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.
Quote
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.
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?
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
This article is 2 years old, but it illustrates the greed and selfishness that feeds the anti-pipeline hysteria in Canada.
Quote
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
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.
Canada is resource based. There's not much left here to do, unless we chop it down, or dig it out of the ground.
I said years ago, it was time to get going on the pipeline.
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.
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
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
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.
Once again, states interfere with the national interest.
Time to get rid of these expensive, burdensome and utterly unnecessary organs of disruption.
Environment isn't national interest?
It's not BC's fault Kinder Morgan can't meet obtainable criteria.
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.
Quote from: "RW"
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.
Quote from: "seoulbro"
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.
Quote from: "Shen Li"
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.
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?
Quote from: "cc la femme"
You never miss an opportunity to twist ANYTHING into an opportunity to empty your obsessed US hate spleen.
No, it isn't US hate.
Actually, I like the US. I like Americans.
But like any good neighbor, then should return the favor when another has been so good to them.
There is nowhere on this planet, where an American citizen/tourist gets treated better than in Canada.
Are they as safe in other parts of the world?
Somehow I don't think so, cc.
Quote
Yes it is. Your usual bullshit spin (see above) can't save you. The US hate oozes out of you 24/7
You can't address anything without your obsession slithering into it
Quote from: "Shen Li"
Quote from: "RW"
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.
I want the pipeline Shen. The job creation would be great for BC but Kinder Morgan needs to meet the goddamn criteria already. Trans Mountain claims it can do it then they should get on it.
They need to give the Fiberals no more wiggle room and excuses to delay this project.
Quote from: "cc la femme"
Quote
Yes it is. Your usual bullshit spin (see above) can't save you. The US hate oozes out of you 24/7
You can't address anything without your obsession slithering into it
Well, I don't agree with you, cc.
For example, Shen, the OP, also pointed out in another thread how the Obama administration set up deals to buy more oil from places like Venezuela, while nixing the Keystone pipeline. Another, seoulbro, also agreed somewhat that the Americans take us for granted. These posters, are further to the right on the political spectrum than I am, yet are also supportive of the Keystone pipeline. Are they American haters? No. But did their posts suggest that they are miffed that the Keystone was not approved? yes.
what I find, is that you make accusations about me and others, call us names, and then you don't substantiate them with any solid proof. You are driven by your preconceived notions about others. Just people don't agree with something or their POV doesn't mean they hate them.
I often disagree, argue with my friends. But do I hate them? No.
Ifyer gonna open fire upon others, then at least know what you're shooting at and aim properly.
Regarding the drop in oil prices. How important is the construction of more pipelines? I ask because I don't know. Gives me great pleasure to see that gas is under $2. per gallon on the west coast. One other quick thing. Why is diesel more expensive than gas? Doesn't it take less to refine?
Quote from: "RW"
I want the pipeline Shen. The job creation would be great for BC but Kinder Morgan needs to meet the goddamn criteria already. Trans Mountain claims it can do it then they should get on it.
They need to give the Fiberals no more wiggle room and excuses to delay this project.
Well that is what the hearing with the NEB will be about. I don't like when people like Clark come up with conclusions before the hearings are finished. She can make her concerns known at the hearings just like everyone else. This is reminiscent of what Adrian Dix did in your last provincial election.
Either they met the criteria or they didn't...
Quote from: "RW"
We won't know that until the hearings are concluded. Even Notley is getting frustrated with BC politicians playing politics with needed infrastructure.
I guess job creation isn't as important to our Liberals as it is to the rest of us.
Quote from: "RW"
A former premier of Alberta indirectly described Ms. Clark as a chameleon who changes her colours to match the background of the time.
I've known her since I was in my teens. She's never impressed me - not as a person or a politician.
Quote from: "RW"
I get a snaky vibe from her too. But, she is sexy for her age.
Climate change was a convenient excuse for the Americans to say no. It coincided with Obama lifting a four decade old ban on oil exports. The US wants the money that comes with petro exports and they do not want competition from Canada. They also don't want to narrow to narrow the price differential that would come with new pipeline access. This is not likely to change even with a Republican administration. We need Energy East now.
http://boereport.com/2016/02/25/us-energy-independence/
By now, it should be clear that for the US government, the climate change argument serves as a thin veil to hide behind in order to prevent Canadian pipelines from being built.
