EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Tue Oct 17, 2017 8:22 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 6:24 pm 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 4:31 pm
Posts: 44
Kinder Morgan practices ‘worst case’ spill response at Burnaby terminal[/size]

National Energy Board evaluators were keeping a watchful eye over Kinder Morgan’s Westridge Marine Terminal, where crews trained for a potential oil spill on the Trans Mountain pipeline.

More than 20 agencies and organizations were part of a full-scale oil spill response exercise – the biggest of its kind – at Kinder Morgan’s Westridge Marine Terminal in Burnaby Thursday.
The terminal will serve as the end-point for the proposed $5-billion Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, so National Energy Board (NEB) evaluators watched with keen interest to see how crews handled what Kinder Morgan called “a credible worst case scenario” involving 160 cubic metres of oil leaking from a failed loading arm.
Multiple booms were deployed around the port while crews on land and in the water hustled to clean up the imaginary spill.
Kinder Morgan containment crews were assisted by eight of the 12 vessels the industry-funded Western Canada Marine Response Corporation stations in the Burrard Inlet, as well as responders from NEB, Transport Canada, the coast guard, and provincial and municipal governments.
“We’re looking to make sure that the company can manage the incident as if it were really happening,” said NEB spokesperson Darin Barter. “That’s why it’s really important to see that they have the full deployment here. We want to see that every eventuality is taken into account, that all the technical and environmental aspects of this exercise are accounted for and dealt with.”
While Kinder Morgan conducts about 20 spill exercises a year along its existing Trans Mountain pipeline from Edmonton, Alta., this is the largest.
Given the intense scrutiny surrounding the company’s planned expansion – which would increase the pipeline’s capacity to 890,000 barrels per day from 300,000 and boost tanker traffic from 32 per year to 408 – Barter said the NEB plans to release its review of the exercise publicly by Dec. 29.
He said the national regulator is able to take post-exercise enforcement action if observers spot serious flaws during the drill.
“We want to make sure the company responds quickly, appropriately and fully,” Barter said. “If we don’t have confidence a company will capably manage this then we have the ability, the legislated ability, to shut it down and take over.”
The scope of “worst case scenario” at Westridge Marine Terminal has been a topic of debate at the NEB’s hearings into the proposed expansion.
The City of Vancouver estimates a worst case spill would expose a million people to toxic fumes, kill 100,000 sea- and shorebirds and cause $1.2 billion in economic losses, much higher than Kinder Morgan’s own modeling.
“For us, we’re exercising for a credible scenario under our emergency plans,” said Michael Davies, senior director of marine development at Trans Mountain. “Not to say a larger spill [more than 160 cubic metres] couldn’t happen, but a larger spill starts to become so unlikely as to become impractical for regular practice.”
Intervenors at the NEB hearings have criticized Kinder Morgan for not fully releasing its emergency response plan to the public.
Davies said parts of the plan had to be redacted to protect people’s privacy and because other sections contain “details about our facilities that we wouldn’t normally publish” (such as valve locations and detailed pictures of parts along the pipeline system).
However, he claims all public agencies involved in Thursday’s drill have full access to the plan and believes Kinder Morgan has fulfilled its obligation to the NEB.
“In my view, if you look at those plans [with redactions] you can get a very good sense of how our programme works and how our response plans work,” said Davies. “The bulk of it is there.”
The NEB’s hearings into the proposed pipeline project are set to resume in December and it is expected to make a recommendation to cabinet in May.
If approved, Davies said construction on the Trans Mountain expansion could started in late 2016.

(October 30, 2015, Metro News)

