Sunday, February 5, 2017

WAC Bennett's 1952 New Deal: Kinder Morgan's TransMountain Pipeline to pay $400,000 per year taxation. Where's the money to the affected municipalities??


In this election year has anyone crunched the number$ that Premier Christy Clark worked out with Kinder Morgan?  Is there a 'taxation' that benefits British Columbians or is her showmanship exactly the same as WAC Bennett's NEW deal with Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain pipeline in 1953?

Was it an election year in 1953?    

Outline of Burnaby History - David Pereira


In Particular, the third paragraph


Trans Mountain Pipeline

Outline of Burnaby History - David Pereira


Page 23 of 24

The figures describing this gigantic undertaking are astronomical in size; the cost is estimated at $82,000,000.  The pipe is of 24-inch diameter, with walls varying from 1/4 -inch to 1/2-inch in thickness.  It is of high pressure electric welded steel,   (Welded Steel Pipe - Steel Tank Institute)(Page 91) and a single length weighs a ton, approximately, for a 40-foot pipe.  In order to keep the cost of truck hauling in the rough sections of the route to as low a level as practible, distribution of the pipe is made to almost every available siding en route.  For instance, on the Canadian National Railway between Edmonton and Kamloops, a distance of 510 miles there are 97 sidings.  About 5,000 railway cars are required to deliver the pipe, each car carrying between 640 and 840 lineal feet.  Before being laid, all rust and scale are removed by steel brushes, a coat of primer is then supplied, followed by a coating of enamel brushed on at temperature of 450 degrees, Fah.  The pipe is then wrapped in fibre-glass, then with asbestos felt.  The delivery of these materials alone will require 21 cars for the fibre-glass, 63 cars for the asbestos felt, and 280 cars for the enamel.  We quote these figures to illustrate the magnitude of  the undertaking, the total work in connection with which requiring 1,500 men during the peak of construction.  A welding school for the training of welders was opened in Vancouver in the spring of this year. The completion of the line is scheduled for two years hence.  From the ....


Taxation has been set by the Provincial Legislature at $38,500 a mile, based on the ultimate throughput of 200,000 barrels per day.  The initial throughput, however, being 75,000 per day, a sliding scale will go into effect until the maximum throughput is reached.  In affected municipalities through with the pipeline passes, the taxation will amount to $38,500 per mile, multiplied by the mill rate of the municipality.  It is estimated that when the line is flowing at full capacity, British Columbia will receive about $400,000 per year, divided between the province and the municipalities.  The work of laying the pipe is progressing steadily, the local site of the receiving plant is about cleared of forest growth, and this undertaking is fairly on the way to completion by the end of 1953.

BC Auditor General may be able to explain Where's our money as British Columbians, and more importantly, the municipalities that ARE affected directly     eg. Burnaby?

The 'divided' number is not mentioned in the history of Burnaby.


Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project

The original Trans Mountain Pipeline was built in 1953 and continues to operate safely today. The expansion is of this existing 1,150-kilometre pipeline between Strathcona County (near Edmonton), Alberta and Burnaby, BC. The expansion, will create a twinned pipeline increasing the nominal capacity of the system from 300,000 barrels per day to 890,000 barrels per day.

 Oh by the way, the reason that its so expensive for Kinder Morgan to repair the pipeline anomalies, we call them SPILLS, is that they have to remove not only the oil, but they have to remove the ASBESTOS wrapped around the pipe.

Page 26

Number of Spills
It should be noted that the pipeline goes south to Washington State so the barrels per day are skewed, conflicted, whereby the oil travels 98% through Alberta and British Columbia and skips from the Fraser Valley to Sumas.

Historical Background Report: Trans Mountain Pipeline, 1947 - 2013       Sean Kheraj
  Page 17 of 86
1953 version of 'taxation' was based on 'barrels per day' forever

2017 is based on 'right-of-way" for 20 years

By jurisdiction, economic and fiscal impacts from Project development, operations and higher netbacks include:
  • $5.7 billion provincially in British Columbia
  • $19.4 billion provincially in Alberta
  • $21.6 billion to the rest of Canada
  • At the municipal level, the approval of the Expansion Project would increase property tax revenue by $530 million to local governments along the pipeline right-of-way over 20 years. Existing and new tax payments to municipalities and regional governments would exceed $1 billion over 20 years.


Anonymous said...

thought you might want to see this:

North Van's Grumps said...

Thanks for the link Anonymous,

It explains why the BC Liberals having been overpaying IPP when it comes to the cost electricity here.

.... because regulators have approved higher rates for years to come so utilities can recoup the expense of building and maintaining the new plants, transmission lines and related equipment, even if their power isn’t needed.

e.a.f. said...

its all about their friends and supporters getting/making money. there isn't much of anything in all of this for municipalities or average citizens of the province. Christy would like to take in a few dollars so she can re distribute them to her friends and supporters via lower taxes, royalty rebates, etc.

nothing in all of this is for the majority of people who live in this province. We know that just by looking at the latest report on the young man who died in care of this government.

Anonymous said...

Is there somewhere, on every 'affected' municipality financial statements, presented to the BC Government, indicating the money Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain Pipeline sent off, and received, since 1953? And where was the money used? General Revenue for sure in the case of the BC Liberals, but what of the affected municipalities?