Volk theatrics miss point on KM pipeline

Dear editor: From reading Reg Volk’s recent theatrical blurb about his view of the Kinder Morgan pipeline (“What could go wrong with the Kinder Morgan pipeline?” May 8), he attempts to sway reader’s into believing that if the existing pipeline gets twinned, that the Rocky Mountains, Mount Robson, Banff and Jasper national parks — along with a host of many other rivers, lakes, mountains and valleys — are going to not be as majestic or disappear, not so.

Pipelines don’t “blast across the Prairies,” they don’t “crash into British Columbia,” they don’t “rapidly crisscross tributaries,” they don’t “try to find the Fraser River,” nor do pipelines “stagger towards terminals.”

They are professionally engineered and laid. For the record, they are stationary as opposed to rail cars and transport trucks which do derail or crash periodically creating spills.

Volk goes on to claim that “half or more of B.C. residents do not want the pipeline to expand or even to continue,” From what the major B.C. news media sources that I’ve read or watched recently have reported, that’s not the case. I believe that the number reported was 56 per cent of B.C. residents are now in favour of this pipeline project proceeding.

I do agree there are many people, but not a majority, that are opposed to this project.

I also believe that many of those have not thought out the consequences.

How do protesters get to where they picket? Are we to believe that they all walk or cycle everywhere, that they don’t own or use anything with petroleum-based plastics involved in the production of such or that they never travel in a fuel burning car, truck, plane or bus?

Even if they do cycle, they should check out the accessories on their bikes that are produced using plastics.

If you remove all petroleum based products from our current world, our lives go back to where we were at over 100 years ago. Is that what you propose? Don’t be a hypocrite, if you use petroleum based products, how do you justify complaining about the transporting of the petroleum to markets where it gets refined and utilized in manufacturing those products?

B.C. has a huge tourism industry and it was recently reported that 270-plus cruise ships will dock in Vancouver on their way to ply the B.C. waters on their way to Alaska this year.

They all require huge amounts of fuel, burning thousands of gallons per hour. If we’re going to be truly green, maybe we should be banning that industry.

Something could go wrong and one of those ships run aground and leak their fuel into our waters.

How about the amount of fuel required at Vancouver International Airport? Should we go green and shut it down?

Like it or not, we are all dependent on the oil industry, and it touches each of us pretty well every day, even in the schools Volk made a living in.

I never worked in the oil industry, nor do I have any money invested in it, but I am a realist and do know that it creates Canadian jobs and helps to drive our economy.

You can play the “what if” game about anything.

Why get up and go to work, what if you get hit by a bus crossing the street?

Oil is a big part of our lives, and from what has been studied, debated and presented to us, the safest and most economical way of moving it is via pipelines, so I am with the majority and do see the need for this project to move forward.

One last question for Volk: it sounds like he’s travelled our beautiful province extensively. How did he get around?

Was it driving an internal combustion, petroleum burning vehicle, or did he go green and walk? Guy Bissonnette, Lake Country