It's about safety ,stupid

In October 1944 ,an LNG plant explosion ‘happened ’in Cleveland Ohio, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_East_Ohio_Gas_explosion. This disaster had a lengthy impact on the LNG sector of the natural gas industry.

Today, we boast that LNG can greatly help our economy--safely!

The time has come for the bitumen transport sector to respond to public/political pressure about some or our current OIL TRANSPORT issues ...that have yet have yet to be ‘resolved’,satisfactorily.

Do we need a bitumen tanker spill DISASTER or another Kalamazoo to help us better‘design’ our bitumen infrastructure?

I read that LNG ships are manned by highly skilled ,specially trained crews .Yet we intend to send HUGE bitumen loaded tankers into our coastal watereways.

Pick any location on our coastline and SHOW US how the shipping crews WILL cope with a MAJOR bitumen LEAK, from a tanker hung up on a reef in a howling gale;while we wait for many hours...or days to receive containment equipment.

UNTIL WE LEARN MUCH MORE , bitumen laden tankers should be permitted only in the COMMON SENSE locations... NOT BURRARD INLET...OR DOUGLAS CHANNEL..!

Our LNG cousins have been developing transport techniques for decades.

We need to be convinced that our bitumen transporter proponents give a damn...let’s see a ‘CULTURE of SAFETY’ in the Board rooms...

Canada has the world’s longest coastline and it’s time that those proposing a potential threat to that coastline present us only with ‘SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN’ leak recovery capabilities...

We may have golden opportunity here, to provide the shipping world with the ‘oil transport’ ocean science research leadership ... with the help our B.C. and Alberta universities and the other beneficiaries.

As Mr. Harper told us not long ago not long ago....’science ,NOT POLITICS, should help us to decide

Enbridge Culture--same old !

please see links below

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/03/14/enbridge-kalamazoo-river-oil-spill-clean-up_n_2879464.html

http://www.epa.gov/enbridgespill/ar/enbridge-AR-1718.pdf

(Recall that this pipe line failed July 26,2010 !!)

I wonder about Enbridge' culture, still. The new President gave some early signals that staff are to be rewarded for ‘safe practices; something like that?—and Al Monaco was also quoted ,in the press, saying Enbridge POSSIBLY might look at moving out of Douglas channel (soon after his appointment?).For a while things sounded hopeful—but as I see it ,nothing has changed—Janet Holder’s ubiquitous ads continue—and Enbridge sounds, to me, like the same old bunch.

I’d guess that your BC Government team would have seen the latest ‘peeing match ’ stuff going on with US EPA(see links above)—for a chuckle you might look at the Ron James’ Enbridge spoof??

Many times I’ve suggested that an OPERATIONS SAFETY EPIPHANY, by the full Board, would be welcomed--- I guess I’ll need to wait a bit longer??

Joe's back---poor Joe

http://www.vancouversun.com/Pipeline+exercise+hits+some+rough+water/8142736/story.html

As many have said—‘you can’t make this stuff up!'

Joe Oliver comes to town for a ‘photo op’ of BC’s pride of the clean up fleet! ...presumably to show the world how we intend to develop/create ‘a World Class Tanker Safety System’..Craig McInnes must have had difficulty writing this without the occasional fit of laughter...’slap stick’ for sure..

Questions

1.why is this critical piece equipment (the BURRARD Cleaner No. 9) kept in Esquimalt---I thought the congested oil tanker traffic was in Vancouver harbour??

2.we have had no serious oil spill situations –great but was that more a matter of dumb luck

3.this ‘pride of BC clean up vessel’ apparently ‘got lost’ on the way to Burrard Inlet...and goes aground on a Fraser river sand bar—slightly off course and apparently unable to operate the high tech sounder on board??

4.this incident reinforces the idea that ships rarely sink or founder unless assisted by the crew!

5.and on and on---No, this this not funny---but it is VERY SAD to see this Looney Tunes operation up close.

Poor Joe for sure...what can you say..

Remember your own famous words Mr. Harper—‘’science ,NOT POLITICS, should help us to decide...’

Are there any scientists left

Enbridge and Kinder Morgan need to listen

LNG projects ok ..