_________________________________________________


If Metro was to be refreshingly honest regarding its heavily lopsided coverage, they’d openly admit to running press releases from huge-oil-interest corporate entities like Kinder Morgan (note the most-well-read-weekend-edition full-page-three story sampled above)—as well as those from some other big-bucks and/or political interests—essentially as they are received, notwithstanding some pigeonholing of text or a clarification here or there. Metro needs to acknowledge that they’ve created or are in the process of creating an alternate journalistic practice that does not reflect true democratic principles and ethics—a journalistic standard of zero opposition comment or rebuttal when it comes to big oil and mineral extraction corporate interests. Running such ‘news stories’ with no input from any informative opposing viewpoints is not only frustrating for the consumer, but also potentially scary; after all, it’s the very nature of a PR release to have absent from it the published information that’s against the interests of its government or corporate writers and distributers? Opposing views and thus political pressure are one of the most important pillar posts of a democracy. To generally summarize profound linguist professor and media critic Noam Chomsky: the news-media are to a democracy what the baton is to a tyranny. Therefore, it’s just as important to publicly identify primary news-media ownership which has significant vested interests in the election and re-election of specific political parties and their campaigning-for-office representatives.
Furthermore, there no longer are the till-now-typical means for a reader to communicate with Canada’s freebee metro-daily newspapers. For one, Metro applies a complete look-only-but-don’t-touch policy: all of its e-mail addresses have been removed from its newspaper and website. Oh, pardon me; they actually do supply one email address—Metro’s advertising agent department.
But perhaps most bothersome is Metro’s failed attempt at a façade of true liberalism; the contradiction of genuine liberalism—note, not libertarianism—on its part being through Metro’s run-big-corporate-media-releases-as-are practice.
Where Metro does try to portray itself as ‘liberal media’ is with its uncompromising Good Ol’ Girls Club readership content. Most notable is that its entire opinion page, ‘Views’, is solely allocated to female writers, unless there are no such written pieces readily available. But to be fair, Metro does employ fulltime a homosexual male entertainment writer/editor—albeit one who’s seemingly obsessed with running pics of Justin Bieber’s bare butt from various social media outlets.
But then again, one may say that the said openly-gay editor makes up for the bare-Bieber-butt zero-blackout with a strangely excessive blackout of Kim Kardashian’s bare behind with the black-block-box extending far beyond both the horizontal and vertical blatant censorship: i.e. the blockage extends far beyond the outermost edges of her butt cheeks, and vertically from her mid-back down to her lower thighs. One can safely presume that if he’s not at all interested in Kim’s pre-pregnancy pleasant curvature, neither will her almost exclusively straight female readership. All of which may bring one back to the Good Ol’ Girls Club readership content …

Frank Sterle Jr


Last edited by FrankGSterleJr on Mon Dec 28, 2015 5:55 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 5:30 pm 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 4:31 pm
Posts: 44
A post from the SumOfUs team

Canadians banded together like never before and ditched Stephen Harper despite one of the dirtiest, most divisive campaigns in recent memory. But no thanks to Canada's corporate media. 70% of Canadians voted to turf Harper. But every one of Postmedia's more than 180 daily newspapers endorsed him.
It was shocking. Even the National Post's comment editor (and lifelong Conservative) Andrew Coyne resigned in disgust when the paper wouldn't let him publish his own dissenting endorsement. But really, should we have been surprised that the media of Big Oil and Big Business endorsed Harper despite his disgraceful record?
We got the change we wanted because concerned Canadians like us talked to our neighbours, knocked on doors and volunteered. But that's supposed to be our media's job. Instead, Postmedia ran full-page, Conservative-funded "advertorials" on every front page of its papers the day before the election.
It's time we got the media we deserve. Tell the corporate owners of Postmedia to take their hands off the editorial process.
When we say that Postmedia is the media of Big Oil, we're not exaggerating. Two years ago it was leaked that Postmedia made an agreement with the Canadian Association for Petroleum Producers (CAPP) to "bring energy to the forefront of our national conversation." And last year another leak revealed a partnership between the Vancouver Province and an LNG extraction corporation.
We shouldn't blame the journalists and columnists who work and write for these papers -- often they are just as frustrated as we are with the status quo. In fact, in last year's Ontario election the editor for The Globe and Mail ordered his editors to scrap their endorsement for Kathleen Wynne and endorse the conservative candidate Tim Hudak instead. Likewise, Postmedia told its Alberta papers to endorse Conservative Premier Jim Prentice despite allegations of incompetence, corruption and arrogance.
I don't want to live in a Canada where the opinions of a few media moguls are more important than those of the vast majority of Canadians.
Enough is enough. Give us our media back.
 
