Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eric who wrote (138100)	7/24/2010 11:44:51 PM
From: Tommy Moore	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206325

Eric Those US waters you speak of contain two terminals that receive Alaskan oil, so I don't see the issue there, besides which the International border runs up the middle of the strait. No need to transit US waters. There are several tankers per week coming out of Burrard inlet(Vancouver). They must transit two narrows under bridges. Then through a very crowded southern Georgia Strait and out through an even more congested Strait of Juan De Fuca. The northern Kitimat route down Douglas channel is much safer in a lot of respects. As a BC resident I have to ask the question" What's in it for me?" We get the risk and Alberta gets the lions share of the reward. That said, I think it only fitting that the American public who hate dirty oil have the opportunity to do without while the Chinese act as ready consumers.