Now Is The Time To Get Behind Pipeline Construction

[Anonymous]

The Grits wouldn't need to run massive deficits if they would stand up for Canada and push much needed pipeline construction. Although we produce all resources in the most socially and environmentally responsible manner, we are the only major producer that doesn't have access to international markets.

Occasionally it takes an incredibly long time for people to get the screamingly obvious. Personal bias can make for wilful blindness. Or opinion leaders may not talk about things that go counter to their preferred narrative.



At some point, the penny will finally drop on the enormous opportunity of building pipelines to move our oil and gas to tidewater and on to Asia and other markets.



Building oil pipelines would generate huge economic activity and create thousands of jobs, even at lower prices. Let me cite just two examples. Northern Gateway is a $6.5 billion pipeline project that would transport 525,000 barrels of oil a day from near Edmonton to Kitimat BC. It would create 3,000 construction jobs and over $30 billion in GDP growth over 30 years. The project underwent an independent scientific environmental review and was approved, with conditions, by the previous federal government.



Another pipeline under regulatory review is the $15.7 billion Energy East, which would transport 1.1 million barrels a day from Alberta and Saskatchewan to refineries in eastern Canada. It would create 14,000 development and construction jobs and $55 billion in economic growth by 2040.



There is talk that government should spend a lot more money on infrastructure. But public projects can mean massive public deficits. In contrast, capital for pipeline construction comes from the private sector. Furthermore, the two projects are estimated to generate over $12 billion in royalties and tax revenue, that could pay for healthcare and social programs Canadians want and need.



However, it is not only a matter of seizing a huge opportunity. We need to protect our economy against losses. Since the US became the largest producer of oil in the world, it needs Canadian oil less. In the meantime, our production continues to grow and there is a significant discount on the price we sell our oil in the US compared to the international price.



One of the challenges I faced in government was how to communicate the impact of huge numbers on people's lives. Billions are hard to relate to. More immediate concerns are long waiting lines in the Emergency Department, skyrocketing home electricity bills, frustrating traffic gridlock and high youth unemployment. Developing our natural resources can provide funding to help deal with those problems.



I fear we may have to wait for more financial pain before people start asking the obvious question. Why are we not taking full advantage of our natural heritage like every other resource-rich country in the world?



Unfortunately, there are some Canadian and American environmental activists who oppose every major Canadian resource project. They are indifferent to the economic consequences of their opposition. They do not care if an independent regulatory review concludes a pipeline is safe for the environment. In the guise of 'social licence' they claim a right to veto anything they don't like. Surrendering to their demands would mean no big project would every get built. Looking back at our proud history, if protestors had their way, Sir John A. MacDonald could not have constructed the nation-building transcontinental railway.



Of course we must listen to the people, including aboriginal peoples. That is what our democracy is about. And we definitely must protect the environment. But I do not believe a few ideological opponents of resource development should be able to block our progress as a nation. At some point, Canadians will demand the government move forward. But first the penny has to drop.

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/12/28/time-to-get-behind-pipeline-creation">http://www.torontosun.com/2015/12/28/ti ... e-creation">http://www.torontosun.com/2015/12/28/time-to-get-behind-pipeline-creation

[Anonymous]

This article is 2 years old, but it illustrates the greed and selfishness that feeds the anti-pipeline hysteria in Canada.

A left-wing lobby group in San Francisco wired $55,000 to the bank account of an Indian chief in Northern Alberta, paying him to oppose the oilsands.



And sure enough, that chief – Allan Adam, from the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation – earned his money. Last weekend, he flew to Toronto to sit on a stage next to Neil Young, the folk singer who was in town to demonize Canada's oil industry.



Now, $55,000 might sound like a lot of money to pay, just to rent a politician for a day if all the chief did for his money was to appear on stage in Toronto beside Neil Young. But to the Tides Foundation, it's well worth it. Think of Adam as an actor, hired to play a part in an elaborate theatrical production.



Neil Young had his role: he's the American celebrity who can draw crowds of fawning Baby Boomer journalists. But at the end of the day, he's just another millionaire celebrity. When he talks about the oilsands, he quickly reveals himself as a low-information know-nothing.



Adam brings what Young can't: authenticity. Young likes to wear an Indian-style leather vest, but Adam really is an Indian, and he really lives near the oilsands.



