Alberta/Canada Becoming Less Attractive For Lucrative Resource Investment

[Anonymous]

I've never seen a country deliberately sabotage their own economy/workers the way this country does. OPEC, Russia and the US say thank you.

Four years ago, BC Premier Christy Clark declared liquefied natural gas (LNG) was "the economic opportunity of a lifetime."



At the time, Clark led a deeply unpopular, decade-old Liberal government up against a resurgent NDP, aggressively branding the incumbents as corporate sellouts that were out of touch with the working class. Clark limped into the campaign facing certain defeat, but managed to reframe the NDP's anti-development platform as an existential threat to the very workers it claimed to champion.



It worked. Clark's Liberals won a shocking majority government by convincing British Columbians that only she could deliver jobs and a prosperous economy; and to do that, she leaned on LNG.



Throughout the campaign, Clark pitched LNG as an economic panacea. She claimed it would create 100,000 new jobs, establish a $100 billion prosperity fund, and eliminate the province's $60-billion debt. She even hinted that LNG revenues could eventually replace the reviled Provincial Sales Tax. It was, in her words, "the economic opportunity of a lifetime."



Fast-forward to 2017.



Of the two dozen LNG projects proposed, zero have been built. Clark's Liberals are gone, replaced by an NDP-Green Party partnership willing to zap virtually all forms of non-renewable resource development in the province.



Recently, the largest approved LNG project was cancelled when Petronas pulled the plug on their $36-billion Pacific NorthWest LNG facility.



How did LNG go from Clark's cure-all to an economic albatross in less than half a decade?



It's important to note how dramatically the natural gas market has changed in recent years. As late as 10 years ago, Canada was considering proposals for coastal natural gas import facilities. Now, with our newfound glut of domestic supply and gas replacing coal in developing countries in Asia, Canada is attempting to shift on the fly.



Such agile economic maneuvering might be feasible in a different political climate. But Canada's debate around resource development has grown increasingly more intransigent, with lawful but lengthy regulatory approvals hijacked and trumped by foreign influence, special interests, and partisan politics.



This instability, coupled with Canada's bungling shift from natural gas importer to exporter, has allowed the United States to meet the world's growing demand for natural gas. There are currently seven LNG export facilities under construction in the US and another four are ready to go. This is happening after the very first LNG cargo ship left American soil only 18 months ago.



Not surprisingly, Pacific NorthWest's demise has become political fodder for partisans on both sides of the issue. LNG supporters say it's ironclad proof that BC's new government will drive all innovation and investment out of the province, while LNG critics say the market has rendered its verdict on the resource as uneconomical regardless of who is in power.



Adverse market conditions for natural gas have been accumulating for years without Petronas indicating cancellation, but just days after a hostile government is installed they pull the plug. To suggest the change in government was not a factor certainly pushes the bounds of reason and logic.

http://businessinedmonton.com/regular-contributors/brock-harrison/canadas-lng-dream-really-dead/">http://businessinedmonton.com/regular-c ... ally-dead/">http://businessinedmonton.com/regular-contributors/brock-harrison/canadas-lng-dream-really-dead/

[Anonymous]

This is what leadership looks like Nothead's New Debt Party. Job killing regulations, record deficits and consumer gouging carbon taxes that won't budge the climate needle one fucking hair.

Alberta is scaring away oil and gas investment, according to a new Fraser Institute study released Tuesday morning.



The conservative think-tank said it questioned petroleum executives from around the world, and in their view, Alberta and British Columbia are slipping.



Those surveyed were asked 16 questions based on royalties, taxes, trade barriers, environmental regulations and enforcement, quality of infrastructure and geological information, the availability of skilled labour, political stability, the quality of the legal system and security.



Despite a slight improvement in Alberta's score since 2016, Alberta and B.C. are Canada's least attractive jurisdictions for investment, the institute says.



More than 50 per cent of survey respondents said Alberta's taxes deterred investment in the province's oil and gas sector, among other things.



"Most of our survey respondents blame the tax rates, the tax regime in Alberta, but there's also a lot of regulatory uncertainty in Alberta due to all the new climate change regulations that have been put in place," said Kenneth Green, the senior director of the Fraser Institute's Centre for Natural Resources and co-author of the 2017 Global Petroleum Survey.



Green said barriers to investment include the high cost to produce Canadian petroleum in comparison to the global price of oil, as well as the carbon tax, a cap on oilsands and methane emissions, and "an aggressive spending plans on climate change that are siphoning off tax dollars to spend on things like home efficiency programs and LED light bulbs and things like that."



"The priorities are not toward attracting investment, plus we're still landlocked here. We can't get to tide water from Alberta to capture the world price of oil," he said.



