Trudeau and Notley Finally Coming to their Senses on the Importance of Pipelines

[Anonymous]

Call it the discipline of power. In opposition, it's easy to oppose everything. But prime ministers and premiers, regardless of party a affiliation, should work together for the economic good of the country. For that reason, we're not going to criticize Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau or Alberta NDP Premier Rachel Notley for apparently coming to their senses, however slowly, about the vital importance of oil and natural gas to Canada's economy. On Sunday, Notley met with Trudeau and his cabinet at the federal cabinet retreat in Kananaskis, Alta.



These things don't happen by accident. Since Notley had a clear message about the importance of pipelines to Alberta's and Canada's economy and Trudeau knew that's what she'd be lobbying for, inviting her to the Liberal retreat meant Trudeau wanted to highlight her arguments to his cabinet and to Canadians in general.



If indeed the premier and prime minister are flip-flopping on the issue compared to many of their statements while in opposition that expressed skepticism about various pipelines, it's the right flip-flop to make.



Canada needs to get its land-locked natural resources to international markets through pipelines such as TransCanada Corporation's Energy East, Enbridge's Northern Gateway and Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.

 

As former prime minister Brian Mulroney said last week, it's Trudeau's responsibility to advocate for the environmentally responsible construction of pipelines, which means more than acting as a referee between supporters and opponents.



Alberta oil already sells at a substantial discount because of a lack of pipeline capacity in Canada, hindering our ability to export our oil. at costs the Canadian economy jobs and the federal and Alberta governments tax revenues.



Compare that to U.S. President Barack Obama. Despite his hypocritical vetoing of the Keystone XL pipeline which would have delivered Alberta oil to U.S. re neries on the Gulf Coast, Obama has boasted that his administration has approved enough new oil and gas pipeline in the U.S. to more than encircle the Earth and that increased pipeline capacity is vital to the economic interests of the United States.



Indeed, it's astounding and disturbing that in Canada, so many politicians and special interest groups campaign against oil and gas pipelines, which amounts to voluntarily agreeing to slit our own economic throats.



Trudeau and Notley like spending money. Pipelines are a good way to raise money.

[Anonymous]

This is from Lorrie  Goldstein. It's funny how Trudeau and Notley have been forced to reverse their positions when they were in opposition.



No country in its right mind would need the premier of Alberta to explain to the federal cabinet why Canada needs pipelines to get our land-locked oil and natural gas resources to international markets.

But since Canadian politicians are seldom in their right minds on the related issues of energy policy and man-made climate change, that's what Alberta Premier Rachel Notley was doing in the resort community of Kananaskis, Alberta with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's befuddled cabinet earlier this week.



The irony is that prior to moving from the opposition benches into the realities of power, Notley and Trudeau contributed significantly to the hysterical anti-pipeline rhetoric in Canada that now makes the job they have to do — getting our natural resources to market — more di cult than it needed to be.



The basic arguments in favour of pipelines are that (a) not being in favour of them amounts to Canada voluntarily agreeing to slit its own economic throat and (b) pipelines mean greater public safety, as well as fewer greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, than the alternative methods of transporting natural resources, such as oil, by rail.



Any politician confused about what that means should look up the July 6, 2013 LacMegantic train derailment in which 47 people died and the U.S. State Department studies that concluded in the absence of the Keystone XL pipeline, GHG emissions will in fact go up.



Trudeau, when he was in opposition, frequently compared former prime minister Stephen Harper unfavourably to Trudeau's Jolly Green Giant — U.S. President Barack Obama.



Except Obama, save for his hypocritical rejection of the border-crossing Keystone XL pipeline after seven years of acting like Hamlet on the issue, has been approving U.S. pipelines like stink.



In fact, Obama's boasted that during his administration, the U.S. has laid enough new oil and gas pipeline to more than encircle the Earth, and that even more pipelines are needed.



Regardless of know-nothings who believe in fairy tales like the Leap Manifesto, oil, gas and coal are not going away for the foreseeable future as the major method by which developed and developing countries produce energy.



Some day, due to technological advancement, we may have batteries capable of storing excess electricity on an industrial scale, at which point wind turbines and solar panels will make economic sense.



Some day, carbon capture and storage may be viable on a societal scale.



Some day, we may figure out an economically viable way to replace gasoline with hydrogen and traditional cars with electric vehicles, although how much environmental good the latter will do depends on the electricity sources used to recharge them.



Some day, scientists may discover the secret of nonradioactive cold fusion (renamed Low Energy Nuclear Reactions because of the stigma surrounding past hoaxes), resulting in the widespread acceptance of nonemitting nuclear power to replace coal-fired electricity.



But that day is not today, nor is it in the foreseeable future, meaning fossil fuels will be the major method by which we power our world for many decades to come.



That means, if Trudeau intends to run his government in the best economic interests of Canadians, he must find ways to build the consensus needed to approve environmentally responsible pipeline construction.



He cannot simply be, as former prime minister Brian Mulroney rightly noted last week, a referee between pro and anti-pipeline interests.

[Anonymous]

We are a petroleum producing nation. Our oil is heavily discounted because it cannot reach tidewater and international pricing. Pipelines are the safest and most efficient way of transportation. One or two pipelines to tidewater would be a huge boost for the national economy. Next.

[Anonymous]

We are a petroleum producing nation. Our oil is heavily discounted because it cannot reach tidewater and international pricing. Pipelines are the safest and most efficient way of transportation. One or two pipelines to tidewater would be a huge boost for the national economy. Next.

Our premier has always been a strong proponent of pipelines. Trudeau and Notley are new to the game, but they seem to have had a change of heart. Let's hope they can get at least one in the ground in the next few years.

[Anonymous]

We move a lot of oil at CP. Most of it is Bakken crude from Saskatchewan and North Dakota, but we also move Alberta oil. While pipelines are the better way, the worry here is layoffs if new pipelines are built.

[Anonymous]

There now seems to be a consensus in Alberta that we need one or two pipelines to tidewater..