Adam didn't do a lot of talking in Toronto. He was more of a prop than an actor. See, the Tides Foundation is from San Francisco. And Neil Young lives on a 1,500-acre estate near San Francisco. Without Adam, this would have just been some California millionaires coming up here to boss Canadians around. That's why they had to hire Adam, to aboriginalize their attack on Canada. It was political sleight of hand, to distract from the fact that this was a foreign assault on Canadian jobs.



Tides could have hired an actual actor, like maybe Lorne Cardinal, who played the Aboriginal policeman in the comedy series Corner Gas. But they didn't hire an actor. They hired an elected public official. That's the problem.



Adam's official title is "chief." But it's not a religious or cultural title. Under the Indian Act, that's just the legal title given to the elected mayor of an Indian Band.



The Tides Foundation put $55,000 into the bank account of a mayor to get him to take a particular political position. Depending on what Tides was getting the Chief to do, the payment might well have been a bribe. But we won't know, because no one is talking about the $55,000 payment.



How is it acceptable that a foreign lobby group can simply deposit cash into a bank account of a Canadian politician? Who else is being paid cash to oppose the oilsands?



This fact almost escaped detection. It was buried in the Tides Foundation's 138-page filing with the IRS, who only disclosed it to get a tax break. Even then, it was shrouded in secrecy.



The money was paid to a numbered company, 850450 Alberta Ltd. Only a search of Alberta's corporate registry revealed that 850450 Alberta Ltd. was owned by another company, called Acden Group Ltd., that had changed its name twice in the past four years. Adam and other band politicians were directors and shareholders, in trust for the band.



The payment was well-hidden – and Adam certainly didn't disclose it when he was on stage with Young.



The same IRS disclosure shows Tides made 25 different payments to Canadian anti-oilsands activists in a single year, totaling well over a million dollars. And that's just one U.S. lobby group. The Rockefeller Brothers Fund out of New York, spends $7 million a year in Canada, with an explicit campaign strategy of fomenting Aboriginal unrest, through protests and lawsuits.



If a foreign oil company – say, ExxonMobil – was depositing secret payments in the bank accounts of MPs, it would be a scandal. Those MPs would face an RCMP investigation, Exxon would likely be charged with bribery, and the media on both sides of the border would have a field day.



Yet none of those things will likely happen with Adam.



Because the Tides Foundation knows that the Canadian media and even the police are cowards when it comes to Aboriginal politicians. They don't dare hold them to account, for fear of being called racist. If you doubt this, look at the continued success of Theresa Spence, Attawapiskat's chief.



Tides got its money's worth.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/01/17/first-nations-chief-received-55000-from-tides-foundation?token=3f4d08ccc8021cd089825f189564fc36&utm_source=addThis&utm_medium=addthis_button_facebook&utm_campaign=First+Nations+chief+received+%2455%2C000+from+Tides+Foundation+%7C+LEVANT+%7C+Columnists#.VoQS2jiRixA.facebook">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/01/17/f ... A.facebook">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/01/17/first-nations-chief-received-55000-from-tides-foundation?token=3f4d08ccc8021cd089825f189564fc36&utm_source=addThis&utm_medium=addthis_button_facebook&utm_campaign=First+Nations+chief+received+%2455%2C000+from+Tides+Foundation+%7C+LEVANT+%7C+Columnists#.VoQS2jiRixA.facebook

[Anonymous]

The lack of pipeline infrastructure is the biggest economic obstacle this country faces. It is hurting our stock market, it keeps our dollar low, unemployment high, it hurts government revenue/programs and hurts our manufacturing sector. What a huge boost it would be for the national economy if we could get shovels in the ground on a couple of these proposals this year. Energy East is my favourite.

[Ace]

Canada is resource based.  There's not much left here to do, unless we chop it down, or dig it out of the ground.

[Registered Guest]

I said years ago, it was time to get going on the pipeline.

[Anonymous]

The lack of access to international markets is a national emergency. I have worked all over the world and Canada does it better than the rest. More oil bought by China from us the better.

