Whoa! I should give up my column space to Mayor Gregor Robertson more often.

His self-admitted “cheeky” response to my challenge last week to provide some alternatives to society’s reliance on oil riled up a tanker full of folks.

Good thing my email inbox is made of sturdy double-hull construction and Twitter can handle such sudden swells threatening to capsize the mighty social media vessel.

Public engagement, overboard!

As regular readers will know, I gave up this coveted space last week to His Worship. My offer was triggered by a recent op-ed he wrote in the Vancouver Sun in which he laid out his opposition to Kinder Morgan’s plan to increase the amount of crude flowing down the tube from Alberta to its terminal in Burnaby.

It was a predictable rant coming from a leader who wants to have “the greenest city in the world” by 2020. After I read the piece, I was left asking why Robertson didn’t provide any realistic alternatives to oil in this car-crazy city.

Hence, the challenge.

Normally, I would just call him up and ask him about this. But I wanted to try something different and see what the reaction would be from readers.

And, for the record, I’ve never taken sides in this debate. Just asking questions, people. Nor did I state anywhere I wanted to be mayor for a day, although I’d gladly take the $140K salary.

One more thing: Judging by Robertson’s cheeky tone, which seemed out of character for the normally diplomatic politician, I have a sneaky suspicion he had some help writing his response.

Here are some excerpts from readers’ letters:

“I think the office of the mayor got you fare [sic] and square on this one. And, no, you don’t get to be mayor for a day.”—Wong Wing-Siu.

“You gotta admit, Mike, Vancouver’s mayor makes a good case. Aside from the odd pilot boat captain and a handful of port jobs, there really is no upside for Vancouver when you compare it to the risk borne by everyone between Vancouver and Port Renfrew at the exit of the Strait of Juan de Fuca.”—Neil Borecky.

“Robertson keeps talking about Vancouver taking all these risks and getting no benefits from the oil shipments. Firstly, there are no risks—Burrard Inlet is an ice-free, protected harbour, there is no chance of a mishap. Second, Canada benefits and we are Canadian.”—RJ McCance.

“Hook, line, sinker. Brilliant. Thank you.”—Amy Forest.

“Our mayor’s column has the same tone as a televangelist: Believe in me and you’ll be saved. He offered no details and no substance.”—Alan Thurgood.

“It would be a better use of time if the mayor repositioned his opposition. Wouldn’t an alternative plan like pushing for new refineries help us rally as a team instead of being divided [again] on such an important issue?”—Rebecca Kovacs.

“I’m tired of celebrities, sports figures, millionaires and billionaires telling us it’s OK to pay $10 a litre [for gas] and to drive an electric vehicle. They don’t speak for the masses. They can afford whatever expensive alternatives come on the market while the rest of us can ‘take a hike,’ in more ways than one.”—Lambert Low.

Check out our letters page for more opinion from readers. Thank you everybody who took the time to write, tweet and leave me phone messages.

Note: Those readers interested in reading about the people who ensure tankers get in and out of local waters without running aground are featured in a story I wrote in July 2010. I also look at tanker mishaps and discipline meted out to the marine pilots. Go to our website, search “Averting disaster” or if reading online, check the More on this Story link.

mhowell@vancourier.com

Twitter: @Howellings