Alberta, B.C., And Pipelines
rickc @ Wed Mar 07, 2018 2:24 am
+5 You know how we give individuals rep points? Well I would like to give the forum some rep points. It is really refreshing to come on a Canadian forum and actually see some Canadian topics being discussed! ![[B-o]](./images/smilies/drinkup.gif "Drink up")
This might be a first since Trump got elected. Hopefully we can see a lot more of threads like this one!!!
martin14 @ Wed Mar 07, 2018 2:44 am
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
[popcorn]
Giving the provinces control over natural resources was a serious mistake.
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
It isn't Horgan who's running BC it's Weaver and this is one of his talking points. Without Weaver's support the BC NDP are dead in the water because as it stands now Weaver and his Environuts are the balance of power in our province.
BC Green Party 3
BC Green Party 3
Yes and No.
You can't place all the blame on the Greens, the NDP has to have
basic support for it in the first place.
Granted, the eco-nuts aren't helping the situation.
Funny thing is, thinking that herbie's position is an extreme one in BC.. isn't.
He is happy to sacrifice other people's jobs for his own selfishness,
like a lot of BCers.
rickc rickc:
R=UP +5 You know how we give individuals rep points? Well I would like to give the forum some rep points. It is really refreshing to come on a Canadian forum and actually see some Canadian topics being discussed!
Honestly, it isn't much fun to watch Canadians devolve themselves into arguing
default provincial points. Doesn't do much for cohesion in the country.
DrCaleb @ Wed Mar 07, 2018 7:27 am
Thanos Thanos:
Right now I'd say Kenney is all but guaranteed to win the next Alberta election, especially after his open threat to BC to go nuclear over the pipeline.
I think when people realize former, and well respected, Edmonton mayor Stephen Mandell is heading up a new right-center party, I think he'll win. No one wants to take a chance on that Kenney nutter.
bootlegga @ Wed Mar 07, 2018 10:42 am
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
Thanos Thanos:
Right now I'd say Kenney is all but guaranteed to win the next Alberta election, especially after his open threat to BC to go nuclear over the pipeline.
I think when people realize former, and well respected, Edmonton mayor Stephen Mandell is heading up a new right-center party, I think he'll win. No one wants to take a chance on that Kenney nutter.
I'd like to believe that, but the Alberta Party has a long way to go to get 87 candidates and a decent-sized war chest built up in time for next year's election.
However, I could see them with the same king-maker role the Greens have in BC if they can win between 10-15 seats. I expect the NDP will maintain a chunk of their seats in Edmonton, but lose most, if not all, of their rural and suburban seats. Rural seats will almost certainly go to the UCP, but the Alberta Party could pick up the suburban seats with some hard work and decent funding.
The real battleground will be Calgary - whoever wins the most seats there will likely form the next government.
herbie @ Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:29 am
$1:
While upgrading a shuttered refinery is a nice idea, I doubt you'll find a company willing to spend a couple billion to do it - it's too risky, especially because its service life would probably only be a couple decades and might not generate enough to pay back its capital costs.
TMX will probably drop gas prices, because the lower mainland would no longer be constrained by the production limits of the tiny Burnaby refinery (55,000 BPD) and would be able to access the production from much larger refineries in Alberta. But if the pipeline went from 300,000 BPD to 900,000 BPD, there would be plenty of room for growth in diesel fuel, jet fuel and gasoline for a long time.
TMX will probably drop gas prices, because the lower mainland would no longer be constrained by the production limits of the tiny Burnaby refinery (55,000 BPD) and would be able to access the production from much larger refineries in Alberta. But if the pipeline went from 300,000 BPD to 900,000 BPD, there would be plenty of room for growth in diesel fuel, jet fuel and gasoline for a long time.
Yeah, you get the big picture.
Including the service life which is why Alberta should be the site of the big new refineries, right at the oilfields. Even simple refining bitumen into crude oil is added value. Plus less opposition piping known products with known cleanup solutions.
20 years from now the demand for gas is going to be way down in the Lower Mainland, I'm surprised it isn't right now. FFS there isn't anywhere there out of range or in a better climate for a Nissan Leaf or Chevy Bolt right now, never mind in the future.
But you still have the black or white problem. They'll protest LNG pipes because pipelines are bad, mkay? while the other side insists the dock's going on a spawning ground, not one inch to the side and that's all there is to it.
$1:
But if anyone wondered what proportional representation would look like all they have to do is look at BC where the party with the least number of seats is the party calling the shots.