[Anonymous]

As Canada wavers on pipelines, U.S. gives go ahead for oil exports

http://calgaryherald.com/business/energy/ewart-as-canada-wavers-on-pipelines-u-s-gives-go-ahead-for-oil-exports">http://calgaryherald.com/business/energ ... il-exports">http://calgaryherald.com/business/energy/ewart-as-canada-wavers-on-pipelines-u-s-gives-go-ahead-for-oil-exports

[Anonymous]

More bad news for the Canadian economy as BC reject's Kinder Morgan's pipeline expansion. This would have been a much needed multi billion dollar shot  in  the arm for struggling economy.



http://business.financialpost.com/news/energy/with-b-c-s-rejection-of-trans-mountain-pipeline-expansion-canadas-diversification-strategy-is-unraveling?__lsa=1b9a-1662">http://business.financialpost.com/news/ ... =1b9a-1662">http://business.financialpost.com/news/energy/with-b-c-s-rejection-of-trans-mountain-pipeline-expansion-canadas-diversification-strategy-is-unraveling?__lsa=1b9a-1662

Just as the proposed Trans Mountain pipeline expansion seemed to be within striking distance of winning a regulatory permit, the British Columbia government formally requested its rejection Monday in a submission to the National Energy Board (NEB).



The takeaway: Alberta's – and Canada's – oil market diversification strategy is unraveling.



The other takeaway: The climate change policy implemented by Alberta's NDP government to secure pipeline approvals, with much encouragement from Justin Trudeau's federal Liberal government, is looking more and more like a lot of pain for zero gain.



Of the four major export pipeline projects proposed to open new markets for Canadian oil production, the TMX expansion should have been the easiest to pull off because it twins a pipeline that has been safely transporting oil from Alberta to the B.C. coast for 60 years.



But in its final argument to the NEB, which is in the last days of a two-year review, B.C. threw the book at the project, claiming: "the company has not provided enough information around its proposed spill prevention and response for the province to determine if it would use a world leading spills regime."



This after a review that, according to TMX proponent Kinder Morgan, was one of the most comprehensive in the board's history and involved the filing of a 16,000-page application, answering 17,000 questions, participation of more than 400 intervenors and of 1,250 commenters, not to mention more than $300 million in costs.



Mary Polak, B.C.'s environment minister, didn't seem to be too concerned Monday that the hard line would scare away investment.



"Companies around the world ... know and have known for a long time that British Columbia has very high environmental standards," she said to reporters.



"These five conditions we have had in place since 2012 reflect that. They are no surprise. Kinder Morgan has made it clear that they are supportive of the five conditions and that they wish to meet them. We have not seen evidence of that in the NEB hearing, but the fact is that we don't ... trade the idea of jobs and the environment."



With U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude futures falling US$1.75 to settle at US$31.41 a barrel, the lowest since December 2003, and Canada bleeding energy jobs and investment, it's an overconfident view for a province that hasn't yet secured a single liquefied natural gas project, also required to meet B.C.'s world leading environmental standards, despite more than 20 proposed in the past five years.



The $6.8 billion Trans Mountain project involves twinning its existing 1,150-kilometre pipeline from the Alberta oilsands to its terminal in Burnaby to increase pipeline capacity to 890,000 barrels a day from 300,000. The NEB is expected to recommend in May whether the project is in the national interest, and the federal cabinet is due to rule this summer.



B.C.'s five conditions for heavy oil pipelines, announced in 2012, are: that they successfully complete the NEB process; that they have "world-leading" marine oil spill response, prevention and recovery; that they have "world-leading" practices for land oil spill prevention, response and recovery systems; that they meet legal requirements on Aboriginal and treaty rights; that B.C. receives its "fair share" of the fiscal and economic benefits.



Polak said the conditions don't close the door on pipelines through B.C., but at this time TMX hasn't met them.



Still, they raise questions about whether they are actually attainable, or why Canada has a federal process to approve cross-border pipelines when B.C. effectively claims it has final say.



B.C. pulled the same stunt on Northern Gateway, using the same argument to oppose the project at the NEB. Its stand energized environmental and aboriginal opponents. Eager to win votes, the federal Liberal government formalized a tanker ban in November and Northern Gateway is now adrift.



Similarly, it's unlikely Ottawa will take the political heat for the TMX expansion if B.C. isn't willing to support it. Polak said Ottawa supports B.C.'s conditions.