**********
More information:
Andrew Coyne exits editor role at National Post over endorsement, The Globe and Mail, Oct 19, 2015
Postmedia's oily Harper endorsement, National Observer, Oct 16, 2015
On the strange phenomenon of editorial political endorsements, rabble.ca, Oct 17, 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 2:41 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:59 am
Posts: 2590
Location: Central Colorado
"Doctors in Los Angeles are urging people exposed to a gas leak from a broken natural gas well, to EVACUATE THE AREA to stop breathing toxic fumes.

According to health professionals, hundreds of citizens are suffering severe effects from breathing methane and volatile chemical carbons in gases being released from underground from a cracked natural gas well on the Porter Ranch in the Aliso CCanyon outside of Los Angeles. Symptoms range from nose bleeds, to swollen throats, to difficulty breathing, to respiratory distress, then failure, then cardiac arrest. Doctors are now publicly telling citizens "get out."

Officials confirm this is the largest natural gas leak ever recorded and that it is jeopardizing health and causing evacuations for thousands of Southern California residents… Methane is estimated to be leaking out of the Aliso Canyon site at a rate of about 62 million standard cubic feet, per day… it’s potentially devastating on a planetary scale… "
https://www.superstation95.com/index.php/world/734

_________________
"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.
“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle
“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 29, 2016 2:36 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 11:42 am
Posts: 122
Please ask PM Trudeau to reconsider his approval of the Kinder Morgan expansion proposal. --

http://owl.li/EaDc306El5C

_________________






"WE ALL LIVE DOWNSTREAM" -- bumper sticker slogan


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2017 10:13 am 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 11:42 am
Posts: 122
I think big oil and other giant corporations are allowed by government to wield too much power. This makes it possible for these large companies to have a negative effect on the press. I don't think the press is all that they can have a lot of influence over, however.

At present, municipal regions all along the Ottawa River seem to be getting a lot of their advice on how to manage this grand waterway from Ottawa Riverkeeper, a non-governmental organization. Why is that? The people of Ontario and Quebec did NOT elect anyone from this organization to care for their river.

Ottawa Riverkeeper is funded, in large part, by Royal Bank of Canada (RBC). I wonder if there are any strings attached to the $$$$ RBC donates to this organization. I mean, it's no secret that RBC has investments at stake in ventures that are tied to the Alberta oil sands. No doubt RBC supports TransCanada Corp's wish to run a section of the Energy East pipeline over many Ottawa River tributaries so that they can transport corrosive, toxic, diluted bitumen to the East coast for export. Could RBC be trying to pressure Ottawa Riverkeeper from standing in their way?

I think the government should be taking advice from scientists who do not get their paycheck from big oil companies. Environment Canada employs scientists. Our taxes pay for them to work there. Therefore, I think our government should rely on Environment Canada for advice and I think that the PM should listen to them too.

.

_________________






"WE ALL LIVE DOWNSTREAM" -- bumper sticker slogan


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2017 10:42 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21214
Location: Southeastern US
SunnysideTroll wrote:
Ottawa Riverkeeper is funded, in large part, by Royal Bank of Canada (RBC). I wonder if there are any strings attached to the $$$$ RBC donates to this organization. I mean, it's no secret that RBC has investments at stake in ventures that are tied to the Alberta oil sands. No doubt RBC supports TransCanada Corp's wish to run a section of the Energy East pipeline over many Ottawa River tributaries so that they can transport corrosive, toxic, diluted bitumen to the East coast for export. Could RBC be trying to pressure Ottawa Riverkeeper from standing in their way?
.


RBC Foundation donated 2.7 million worldwide to protects rivers and waterways through grants to organizations such as that riverkeeper group and others here in the US.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2017 12:08 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 11:42 am
Posts: 122
Wayne Stollings wrote:

RBC Foundation donated 2.7 million worldwide to protects rivers and waterways through grants to organizations such as that riverkeeper group and others here in the US.



Is that all? RBC is Canada's richest bank.
Anyway, $2.7 million is chump change as compared to what they hope to gain from their oil sands investments.
I really don't think that :twisted: , I mean RBC, cares all that much about investing in the rivers and waterways of the world unless they can get something they see as valuable in return.

_________________






"WE ALL LIVE DOWNSTREAM" -- bumper sticker slogan


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2017 12:14 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21214
Location: Southeastern US
SunnysideTroll wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:

RBC Foundation donated 2.7 million worldwide to protects rivers and waterways through grants to organizations such as that riverkeeper group and others here in the US.