And here we go mocking anything other than either/or. The saying is 'politics is the art of compromise' not 'the art of confrontation'.
Plus, take a look at where those NDP and Green seats came from. Seems to be right where the shit's hitting the fan.
bootlegga @ Wed Mar 07, 2018 2:17 pm
herbie herbie:
$1:
While upgrading a shuttered refinery is a nice idea, I doubt you'll find a company willing to spend a couple billion to do it - it's too risky, especially because its service life would probably only be a couple decades and might not generate enough to pay back its capital costs.
TMX will probably drop gas prices, because the lower mainland would no longer be constrained by the production limits of the tiny Burnaby refinery (55,000 BPD) and would be able to access the production from much larger refineries in Alberta. But if the pipeline went from 300,000 BPD to 900,000 BPD, there would be plenty of room for growth in diesel fuel, jet fuel and gasoline for a long time.
TMX will probably drop gas prices, because the lower mainland would no longer be constrained by the production limits of the tiny Burnaby refinery (55,000 BPD) and would be able to access the production from much larger refineries in Alberta. But if the pipeline went from 300,000 BPD to 900,000 BPD, there would be plenty of room for growth in diesel fuel, jet fuel and gasoline for a long time.
Yeah, you get the big picture.
Including the service life which is why Alberta should be the site of the big new refineries, right at the oilfields. Even simple refining bitumen into crude oil is added value. Plus less opposition piping known products with known cleanup solutions.
20 years from now the demand for gas is going to be way down in the Lower Mainland, I'm surprised it isn't right now. FFS there isn't anywhere there out of range or in a better climate for a Nissan Leaf or Chevy Bolt right now, never mind in the future.
But you still have the black or white problem. They'll protest LNG pipes because pipelines are bad, mkay? while the other side insists the dock's going on a spawning ground, not one inch to the side and that's all there is to it.
As I noted to Zip, Alberta does have lots of refineries, both in the oil sands and in the Edmonton region (the smallest of which is 50% larger than the Burnaby one).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_o ... es#Alberta
That's why expanding the pipeline makes sense - gas in the Lower mainland already either comes from Edmonton refineries or Washington State refineries - and the stuff from south of the border comes by truck and train, which increases the risk of spills and environmental damage.
I agree that regular gas demand will drop in the next decade or two in the Lower Mainland, but until someone figures out how to run a jet airplane on something other than Jet-A, that demand will remain - and that's a large chunk of what goes through the existing pipeline right now. Most of the rest is gas and diesel fuel, very little is actually oil for export.
Unfortunately, the far left is often just as unwilling to listen to facts as the far right is.
herbie @ Wed Mar 07, 2018 3:15 pm
$1:
Funny thing is, thinking that herbie's position is an extreme one in BC.. isn't.
He is happy to sacrifice other people's jobs for his own selfishness,
like a lot of BCers.
He is happy to sacrifice other people's jobs for his own selfishness,
like a lot of BCers.
Confirming my opinion that you're the stupidest contributor to this forum, you once again claim another member says the exact fucking opposite of what they posted.
Thanos @ Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:03 pm
Notley officially moves Alberta from DefCon-5 to Defcon-3, threatens to shut off oil to BC altogether if BC NDP/Green government continues with illegal obstructionism:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/ ... -1.4567873
$1:
The Alberta government is taking a page from the playbook of former premier Peter Lougheed by threatening to cut oil exports in its fight against B.C.'s efforts to stop the expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline.
In Thursday's throne speech, Alberta Premier Rachel Notley threatened to "invoke similar legislation" if B.C. takes "extreme and illegal actions" to stop the $7.4-billion project.
Notley suggested in a news conference earlier in the day that the province is particularly vulnerable to fluctuations in supply.
"There is no question that the lower mainland of B.C. in particular struggles from rather high gas prices and that they have a very high sensitivity to supply changes," she said.
Notley said some British Columbians who are concerned about the environment seem not to understand that decisions that affect the economy don't just hurt Albertans, but have impacts across this country.
In 1980, Lougheed fought Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau's national energy program by passing a regulation to restrict the amount of oil and gas leaving Alberta.
The government also stopped issuing permits for natural gas exports.
Notley has been pushing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to lean harder on B.C. so it will stop delaying the project that would nearly triple the pipeline's capacity to 890,000 barrels a day. But the B.C. government created uncertainty in late January when it proposed limits on shipments of diluted bitumen while it further studied the risk of oil spills on the Pacific coast.
In retaliation, Notley announced Alberta would boycott all B.C. wines, arguing B.C. Premier John Horgan's government was violating the Constitution.
