babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

NDP's Mulcair throws support behind west to east oil pipeline

Todrick of Chat...
Offline
Joined: Dec 10 2009

  


Comments

Todrick of Chat...
Offline
Joined: Dec 10 2009

NDP's Mulcair throws support behind west to east oil pipeline

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ndps-mulcair-throws-support-behind-west-to-east-oil-pipeline/article4574676/

In a speech to the Canadian Club of Toronto at the Royal York Hotel, NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair gave his clearest sign of support yet for the notion of a west-to-east pipeline that would allow western producers to receive higher prices for their crude and refiners in Eastern Canada to replace imported supplies of oil with North American product.

 

 


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

I saw that on the news, and my first thought was that Mulcair has given up any environmental cred he had. He should be fighting for green alternatives, not to keep the tar sands going.

ETA: There was a good discussion on P&P not long ago, where someone - maybe from the NDP - argued that a dedicated green energy industry in Canada would put far more people to work than work in the tar sands. I get the impression Tom Mulcair doesn't subscribe to that thesis.


Aristotleded24
Offline
Joined: May 24 2005

From a political standpoint, this could very easily backfire into NEP 2, Mulcair hates Alberta, Mulcair is using Alberta to prop up Eastern Canada, etc.

From an energy security and national point of view, Mulcair has it right. Of course we need to reduce our dependence on oil, but in the interim when the oil is being used anyways, it makes far more sense for Canada to use its own oil rather than import from somewhere else in the world as it does now. The other aspect is the local processing of the oil and bitumen, which many in Alberta have argued for as it keeps jobs here as opposed to allowing someone else to benefit from finishing the product.

Besides, the focus on the tarsands is misdirected anyways. The tarsands are being exploited because there is money to be made, and there is money to be made because that oil is in demand. Switch to a green economy, reduce the demand for the oil, and tarsand development will take care of itself.


NDPP
Offline
Joined: Dec 28 2008

In fairness to Mulcair and the no difference party - one can't sell-out what one never had. This is neither the first nor the last in any case and clearly the party never underestimates the power of denial. And I do also very much hope that Terrance Nelson, the Lubicon or the other  Oil Sands Chiefs get to make their trip to talk of this and other matters of Canadian invasion, occupation and colonialist criminal resource rip offs to Tehran...No wonder all our pols get along so well with Israel..


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Yes, we know that North Americans (and the Chinese...) are real energy hogs and the demand for oil will continue, but Mulcair and the NDP nevertheless need to talk about green alternatives at every opportunity, and especially at the same time as the oil patch is discussed. If the NDP don't push the country towards getting off their oil addiction, who will? The Greens only have one seat in Parliament....


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

Did he really say he was okay with pumping bitumen to the east without at least refining it to heavy crude first?  I think he needs new research assistants that can highlight the important points. 

1. All pipelines leak.

2. Tar sands bitumen when piped is actually two substances.  When the inevitable leak happens the bitumen sinks and the chemical slurry gives off toxic fumes. 

Fortunately for Canadians there are no rivers and lakes between Alberta and Sarina.  

Laughing

Better still lets externalize the risk and run the pipeline like a Google map.  Cross into the states and head for Sarnia through North Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan.  The people of Kalamazoo will be really open to this new green initiative.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

kropotkin1951 is my choice for babbler of the week! Great post, btw. Laughing


theleftyinvestor
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2008

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Better still lets externalize the risk and run the pipeline like a Google map.  Cross into the states and head for Sarnia through North Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan.  The people of Kalamazoo will be really open to this new green initiative.

Or run the pipeline like an Apple iOS 6 map. You basically won't find any points of interest along the route, so it should be smooth sailing!


Aristotleded24
Offline
Joined: May 24 2005

This oil that is currently imported, can anybody say where it's imported from?

And not to deny that shipping oil from Alberta to Eastern Canada will have environmental impacts, but can you really make the case that importing oil as is currently done has no impacts either?


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

Oil does not equal bitumen.  Please try to keep up this is way to important an issue to not differentiate between the two substances.


Todrick of Chat...
Offline
Joined: Dec 10 2009

http://www.ndp.ca/news/building-balanced-21st-century-economy

But first, I'd like to begin with an apology.

I see that Lloyd Blankfein from Goldman Sachs spoke here just last week. So I have to apologize to those of you who will have to sit through what is essentially the same speech twice.

Lloyd and I have been borrowing each other’s material for years.

Lloyd really is doing “God's work”.

In all seriousness, though, I actually read a brief media report about the speech Lloyd Blankfein gave here.

 

Goldman Sachs and the NDP, can you tell the difference?

 

 


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005
Aristotleded24 wrote:

This oil that is currently imported, can anybody say where it's imported from?

Mostly Venezuela and Saudi Arabia, I believe.

Aristotleded24
Offline
Joined: May 24 2005

Unionist wrote:
Aristotleded24 wrote:

This oil that is currently imported, can anybody say where it's imported from?

Mostly Venezuela and Saudi Arabia, I believe.

If the imported oil comes from Saudi Arabia, in my mind that's all the more reason to supply more of our oil domestically.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004
Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

God help us if there ever is a  plan  to export tar sands product from the Port of Montreal - I live on the shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and a spill anywhere on the St. Lawrence is too awful to even think about.


NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

Canada is finally getting a new refinery in Western Canada


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Can't find a link - the closest was the proposed one for Kitimat which I think hasn't gone anywhere.


NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

It's in Alberta - I heard it on the radio - a co called  north west upgrading or something like that, near edmonton. u probably will find it doing a search for new refinery - canada

The one in BC was nonsense by a BC Liberal shill.


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

I helped build the bi-provincial upgrader in Lloydminster in the early '90's.  Lots of government money in the project and mostly corporate control but working there summers did put me through university.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2012/11/08/edmonton-redwate...


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments