Thursday, July 19, 2012

The way a 3-year old cleans spilled milk

The Cost of an Oil Spill in Burrard Inlet: $40 Billion...For Starters, Rex Weyler, The Common Sense Canadian, May 2012
"But let’s keep in mind:
  1. "There is no such thing as “cleaning up” an oil spill. Most “clean ups” get about 10 percent of the oil spilled, like the way a 3-year-old “cleans up” milk spilled on the kitchen floor.

  2. "There is no price to cover the soul of this region, the promises of indigenous rights, the food we take from this water, the childhoods on our beaches, the families of creatures and forests of fauna, the identity of this city and region, our heritage, and our dignity. There is no price for that."
While waiting for the birth Thursday of grandchild number six, our second granddaughter, Gwen and I took three other little ones to Cates Park in North Vancouver today. Here's a taste of the human activity we observed in Burrard Inlet across from Burnaby's oil lands. Even a minor spill could end all this for years to come.


Recommend this post

2 comments:

  1. Right Norm. I want my little granddaughter to have a decent life, to look forward to. However, Harper's disgusting greed comes first.

    Harper has been a litany of, lies, deceit, corruption, thefts, dirty politics, dirty tactics. Well over 2/3 of Canadians, believe Harper cheated to win.

    There is no possible way to clean up oil spills. The spills are permanent damage to our eco systems. The huge Athabasca watershed is contaminated. The Kalamazoo River pipe burst, is a true disaster. Enbridge threw sand over the ground spill. They planted grass on top of the sand. When people went out to check, they stuck their shovels in the sand, and struck oil.

    Same in Alberta. Those three spills, were a disaster. Valuable farmland destroyed. Livestock had to be moved. A city's drinking water, contaminated. AND, Premier Redford has the gall, to try and force the dirty tar oil into BC.

    There are contaminated sites all over Canada. Harper hasn't lifted a finger, to even try to do anything about them.

    BC is in a terrible position. The citizens have had to battle both, the Campbell/Clark BC Liberals, as well as Harper and his Conservatives.

    Only the brain dead, would string a pipeline through BC's vast wilderness. And just as ridiculous bringing the massive tar tankers, into one of the most treacherous seas in the world.

    ReplyDelete
  2. G. Barry StewartJuly 20, 2012 at 2:54 PM

    I'm with Harvey O. on the idea that the oil is needed and will have to be moved. I'm suspecting that there wasn't much concern over the building of the oil and gas pipelines that came to the Lower Mainland in the 1950s — though all of us depend on them now. They benefit US, though — not the Albertan/Chinese connection that will be the main beneficiaries of the proposed Enbridge line.

    Railways could move the oil, either down to Vancouver (where shipping should be safer) or to the north coast (where tankers would have tougher waters to ply.)

    Here's what I wrote in the Sun blog today.

    "I've been wondering about rail transport instead — and found this story (at bottom). Rail adds to the cost of transporting light crude, by about $5-10/barrel.

    BUT: heavy oil can be shipped by rail without the thinners that a pipeline requires. $avings there.

    Other advantages of rail:

    • it's flexible and can get to all sorts of destinations where pipelines don't go.

    • When the oil — or the Chinese market — dries up, you just stop sending the trains. If you've built a pipeline, there's all that wasted steel buried in the ground.

    • Spills: certainly trains do come off the rails — but the chances of every car springing a leak would be small. You also know when and where it happened, so you can get at it for clean-up.

    Story: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/rail-makes-big-inroads-in-oil-transport/article4198192/ "

    Read more: http://www.canada.com/business/Christy+Clark+Northern+Gateway+pipeline+very+large+risk+with+very+small+benefit/6966345/story.html#ixzz21CZKTSQR

    ReplyDelete

COMMENTING

This is an archive only of items published before April 22, 2016. These and newer articles are available at:

https://in-sights.ca/

If you read an article at this blogger site, you can comment on it at the new site.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.