But, of immediate concern are ‘our’ wannabe OIL pipe liners –they need a ‘talking to’. The BC public’ requirements are ‘conveniently’ ignored by them... . Enbridge leaders have done nothing to convince me that they have CHANGED their OPERATIONS CULTURE to something we can accept —

Typically, pipelines don’t fail—PEOPLE FAIL PIPELINES-- a la Kalamazoo,Michigan and that infamous 40+ year ‘old’ pipeline.

Further,the BC public want the bitumen laden oil tankers OUT of Douglas Channel.

Let the Enbridge Board TELL us how they will change their organization and mandate if they want to operate in our province,today and 50 years hence,( pipelines DON’T IMPROVE with age)!What we want is for the folks sitting in those fancy leather covered chairs, around the big the mahogany table, to ‘COME OUT’ and face the public in open forums and CONVINCE US that they will change and tell HOW they propose to do that. Will we believe them—that’s up to them! Boards claim to be the stewards of their corporations—OK, show us your stewardship.

That ‘OTHER’ wannabe oil pipe liner has this insane idea that we should allow MORE and BIGGER bitumen laden super size oil tankers to wiggle their way through Burrard Inlet—go figure ??

Surely Premier Clark, you’re going to TELL Kinder Morgan to forget that crazy scheme.I’d guess that the Burrard Inlet Community residents (BICres) will support anyone that can talk some common sense into these ‘deaf’ oil pipe liners...

So Premier, call your colleagues(Premier Alison Redford and Prime Minister Stephen Harper) soon, and work out a plan to get these revenue generating oil pipelines built—BUT with fair consideration for the BC public !

OK?

Newfies show the way,,

 

Subject: Newfies show the way!

What’s going on?The press tells us that our East Coast cousins are looking at more offshore drilling ..and maybe Western sourced oil pipelines,etc.??---Meanwhile we lotus landers dither—and cry out,’no pipelines’,’no off shore exploration’,’oil tankers are feared’...

Recall the Ocean Ranger(East coast offshore oil exploration platform) disaster of 1982 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_Ranger ) . Well I guess the East Coast leaders and oil folks have more confidence in their ability to learn from their experience and move on? Maybe we ‘lotus landers’ should just get ‘off the POT’!

Come on BC..let’s progress. Yes,we don’t want ‘yahoos’, running the show—but we’ll accept organizations that are willing to demonstrate their Corporate bona fides—starting at the top!

Point: Our natural resources have supplied Canadians and much of the world with valuable natural resources—we live with a relatively high standard of living as a result.There are risks and rewards—Those complaining are often the very same folks that want more ‘free government services’ but forget that those ‘free services’ arrive because of risk takers and hard working folks(you know—parents and grandparents!)

Yes—young people should challenge and demand answers—together the entrepreneurs ,leaders should be ‘steered’ into developing progressive new opportunities to create a better social environment.

Some will profit—some will lose---but progress stops when we give up trying.

The horse and buggy era sounds great—but who’s going to clean up that mess?

Get real Joe!

Subject: Get real Joe!

I see that Ottawa are proposing new environmental fines http://o.canada.com/2013/02/15/harper-government-proposes-new-fines-for-nuclear-and-pipeline-industries/..for pipelines and nuclear industries.Fines to be $25,000 for individuals and $100,000 for corporations(trivial,even laughable!)...to ensure resource development is ‘safe and responsible’ says Joe Oliver,Natural Resources Minister.

FINES don’t stop pipeline leaks—PEOPLE stop pipeline leaks.

Start with Corporations that implement sound operations,maintenance and training plans for their all their PEOPLE that operate and maintain pipeline, facilities.

See ‘Summary of Enbridge Organizational Deficiencies’(per final U.S. NTSB report).

“Although these deficiencies involved different elements of Enbridge’s operations, and

may appear unrelated, taken together they suggest a systemic deficiency in the company’s APPROACH TO SAFETY”

Our lawmakers must insist that pipe liner organizations include an organizational structure that addresses ‘system operations safety’ as a public responsibility. The board provides STEWARDSHIP we’re told . Enbridge’ recent history suggests that there’s lots of work to be done to clarify who should be looking after pipeline operations.

Suggestion: Create a Corporate Technical Officer (CTO) and let the CTO sit at Board meetings to keep the Board apprised of ‘areas of concern’ and what actions are required to maintain a sound,safe system—on new AND older systems.The CTO, (along with a team of operations and technical experts),becomes responsible to monitor and report and the Board then becomes accountable to LISTEN and then ACT—by approving and implementing necessary action.That’s what I would call Stewardship.

