Thursday, February 6, 2020

TMX Update: Lies and/or Truth in the Cdn House of Parliament

Climate Activist Greta Thunberg and 
Greta recently "Tweeted" that Trudeau was a
 hypocrite regarding the environment

MSM is playing Question Period in the House of Commons this morning live, as is CTV.  Opposition leader Andrew Scheer just stood up and asked Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau whether he is going to allow the First Nations who live on the coast of the Burrard Inlet to exercise their UNDRIP [United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples] rights to veto the TMX project.  Trudeau denied that he was going to do so and said that the project was already underway and that the majority of First Nations were in support of the project.

It is hard to separate the onion skin layers of lies in Trudeau's response.  First of all, the project may be going ahead in Alberta but many of the prospective BC construction terminals/hubs in the project have not even received BC government construction permits to go ahead.  Receiving approval involves answering serious questions about safety and environmental impact. These are not rubber stamp questions.

More importantly, Trudeau, Alberta Premier Jason Kenney and all the so-called "journalists" in the MZM are saying that most of the First Nations are in support of the project.  This is a lie.  Many First Nations communities in Alberta and interior BC may have been bribed to support the project.  These communities are dirt poor...have been starved for government support and are easily bribed.

The First Nations Communities who are actually impacted from future oil tanker gridlock on Burrard Inlet--and thus the total destruction of a way of life, not only for First Nations, but for the entire Vancouver lower mainland regarding our environment, economy [tourism and fishery] and culture are uniformly opposed to the are the Cities of Victoria, Vancouver and Burnaby which have all passed formal resolutions opposing the project. The Assembly of British Columbia First Nations Chiefs are also opposed to the project and appeared with the local First Nations at their press conference yesterday.  Politicians and their bought and paid-for media are lying when they pretend that First Nations [who are impacted] are in support of the project.

So, we have to endure this Kabuki Dance process of pretence:  a) that impacted First Nations are supportive and; b) that nobody knows that impacted First Nations, supported by the Province of British Columbia, will use the UNDRIP veto to stop this deadly assault on British Columbia.  Of course we'll use it.  That's why the BC Legislature PASSED THE UNDRIP resolution before Christmas in the first place.

If you were being mugged on the street at night, and had some kind of lethal weapon on your person, would you not use it in your own self defence?


NOTE:  I received a comment on my previous post from reader AlberteD that the font is too small on the quoted sections. I am going to enlarge the relevant font for the benefit of those who, like myself, struggle with small font.  Thanks for letting me know.


greencrow said...

Today MRocknest left a comment on an old post of mine

That's related to this current discussion. Let it be known, if it is not already, that I am not and never have been supportive of wind turbines...specifically because of the danger they pose to my alter egos...birds.

My favourite alternative forms of energy which...I know, I know...ALSO have their drawbacks are: solar power and electricity.



wallflower said...

Originally posted on Aletho News but this critical photo goes with the story: 'Green' Debacle Tens of Thousands of Abandoned Wind Turbines Now Litter American Landscape

Penny said...

Hi Greencrow:

I'm going to be doing a report on the huge and massive problems with 'green' electricity. Green electricity does generally include nuclear energy, touted by the phony greens,not green in my opinion. However the information I have is not about nuclear generated electricity.

There is not one form of energy without issue. All energy produced comes with a cost. Including the energy we generate to run our bodies based on the energy we consume from other plants and animals. Calorie is an energy measure.

What we need is multiple sources of energy based, more sensibly, on geography.
Example- while solar power is great in Arizona or California- it's not so great in Canada- Natural gas is better, imo, for Canada. It's reliable, clean and abundant.

But that does not mean small scale wind, solar and even bio fuels cannot play a role in providing us our energy needs for heat, transportation etc., And yes, even oil has it's place (in my opinion)

I hope that you will read it and share some thoughts...

Penny said...

@ wallflower... it's cheaper to abandon the turbines- for obvious reasons.
they are often (not always) on private land so they are left to the land owner to deal with.. or the state/province

Much like orphaned oil wells..

" Texas, the state with the highest wind-energy generation capacity,10 imposes no requirement that wind farms be decommissioned at all.11 Other producing states simply have blanket requirements imposing a duty on wind-farm owners to close their facilities but do not require any sort of financial guarantee of performance.12This regulatory framework creates a system highly dependent on promises. "

"Estimates put the tear-down cost of a single modern wind turbine, which can rise from 250 to 500 feet above the ground, at $200,000... Which means landowners and counties in Texas could be on the hook for tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars if officials determine non-functional wind turbines need to be removed. Or if that proves to be too costly, as seems likely, some areas of the state could become post-apocalyptic wastelands steepled with teetering and fallen wind turbines, locked in a rigor mortis of obsolescence.

Companies will of course have the option of upgrading those aging wind turbines with new models, a resurrection of sorts. Yet the financial wherewithal to do so may depend on the continuation of federal wind subsidies, which is by no means assured. Wind farm owners say the recycling value of turbines is significant and recovering valuable material like copper and steel will cover most of the cost of decommissioning... Yet extracting valuable materials from the turbines is not as easy as it sounds... "The blades are composite, those are not recyclable, those can't be sold," said Lisa Linowes, executive director of WindAction Group, a nonprofit which studies landowner rights and the impact of the wind energy industry. "The landfills are going to be filled with blades in a matter of no time...."

Unlike Duke Energy, some of the smaller wind farm companies operating in Texas, with fewer financial resources, may be tempted to just walk away when aging turbines no longer spin a profit. Linowes believes such moves may begin occurring even before wind turbines outlive their useful life as manufacturing warranties on the big turbines expire. "At what point does the cost of maintenance tip over to the point it's not worth maintaining a turbine?" she said. "We're in something of an unknown or uncertain territory... It could be a very ugly situation in the next five years when we see turbines need work, and are no longer under warranty and not generating enough electricity to keep running them."

M. Rocknest said...

@ Greencrow, Wallflower and Penny

I appreciate your comments re: wind turbines. Gotta be honest, for me it's about the birds, the bats and the blight on the landscape. A few here and there are okay but when I see acres and acres of beautiful southern Alberta scenery covered with them, it kinda makes my heart ache.

As for this TMX update, I'm so pleased to hear there is such a thing as an UNDRIP veto. Several years ago I heard of the proposal to put oil tankers on Burrard Inlet and went to Google maps to check out this waterway. I couldn't believe they would even consider such a thing.

As an aside, when I was doing the plans for our mostly DIY home I did consider solar but at this latitude and with the shadows of mountains to contend with I decided it wasn't viable so I opted for the quilt effect. Our house has 1 foot thick, well-insulated, walls and a soapstone wood-burning fireplace which needs only a 2 hour burn to provide 22 hours of heat. I wanted to make sure a prolonged cutoff of electricity and/or natural gas would be manageable.