of principle” that he would not take a stand until the project was formally proposed, and instead announced his party would oppose the expansion of the oil pipeline.

For the next four days, the Liberal pollsters and strategists watched anxiously as Mr. Dix, already well ahead in the polls, began to grow their lead while the Liberals flatlined.

Speaking with reporters after her convention speech on Saturday, the Premier said she was not part of the internal debate about the need for a Liberal policy about-face – she was on the campaign bus while strategists back at the campaign headquarters debated how to respond.

Ms. Clark said she was asked to get off the fence and take a stand against the pipeline, because the NDP was jeopardizing her party’s support in coastal ridings – including her own Vancouver-Point Grey seat. ...

Instead, she came out swinging against Mr. Dix on the issue in a radio debate four days later. Ms. Clark spent the final two weeks of the campaign hammering the theme that the NDP would threaten job creation, that rejecting Kinder Morgan made the NDP the “party of no.”

“The NDP were going up in the polls every day... the Green support started to coalesce behind the NDP and we were pretty far behind in the polls, we couldn’t really afford them making gains in support. But to me, it seemed so obvious that if you stand for something, you have got to stick with it. And I also believed the election would be about character as much as anything else,” she said.

On Election Day, the NDP succeeded in defeating Ms. Clark in her own riding, but lost the election.

“In the end, standing firm on my values was more important than winning,” Ms. Clark said. “Thankfully we got to do both.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/bc-liberals-were-re...

 

One can argue that it took several days for the impact of Dix's votes to register with the voters, so numbers were following already trending directions for a few days, as is often the case with changes in poll numbers following debates, or one could argue that Dix's change on Kinder Morgan was winning at that point in the campaign, or one could argue that the poll direction had not yet shifted because Christy had not had the opportunity to press home her message that an NDP government would damage the economy because it was not focused on strengthening the economy through LNG and other projects, many of which would occur in the Interior.

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

If you want to buy Christy's spin fill your boots.  Shouldn't the fact that she is one of the people pushing the message be a red flag for you?

IMO the defining moment of the campaign was during the debate when he was asked the inevitable question about the backdated memo and instead of the prepared answer that he had practised he looked like a deer in the headlights and blurted out that he was only 35 at the time. Given that he had been under attack on every single radio station in the province with rotating non stop ads about the memo it finished him as any kind of decisive figure.

Every politician in Burnaby from the Mayor to the MP's and MLA's are opposed to Kinder Morgan and they are not afraid to say it, why do you think it should be even considered?

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

The polls were fucked what don't you get about that.  The NDP campaign also did a shitty job of tracking internally because they thought it was in the bag. Tracking numbers is an anal thing that winning campaigns obsess over because every political operative knows you can't trust the pollsters to be accurate enough and regional enough.  I lived in the East Kootenays for seven years and my wife worked in Kelowna for a couple of years. The "Interior" is a whole set of regions with different political histories. The Okanagon elects anything but the NDP.  In the Kootenays the NDP still did very well especially given the overall ineptitude of the central campaign.

You are right that the NDP needs a vison for the economy. Hell they need a vision period.  Given that the people who run the party have no ideoogy to guide them except a desire to form government its not like they have a foundaton to construct anything on.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..election results don't usually tell you why people do things. i have posted various polls saying that the environment of crucial importance. and that they don't want the tankers in the harbors. the majority of 1st peoples who will be expected to provide provide the land for the energy projects have rejected the notion. this needs to be addressed by the politicos. this defines the political situation. everything the ndp does follows this.

..also tools are being created. look what's going on with cope. an new alternative has been created by movements. a space has been opened for a voice for all the disgruntled and disaffected folks in van. this is a response to what we are not getting from anywhere else. i read somewhere that getting elected was not their primary goal.

KenS

What Krop said in the last paparagraph. And even if its put very different, I think jerrym is saying the same.

There is nowhere in the NDP thats ever adopted an intellectual strategy of, "hey, it looks like its lemons we get, we need to figure out how to win with lemonade."

Its always- "those are lemons. People want pop." And oh shit, we forgot again, offering them pop always starts out working for us, but then bites us in the ass. 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

I believe that when life serves up lemons it is best to make whiskey sours and have a toke.

jerrym

Now lets look at the polls. In general, the polls showed that the NDP had a huge lead throughout the campaign on Vancouver Island. In Metro Vancouver early on the NDP had a quite large lead and a substantial lead in the Interior.

