Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Pipeline Politics - Is Canada the only "sucker" Nation?


Recommended Posts

Why is it that we are the only nation on earth that faces almost insurmountable obstacles to build new pipelines. We've had 100,000 kilometers of pipeline running virtually free of problems for decades. The US has over two million kilometers of pipelines criss-crossing their nation - again, virtually free of problems - and Obama brags that his administration has built enough new pipelines to circle the world. Where is the clamour to shut down oil production in the Gulf of Mexico - or the North Sea? Where is the outrage in Denmark or Norway? Why is Canada singled out?

What is it about Canada that allows foreign-funded activist groups to continually disparage our oil? Why is the mainstream media - and now this new Liberal government - so ignorant of the difference between "pipeline safety" and the forces that want to keep all oil in the ground?

We're suckers. We need to stand up for our country and our economy - the right to responsibly extract and deliver our product to market - like every other nation in the world. Until we do, we'll be the only "sucker" nation in the world.

Here's a list of all countries who have pipelines - and the number of kilometers for each:

Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_length_of_pipelines

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 237
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Oh well, I have little doubt they'll do it again with Kinder Morgan..........now emboldened by the "victory" at Standing Rock.........Trudeau picked the wrong time to approve a pipeline.

Because the enviros have been bought off by our competitors. The enviros think they are on to something to save the planet but far from it. We are cutting our own throats while everyone else is making money. And after watching McKenna and Carr last nite, IMO pipelines are dead. Or they are lying thru their teeth and once everybody has they say, they will still go ahead with it. Come on, after all there consultation, the enviros and natives will still say no, then what?

Edited by PIK
Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the enviros have been bought off by our competitors. The enviros think they are on to something to save the planet but far from it. We are cutting our own throats while everyone else is making money.

There has to be some truth in that - because there is no rational reason for Canada to be singled out as a pariah. Keeping Canadian oil is such a tiny fraction of global production that keeping it in the ground makes no sense - other than using a pliant nation to advance their "cause" while everyone else keeps pumping oil..

I don't expect too many posts on this topic because for the life of me, I can't see how anyone can rationally defend how Canada is being singled out!

Edited by Keepitsimple
Link to post
Share on other sites

In a country that couldn't even bear to be unfriendly to Iran it's not really surprising that we can't stand up to the environmental movement and the know nothings that follow them, we are just weak, pathetic really, we are an easy target because too many of us have been born and raised to believe that to be Canadian means standing for nothing while always trying to be the nicest kid in the class. Our own self interests be damned, we just can't take being disliked, even if it is for producing a tiny fraction of the pollution of other countries, we are supposed to be better! We had almot 10 years where that wasn't completely the case, but now we are going to over compensate for it, it's the Canadian way, and it's sad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In a country that couldn't even bear to be unfriendly to Iran it's not really surprising that we can't stand up to the environmental movement and the know nothings that follow them, we are just weak, pathetic really, we are an easy target because too many of us have been born and raised to believe that to be Canadian means standing for nothing while always trying to be the nicest kid in the class. Our own self interests be damned, we just can't take being disliked, even if it is for producing a tiny fraction of the pollution of other countries, we are supposed to be better! We had almot 10 years where that wasn't completely the case, but now we are going to over compensate for it, it's the Canadian way, and it's sad.

If we were really interested in our own self-interests, we wouldn't let our economy and jobs become so dependent on a single, volatile commodity. A petro-republic is just a banana republic with a higher price tag. Long term, countries like Saudi Arabia and Russia are in for a nightmare when petroleum age comes to an end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we're 3rd in world, despite just recently having large oil production, and despite our smaller economy than the US. Not bad.

Our country is extremely spread out compared to most countries, with big cities here and there and virtually nothing but wildlife in between. It's largely spread out east-west economically so it runs a long way. You're also talking about going through many provinces potentially, which causes problems as they all need to agree. Also, most of our oil is very carbon-intensive.

We're also more liberal ideologically, both federally and provincially. That's probably the "sucker" thing you're talking about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In a country that couldn't even bear to be unfriendly to Iran

You must be mad at the rest of the other countries that did exactly the same thing as us.

We had almost 10 years where that wasn't completely the case, but now we are going to over compensate for it, it's the Canadian way, and it's sad.

