letters

Letter: We are behind in constructing pipelines

The safest and most economic method of transportation is via pipeline

We are behind in constructing pipelines

Re: Pipelines/sabotage in general.

Pipelines can be used to transport a variety of products. One of which is hydrogen, be it blue or green. Hydrogen could drastically reduce our greenhouse gas output. Which is probably why the environmental movement never advocate the transition to this cleaner fuel source. Why? Because the safest and most economic method of transportation is via pipeline.

Hydrogen requires a dedicated pipeline due to its unique properties, but our present pipeline system can safely take up to 10 per cent hydrogen mixed in with natural gas. Indeed the U.S have thousands of kilometres of pipelines dedicated to the transportation of hydrogen already. We are decades behind.

Given that prominent environmentalists are now advocating acts of sabotage (terrorism) against the infrastructure of our country it may be time to reflect on the UN-quantifiable amount of greenhouse emissions the environmental movement have caused. They have prevented the export of lower emission natural gas, which has led other countries to build coal powered power stations. They have caused emissions by forcing the transportation of oil by both train and road. Prevented Northern Gateway and Energy East, forcing Canada to continue importing 750,000 barrels of oil per day into eastern Canada, (which is transported from Saudi Arabia via tanker) Each Aframax tanker creates in excess of 83,000 tons per year. But then their funding model is based around an anti-pipeline stance. They have been and are being self-serving. Their continued opposition to pipelines is stating in the most categorical manner possible that they have never have been serious about lowering greenhouse gasses. Actions always speak louder than words.

Now their actions are turning to advocating sabotage, which is in violation of the Criminal Code of Canada Section 52.

Sabotage

2 (1) Every person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years or is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction who does a prohibited act for a purpose prejudicial to

(2) In this section, prohibited act means an act or omission that

· (b) Causes property, by whomever it may be owned, to be lost, damaged or destroyed.

Of course this subject underscores the ineptitude of our politicians who have preferred to virtue signal rather than research the subject. But that incompetence has probably been expected.

Ian Kimm

Duncan

Letters