While the Obama administration railed against Canadian pipelines crossing into the States,the US backed multiple pipeline infrastructure projects within their own borders and abroad. Furthermore, the construction of these pipelines was done concurrent with administrative process of lifting of the nation's 40 year ban on crude oil exports. Each of these activities comes with a hefty carbon footprint, yet Canada's proposed Keystone XL pipeline was denied for the apparent crime of carbon emissions – at least that's what the common narrative appears to be (and the answer that our new Liberal government accepts).
Canadian oil sits on the sidelines, in part, because the US holds the keys to our largest client base and market access. Another piece of that puzzle lies with Canada's own government – while the Liberals sign green deals with the US and Mexico, they also increased regulations on pipeline infrastructure (Energy East) and continue to preach the global warming narrative above all else. The US will keep the relationship with Canada this way while they begin to export their own oil to Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Russia – markets in which Canada could easily fulfill a portion of the demand if it only had access. While Canadian oil stands by, the United States has now started "test cargoes" and we can expect their export window to open in the coming years.
Since the 1970's, the US imported the majority of its oil and most recently, Canada has been the country of origin for approximately one third of that supply. At 3.9 million barrels per day (bbl/d), Canada is the 5th largest oil producing country on the planet with only one major client – the United States. What's more, Canada imports 50% of American oil exports, meaning we essentially buy back a product similar to what we are already selling – again, as a result of not having adequate pipeline infrastructure within our own nation.
American energy independence seemed like an Hollywood fairy tale just five years ago, but is becoming a reality thanks to the proliferation of unlocking previously uneconomic shale oil deposits. In 2013, the country produced more oil than it imported for the first time in two decades. As a result, the US demand for Canadian oil is hitting a plateau and annual forecasts for imports are declining.
Ultimately, it appears The US doesn't want Canadian pipelines crossing their borders because 1) it would prevent total energy independence, and 2) increased Canadian pipeline infrastructure into the US pipelines decrease the price differential between WTI and WCS, and render the currently large discount a thing of the past.
The rejection of Keystone XL had nothing to do with the environment. While we cannot get our oil to tide water the US has been speeding up pipeline approval and ending a 40 year ban on oil and gas exports.
http://thestarphoenix.com/storyline/this-calgary-columnist-thinks-canada-is-an-embarrassing-failure-on-the-world-stage-due-to-environmental-oversight-of-oil-industry
Why is Canada being such a schmuck? In worldwide oil play, where every other country does whatever it can to develop its oil and gas assets, how is it that Canada is the only player actively taking itself out of the game?
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's latest announcement that there will be additional delays in pipeline approvals must have prompted a chuckle that began in the U.S. and turned into an all out belly-splitter by the time it spread to Venezuela, the Middle East and North Africa. These countries get the main rule that we don't: he who can deliver first, wins.
Anyone who still believes the environmental narrative that restricting oil production is about saving the Earth is naive; it's all about money.
Let's take the example of the United States. While Canada writhes to accommodate American concerns about our oil, the U.S. has taken complete advantage of the delay by exploiting its resources, and why wouldn't it? It's what smart countries do. In the time it's taken to quash the proposed 1,400 kilometres of Keystone XL pipeline, 19,200 kilometres of American pipeline has been built, some of it serving Canada.
The U.S. has quickly gone from being an importer of oil, to becoming the largest oil producer in the world, now exporting overseas for the first time in 40 years. The large American-owned oil companies operating in Canada are actually doing quite well; in fact, the more paralysis on Canadian fronts, the bigger their value stateside. We've just paid for that by sacrificing the smaller Canadian companies with no net decrease in overall oil production. Oops.
In fact, while our governments are being do-goody apologists-in-chief, Washington has furthermore committed to helping Kenya raise $18 billion for a 900-kilometre pipeline that will roll through endangered species habitats in the Great Rift Valley to the Indian Ocean. It's only an environmental issue it seems, when it's a Canadian pipeline.
We even marginalize ourselves in our own country. How amusing it must seem to our competitors, that in turning on ourselves, we implode our industry, unable to get pipelines built to supply even our own family.
The irony that Eastern Canada will buy even more oil from the U.S. rather than from a domestic industry that employs so many of them and pays so many of their bills, is beyond a joke. That Canada sits on the third largest oil reserves in the world, and we can't even create domestic independence, much less an export industry, is not only an embarrassing failure, but one can hardly imagine that it's prudent national policy. Yet here we are.