Dix's change on Kinder Morgan occurred on April 22nd. The following poll results are from "British Columbia general election, 2013"'s summary of polls. I did not analyze every poll but tried to be fair in selecting polls.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Columbia_general_election,_2013

The first thing to note is that all polls before Dix's flip flop showed the Liberals below 30% (27%-29%) while the NDP ranged from 45%-49%. Following Dix's change, Liberal poll numbers climbed from 31 to 41% while the NDP's fell to 38 to 45% (even the Abacus and Angus Reid polls that Christy claims show poll numbers shifting to the NDP show the opposite (possibly internal Liberal polls? but she doesn't specify and therefore making her above claim of a 4 day climb in NDP numbers following the change or maybe she is simply trying to highlight how shrewd she feels she is compared to her advisors).

If we look at the regions, the Angus Reid numbers for Arril 12-13 were: Interior Liberal 32%, NDP 43%  (+11 NDP); Vancouver Island Liberal 19%, NDP 45% (+26% NDP); and Metro Vancouver Liberal 30%, NDP 45% (+15%); North Liberal 19%, NDP 62% (NDP +41%).

The Justason poll of April 15-23 (nearly all before Dix's change but closest available before poll) showed: Interior Liberal 23%, NDP 41  (+18 NDP); Vancouver Island Liberal 12%, NDP 49% (+37% NDP); and Metro Vancouver Liberal 33%, NDP 56% (+23%).

I chose the two Forum polls following Dix's change (because the first was the first following the four days that Christy claims the NDP was still growing following the change [Forum did none before the change] and the second because it came closer to the actual election results) plus a May 12 Angus Reid poll since it was close to election day (May 14) and could be compared to the Angus Reid April 12-13 poll before Dix's change. I couldn't find the actual regional election numbers. 

The Forum poll of April 30 reported: Interior Liberal 37%, NDP 29  (+8 Liberal); Vancouver Island Liberal 33%, NDP 39% (+7% NDP); and Metro Vancouver Liberal 43%, NDP 44% (+1%).

The Forum poll of May 8 reported: Interior Liberal 52%, NDP 32  (+20 Liberal); Vancouver Island Liberal 32%, NDP 49% (+17% NDP); and Metro Vancouver Liberal 41%, NDP 44% (+3% NDP).

The Angus Reid numbers for May 12-13 were: Interior Liberal 39%, NDP 37%  (+2 Liberal); Vancouver Island Liberal 28%, NDP 46% (+18% NDP); and Metro Vancouver Liberal 38%, NDP 45% (+7% NDP); and North Liberal 39%, NDP 52% (NDP +13%).

The decline in NDP support from before to after the change in Dix's position is clear in all regions, even taking into account polling error. However, because the NDP lead before the Dix change was much smaller (11 to 18%) in the Interior, it meant that a large shift in the Interior would give a the Liberals the lead in the Interior, unlike the Lower Mainland and Vancouver Island. The Forum polls also show this lead growing between April 30th and May 8th which is what one would expect if the Liberal focus on LNG and other Interior-oriented projects were gaining votes. The near sweep of the Interior ridings is what gave the Liberals their victory. The changing polling numbers over the course of the election do not contradict my hypothesis. One can certainly quarrel with the overall accuracy of the polls and one certainly can do a much more thorough analysis of the results. Other theories do exist but IMO none are as plausable. However, as always beauty is in the eye of the beholder. 

Furthermore, this viewpoint is not necessarily right-wing as you allege. The Liberals, as in most elections everywhere, are unlikely to lose the next election if the economy is doing well, regardless of whether this has anything to do with LNG and other pipelines. However, if the LNG fantasy does fail, as I have discussed is likely above, the NDP will still need an economic plan that BCers will buy, especially if they are going to win enough seats in the Interior to form the government. As I already noted in posts above, there has been an enormous shift towards renewable energy investment globally, so much so that gobal spending on renewable energy has been greater than fossil fuel investment since 2010 and the difference in investment levels is growing. In other words, we are in danger of becoming a buggy whip industry type country over the next few decades if we continue our almost total focus on fossil fuel growth. Canada was ranked dead last among OECD countries in dealing with climate change.