The boycott was suspended after Horgan retreated on the threat, deciding instead to put the constitutional question to the courts.
Horgan is ever mindful of the three Green Party MLAs who hold the balance of power in the B.C. legislature. Green Party Leader Andrew Weaver has vowed the expansion will never be built.
In Thursday's throne speech, Alberta Premier Rachel Notley threatened to "invoke similar legislation" if B.C. takes "extreme and illegal actions" to stop the $7.4-billion project.
Notley suggested in a news conference earlier in the day that the province is particularly vulnerable to fluctuations in supply.
"There is no question that the lower mainland of B.C. in particular struggles from rather high gas prices and that they have a very high sensitivity to supply changes," she said.
Notley said some British Columbians who are concerned about the environment seem not to understand that decisions that affect the economy don't just hurt Albertans, but have impacts across this country.
In 1980, Lougheed fought Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau's national energy program by passing a regulation to restrict the amount of oil and gas leaving Alberta.
The government also stopped issuing permits for natural gas exports.
Notley has been pushing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to lean harder on B.C. so it will stop delaying the project that would nearly triple the pipeline's capacity to 890,000 barrels a day. But the B.C. government created uncertainty in late January when it proposed limits on shipments of diluted bitumen while it further studied the risk of oil spills on the Pacific coast.
In retaliation, Notley announced Alberta would boycott all B.C. wines, arguing B.C. Premier John Horgan's government was violating the Constitution.
The boycott was suspended after Horgan retreated on the threat, deciding instead to put the constitutional question to the courts.
Horgan is ever mindful of the three Green Party MLAs who hold the balance of power in the B.C. legislature. Green Party Leader Andrew Weaver has vowed the expansion will never be built.
BRAH @ Sat Mar 10, 2018 5:26 am
_______________
Notley's credibility is questionable but when she became Premier the reality of the position probably hit her like a freight train.
herbie @ Sat Mar 10, 2018 10:11 am
Is the Trans Mountain pipeline really an ocean-murdering hellspawn like B.C. says it is?
Not that aforementioned kayaker with the man bun and face piercings is going to believe it. No that ONE extra ship a day will seek out and kill the orcas (don't look at the container port growth - no that brings in my avacados, iWatches and chinese made kayaks)
In reality the WORST effect from all this electioneering bullshit is that people down there are already shelling out over $1.50 a litre.
And still not thinking propane, CNG conversions or electric cars at $1.50
Now being psyched to prepare for $2 even $3 a litre.
That means the oil industry knows ALL OF YOU will shell out 50-100% more for gas. You'll just bitch and moan and make due like good Canadians and carry on. So don't be surprised when prices soar in Ontario, even in Alberta.
They already have their legions of SNL's Jon Lovitz "the liar's" and scripts for newspapers and radio talk shows:
It's those goddam taxes! They're taxing us to death!
It's the greenies and their carbon tax!
All those electric cars are driving demand down, so gas prices have to go up!
JaredMilne @ Sat Mar 10, 2018 10:18 am
There are a couple of points that crossed my mind while reading the exchanges in this thread:
-I wonder if Herbie does have a point about the cleanup costs of spills having to be eaten by the public rather than the companies that caused them. I've certainly heard it here in Alberta with the costs of reclaiming abandoned wells being passed on to us as the taxpayer. I'm not an expert on it, so maybe I'm misinformed?
-Sometimes I'm glad to be proven right. Other times I hate it, such as when I wrote back in 2015 about how Harper was royally screwing the pooch on pipelines. The reduction in funding for the Coast Guard was mentioned here, and there's also the problem of reducing funding for spill cleanups. So the anti-pipeline crusaders in B.C. have gotten a lot of gift-wrapped ammunition from Harper.
-OTOH, I'm curious as to where the fuel for everything from heating to transportation is supposed to come from without oil and gas development. Herbie mentioned that gas demand in the Vancouver area is supposed to sharply decrease-why is that? I'd have thought that transporting goods to outlying communities, not just in B.C. but across Canada, would still need O&G. That was one of the problems I had with the Leap Manifesto-I'm all for helping local communities thrive (whether they be Indigenous reserves, non-Native rural communities, or communities in places like Nunavut and Saltspring Island) but how do we transport people and goods to and from there?
If B.C. communities don't use Alberta oil and gas, whose O&G should they use?
-If I ever get the chance to meet Mike Hudema or Naomi Klein in person, I'd ask them what they feel about the Chavez revolution in Venezuela, and how Chavez funded so many of his promises with oil money. Why should Venezuela benefit from O&G sales, but Canada shouldn't?