In a statement, Trans Mountain said it has been working closely with the B.C. government and that it's confident it will be able to satisfy the conditions once the regulatory process is complete.



But it adds: "The conditions related to world-leading marine oil spill response, recovery and prevention, addressing Aboriginal treaty rights and B.C. receiving its 'fair share' are all conditions that require multiple parties to come to the table and work together."



Since B.C.'s conditions were announced, there have been multiple meetings between B.C. and Alberta to discuss benefit sharing, a new national energy strategy that promised lots of inter-provincial cooperation, initiatives by the previous Conservative government to improve oil spill prevention and response as well as initiatives to resolve aboriginal concerns and increase their benefits, yet B.C.'s palm remains wide open.

[Bricktop]

Once again, states interfere with the national interest.



Time to get rid of these expensive, burdensome and utterly unnecessary organs of disruption.

[RW]

Environment isn't national interest?



It's not BC's fault Kinder Morgan can't meet obtainable criteria.

[Bricktop]

Environment, economy, security, health and welfare including education and social support are NATIONAL issues.



What you seem to have is what we are experiencing here in Australia; resources are located in different States. These resources can, with proper management of environmental and social consequences, contribute to the NATIONAL benefit. It should NOT be the case that a State should sit on a resource and say "This is ours. WE decide what we'll do with it". Otherwise, why be part of the Commonwealth (Note that word) at all. The resources belong to ALL Australians, Canadians and Americans, not just those who happen to live near their location.



States must be abolished. Their raison d'etre has long since expired, and they simply add yet another layer of obfuscation, confusion and ideology where we already have too much of it at a national level.

[Anonymous]

Environment isn't national interest?



It's not BC's fault Kinder Morgan can't meet obtainable criteria.

What have they been doing for the past 63 years ffs?? This isn't a new project, this is expanding an existing one. I'm really sorry for all of us that Clark is putting an election ahead of the country's interests at a time we REALLY need this infrastructure project. What a selfish twat. If this was the US, it would have been a fast tracked slam dunk. Score yet another one for our competitors.



Talk about circumventing democracy, the premier of BC is circumventing the independent regulatory process.

[Anonymous]

More bad news for the Canadian economy as BC reject's Kinder Morgan's pipeline expansion. This would have been a much needed multi billion dollar shot  in  the arm for struggling economy.



http://business.financialpost.com/news/energy/with-b-c-s-rejection-of-trans-mountain-pipeline-expansion-canadas-diversification-strategy-is-unraveling?__lsa=1b9a-1662">http://business.financialpost.com/news/ ... =1b9a-1662">http://business.financialpost.com/news/energy/with-b-c-s-rejection-of-trans-mountain-pipeline-expansion-canadas-diversification-strategy-is-unraveling?__lsa=1b9a-1662

Just as the proposed Trans Mountain pipeline expansion seemed to be within striking distance of winning a regulatory permit, the British Columbia government formally requested its rejection Monday in a submission to the National Energy Board (NEB).



The takeaway: Alberta's – and Canada's – oil market diversification strategy is unraveling.



The other takeaway: The climate change policy implemented by Alberta's NDP government to secure pipeline approvals, with much encouragement from Justin Trudeau's federal Liberal government, is looking more and more like a lot of pain for zero gain.



Of the four major export pipeline projects proposed to open new markets for Canadian oil production, the TMX expansion should have been the easiest to pull off because it twins a pipeline that has been safely transporting oil from Alberta to the B.C. coast for 60 years.



But in its final argument to the NEB, which is in the last days of a two-year review, B.C. threw the book at the project, claiming: "the company has not provided enough information around its proposed spill prevention and response for the province to determine if it would use a world leading spills regime."



This after a review that, according to TMX proponent Kinder Morgan, was one of the most comprehensive in the board's history and involved the filing of a 16,000-page application, answering 17,000 questions, participation of more than 400 intervenors and of 1,250 commenters, not to mention more than $300 million in costs.



Mary Polak, B.C.'s environment minister, didn't seem to be too concerned Monday that the hard line would scare away investment.



"Companies around the world ... know and have known for a long time that British Columbia has very high environmental standards," she said to reporters.