Looking forward to a guarantee of massive government grants, alternative energy sources are the new frontier of capitalism, good at sponsoring the rhetoric that fits the stick-it-to-the-man perspective we seem to absorb with such fervour and lack of critical thinking. As for the other objectors, does anyone really think obstruction of pipelines can't be salved with more money?
For its part, Alberta's carbon tax will reduce energy use not a whit, but will cycle more money to government.
Ottawa's new rules for project approval will be arbitrary, based on cabinet political opinion rather than the evidence-based science of National Energy Board professionals who achieve the most stringent standards on the planet.
This is nothing less than a way for the feds to take control of provincial assets — an egregious interference and outrageous demonstration of political swagger.
More dithering on pipelines is likely to make this all a moot point: Demand for oil doesn't remain unsatisfied, and someone else will fill the order.
Delaying pipelines just changes who profits — and apparently, it won't be Canada, even in Canada.
What rubes we must seem, behaving as though we believe other countries are joining us in a kind of lower-emissions Peace Corps initiative. Outmanoeuvred we are in this game, to say the least.
Fiscal reality MAY have finally hit the Grits right in the face. It seems they may now start doing their job as the federal government and facilitate critical energy infrastructure. We cannot grow the way we need to to afford all Trudeau's cash giveaways if Alberta and Saskatchewan are denied international access to world prices for their product.
Quote
On Monday it was reported that senior federal cabinet ministers have succeeded in convincing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that if his government is to reach the revenue targets required to fund all its spending dreams, he will have to convince the premiers that the country needs not just one, but two pipelines.
The national economy simply cannot grow enough without Alberta and Saskatchewan being able to get their bitumen and heavy oil to refineries and ports.
Apparently finance minister Bill Morneau and some of the other grownups at the cabinet table have managed to persuade Prime Minister Selfie that to govern it is not enough just to Tweet fashionable platitudes, skip around the country emoting with gushy fans and jet off to D.C. for a bromance festival with Barack Obama.
Reportedly, Trudeau is now aware the whole country needs Energy East to New Brunswick and the twinning of Kinder Morgan's existing Trans Mountain pipeline to Vancouver.
Just that admission of reality is an achievement.
The federal NDP couldn't do it.
At their national convention in Edmonton over the weekend, the New Dems voted overwhelmingly to spend the next two years debating whether to adopt the ultra-leftist Leap Manifesto; the most left-wing document to be introduced into a major party since the NDP's Waffle movement created the Manifesto for an Independent Socialist Canada in 1969.
The two documents – Leap and Independent Socialist – are very similar in tone and objective.
Alberta NDP Premier Rachel Notley has spent much of her time since Sunday's Leap vote running away from the anti-oil, anti-pipeline, pro-socialism document. Leap's call for an immediate halt to further pipeline construction and an end to all use of fossil fuels within a generation would rob her new provincial government of any hope of re-election – and it has little enough hope already.
On Monday, while the federal Liberals were quietly letting it be known that they had been mugged by fiscal reality – and were now behind two pipeline projects – Premier Notley was feverishly trying to convince Albertans that a) the Leap Manifesto vote was non-binding ("It's just for discussion," she told a news conference.) and b) if the manifesto ever became federal NDP policy, she and her party will... well, she's not clear on what she would do if that happens.
Would her wing of the party breakaway from main body? She won't go that far.
So while the NDP were busy committing doctrine-assisted suicide, the federal Liberals were at least giving the appearance of "getting it."
Big plans require big money, and big money requires a strong economy, and like it or not, a strong economy requires the West being able to sell its oil and gas at world prices – lots of oil and gas.
And all of that requires pipelines. But saying yes to pipelines is the easy part (except, of course, if you're a faculty-club New Democrat).
Lots of real-life barriers remain in the Liberals' way. And it is not entirely clear they have the stomach to overcome them.
Trudeau has promised to wait for National Energy Board approval before going ahead with pipelines, and he has made NEB approval harder to get.
He also has a desire to win more seats in Quebec next election – the province where pipelines are the least popular. And his provincial cousin – Liberal Premier Christy Clark – is facing re-election in 2017 in B.C., where pipelines are the second-most unpopular.
Then there are the potential objections of First Nations, who Trudeau has promised may have a veto over such developments.