Is that all? RBC is Canada's richest bank.
Anyway, $2.7 million is chump change as compared to what they hope to gain from their oil sands investments.
I really don't think that :twisted: , I mean RBC, cares all that much about investing in the rivers and waterways of the world unless they can get something they see as valuable in return.


What do they get in return for all of the other charity grants from the foundation? Looking for a motive does not make that motive probable.

https://www.rbcwealthmanagement.com/us/ ... ents/index

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2017 12:46 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 11:42 am
Posts: 122
[quote="Wayne Stollings]

What do they get in return for all of the other charity grants from the foundation? Looking for a motive does not make that motive probable.

https://www.rbcwealthmanagement.com/us/ ... ents/index[/quote]


It can present these organizations with difficult conflicts of interest and that's already reason enough to disapprove of these so-called charity grants.

When it comes to making decisions, money is a powerful motivator.

_________________






"WE ALL LIVE DOWNSTREAM" -- bumper sticker slogan


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2017 1:43 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21214
Location: Southeastern US
SunnysideTroll wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:

What do they get in return for all of the other charity grants from the foundation? Looking for a motive does not make that motive probable.

https://www.rbcwealthmanagement.com/us/ ... ents/index



It can present these organizations with difficult conflicts of interest and that's already reason enough to disapprove of these so-called charity grants.

When it comes to making decisions, money is a powerful motivator.


Lack of money means the organizations do very little. Foundations are set up to insulate from such conspiracy theory situations and the numbers of volunteers involved makes it more unlikely that any undue influence is created. Some will believe no matter what, however.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2017 1:47 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21214
Location: Southeastern US
RBC (Canada) was only one of six donors to Ottowa Riverkeepers in the maximum sponsorship range, would the other five not generate more influence?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2017 2:46 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 11:42 am
Posts: 122
Wayne Stollings wrote:


Lack of money means the organizations do very little. Foundations are set up to insulate from such conspiracy theory situations and the numbers of volunteers involved makes it more unlikely that any undue influence is created. Some will believe no matter what, however.[/quote]
Wayne Stollings wrote:
RBC (Canada) was only one of six donors to Ottowa Riverkeepers in the maximum sponsorship range, would the other five not generate more influence?

_________________






"WE ALL LIVE DOWNSTREAM" -- bumper sticker slogan


Last edited by SunnysideTroll on Sun Jan 15, 2017 2:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2017 2:47 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 11:42 am
Posts: 122
SunnysideTroll wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:


Lack of money means the organizations do very little. Foundations are set up to insulate from such conspiracy theory situations and the numbers of volunteers involved makes it more unlikely that any undue influence is created. Some will believe no matter what, however.
Wayne Stollings wrote:
RBC (Canada) was only one of six donors to Ottowa Riverkeepers in the maximum sponsorship range, would the other five not generate more influence?




Not everyone sees it your way though, Wayne. Ottawa Riverkeeper lost members when they decided to accept RBC's bribe ...er, I mean charity donation. I know. I was one of those members.

_________________






"WE ALL LIVE DOWNSTREAM" -- bumper sticker slogan


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2017 3:06 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21214
Location: Southeastern US
SunnysideTroll wrote:



Not everyone sees it your way though, Wayne. Ottawa Riverkeeper lost members when they decided to accept RBC's bribe ...er, I mean charity donation. I know. I was one of those members.


Your loss. If more had believed as you there would not have been an acceptance, but then all would have lost those funds.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 6:07 am 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 5:39 am
Posts: 4
Location: Somerset, UK
:shock: :shock: :shock: So interesting to see views from other countries on this matter, I just get ignored when I mention it in the UK as everyone seems to believe the media and worship football (soccer) - seems like when conflict hits an oil rich country the UK media is all over it and cannot report enough on it, stoking the fire but when a serious humanitarian crisis or war breaks out in other countries without an abundance of resources they either get the shortest report or worse no mention what so ever! The UK media is ridiculous most of the time!

_________________
Nothing a good cup of tea won't fix!

Photography Website: https://weddingphotographeryeovil.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group