Come on Enbridge show us the new Corporate Mission Statement that spells out exactly how your Board and Organization has changed –particularly your new APPROACH TO SAFETY.

Then the public and decision makers may start to look favourably at your Northern Gateway proposal.

Get real Joe—try TELLING these all wannabe pipe liners(Enbridge and Kinder Morgan,etc.) to commit fully to the safety culture WE REQUIRE.

OR, call for new proposals!

 

Enbridge culture of safety?

Is there a lingering distrust of the Enbridge Operating Chiefs--- the folks in the Boardroom.

Look at what we heard during U.S. NTSB hearings after the (Enbridge) Kalamazoo,Michigan pipeline fiasco. http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/documents/p21799/81081E.pdf

The NTSB sums up “Although these deficiencies involved different elements of Enbridge’s operations, and

may appear unrelated, taken together they suggest a systemic deficiency in the company’s approach to safety; p.114”

What has Enbridge done to convince us that they’ll operate differently on the Northern Gateway pipeline ... two , ten , or 50 years hence?

Yes- there’s lot’s of talk in the ubiquitous Enbridge ads, from Janet Holder, about how ‘wonderful things will be’ on the new pipeline......but as another lady once said ‘WHERE’S the BEEF?

Management often will fall back onto an old ‘dodge’ , “we followed all the regulations and standards of the day” . However, ultimately, the ‘buck’ has to stop somewhere—if the Board was not responsible for the Kalamazoo, Michigan incident---then WHO WAS?

Leaders don’t follow standards, they set the standard—continually;during construction and thereafter.

I don’t know the ‘fix’ for Enbridge ‘public image’ ---but somehow we need to hear and see something convincing ; not from Janet Holder—but from the full Board of Directors—show us how you’ve changed your organization and ‘culture’.

I’m hoping to see an Operations Safety Epiphany by the Enbridge Board...I suggest that a Board affirmation that operations safety will be dealt with purposefully –as ‘a priority and continually’; would be welcomed by the decision makers and the public, even at this late date.

Corporate technical officer(CTO)-what's that

Imagine an P.Eng. in the Board room(unless in disguise) advising Directors about operational matters!Banks require accountants in their backrooms for sure—but complex technical operations seem also to be ‘run’ buy accountants and maybe lawyers—all good folks I know---but where are the technical officers?(Why not a Corporate Technical Officer?)—likely out ‘cleaning up the mess’!

Engineers are not sufficiently apparent in the ‘scheme of things’.What/how can we enlighten the world and improve things?Do we all ‘need, to add MBA to our CVs---My whining won’t solve the problem but the world needs to include more technical advisors in their (corporate and legislative) governance? My only remaining option is to yap at anyone that might listen—not much time left(1957 engineering grad) –though late in my mission, I try—With that in mind I do offer the occasional letter to various media and politicians,etc.—mostly in vain ,but surprisingly with the occasional personal response—So I forward this and hope that somehow we can come out of the wilderness and begin to show the world what they’re missing.Engineers, alone, won’t save the world but we do make it a better place,in my opinion!

“The Enbridge Nightmare(see recently released NTSB/Enbridge reports) is a making of their own---a lack of commitment to operational training by management and OF management can lead to Nightmares.Management often will fall back onto the old ‘dodge’ such as “we followed all the regulations,standards of the day”—give me a break—systems start to become obsolete after day 2 of startup—Besides ‘leader’s don’t follow standards,they set the standard! A cruel thing to say but life is cruel and managements’ obligations are demanding and ceaseless .So,what to do—Listening to your own people(is anyone listening?) is often the best place to start and they will tell you where to find the ‘areas of concern’ and then do something about it(but be sure have an open door policy with meaning)---Accountants have their role but complex physical systems need ongoing scrutiny—operations and engineering folks should be at the fore---so where’s the Financial Officer in this picture---probably in the Board room advising about ways to increase share value,OK. Now tell me where the Corporate Technical Officer is---well firstly ,‘We don’t have such a beast’—they(engineers,operations people) always want to spend money –and that’s not our business,etc. Result –often one big screw up—or maybe 2! Think of Kalamazoo oil spill, Ocean Ranger oil platform loss,Space ship Challenger disaster,Walkerton E-Coli fiasco,Ford Pinto scenario,etc.,etc., Hindsight engineering is not easy---but foresight engineering is one hell of a lot more difficult-right?—We may have to devote a lot of resources to this sometimes trial and error engineering—a costly exercise for sure---like insurance. But if, as a Director, I’m not held accountable and I can deflect the CONSEQUENCES to someone else—to hell with worrying about CONSEQUENCES! Eventually , a Board’s delaying of action can be the most costly ‘action’—will Enbridge survive this fiasco—they probably will survive---I’m hoping to see an epiphany by the Enbridge Board—maybe not as significant as Lyndon B. Johnson where he made the impossible ,possible by uttering 3 words “we shall overcome”—see http://www.historyplace.com/speeches/johnson.htm But we can only hope that we can overcome and get on with the job! “

