TransCanada\Keystone Pipeline.....Sell US ROW or We Wll SUE YOU

arabian knight · #**141** 10/26/11, 05:18 PM

Don't give a flip about what unions say about things.

Sanza · #**142** 10/26/11, 08:42 PM

And don't believe those eastern newspapers which BTW plowjockey, Toronto is 1652 miles from Fort McMurray (as the crow flies) so that's not exactly our local newspaper. Maybe try an Albertan newspaper next time.

Another thing is we actually have no love affair with Ontario and Quebec - A little history lesson here....Back 30 -40 years ago when the east was snivelling about lack of our petroleum products that they wanted for nothing, we had a slogan "Let those eastern Ba***rds freeze in the dark" which was supported by all westerners. There still are no pipelines to central and eastern Canada.

But if you did read the article then I hope you read the comments that followed with all the whining from the east and then the one that set them right...

"You are a little bit confused Mike Smart. First of all, Alberta owns the oil - not Canada. Alberta does not force Ontario or Quebec to ship electricity west. Instead, each province can sell its natural resources on the open market. That is what is happening here.

If you want Alberta`s oil, then outbid the American refineries, then find financing to build a pipeline that heads east. We will be happy to sell it to you. "

plowjockey · #**143** 10/26/11, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arabian knight

Don't give a flip about what unions say about things.

The Unions response, was only an example and in reality, Unions opposition is the least of the worries, for the dreamers (and schemers) who think this pipeleine, will ever become reality.

Apparently, even our own Texans are not impressed with the situation, when supposedly they are the ones, who may beneift the most.

The Keystone is a 'pipedream", nothing more.

Quote:

In East Texas, where pipelines are more a fact of life than a sight for sore eyes, defenders of property rights are teaming up with environmentalists to oppose TransCanada Corporation’s Keystone XL tar sands pipeline

.

Quote:

Perhaps underestimating Texans’ fierce ethic of individual property rights, TransCanada has taken a heavy-handed approach to gathering local support for this project, according to coverage in the Los Angeles Times. In growing numbers, East Texans are becoming unnerved by a foreign company showing up on their properties unannounced, dictating terms and sending out land agents with complicated easement agreements ready for the landowner to sign. (TransCanada isn’t quite so kind in South Dakota, where the company has filed more than a dozen lawsuits against property owners in an effort to condemn land under “eminent domain.”)

http://www.desmogblog.com/texans-fig...ont-mess-texas

Ed Norman · #**144** 10/26/11, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sanza

Another thing is we actually have no love affair with Ontario and Quebec - A little history lesson here....Back 30 -40 years ago when the east was snivelling about lack of our petroleum products that they wanted for nothing, we had a slogan "Let those eastern Ba***rds freeze in the dark" which was supported by all westerners. There still are no pipelines to central and eastern Canada.

You gotta do it right

Laissez ces bâ***ds orientales geler dans l'obscurité

Hmm, it appears my translator went a little too far east. And it's a shame that I am unable to use my three years of French One I took in high school.

plowjockey · #**145** 10/26/11, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sanza

And don't believe those eastern newspapers which BTW plowjockey, Toronto is 1652 miles from Fort McMurray (as the crow flies) so that's not exactly our local newspaper. Maybe try an Albertan newspaper next time.

I must live in the "twilight zone".

This may not be a local news source, but are these not, your next-door neighbors, in your local community?

Quote:

Labour group argues expanding AB pipeline to US will cost province in the long run

Quote:

The Alberta Federation of Labour, which represents 145,000 workers, is adding its voice to the growing list of opponents of a proposed pipeline project that would ship raw bitumen from Alberta's oilsands to Texas refineries.

Quote:

Now economic groups are also fighting to stop the construction of the project, arguing the pipeline would allow the US to take Alberta's crude oil and reap the rewards for refining it. Gil McGowan, the president of the Alberta Federation of Labour, believes it would be more responsible for the province to develop its refining capabilities, instead of just shipping raw bitumen to be refined south of the border.

Quote:

"As an Albertan, I'm profoundly worried," said McGowan in Ottawa on Thursday. "Once the construction is complete, all we are going to be left with is a pipeline sucking up our resources south of the border, and no jobs for future generations.

Quote:

He argues approving Keystone XL would create hundreds of thousands of jobs in the U.S., but would only add about a dozen permanent jobs in Alberta.

http://www.globalnews.ca/alberta+lab...710/story.html

plowjockey · #**146** 10/26/11, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sanza

Another thing is we actually have no love affair with Ontario and Quebec - A little history lesson here....Back 30 -40 years ago when the east was snivelling about lack of our petroleum products that they wanted for nothing, we had a slogan "Let those eastern Ba***rds freeze in the dark" which was supported by all westerners. There still are no pipelines to central and eastern Canada.

This just keep getting more interesting by the minute.

Canada and the U.S. are more alike, than anyone want to admit.

Quote:

“Why on Earth are they (Harper and his ministers) going south of the border to promote the construction of a pipeline that will create tens of thousands of jobs south of the border while creating almost no new jobs here in Canada.”

Some workers in Quebec, meanwhile, want the pipeline built across Canada, so the raw product can be refined by workers in that province instead.

“This is stupid, that while we are pumping that stuff to the States, we are depending on importation on the eastern side of the country,” Gaetan Menard, CEP secretary-treasurer, said.

“Right now you have tonnes of workers from Quebec who are working in the tarsands, so they would be more than happy to work in Montreal instead

This pipeline, is anything, but a "done deal".

GoldenCityMuse · #**147** 10/27/11, 11:26 AM

Could I please remind all posters it is EMINENT Domain, not Imminent.

Completely different meanings.

texican · #**148** 10/27/11, 09:04 PM

I didn't know they were going all the way to Port Arthur... sweet! I wish they'd come across my place, especially if they'd go the 'long way'... I could retire the next day. Eminent domain, so what... that means market prices... which hereabouts is over 500/rod, which would be ~200K. It could join the other four pipelines here already. If they 'spill', they pay triple damages. If my price differs from their price, a judge appointed arbitrator comes in... and it's always at least what the market is.

I know money is the be all end all... and I know a lot of locals don't like pipelines on their place.... until the landman gives them a huge check for damages.

I'd prefer my quarter section to be smack dab in the middle of a federally protected wilderness area, but it's not, and had pipelines on it, before I was even born.

ErinP · #**149** 10/27/11, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldenCityMuse

Could I please remind all posters it is EMINENT Domain, not Imminent.

Completely different meanings.

Not usually...

Sanza · #**150** 10/28/11, 02:03 AM

My apologies plowjockey. Somehow I missed this.

I can't remember reading anything like this in the Edmonton Journal, but I did find it now in a Calgary paper. (LOL I could still care less about the poor quebeckers that still want us to pipe our oil to them)

I agree with the union that we should keep our oil and the jobs here of course, and if this whole pipeline is scrapped it will be a win/win situation for us here because they will be forced to build the refineries up here.

BUT, you know how it is with big business, and your government knows they need our crude oil to survive, never mind all the jobs the pipeline will create especially with your economy crisis. So I can see our governments going ahead and building it anyway in spite of all the oppositions from both sides.

And yes, the whole thing is in my back yard so to speak. The town I live by is being turned into a bedroom community for the oilsands workers (Only 2 1/2 hours drive to Fort Mac with not much available closer), and it's only 1 hour from the refineries in the opposite direction. A lot of the local men -even some farmers do work in one or the other place. Actually my own son was the environmental field manager with Ledcor for the 1st Keystone pipeline.

Quote:

Originally Posted by plowjockey

I must live in the "twilight zone".

This may not be a local news source, but are these not, your next-door neighbors, in your local community?
http://www.globalnews.ca/alberta+lab...710/story.html

Paumon · #**151** 10/28/11, 03:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sanza

I agree with the union that we should keep our oil and the jobs here of course, and if this whole pipeline is scrapped it will be a win/win situation for us here because they will be forced to build the refineries up here.

You know, I wish they could just go ahead and do that anyway. Get it out of the ground so that ground could be cleaned up and put to better agricultural and environmental use. Then stockpile the oil in the Arctic and eke it out slowly for the next 200 or 300 years for practical things only. I guess that wouldn't work very well though because I think refined oil has a finite "shelf life", doesn't it?

plowjockey · #**152** 10/28/11, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sanza

My apologies plowjockey. Somehow I missed this.

I can't remember reading anything like this in the Edmonton Journal, but I did find it now in a Calgary paper. (LOL I could still care less about the poor quebeckers that still want us to pipe our oil to them)

I agree with the union that we should keep our oil and the jobs here of course, and if this whole pipeline is scrapped it will be a win/win situation for us here because they will be forced to build the refineries up here.

BUT, you know how it is with big business, and your government knows they need our crude oil to survive, never mind all the jobs the pipeline will create especially with your economy crisis. So I can see our governments going ahead and building it anyway in spite of all the oppositions from both sides.

And yes, the whole thing is in my back yard so to speak. The town I live by is being turned into a bedroom community for the oilsands workers (Only 2 1/2 hours drive to Fort Mac with not much available closer), and it's only 1 hour from the refineries in the opposite direction. A lot of the local men -even some farmers do work in one or the other place. Actually my own son was the environmental field manager with Ledcor for the 1st Keystone pipeline.

No need to apologize to me.

Your facts were based oun your local news, which understandly, is likely quite positive towards local oil sands projects.

I have witnessed too many of these projects, (at least in the U.S.) which may make sense, from economic, or even strategic standpoint, as a benefit to the country and it's people, go down in a ball of flames, when the oppostion powers, have their way.

The oppositions is usually powerful environmental groups (who want nothing to do with petroleum-based projects) Tribal groups and competing businesses, who use Govt influence, to control the market, but this time, there is much more local and regional opposition, on both sides of the border.

IMO, this pipeline proposal may also open up whole "can of worms", for the oils sands themselves.

The "oil sands" have been tucked away nicely (and mostly quitely) producing for many years, with little fanfare.

Now they are on the front page every day and the term "dirty oil", is starting to sink in, with environmentalists, previously preoccupied with other things before, will be taking a much closer look. Unfortunately, I fear that "dirty oil", may replace "foreign oil" as the protester's and plaintiff's rallying cry, causing yet more problems, for eveybody who benefits.

Sanza · #**153** 10/29/11, 02:28 AM

Yeah but when have you ever seen our governments use common sense?

fordy · #**154** 10/29/11, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plowjockey

No need to apologize to me.

Your facts were based oun your local news, which understandly, is likely quite positive towards local oil sands projects.

I have witnessed too many of these projects, (at least in the U.S.) which may make sense, from economic, or even strategic standpoint, as a benefit to the country and it's people, go down in a ball of flames, when the oppostion powers, have their way.

The oppositions is usually powerful environmental groups (who want nothing to do with petroleum-based projects) Tribal groups and competing businesses, who use Govt influence, to control the market, but this time, there is much more local and regional opposition, on both sides of the border.

IMO, this pipeline proposal may also open up whole "can of worms", for the oils sands themselves.

The "oil sands" have been tucked away nicely (and mostly quitely) producing for many years, with little fanfare.

Now they are on the front page every day and the term "dirty oil", is starting to sink in, with environmentalists, previously preoccupied with other things before, will be taking a much closer look. Unfortunately, I fear that "dirty oil", may replace "foreign oil" as the protester's and plaintiff's rallying cry, causing yet more problems, for eveybody who benefits.

.................Oil sands development in the lower 48 is limited by , lack of sufficient water supply which would have to be diverted from both 'people' use as well as Ag use for crops ! Canada has abundant water too facilitate a slurry pipeline . Plus , the environmental movement would\will put forth a very strong challenge too it's development . Cost of development and production is also a factor . , fordy

ponyboy123 · #**155** 10/29/11, 01:15 PM

USA purchases all kinds of products from Canada. We are your general store. Why all of the sudden are you concerned about buying oil? Look at who you are buying it from now? Canada is already the largest improter of oil into the US. This is just a more efficient way of shipping it.........although this project does not come with out risks, but all of you that have not totally given up their use of oil(riding a bike and heating and cooking with wood, rejecting plastic packaging, etc, etc) you are already supporting this pipeline.......

texican · #**156** 10/29/11, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fordy