Green said all of the factors combined have caused Alberta to go from being one of the most attractive places — not only in Canada but the world — to 33rd place in the list of 97 jurisdictions.



Four years ago, Alberta was ranked among the top 20 for oil and gas investment.



The rating for B.C. has plummeted since that province elected its NDP government, according to the survey. The province dropped from 39th place out of 96 last year, to 76 out of 97 jurisdictions this year.



The Fraser Institute points to political instability and an openly hostile government. The battle against major energy projects like the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion is shaking investor confidence, the think-tank says.



"All of the governments can do good policy, all of the governments can do bad policy, independent of what party they are from or who the politician is — or the level. So we really look at the policy questions, not the politics and the parties."



Elsewhere in Canada, Newfoundland and Labrador was the top-ranked province, moving up from 25th last year to the fourth-most attractive worldwide in 2017.



South of the border, six U.S. states rank in the top 10 global jurisdictions: Texas, Oklahoma, North Dakota, West Virginia, Kansas and Wyoming.



The Fraser Institute said because the U.S. administration is pursuing major tax reforms and reducing regulatory red tape for the energy industry, American jurisdictions could be viewed even more favourably in coming years.



"Our hope is that government will look at this report and find what's deterring investment in Alberta, make some changes to make it more attractive. And help bring back the oil and gas sector in Alberta, to fill up those towers downtown, and get the economy firing and get the unemployement rate down."



These are the top 10 most-attractive jurisdictions for oil and gas investment, according to the survey:



Texas

Oklahoma

North Dakota

Newfoundland & Labrador

West Virginia

Kansas

Saskatchewan

Norway — offshore (except North Sea)

Wyoming

South Australia

These 10 areas with the greatest barriers/least attractive for investment:



Venezuela

Bolivia

Libya

Iraq

Ecuador

Indonesia

California

Cambodia

France

Yemen

https://globalnews.ca/news/3884871/alberta-ranks-33rd-on-global-list-of-attractive-places-for-oil-gas-investment-fraser-institute/">https://globalnews.ca/news/3884871/albe ... institute/">https://globalnews.ca/news/3884871/alberta-ranks-33rd-on-global-list-of-attractive-places-for-oil-gas-investment-fraser-institute/

[Anonymous]

I have worked on  every continent in the petroleum industry.  We do it right. But, we would rather give it to countries that don't.



There is not much future for blue collar middle class jobs in this country.

[Anonymous]

I'm not really surprised.



A profane sign posted outside a gas station west of Edmonton targeting the Alberta NDP and Trudeau government over the carbon tax has attracted attention from across the province.



"I drove two hours today to come and see this sign," said Tia Duplessie, who drove in from Mayerthorpe, Alta. Wednesday morning. "I had to come see it for myself.



"It really speaks for itself and I'm a supporter of this sign."

The sign at the Tempo gas station in Spruce Grove, which read "F**K NDP/TRUDEAU," began to gain attention on social media Tuesday night.



Ashley Gould, co-owner of CT Automotive & Customs Inc. near the gas station, said she loved the sign and its original message.



"It made my day," Gould told Global News on Wednesday. "I like the original message... I don't want to offend our clients but if I had the opportunity to put a big sign out the front there, that's exactly what my sign would say.



"I am totally against Notley and the NDP government and Trudeau. When I see stuff like that, it's supporting what we don't want here in Alberta so I think it's good. I loved it."

The carbon tax came into effect in Alberta on Jan. 1, 2017. On Jan. 1 of this year, the tax went up by 50 per cent, going from $20 per tonne of carbon-dioxide emissions to $30 per tonne.

https://globalnews.ca/news/3944191/crude-alberta-gas-station-sign-takes-aim-at-premier-notley-trudeau-over-carbon-tax/">https://globalnews.ca/news/3944191/crud ... arbon-tax/">https://globalnews.ca/news/3944191/crude-alberta-gas-station-sign-takes-aim-at-premier-notley-trudeau-over-carbon-tax/

[Anonymous]

I'm not really surprised.



A profane sign posted outside a gas station west of Edmonton targeting the Alberta NDP and Trudeau government over the carbon tax has attracted attention from across the province.



"I drove two hours today to come and see this sign," said Tia Duplessie, who drove in from Mayerthorpe, Alta. Wednesday morning. "I had to come see it for myself.



"It really speaks for itself and I'm a supporter of this sign."

The sign at the Tempo gas station in Spruce Grove, which read "F**K NDP/TRUDEAU," began to gain attention on social media Tuesday night.



Ashley Gould, co-owner of CT Automotive & Customs Inc. near the gas station, said she loved the sign and its original message.



"It made my day," Gould told Global News on Wednesday. "I like the original message... I don't want to offend our clients but if I had the opportunity to put a big sign out the front there, that's exactly what my sign would say.