Monday's news was good. But a long road still lies ahead.
http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/04/12/trudeau-now-gets-it-on-pipelines
Quote from: "seoulbro"
===
Anyone who still believes the environmental narrative that restricting oil production is about saving the Earth is naive; it's all about money.
===
Let's take the example of the United States. While Canada writhes to accommodate American concerns about our oil, the U.S. has taken complete advantage of the delay by exploiting its resources, and why wouldn't it? It's what smart countries do. In the time it's taken to quash the proposed 1,400 kilometres of Keystone XL pipeline, 19,200 kilometres of American pipeline has been built, some of it serving Canada.
===
It's only an environmental issue it seems, when it's a Canadian pipeline.
Thanks for a long, thoughtful post. This kind of perspective is one reason I joined this forum. Although I've only quoted parts of it, I did read it all.
I am probably not much better informed on the issue than most Yanks are, which makes me quite ignorant I suspect. But the two or three things I have to offer might surprise you, or at least illuminate some of your views of the US.
Several of my friends are Greens, rather than Dems or Reps. I hear a lot from them. Because the issue du jour right now is hydraulic fracking, and because the industry is rich enough to buy local pols with ease, and because I live between two major fault lines and fracking is empirically suspected in earthquakes now (as well as increased radon emissions and groundwater pollution) the fracking issue is on center stage around here with libs and greens.
Most people I know did oppose Keystone, but not for any reason beyond its being an oil pipeline. Oil pipelines generally, in the US midwest, have a poor safety record due to many factors that are mostly related to corporate greed....poor maintenance, poor oversight, lack of safety valving, slam-dunk construction in unwise areas, etc. It has been assumed that Keystone would be bad for this reason, but not because of any real thoughts about the Canadian oil industry as opposed to the US oil industry. In fact the thought that they are two separate interests has scarcely even crossed my own mind until recently.
For these reasons it is also safe to expect that newly constructed US pipelines would be met with the same groundswell of objections...yet they have not. I believe the reason is that the US media has virtually blacked out the construction of those pipelines, and the ordinary and usual lib and green watchdogs were evidently either looking the other way or else they were also in the tank. I don't pay a lot of attention to news, but although I have idly wondered how the hell they were gonna get all that oil from the Bakken field to a refinery or a tanker I simply haven't seen any headlines to speak of.
Quote from: "Peaches"
Several of my friends are Greens, rather than Dems or Reps. I hear a lot from them. Because the issue du jour right now is hydraulic fracking, and because the industry is rich enough to buy local pols with ease, and because I live between two major fault lines and fracking is empirically suspected in earthquakes now (as well as increased radon emissions and groundwater pollution)
Most buying of pols across this continent is buy selfish big greens. It's the reason we cannot get a new pipeline to tidewater and international markets because of downtown Toronto greens with a bigger carbon footprint than most working Canadians. The greedy Grinch greens get outside help of course from California billionaire. In your country it is Steyer, Rockefellers and of course Hollywood celebrities are among the finaciers who have the money to block energy projects.
As a wellsite consultant I can do drilling and completions/workovers. I have overseen hundreds of fracked wells across North America. In Western Canada nearly 200, 000 wells have been fracked for gas and oil. It has brought great prosperity to the area and not a single confirmed case of groundwater contamination. Drilling water wells is worse for the environment that fracking for gas and oil
Quote
Pipelines are the safest way to transport anything across the US. Not a single case of injury in 2011 alone. That is amazing considering the billions and billions of gallons of oil that are transported around the US annually.
If there is a spill, it is usually on old infrastructure that was built more than 45 years ago. Todays modern pipelines with advanced pigs can be shut down in seconds if the pressure becomes to great at a pumping station. They are more environmentally friendly than pleasure boats.
Quote
The big green lobby in Canada has lots of money, lots of influence. Don't worry about them. They will continue to work against the interests of mortgage paying Canadians and Americans.
^^There is intelligent environmentalism, but what we have now is a war on working people. Our so called party of working families in Canada has totally abandoned their working class base. They have been hijacked by the latte quaffing downtown wealthy greens who are not only NIMBY's, but also consider all of Canada their own private back yard. Unfortunately they have resources disproportionate to their numbers.
It is good to see that some American politicians have not sold out working Americans entirely to the massive international green conglomerates the way so many pols in Canada have.