[Newsbot]

Title: Pam Anderson joins movement to ban oil-tanker traffic off B.C.
Category: Environmental
Posted By: Hyack
Date: 2010-12-10 15:37:18
Canadian

[Hyack]

The face that stopped a thousand ships........it looks like she's had a run in with a tanker or two already...

[Thanos]

More likely a tanker-load or two of man-gravy, given Pam's well-documented personal lifestyle. Too bad they may be correct on this. Given the history of tanker activity along the west coast of North America I'd be extremely hesitant too to open any BC ports to them. Best case scenario, we only get an Exxon Valdex once a decade. Worst case scenario, they manage to turn the BC coastline into the Gulf Of Mexico Junior within about five years.

As the malfesance of BP recently demonstrated there isn't a single aspect of the industry that can be trusted to take environmental concerns seriously. This is especially true of the tanker fleets, which are conveniently owned and registered overseas in order to gain as many exemptions from safety and basic maintenance requirements as possible.

[RUEZ]

Thanos Thanos:

As the malfesance of BP recently demonstrated there isn't a single aspect of the industry that can be trusted to take environmental concerns seriously. This is especially true of the tanker fleets, which are conveniently owned and registered overseas in order to gain as many exemptions from safety and basic maintenance requirements as possible.

The thing is, rather than ban them outright our governments have the power to legislate what they must do to navigate our waters. Why don't we force any company that wants to run a ship carrying oil to maintain a fund in an account that would cover any cleanup? We can force them to meet our safety requirements. With the profits that oil brings in I'm sure it wouldn't be a problem.

[Thanos]

The industry always trends towards reducing as much regulation as possible, including environmental. With so many of the head offices in Houston it would be impossible to believe that they wouldn't immediately work (if they aren't already) to start bringing Canadian regulations downwards to the US level. If it costs them money, such as any type of insurance plan that you've recommended, then you can bet dollars to donuts that they're going to go to town on both our provincial and federal politicians to get as many costly regulations watered down to uselessness.

The toxic soup of the Gulf Of Mexico isn't a by-product of random industrial accidents. It was an easily predictable occurance of what assuredly will happen when oil companies have undue amounts of influence and coercion over both the federal and state levels of American government. They will do the exact same thing on the BC coast that they've done in the Gulf and up in Alaska if Canadians allow them to. I work for this industry for a living too. I've dealt with enough Americans*, and Americanized, managers over the last few years to feel confident in saying that they can't be trusted to take any environmental concerns seriously at all. It too many parts of the 'patch it's still the Wild West attitude in full control. You might take the American in this business out of their home in the Wild West, but you'll never take the Wild West out of the American. To me the potential for massive and permanent damage, all thanks to the reckless and careless attitude of far too many of these upper management cretins in the companies, along the BC coastline is simply to great a risk to take at this point in time.

*And for some real fun, just to prove I'm not hopelessly bigotted against the Yanks, just wait until the cut-throats of China (who own an ever-increasing share of oilsands activity) start pressing our gutless, shitty, and paid-off politicians to gut even more regulations on the behalf of China. It'll make dealing with the Texans look as easy as eating pancakes in comparison.

[Regina]

She has a gallon or two of petroleum products under her shirt...........she should STFU.

[Thanos]

LOL. Boobies!

[Gunnair]

RUEZ RUEZ:

Thanos Thanos:

As the malfesance of BP recently demonstrated there isn't a single aspect of the industry that can be trusted to take environmental concerns seriously. This is especially true of the tanker fleets, which are conveniently owned and registered overseas in order to gain as many exemptions from safety and basic maintenance requirements as possible.

The thing is, rather than ban them outright our governments have the power to legislate what they must do to navigate our waters. Why don't we force any company that wants to run a ship carrying oil to maintain a fund in an account that would cover any cleanup? We can force them to meet our safety requirements. With the profits that oil brings in I'm sure it wouldn't be a problem.

Sail up Douglas Channel - it's no piece of cake in good weather and in a minesweeper.

[Regina]

Thanos Thanos:

LOL. Boobies!

[ttruscott]

Hey - a dead clock is right twice day.

She may not have my respect in everything but on this, I like her stand.

And I agree - if it ever happens, it will be because of Chinese pressure based on their investment in the oil sands.

[Yogi]

Who is pam anderson, and why should we be paying attention to anything she has to say? Besides, doesn't she know that it is rude for her to talk with her mouth full!!