"I am totally against Notley and the NDP government and Trudeau. When I see stuff like that, it's supporting what we don't want here in Alberta so I think it's good. I loved it."

The carbon tax came into effect in Alberta on Jan. 1, 2017. On Jan. 1 of this year, the tax went up by 50 per cent, going from $20 per tonne of carbon-dioxide emissions to $30 per tonne.

https://globalnews.ca/news/3944191/crude-alberta-gas-station-sign-takes-aim-at-premier-notley-trudeau-over-carbon-tax/">https://globalnews.ca/news/3944191/crud ... arbon-tax/">https://globalnews.ca/news/3944191/crude-alberta-gas-station-sign-takes-aim-at-premier-notley-trudeau-over-carbon-tax/

That's awesome.

[Wazzzup]

I feel bad for you all.  I wish that Canada were being run smarter.  I am glad we have Trunp.  You guys need a Canadian Trump

[size=150]

Trump Seeks to Open Most U.S. Coastal Waters to New Oil Drilling[/size]



https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-04/trump-seen-urging-all-u-s-coastal-waters-be-opened-to-drilling">https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... o-drilling">https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-04/trump-seen-urging-all-u-s-coastal-waters-be-opened-to-drilling



With a stock market already growing, a big jump in consumer confidence, Trumps deregulations, the corporate tax rate coming down from an absurd 35% to a sane 21% and he is now trying to open up coastal waters for drilling.  Our economy is poised to grow big.

[Anonymous]

I feel bad for you all.  I wish that Canada were being run smarter.  I am glad we have Trunp.  You guys need a Canadian Trump


This is very bad news for Canada..



We can only export our oil and natural gas to one customer because we won't approve export pipeline and processing facilities..



The USA  won't need our oil and gas very soon..



And worse, Americans will be exporting oil and LNG to Asia instead of us.

 

[Anonymous]

Ottawa and the provinces will rake in more than $16 billion from carbon pricing between 2018 and 2020, while failing to achieve the Trudeau government's 2020 greenhouse gas reduction target.



My $16-billion estimate — the bulk of which will be paid by Canadians in higher taxes and prices for most goods and services — is a conservative one.



It doesn't factor in the full financial impact of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's mandatory minimum national carbon price of $10 per tonne of emissions, which kicked in Jan. 1, rising to $50 per tonne in 2022.



Meanwhile, the Trudeau government has already conceded in its recent report to the United Nations under the Paris climate accord, that Canada won't achieve Trudeau's target of reducing emissions to 17% below 2005 levels by 2020.



That would require Ottawa to reduce Canada's current emissions of 722 megatonnes annually (based on 2015 figures, the latest available) to 613 megatonnes by 2020, or by 109 megatonnes.



Reducing Canada's emissions by 109 megatonnes annually (a megatonne equals one million tonnes) by 2020, would mean the equivalent of shutting down Canada's entire electricity sector (79 megatonnes of annual emissions) plus 41% of the agriculture sector (73 megatonnes of annual emissions), in three years.



Simply put, that's impossible.



In 2018 alone, Ottawa and the provinces will rake in at least $5.4 billion in revenue from carbon taxes and cap and trade, a carbon tax by another name.



This figure is based on revenue estimates from the four provinces — Ontario, Alberta, B.C. and Quebec — that have already imposed carbon pricing, a federal estimate of revenues from carbon pricing in the six provinces that haven't yet set a carbon price but must do so this year, plus Ottawa's share of carbon pricing revenues from the GST.



Ontario will take in about $1.8 billion from carbon pricing in 2018, Alberta $1.04 billion, B.C. $1.19 billion and Quebec $545 million.



According to Parliamentary Budget Officer Jean-Denis Frechette, Ottawa will take in between $236 million and $267 million in carbon pricing revenues during the 2017-18 fiscal year in the four provinces that have already imposed it, because of the GST, and between $265 million and $313 million in the 2018-19 fiscal year.



Finally, according to a secret federal finance department memo obtained by Blacklock's Reporter, "energy consumers in provinces without a legislated carbon tax will pay at least $600 million in higher fuel costs" in 2018, with the imposition of Trudeau's mandatory minimum carbon price of $10 per tonne, rising substantially in future years as the mandatory minimum price increases.



Most of the estimated $5.4 billion cost of carbon pricing in 2018, and the $16 billion cumulative cost from 2018 to 2020, will be paid by Canadians in higher taxes and prices for most goods and services, although B.C. has historically lowered other taxes to offset revenues from its carbon tax and Alberta's carbon tax is partially offset by tax reductions for small business and full rebates to about 60% of provincial households.