I really hate arguing along the same lines as Ezra Levant, but like Boots I'm trying to figure out where to go from here.
-This might be me speaking from ignorance, but why is the pipeline going on a spawning ground, as herbie says? I've heard proposals for the pipeline to go to some place like Prince George. Would that have been a more viable location? So how much of the opposition to the pipeline is based on its proposed route, rather than just on principle the way the Mike Hudemas are protesting?
Mowich @ Sat Mar 10, 2018 12:26 pm
Living in the BC Interior, I am about as far removed politically and ideologically from the Left Coast as I would be on the moon. I would gladly pay higher prices at the pump to see this current crop of elected NDP and Green politicians hoisted on their own petards.
Freakinoldguy @ Sat Mar 10, 2018 12:27 pm
Thanos Thanos:
Notley officially moves Alberta from DefCon-5 to Defcon-3, threatens to shut off oil to BC altogether if BC NDP/Green government continues with illegal obstructionism:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/ ... -1.4567873
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/ ... -1.4567873
$1:
The Alberta government is taking a page from the playbook of former premier Peter Lougheed by threatening to cut oil exports in its fight against B.C.'s efforts to stop the expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline.
In Thursday's throne speech, Alberta Premier Rachel Notley threatened to "invoke similar legislation" if B.C. takes "extreme and illegal actions" to stop the $7.4-billion project.
Notley suggested in a news conference earlier in the day that the province is particularly vulnerable to fluctuations in supply.
"There is no question that the lower mainland of B.C. in particular struggles from rather high gas prices and that they have a very high sensitivity to supply changes," she said.
Notley said some British Columbians who are concerned about the environment seem not to understand that decisions that affect the economy don't just hurt Albertans, but have impacts across this country.
In 1980, Lougheed fought Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau's national energy program by passing a regulation to restrict the amount of oil and gas leaving Alberta.
The government also stopped issuing permits for natural gas exports.
Notley has been pushing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to lean harder on B.C. so it will stop delaying the project that would nearly triple the pipeline's capacity to 890,000 barrels a day. But the B.C. government created uncertainty in late January when it proposed limits on shipments of diluted bitumen while it further studied the risk of oil spills on the Pacific coast.
In retaliation, Notley announced Alberta would boycott all B.C. wines, arguing B.C. Premier John Horgan's government was violating the Constitution.
The boycott was suspended after Horgan retreated on the threat, deciding instead to put the constitutional question to the courts.
Horgan is ever mindful of the three Green Party MLAs who hold the balance of power in the B.C. legislature. Green Party Leader Andrew Weaver has vowed the expansion will never be built.
In Thursday's throne speech, Alberta Premier Rachel Notley threatened to "invoke similar legislation" if B.C. takes "extreme and illegal actions" to stop the $7.4-billion project.
Notley suggested in a news conference earlier in the day that the province is particularly vulnerable to fluctuations in supply.
"There is no question that the lower mainland of B.C. in particular struggles from rather high gas prices and that they have a very high sensitivity to supply changes," she said.
Notley said some British Columbians who are concerned about the environment seem not to understand that decisions that affect the economy don't just hurt Albertans, but have impacts across this country.
In 1980, Lougheed fought Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau's national energy program by passing a regulation to restrict the amount of oil and gas leaving Alberta.
The government also stopped issuing permits for natural gas exports.
Notley has been pushing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to lean harder on B.C. so it will stop delaying the project that would nearly triple the pipeline's capacity to 890,000 barrels a day. But the B.C. government created uncertainty in late January when it proposed limits on shipments of diluted bitumen while it further studied the risk of oil spills on the Pacific coast.
In retaliation, Notley announced Alberta would boycott all B.C. wines, arguing B.C. Premier John Horgan's government was violating the Constitution.
The boycott was suspended after Horgan retreated on the threat, deciding instead to put the constitutional question to the courts.
Horgan is ever mindful of the three Green Party MLAs who hold the balance of power in the B.C. legislature. Green Party Leader Andrew Weaver has vowed the expansion will never be built.
![[cheer]](./images/smilies/icon_cheers.gif "Cheer"){kind=icon}
And now all the good people in BC who don't live in cities with an effective bus and rapid transit system, wear birnkenstocks, chullo's and North Face jackets can pay 2 to 3 dollars a litre for gas the costs of which will be passed on to everyone in BC through increased costs across the board for pretty much everything.
images.jpg [ 11.83 KiB | Viewed 459 times ]
BC's Premier, Jon Whorgan has become a modern day Dr. Faustus willingly selling his and everyone else in this provinces soul to that Green Devil Andrew Weaver just so he can keep power.