"These five conditions we have had in place since 2012 reflect that. They are no surprise. Kinder Morgan has made it clear that they are supportive of the five conditions and that they wish to meet them. We have not seen evidence of that in the NEB hearing, but the fact is that we don't ... trade the idea of jobs and the environment."



With U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude futures falling US$1.75 to settle at US$31.41 a barrel, the lowest since December 2003, and Canada bleeding energy jobs and investment, it's an overconfident view for a province that hasn't yet secured a single liquefied natural gas project, also required to meet B.C.'s world leading environmental standards, despite more than 20 proposed in the past five years.



The $6.8 billion Trans Mountain project involves twinning its existing 1,150-kilometre pipeline from the Alberta oilsands to its terminal in Burnaby to increase pipeline capacity to 890,000 barrels a day from 300,000. The NEB is expected to recommend in May whether the project is in the national interest, and the federal cabinet is due to rule this summer.



B.C.'s five conditions for heavy oil pipelines, announced in 2012, are: that they successfully complete the NEB process; that they have "world-leading" marine oil spill response, prevention and recovery; that they have "world-leading" practices for land oil spill prevention, response and recovery systems; that they meet legal requirements on Aboriginal and treaty rights; that B.C. receives its "fair share" of the fiscal and economic benefits.



Polak said the conditions don't close the door on pipelines through B.C., but at this time TMX hasn't met them.



Still, they raise questions about whether they are actually attainable, or why Canada has a federal process to approve cross-border pipelines when B.C. effectively claims it has final say.



B.C. pulled the same stunt on Northern Gateway, using the same argument to oppose the project at the NEB. Its stand energized environmental and aboriginal opponents. Eager to win votes, the federal Liberal government formalized a tanker ban in November and Northern Gateway is now adrift.



Similarly, it's unlikely Ottawa will take the political heat for the TMX expansion if B.C. isn't willing to support it. Polak said Ottawa supports B.C.'s conditions.



In a statement, Trans Mountain said it has been working closely with the B.C. government and that it's confident it will be able to satisfy the conditions once the regulatory process is complete.



But it adds: "The conditions related to world-leading marine oil spill response, recovery and prevention, addressing Aboriginal treaty rights and B.C. receiving its 'fair share' are all conditions that require multiple parties to come to the table and work together."



Since B.C.'s conditions were announced, there have been multiple meetings between B.C. and Alberta to discuss benefit sharing, a new national energy strategy that promised lots of inter-provincial cooperation, initiatives by the previous Conservative government to improve oil spill prevention and response as well as initiatives to resolve aboriginal concerns and increase their benefits, yet B.C.'s palm remains wide open.

I thought they would pull a stunt like this. The whole process here is rigged so no new crude infrastructure will ever be built. We're one of the few countries that gets it right, but the only major player that is not allowed access to international markets. It would bolster GDP, employment, government revenue and the dollar. Any other Western country would have fast tracked it, especially in times like this.

[J0E]

This article is 2 years old, but it illustrates the greed and selfishness that feeds the anti-pipeline hysteria in Canada.

Actually Shen, Justin Trudeau & the Liberals supported the Keystone pipeline.



So do I.



Given that so many people south of the border and in this country supported it, as well as the Tories and Grits, the Obama administration should've approved it.



Plus...and this is the big plus....our boys have died fighing in the name of the American Empire in places like Afghanistan. Some of their poorly trained pilots in Afghanistan killed some of our soldiers in a 'friendly fire' incident. We've spilled blood on their behalf and gotten nothing back. We shielded and housed several thousand Americans who were stranded after the 911 attacks. We get nothing back from the Yanks for our kindness, hospitality, friendliness, offering them a safe tourist spot where in most parts of the globe they're largely hated. In addition, we are going to accept more Syrian refugees than the United States from a region of the world in a war they started. That's not even our mess, but we are asked to clean it up from the ones who created it. We are very good to our Southern neighbors.



...and what do we get back?! Nothing! Not a bloody thing! Fuck all!

And we get treated like shit at their border crossings.



I agree. We should get that Keystone pipeline built.



They owe it to us.

[cc]

Consistent you are. Anything else, not so much.



You never miss an opportunity to twist ANYTHING into an opportunity to empty your  obsessed US hate spleen.



Today the pipeline. Tomorrow? ... maybe grandma's cookies?