The ultimate cost faced by Canadians in the six provinces that haven't yet set a carbon price will depend on the outcome of negotiations with Ottawa.



But the bottom line is Canadians are now paying billions of dollars annually for government carbon pricing schemes that will not achieve Trudeau's emission reduction targets for 2020, or for that matter, 2030.  

http://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/goldstein-trudeaus-carbon-scheme-already-a-16-billion-failure">http://torontosun.com/opinion/columnist ... on-failure">http://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/goldstein-trudeaus-carbon-scheme-already-a-16-billion-failure



As I have said, it is a cash grab by stealth that will not change emissions targets nor move the climate needle.

[Anonymous]

Ottawa and the provinces will rake in more than $16 billion from carbon pricing between 2018 and 2020, while failing to achieve the Trudeau government's 2020 greenhouse gas reduction target.



My $16-billion estimate — the bulk of which will be paid by Canadians in higher taxes and prices for most goods and services — is a conservative one.



It doesn't factor in the full financial impact of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's mandatory minimum national carbon price of $10 per tonne of emissions, which kicked in Jan. 1, rising to $50 per tonne in 2022.



Meanwhile, the Trudeau government has already conceded in its recent report to the United Nations under the Paris climate accord, that Canada won't achieve Trudeau's target of reducing emissions to 17% below 2005 levels by 2020.



That would require Ottawa to reduce Canada's current emissions of 722 megatonnes annually (based on 2015 figures, the latest available) to 613 megatonnes by 2020, or by 109 megatonnes.



Reducing Canada's emissions by 109 megatonnes annually (a megatonne equals one million tonnes) by 2020, would mean the equivalent of shutting down Canada's entire electricity sector (79 megatonnes of annual emissions) plus 41% of the agriculture sector (73 megatonnes of annual emissions), in three years.



Simply put, that's impossible.



In 2018 alone, Ottawa and the provinces will rake in at least $5.4 billion in revenue from carbon taxes and cap and trade, a carbon tax by another name.



This figure is based on revenue estimates from the four provinces — Ontario, Alberta, B.C. and Quebec — that have already imposed carbon pricing, a federal estimate of revenues from carbon pricing in the six provinces that haven't yet set a carbon price but must do so this year, plus Ottawa's share of carbon pricing revenues from the GST.



Ontario will take in about $1.8 billion from carbon pricing in 2018, Alberta $1.04 billion, B.C. $1.19 billion and Quebec $545 million.



According to Parliamentary Budget Officer Jean-Denis Frechette, Ottawa will take in between $236 million and $267 million in carbon pricing revenues during the 2017-18 fiscal year in the four provinces that have already imposed it, because of the GST, and between $265 million and $313 million in the 2018-19 fiscal year.



Finally, according to a secret federal finance department memo obtained by Blacklock's Reporter, "energy consumers in provinces without a legislated carbon tax will pay at least $600 million in higher fuel costs" in 2018, with the imposition of Trudeau's mandatory minimum carbon price of $10 per tonne, rising substantially in future years as the mandatory minimum price increases.



Most of the estimated $5.4 billion cost of carbon pricing in 2018, and the $16 billion cumulative cost from 2018 to 2020, will be paid by Canadians in higher taxes and prices for most goods and services, although B.C. has historically lowered other taxes to offset revenues from its carbon tax and Alberta's carbon tax is partially offset by tax reductions for small business and full rebates to about 60% of provincial households.



The ultimate cost faced by Canadians in the six provinces that haven't yet set a carbon price will depend on the outcome of negotiations with Ottawa.



But the bottom line is Canadians are now paying billions of dollars annually for government carbon pricing schemes that will not achieve Trudeau's emission reduction targets for 2020, or for that matter, 2030.  

http://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/goldstein-trudeaus-carbon-scheme-already-a-16-billion-failure">http://torontosun.com/opinion/columnist ... on-failure">http://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/goldstein-trudeaus-carbon-scheme-already-a-16-billion-failure



As I have said, it is a cash grab by stealth that will not change emissions targets nor move the climate needle.

Our provincial government has the  nerve to call harming middle class families like mine by picking our pocketsclimate leadership.

 :001_rolleyes:

[Wazzzup]

trudeau and his party are clearly bad energy and economic leadership for Canada (although the NDP sounds even worse).  Hopefully you will find somebody better to run the place in the future.  Unfortunately most Canadians probably don't understand what's happening, so change is less likely.

[Anonymous]

trudeau and his party are clearly bad energy and economic leadership for Canada (although the NDP sounds even worse).  Hopefully you will find somebody better to run the place in the future.  Unfortunately most Canadians probably don't understand what's happening, so change is less likely.

Our provincial NDP government will almost certainly go  down to defeat next year to the United Conservative Party.