The party needs to start shifting in this direction both for economic and ecological reasons. If it does not it is in danger of losing votes to the Greens over environmental issues while failing to win those who prefer a fossil fuel agenda, because they already have the Liberal and Conservative parties to choose from for that agenda. In other words, my viewpoint is far from right-wing. However, having lived in the Interior, I strongly believe that an economic agenda that does not address the employment concerns of these people in what are often one-industry towns and in communities which often have nearby ghost towns to remind them what can happen to their community, will never win most of these ridings over. The agenda does not have to be a fossil fuel agenda, or the one I suggested, but it has to be one that seems like  having a good chance of working.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..power has shifted. i feel it at the demos. there is a new energy that wasn't there only a short while ago.

Policy changes aimed at reviving B.C. treaty process, gaining support for natural-resource projects: Aboriginal Affairs

 Lawyer Douglas Eyford named Valcourt’s 'special representative'

The Harper government announced Monday sweeping policy changes aimed at reviving the B.C. treaty process and convincing more First Nations they should support major natural-resource initiatives in B.C.

Aboriginal Affairs Minister Bernard Valcourt’s new approach is in response to numerous criticisms over several years that the government has been inflexible in its approach to treaties, and that it has failed to adequately consult First Nations on controversial oilsands pipeline proposals....

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Policy+changes+aimed+reviving+treaty+pr...


jerrym

KenS wrote:

What Krop said in the last paparagraph. And even if its put very different, I think jerrym is saying the same.

 

You're right Ken. 

Krop, with regard to the Okanagan, the NDP have won in the northernmost part of the region (Okanagan North, as well as in the Shuswap) and in the southernmost part (Okanagan Boundary) so I would not write off the region. Afterall, Obama won two elections in part because he went after the southern states, many of which the Democrats hadn't won since Johnson introduced civil rights legislation. Now even more southern states are shifting demographically towards the Democrats as the population changes. 

ETA: I left out the even more obvious example of Jack Layton's decision to go after Quebec ridings when more than 70 years of doing so by the CCF/NDP had led to not a single victory in a federal election (they won once in a byelection) and where the NDP had sometimes got even fewer votes than the Rhino Party with "their so-called primal promise, was 'a promise to keep none of our promises'. They then promised outlandishly impossible schemes designed to amuse and entertain the voting public." If Layton had simply given up saying winning there was impossible, 0% of the current NDP caucus would be from Quebec instead of 60%. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinoceros_Party_of_Canada_(1963–93)

 

jerrym

For anyone unfamiliar with the Rhino Party, it

Quote:

 claimed to be the spiritual descendants of Cacareco, a Brazilian rhinoceros who was elected member of São Paulo's city council in 1958, and listed Cornelius the First, a rhinoceros from the Granby Zoo, east of Montreal, as its leader.[4] It declared that the rhinoceros was an appropriate symbol for a political party since politicians, by nature, are: "thick-skinned, slow-moving, dim-witted, can move fast as hell when in danger, and have large, hairy horns growing out of the middle of their faces".[5]

Some members of the Rhino party would call themselves Marxist-Lennonist, a parody of the factional split between the Communist Party of Canada and the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist), although the Rhinoceros Party meant the term in reference to Groucho Marx and John Lennon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinoceros_Party_of_Canada_(1963–93)

For those who regret the death of the Rhino Party in 1993, it was reincarnated as the Second Rhinoceros Party in 2006, when "Sa Tan, then-president of the Rhinoceros Party, announced a $50-million lawsuit contesting an election reform law that had stripped his party of its registered status in 1993." This neorhino party has since run in a number of elections. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinoceros_Party

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

I think the BC NDP needs to stop being run by people like Moe Sihota. It needs a platform that speaks to the bottom 80% of wage earners. It needs programs to enhance regional employment by retrofitting and subsidies for small innovative companies that hire and retain Canadian workers.  It needs to at minimum double if not triple the rate for disabled people in this province. It needs to start funding education to provide the support staff our children need. It needs to build long term residences for seniors. It needs a higher minimum wage and lots of new officers to enforce what little employment standards that are left. All those things will provide employment throughout the province not just in selected areas.

Instead the NDP promised to do almost nothng for poor people and that they would balance the books before they did anything else of significance.  I can't for the life of me think of why they didn't attract new voters.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

West Vancouver city council passes unanimous motion to ban LNG tankers in Howe Sound

West Vancouver council has passed a unanimous motion to ban tankers carrying liquified natural gas out of Howe Sound.