 

 

The missing link?

This is about the 1973 freighters collision near Point Atkinson and the resultant fuel oil spill clean up activities at Ambleside Beach. See Hansard link for details. We’re told that “A slick extends from Fisherman's Cove to Ambleside, from 5- to 30-ft. wide, and has hit the rocky beach at Dunderave and Ambleside” –a relatively minor leak?..The collision occurred on a clear night and calm seas we’re told.

--from Hansard http://www.leg.bc.ca/hansard/30th3rd/30p_03s_730925p.htm see pages 207,208

---Ambleside photo http://www.johndenniston.ca/blogwp4/?p=456

---Twicsy--more Ambleside photo http://twicsy.com/i/Q9wwZb#A3TbQ11UBM7jZe4A.03

Here’s an interesting observation(I think)--Not too long ago I was able to find the Vancouver Sun oil spill (high quality) pictures and report online ,with this link below--

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/metro/history+September+1973/7294276/story.html

--but now the Vancouver Sun ‘page cannot be found’ I’m told??? Did the Sun PULL that photo,why?---The ‘twicsy’ link above shows the cleanup effort of some young volunteers—a picture I’d guess Kinder Morgan would rather be told that it... “cannot be found”

I wonder how long before ‘someone’ decides that ‘HANSARD cannot be found’??

Get on with it ,already!

Subject: Get on with it,already!

Barbara Yaffe’s recent column

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Alberta+must+respect+pipeline+concerns/7918801/story.html

prompted me to offer this comment ;

1. the oil pipeline and shipping proposals (by Enbridge and Kinder Morgan) are necessary and require some ‘adjustments’; thus far, bullying is not working!

2. oil pipe lines and oil tankers are here to stay

3. all governments (local,Provincial and Federal) want/need the the revenue

4.the outstanding/controversial issues remaining can be dealt with

5.BC public are not a “bunch of earth mothers and fathers and eco freaks” as my recent Wild Rose Land Émigré friend suggested to me —he went on to suggest that without Alberta oil we need to “figure out how to power cars and trucks and aircraft with chicken feathers from Chilliwack! Quite funny —but I suggest , likely the prevailing feeling of many Albertans.

6.BC is not trying to pull off a PQ-NL power swindle deal—(yes,a Canadian solution should be our goal)

7.our leaders (Christy,Alison and Stephen?) need to sit down and hammer out a common sense deal(I suggest Kelowna as an Alberta friendly location)

8.the idealists will always be ‘around’ but ultimately the ‘common sense’ public will decide ; a few key concerns are—Burrard Inlet location,Douglas Channel location; and based on ‘online review’ the lack of Corporate operations SAFETY CULTURE in the proponent corporations. Finally ,who pays for the inevitable oil spill—be in a Kalamazoo like swamp,near a river or major spawning area,in a harbour or on our ocean shores(insurance is offered but we want to see the details and how will these SPILL DISASTER FUNDS be created and managed)?

The public and the project proponents want to ‘get on’ with these, obviously, necessary projects. So, to our leaders ,put away your ‘blinders’—and LEAD!

Surely the public(voters) don’t NEED to wait until the next election?

--or DO WE ?

The Elephant in the room-still there!

In Prince Rupert,

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/government+questions+Northern+Gateway+experts+spill+plan/7921013/story.html ,

Terry Lake (BC Environment Minister) agreed that “this is not just about Gateway(Enbridge Pipeline)...then he (Lake)goes on to say ‘we want a regulated,legislated system...to MINIMIZE THE RISK .. and to respond to ANY incidents...and we’ve been urging the federal government to develop (coastline?) regulations,etc.—(the coastline is under federal jurisdiction).