...................I understand the necessity of pipelines , but , it seems too me that the companies wanting too build IT have been given tacit approval by Obama for both it's tenative construction and it's route ! Were this NOT the case , why would the ROW agents be active when the State dept. hasn't formerly approved it's construction? Hillary has already mimed her acceptance and the fed agency responsible for pipeline safety has approved a waiver for Thinner pipe which speaks loudly too the effectiveness of Paid lobbyists and their legal bribes too politicans for their support . , fordy

fordy, I totally understand the confusion and feeling of betrayal. Most conservationists exist under the concept that the most liberal candidate is going to be the most pro environmentalist. Obama was going to cool the planet and lower the oceans, blah blah blah... O is not an environmentalist, the only environment he ever gets close to is a basketball court or (since becoming president, apparently) a golf course... both of which are anything but green. Ironically, most conservationists loathed the thought of the old gray haired republican McCain getting into office. McCain Was/Is an environmentalist... actually has (be still my beating heart) actually camped out... (not in a four star hotel, like the O's family cherish) under the open skies... and has hiked in the wilderness. McCain, as far as I know, hasn't publicly stated his position on the Keystone... but I daresay he has a better concept of what is actually going on, and what the damages might be to a sensitive environment.

But o well, the American Conservationists got what they wanted, and now they're getting dissed, by someone who could care less if everything really green (and not that faux green he and his urbanistas fawn over) were paved over, as long as it supported his welfare (help the po folks) agenda.

I wouldn't bet against the Obama admin. not granting the permits... He's in a no win situation... Satisfy America's need for oil, satisfy regular American's (who know their lives depend on it) and anger the left sided American's (who think they can live without it)..... or satisfy the left sided American's by disapproving the permits, and make them happy, or anger everyone else. My take is he'll satisfy the red meat crowd... the tofu'istas will vote for him "ir"regardless of what he does... they're mentally incapable of voting any other way.

Sanza · #**157** 10/30/11, 02:44 PM

Slipping further away from the op about the land agents but this is an example of wages associated with the oil sands. Plowjockey this goes back to your post about the union workers crying about the keystone only creating a dozen jobs up here - there's no shortage of jobs up here in the oil patch.

Alberta Heavy Duty Mechanic Job Suncor Energy

Heavy mobile mining equipment mechanic – Heavy Equipment Technician

Alberta Heavy Duty Mechanic Job Suncor Energy

Terms of Employment: Permanent, Full Time, Shift, Overtime, Weekend, Day, Night, Evening

Salary: $51.11 Hourly for 40 hours per week, Bonus, Other Benefits, As per collective agreement, Medical Benefits, Dental Benefits, Disability Benefits, Life Insurance Benefits, Group Insurance Benefits, Pension Plan Benefits, Vision Care Benefits

Anticipated Start Date: As soon as possible

Location: Fort McMurray, Alberta (40 vacancies )

Skill Requirements:

Education: Completion of high school

Credentials (certificates, licences, memberships, courses, etc.): Heavy Duty Equipment Mechanic Trade Certification, Heavy-Duty Equipment Technician Red Seal Endorsement, Driver’s License (Class 3 or D)

naturelover · #**158** 10/30/11, 03:36 PM

$51.11 Hourly for 40 hours per week, Bonus, Other Benefits, As per collective agreement, Medical Benefits, Dental Benefits, Disability Benefits, Life Insurance Benefits, Group Insurance Benefits, Pension Plan Benefits, Vision Care Benefits.

That's pretty decent benefits, eh? I guess you must be seeing an influx of qualified workers from the maritimes provinces coming up there then. I wonder if they're getting any applications from Australians or Russians?

.

Sanza · #**159** 10/31/11, 12:57 AM

Fort Mac has always been a Newfie and Cape Bretoner settlement

Some of them make their money and go back home, others moved here permanently.
Great benefits, and $5 -10 grand is normal wages. That's why it's hard to find local electricians and plumbers because they're making the big bucks up there or at the refineries.

I think almost every family here has someone working in the oil patch somewhere and it's very seldom to hear of any man looking for work for long. I just used the mechanic jobs as an example because of a friend getting one of those positions.