The motion takes aim at Woodfibre LNG, a $1.7 billion LNG facility in Squamish that would ship 40 LNG tankers to Asia every year. It was passed on July 21, after Council heard from a delegation about the potential environmental impact of a large LNG plant on Howe Sound.

"We have good reason to be concerned - this is a volatile, dangerous cargo...We should pull all stops out to prevent this (plant) from being placed at Woodfibre," councillor Bill Soprovich said, to loud applause.

The motion called on federal government to ban the passage of LNG tankers in the waters of Howe Sound.

Eoin Finn, a retired KPMG partner and Bowyer Island resident who presented to the council, welcomed the news, saying that other councils, including the village of Lions' Bay and the Sunshine Coast Regional District. He said Woodfibre LNG threatens to turn Howe Sound into a "marine desert", with 17,000 metric tonnes of chlorinated, desalinated water from gas-cooling being poured back into the marine environment on an hourly basis.

"It will be heated water, because it's used in the cooling process," he said. "They say it will be put back into the sound at 10 degrees warmer than it came in. It's pretty serious."...

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

URGENT! This is a new story that is developing right now: The community of Moricetown Band is about to sign an agreement with Pacific Trail Pipelines under their First Nations Limited Partnership group. The agreement is set to be signed this weekend in Vancouver. The reason they want to sign this agreement in Vancouver is because an overwhelming amount of community members showed up at the last community meeting and voiced their opposition to having any pipelines come through our lands. The agreement gives the Moricetown Band & PTP the rights (via approval from the BC gov't) to set up a gate at our camp and manage traffic coming into this territory. The community of Moricetown Band has NO JURISDICTION outside of their Indian Reservations. They are puppets and have been oppressed by the Federal Government under the INDIAN ACT since contact. They have suffered severe budgetary cutbacks for many decades now and have been prepped by racist poverty policies into this desperate situation. One of the clauses in the agreement also state that PTP cannot sell their pipeline to any parties interested in transporting Tar Sands Bitumen for 5 years. (READ THAT AGAIN) The Delgamuukw Court case is the reason why government and industry are attempting to consult but they are choosing to consult with parties who they have oppressed into survival mode which is less than what most understand as third world living conditions. We believe that if they sign this agreement - it will initiate processes within the BC government, the Federal government, and their security forces to move in and attempt enforcing the agreement. This may lead up to a raid... The plaintiffs in the Supreme Court of Canada's Delgamuukw Court Case are the Hereditary Chiefs and their members. There is no mention anywhere in that court case that Indian Act Bands have decision making powers.

https://www.facebook.com/unistoten

jerrym

Thanks for the warning epaulo. Is there anything that can be done to prevent this?

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

jerrym

..i will post what i find around this. there were no announcements (as yet) with the post on facebook.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..this took place in 2012

Unist’ot’en say NO! to PTP at Moricetown meeting

Dini Ze’yu, Tsakiy Ze’yu, Skiy Ze’yu, and our countless supporters! I am glad to report that a real victory for our future has just happened!! Last night our strong community membership decidedly showed who makes the decisions on unceded Wet’suwet’en lands to the elected Moricetown Band Chief and Band Council. The Band Council had called an “Information Session” and invited representatives from PTP First Nations Limited Partnership (FNLP). The meeting was repeatedly interrupted by hereditary chiefs and clan members who bravely spoke their minds and made statements about protecting the lands. During the meeting one of the elected councillors decided to be arrogant and demand that the members be quiet to hear out the representatives. He said that we needed to be respectful of our guests. But the millions of dollars that was dangled in front of the membership in potential partnership agreements meant nothing to the community....

https://warriorpublications.wordpress.com/2012/12/08/unistoten-say-no-to...

KenS

Is there a link somewhere that discusses dissent within other individual First Nations [besides Unist’ot’en] along the the route where the Indian Act Band councils, and in some cases the heridtary chiefs, have signed onto, or allegedly signed onto the pipeline partnership? [Sometimes it is hard to tell even who has actually signed on.]

And/or do dissenters from those other First Nations tend primarily to voice their dissent by coming to the Unist’ot’en camp?

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..it's not what your asking for but there's this from the fracking thread.

quote:
A tale of two nations: Hereditary vs. Elected

Understanding the discrepancy between the official story on First Nations’ support for LNG and the emerging, contrary reality requires some sense of the different – often competing – systems of governance amongst BC’s aboriginal communities.