In Ottawa,

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Ottawa+spill+plan+cope+with+coming+supertankers/7920670/story.html

Scott Vaughn,Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development states that ”the Harper government’s disaster planning has not kept pace with proposals to greatly expand oilsand exports from B.C” . In 2010 there were 600 tankers on our coast; soon to be 2400 tankers(many with increased capacity).

What to do...?

1. Terry Lake’ suggestion; ‘minimize the risk’—you know, like get out of Douglas channel and Burrard inlet,etc..

2.Create a JOINT ‘project proponents and government’ oil spill OPERATIONS PLAN and financial spill DISASTER FUND –all the those benefitting to provide funding (including oil producers,shippers,pipeliners and each benefitting government) based on their share of the ‘PROFITS’ from the project.

3.Call on the world’s insurance houses and to assist in development of a ‘B.C.’ ocean Disaster Cost Recovery Fund.

4.Oil spill OPERATIONS PLAN (acquire materiel,build facilities and train staff) and develop joint plans with other jurisdictions.

Other ‘transport industries’ have similar problems—for instance,the airline industry has evolved greatly,’safety wise’—But there’s still the chance that a 747 may ‘land’ at Georgia and Granville or your bedroom—there are no guarantees—but we can always do better...if we try!

...OR someone come up with a better workable plan..please.

Seems strange that, after these everlasting NEB goings-on, a key issue (ocean oil spills) has been essentially ignored—

Yes, the problem is not within NEB terms of reference—but THE PROBLEM IS REAL and requires action—POLITICAL action,NOW!

Come on leaders—LEAD

shipping dilemma

Subject: Time for Common Sense

We must REDUCE THE PROBABILITY and minimize consequences of an ‘incident’. HOW?

1.TRAIN:— The Board of Directors must SHOW that training was DEVELOPED and DELIVERED in line with international technical and operating knowledge. Example—the Enbridge Kalamazoo pipe line failure —Were known pipe line system deficiencies addressed adequately and was maintenance and operating field personnel and control room staff training ‘up to snuff’??

The Enbridge Inc. Board of Directors is responsible for the overall STEWARDSHIP;say Enbridge;which means planning and management of ALL resources? Kinder Morgan ,likewise I’d guess.

2.Use COMMON SENSE —see PLANS A and B.

KINDER MORGAN : Proposed scary PLAN A:—Burrard inlet location:
It’s a “Tight squeeze through Second Narrows—”says “North Vancouver oceanographer Peter Baker points out that Port Metro has changed its rules to allow larger tankers, carrying 700,000 barrels of oil, to travel through Second Narrows...see link http://www.georgiastrait.org/files/share/kerSafetyExpertPanel-PB-0v1-61-5July2010-rdx.pdf read this and decide what should be done—lots of room for debate I assume—but the tankers get wider and the Narrows remain narrow.
KINDER MORGAN : PLAN B —Relocate all Kinder Morgan facilities and shipping and to ROBERTS BANK—that’s why Roberts Bank was built—yes we know that a conveyor system could be damaged as happened recently at Westshore terminals—but what about a Burrard Inlet CNR rail bridge damage ‘incident’ and SPILL at Second Narrows??...OR WORSE ?
ENBRIDGE: Proposed scary PLAN A ; Douglas Channel transit .
ENBRIDGE:PLAN B—move OUT of Douglas Channel.
BC citizens should not be asked to bear all the risks without comprehensive disaster insurance scheme in place—!
The BC public needs to see a willingness by the pipe liners to listen and respond—OR
maybe we’re left with the option of leaving the oil in the ground !! Until???
Carl Shalansky,P. Eng.(retired)
3359 Redfern Place,
North Vancouver,B.C. V7N 3W2
6049864657

Enbridge P O P lacks FIZZ

The Hearings are looking into a lot of stuff—BUT the big elephant in the room as I see it is Enbridge’s lack of corporate (by the Board of Directors) commitment to the public about to doing a better job of OPERATING their systems..their proven lack of concern about operational safety (see NTSB Kalamazoo reports,etc.) lingers in our minds—anyone can BUILD a good pipeline (although Enbridge needed to ad significantly –(half billion dollars worth!) –to boost the safety components in the 11th hour -in response to public concerns generated by the Kalamazoo NTSB report)—

the PIPE part of a pipeline is the easy part to sell—it’s the POP part that concerns many –

’P’—the party ;

‘O’-- OPERATING the

‘P’ Pipeline!