It's likely (if a business case still exists) that pipelines will get built under Trudeau. He's doing the work now that Harper failed at to quell environmental concerns, and to placate aboriginal demands. Without doing those two things it will never happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you say.

I don't think it's impossible that it will get passed, but I wouldn't count on it. This looks like another delay tactic like Obama did. They might pass it for political reasons though, just to appear moderate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's impossible that it will get passed, but I wouldn't count on it. This looks like another delay tactic like Obama did. They might pass it for political reasons though, just to appear moderate.

Oh, of course, that Obama just killed American oil!

No, US production has not increased under Obama at all.

But seriously, Trudeau will get it done just like Obama managed to get it done while everyone yapped about how he was gonna kill fracking etc etc.

The reality is much different than what the GOP and CPC partisans say it is.

Which is why the Canadian economy does better under Liberal governments and the US does better under Democratic presidents.

Watch what they do and not what they say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gerald Butts is against all pipelines because he wants to shut down the oil sands.

is this from 'Rebel Media'... perhaps from the Rebel Commander himself?

you keep dropping Butts' name - do you have a money-shot quote to support your related statements? I've read Butts' using the word "sustainable" in regards tarsands development. Oh wait - does that apparently contentious word, sustainable, mean "shut down" to anyone in favour of unfettered, full-blown, all-speed ahead, get out of the way development?

Link to post
Share on other sites

is this from 'Rebel Media'... perhaps from the Rebel Commander himself?

you keep dropping Butts' name - do you have a money-shot quote to support your related statements? I've read Butts' using the word "sustainable" in regards tarsands development. Oh wait - does that apparently contentious word, sustainable, mean "shut down" to anyone in favour of unfettered, full-blown, all-speed ahead, get out of the way development?

You got a cite/link that under Harper it was unfettered, full-blown, all speed ahead, get out of the way development, hey! Or is this just more leftwing/Liberal blather/puffery from the king/master of puffery, hey!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The oil sands boom had very little to do with Harper, and a lot more to do with a business friendly Alberta government and a very long run of high priced oil. You would think for these massive investments, a lot of strategic planning was involved, but since big publics are run by employees (and most of them finance types) their view is much shorter and fuzzier than a real oil man would have (read that as someone with their OWN money at risk). Therefore: stupid decisions get made (CNOOC buying Nexen, for instance). Oh, the oil is there, and that of course makes it possible. Sad part is: the old style open pit mining method of extration is much cheaper and only possible in a relatively small area, so that is what gets public attention.

BTW: we have been there before. the tree hugging eco movement used to dance to the tune of nuclear, now replaced by 'tar" sands and pipelines. It is no different from GMO or fur maina in Europe spread to the rest of the weak-minded world.

Edited by cannuck
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just like I have said before the main problem to the pipelines are, over time break open and spill, so just like the train containers have to be made safer and spill-proof, so does the pipes and there won't be no worries are them splitting open and damaging the environment or people and that's the crust of the problem. So why isn't someone telling the manufacturers change your way of producing them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just like I have said before the main problem to the pipelines are, over time break open and spill, so just like the train containers have to be made safer and spill-proof, so does the pipes and there won't be no worries are them splitting open and damaging the environment or people and that's the crust of the problem. So why isn't someone telling the manufacturers change your way of producing them.

Pipelines are without a doubt safer for people and the environment. This is not controversial.

Stopping pipelines does not mean less oil extraction or less use of fossil fuels. It just means the oil goes west by more dangerous rail, and comes in by tanker from the Arab world.

Making a decision to delay pipelines is making a decision to put more people and environments and risk, and provide more funding to Islamic dictators, period. You cannot have it both ways.

Edited by hitops
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pipelines are without a doubt safer for people and the environment. This is not controversial.

Stopping pipelines does not mean less oil extraction or less use of fossil fuels. It just means the oil goes west by more dangerous rail, and comes in by tanker from the Arab world.

Making a decision to delay pipelines is making a decision to put more people and environments and risk, and provide more funding to Islamic dictators, period. You cannot have it both ways.

Exactly - and if you choose to completely decimate Canada's Oil industry (the "keep the oil in the ground crowd") by making it financially unfeasible to extract more oil - then you're just giving carte-blanche to the Arab World, Iran, Russia and of course our good friend the US - to pump more oil and deliver it by sea and rail. We're a pimple on the elephant. A sucker nation - that's us. Unbelievable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




×
×
  • Create New...