Broadly speaking, there are two main forms of aboriginal government: elected and hereditary. The former is a product of the Indian Act – elected band councils which govern reserves created by the Crown. The latter is an ancestral system of  leadership made up of houses and clans – the specific makeup varying from nation to nation.

Canada’s courts – in formative cases like Delgamuuk vs. British Columbia - have often acknowledged the jurisdiction of hereditary chiefs over their nations’ often vast, resource-rich traditional territories, where such systems still exist. Elected band councils, on the other hand, generally administer the much smaller reserves which many First Nations inhabit today – again, broadly speaking. It remains a contentious legal issue, often specific to individual nations.  That said, a number of deals involving pipelines and energy terminals have been signed by elected councils, which is sewing conflict in some communities....

http://commonsensecanadian.ca/first-nations-collision-course-lng/

KenS

It's good to put that distinction out there.

But the pipeline partnership claims to have support of heritary chiefs as well. I'm not asking to get into what is really true about claims and counter-claims.... I'm just recognizing that at least in some cases hereditary chiefs are going along. Its obviously very complicated, and the history of colonialism makes it no surprise that the consequnces play out on a lot of levels.

Leaving aside sorting all that out- which I suspect you have to be there to have an idea, and then it changes... leaving all that aside, we know that a certain number of the First Nations are going along with the pipeline. In some cases that even includes some hereditary chiefs.

So my question was about dissenters in other First Nations along the route- what do they do when they dont have something to rally around in their own communities that is even remotely like the Unist’ot’en camp? It must be tough.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Apache to Exit LNG Projects After Jana Pushes for Breakup

Apache Corp. (APA) is heeding advice from activist hedge fund Jana Partners LLC and exiting two costly natural gas projects as it considers selling some or all of its international assets.

The company will sell its stake in the Wheatstone liquefied natural gas project under construction in Australia and the proposed Kitimat LNG facility in Canada, Houston-based Apache said today in a statement. Apache, which got 42 percent of its revenue from the U.S. last year, is weighing a sale or separation of its international assets.

“There are no sacred cows and our efforts continue,” Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Steven Farris said during a conference call with investors today. “We have recognized that there really are two different businesses.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-31/apache-to-exit-lng-projects-aft...

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Premier's LNG plans in trouble as major investor out of Kitmat LNG project

The news comes only one month after Premier Christy Clark took a tour of the Kitimat site to promote the LNG industry.

The future of a major LNG project in Kitimat has been thrown into uncertainty, after one of its main backers has decided to walk out. Houston-based Apache Corporation says it will leave Kitimat LNG, which was a joint project with Chevron. 

"Consistent with the company's ongoing repositioning for profitable and repeatable North American onshore growth, Apache intends to completely exit the Wheatstone and Kitimat LNG projects," the company announced today in its second quarter report.

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/premiers-lng-plans-trouble-major-i...

jerrym

Great news. Thanks for the updates epaulo13

KenS

I see the Apache thing a bit different. Partners come and go in these consortia. Apache getting out is not really a decisive blow, to the project, or to the Premeir's fantasies fro the public.

Its more in the nature of just another step in the march of the unraveling. Which INO is not yet to be realistically labeled as 'inevitable unraveling'.

These 2 or 3 projects that have recently been announced that would be in partnership with West Coast Vancouver Island First Nations- how is the gas supposed to get there anyway?

I can see that the distance of new pipeline build is less if it takes off from existing Lower Mainland pipelines. But it would have to first head north to use smaller islands to get from the Mainland Coast, or go more directly across under Georgia Straight. Less sensitive territory than the long peipelines that would have to be built to Kitimat or Rupert. and not quite as risky routes for the tankers. But still, no slam dunks in there.

Presumably, thats where the Howe Sound proposal comes from- traversing the least possible sensitive territory. Good luck with getting it through where lots of wealthy people live, and the median incomes are so high.

KenS

Not to mention that Apache is not going to take fire sale prices for its stake. They publicly announced they are getting out to address the threat posed to them. The real outcome is to further slow down that particular project. Unless Chevron wants to go for broke and buy Apaches stake, it will slow down. Slow down risks turning into death.

On the other hand, they were probably both going to step back and assess how commited they are anyway. These are just differing possible permutations of how in particular 'not going well so far' plays out... both for this project, and for the scattering of fairy dust by the Premeir and cronies.

Pages

Topic locked