Enbridge said, here and there, that they’ve learned from the Kalamazoo and they’ve made some progress in their training and organization to do a better job. —BUT pipelines don’t improve with age the last time I checked –only a continual, due diligent, approach to ongoing system operations safety can begin to result in a safe system—the Kalamazoo line was 40 or 50 years ‘old’—as I read the NTSB report ,they were NOT impressed with Enbridge’ management of this aging system—We don’ want to see a repeat of this style of management on OUR aging Northern Gateway Pipeline..

Enbridge have not been able to convince the public that they’ll behave differently –what to me looks like unwillingness to ‘fess up’ to past screw ups—and to state categorically that they now have changed their ways.
What the public needs to see IN WRITING and at public gatherings is the NEW ENBRIDGE MANDATE about their full Board commitment to how they’ll change –show the NEW organization and spell out the details of this new approach—

The public ‘read’ Enbridge with suspicion as they BULLY THEIR WAY thru this hearing process---

My ideas about an ‘Epiphany’ may be laughable to the Enbridge folks—BUT what they’re doing to date is not convincing us that they’ll change – their pretty picture ,fluffy ads are annoying and likely counter productive..I

I stand by my lecture(Trust Enbridge?) to Enbridge—I offered this as a constructive formula of ‘repentance’ and suggestion for meaningful and progressive way to get the public and political arenas accepting the NEW ENBRIDGE—do they have the cojones –I remain doubtful---

Result;another un-built pipeline –maybe we’ll eventually see a different proponent with better savvy about ‘we peasants’ in BC--

And, I’ve not received any response from Enbridge,yet—maybe a canned response will arrive one day—as has happened occasionally in the past..

 

pretty pix won't work.show us the BEEF!

I sent an email recently, to my MP(copy to my friend) ,suggesting that Enbridge are BULLYING their way thru these NEB Hearings and Enbridge are NOT CONVINCING the public that they really intend to change their MO for operations practices.—We hear a little ‘talk’ from Enbridge , here and there ,about how they’ve ‘learned’ but we see little of substance—except a bombardment of useless, pretty picture, questionable ads from their Janet Holder.Instead,we need to see the BOARD make written statement telling us specifically WHAT THE BOARD WILL DO,AND HOW IT WILL CHANGE—IN WRITING. Also to provide the details of their specific plans to change their operating methods; how will their organization attend to ALL their 30,40 or 50 year old pipelines from now on?—The NTSB was not impressed with Enbridge’s management of the record breaking ,oil land spill, in the Michigan,Kalamazoo stretch of pipeline!!—

Show us how the NEW ORGANIZATION will provide OVERSIGHT from now on!—SHOW US,PLEASE!

My friend suggests I look at today's page FP4, (National Post, 14 December), regarding SNC-Lavalin and, in part, it's Board(of Directors).

Boards are supposed to provide direction and advice—SNC messed up according to a quote from billionaire Stephen Jarislowsky, the largest single shareholder in SNC: ---told Bloomberg April 30 that SNC's current slate of directors provided INADEQUATE OVERSIGHT before the internal probe began. "We have a board that didn't keep its eye on things. The discipline was pretty loose."

Did Enbridge Board provide the OVERSIGHT that ‘permitted’ the aging Michigan line to remain ‘unattended’ and to produce that unfortunate mess in Kalamazoo ?If not the Enbridge Board –then WHO?

My MP did respond to me and expressed some general interest(good) but he doesn’t find it necessary to take Enbridge to task about their lack of clear commitment to OPERATIONS SAFETY; FROM NOW ON!---instead he parroted the usual government party line – "..the coast of BC has had the presence of shipping for well over a hundred years without any serious environmental issues..."

These proposed pipelines, pipeline facilities and MEGA OIL TANKERS are scheduled to ‘arrive’ in 2014 and on, not 1900. My friend continues—“Using history in this matter is useless, in my opinion. Compare, a few dozen per year 100-foot sailing ships to over seven hundred (Enbridge and Kinder Morgan) upwards of 1000-foot super tankers in narrow channels and heavily populated areas.

I think some of these MLAs and MPs are part of the problem. They stand in awe and take whatever Enbridge tells them as gospel!”

The public are still ‘not buying’ the Enbridge we see—they may accept a NEW ENBRIDGE –we wait..

The politicos know the cost of ignoring public opinion(it’s the number one issue in a politicians SURVIVAL HANDBOOK!)

An Enbridge Board ‘Operations Safety’ epiphany may still work?

KEYSTONE CONFUSION?

After reading the following—see link  http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Pipeline+decision+time/7800039/story.html  I became confused .
(The Keystone XL oil pipeline is part of a 2700 km  system stretching from Alberta to Texas).
The article tells me-- ‘According to a new study...TransCanada found an alternative route that avoids Nebraska’s .. crucial aquifer..and numerous ecologically sensitive areas in the state....
The article states that “the company (TransCanada)..addressed most every concern raised..agreeing to dozens of special conditions...during the construction,operation and maintenance phases....Finally,TransCanada has committed itself to taking responsibility,technical and financial,for any spills.”
We hear little about Enbridge or Kinder Morgan  and the ‘profiting’ project participants’(oil producers and shippers) agreeing to ‘take financial responsibility for ANY spills.’!  Occasional mumbling is heard by these folks---but no firm commitment to pay for ALL spills! Conveniently,for them, the project participants profit as a group—regardless—but for A DISASTROUS SPILL ,in Burrard Inlet or Douglas Channel, or some remote ‘Kalamazoo like’ swamp land along the pipeline right of way, we’ll likely see a lot of finger pointing happening—leaving BC citizens  to pay for clean up.
That’s what confuses me ..no clarity about a commitment to pay...AND little apparent interest in reducing the probability and consequences of a spill(and unbelievably still ,sticking to Douglas Channel and Burrard Inlet routing).
Unless we hear soon  how  these  wannabe BC pipe liners will protect us from the inevitable screw up—maybe we should look at inviting new proposals? The oil will keep in the ground while we find the right proponent.
We’re happy to assist our cousin provinces to transport their resources to market—so please, cousins,  support us by telling  the pipeline proponents to come up with some sensible schemes—that do not encumber BC residents unfairly.
Seems fair.

TIME FOR COMMON SENSE--PIPE LINERS!

We must REDUCE THE PROBABILITY and minimize consequences of an ‘incident’. HOW?

1.TRAIN:— The Board of Directors must SHOW that training was DEVELOPED and DELIVERED in line with international technical and operating knowledge. Example—the Enbridge Kalamazoo pipe line failure —Were known pipe line system deficiencies addressed adequately and was maintenance and operating field personnel and control room staff training ‘up to snuff’??

The Enbridge Inc. Board of Directors is responsible for the overall STEWARDSHIP;say Enbridge;which means planning and management of ALL resources? Kinder Morgan ,likewise I’d guess.

2.Use COMMON SENSE —see PLANS A and B.

KINDER MORGAN : Proposed scary PLAN A:—Burrard inlet location:
It’s a “Tight squeeze through Second Narrows—”says “North Vancouver oceanographer Peter Baker points out that Port Metro has changed its rules to allow larger tankers, carrying 700,000 barrels of oil, to travel through Second Narrows...see link http://www.georgiastrait.org/files/share/kerSafetyExpertPanel-PB-0v1-61-5July2010-rdx.pdf read this and decide what should be done—lots of room for debate I assume—but the tankers get wider and the Narrows remain narrow.
KINDER MORGAN : PLAN B —Relocate all Kinder Morgan facilities and shipping and to ROBERTS BANK—that’s why Roberts Bank was built—yes we know that a conveyor system could be damaged as happened recently at Westshore terminals—but what about a Burrard Inlet CNR rail bridge damage ‘incident’ and SPILL at Second Narrows??...OR WORSE ?
ENBRIDGE: Proposed scary PLAN A ; Douglas Channel transit .
ENBRIDGE:PLAN B—move OUT of Douglas Channel.
BC citizens should not be asked to bear all the risks without comprehensive disaster insurance scheme in place—!
The BC public needs to see a willingness by the pipe liners to listen and respond—OR
maybe just leave the oil in the ground--until???