BRAH @ Sat Mar 10, 2018 7:36 pm
herbie herbie:
Is the Trans Mountain pipeline really an ocean-murdering hellspawn like B.C. says it is?
Not that aforementioned kayaker with the man bun and face piercings is going to believe it. No that ONE extra ship a day will seek out and kill the orcas (don't look at the container port growth - no that brings in my avacados, iWatches and chinese made kayaks)
In reality the WORST effect from all this electioneering bullshit is that people down there are already shelling out over $1.50 a litre.
And still not thinking propane, CNG conversions or electric cars at $1.50
Now being psyched to prepare for $2 even $3 a litre.
That means the oil industry knows ALL OF YOU will shell out 50-100% more for gas. You'll just bitch and moan and make due like good Canadians and carry on. So don't be surprised when prices soar in Ontario, even in Alberta.
They already have their legions of SNL's Jon Lovitz "the liar's" and scripts for newspapers and radio talk shows:
It's those goddam taxes! They're taxing us to death!
It's the greenies and their carbon tax!
All those electric cars are driving demand down, so gas prices have to go up!
Not that aforementioned kayaker with the man bun and face piercings is going to believe it. No that ONE extra ship a day will seek out and kill the orcas (don't look at the container port growth - no that brings in my avacados, iWatches and chinese made kayaks)
In reality the WORST effect from all this electioneering bullshit is that people down there are already shelling out over $1.50 a litre.
And still not thinking propane, CNG conversions or electric cars at $1.50
Now being psyched to prepare for $2 even $3 a litre.
That means the oil industry knows ALL OF YOU will shell out 50-100% more for gas. You'll just bitch and moan and make due like good Canadians and carry on. So don't be surprised when prices soar in Ontario, even in Alberta.
They already have their legions of SNL's Jon Lovitz "the liar's" and scripts for newspapers and radio talk shows:
It's those goddam taxes! They're taxing us to death!
It's the greenies and their carbon tax!
All those electric cars are driving demand down, so gas prices have to go up!
Gas prices in Vancouver are what they are no matter how much whining people do which is why ride sharing companies and transit is a better option. As for electric cars they're a bullshit status symbol while hybrids are more realistic as daily drivers.
Thanos @ Sun Apr 08, 2018 3:43 pm
Bump. Looks like, after all the drama and recriminations, that the bad guys just quietly won:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/ ... -1.4610626
$1:
Kinder Morgan is suspending "non-essential activities" and related spending for the Trans Mountain pipeline project, citing ongoing opposition from the British Columbia government.
"In the current environment, we will not put [Kinder Morgan] shareholders at risk on the remaining project spend," Steve Kean, Kinder Morgan's chair and chief executive officer, said in a press release Sunday afternoon.
The company said it will, however, consult with stakeholders in an effort to reach agreements before May 31 that could allow the pipeline project to proceed.
The pipeline project has support from the federal government, as well as the provincial governments in Alberta and Saskatchewan.
On a swing through western Canada this week, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau repeatedly cited his government's backing of the pipeline.
The company said that the active opposition from B.C. and its premier John Horgan is not something it can deal with and it needs to take action to protect its shareholders.
A statement from federal Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr on Sunday urged the B.C. government to "end all threats of delay" to the pipeline expansion.
"His government's actions stand to harm the entire Canadian economy. At a time of great global trade uncertainly, the importance of Canada's role in the global energy market is bigger than individual projects and provinces."
"A company cannot resolve differences between governments," Kean said.
"While we have succeeded in all legal challenges to date, a company cannot litigate its way to an in-service pipeline amidst jurisdictional differences between governments."
"In the current environment, we will not put [Kinder Morgan] shareholders at risk on the remaining project spend," Steve Kean, Kinder Morgan's chair and chief executive officer, said in a press release Sunday afternoon.
The company said it will, however, consult with stakeholders in an effort to reach agreements before May 31 that could allow the pipeline project to proceed.
The pipeline project has support from the federal government, as well as the provincial governments in Alberta and Saskatchewan.
On a swing through western Canada this week, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau repeatedly cited his government's backing of the pipeline.
The company said that the active opposition from B.C. and its premier John Horgan is not something it can deal with and it needs to take action to protect its shareholders.
A statement from federal Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr on Sunday urged the B.C. government to "end all threats of delay" to the pipeline expansion.
"His government's actions stand to harm the entire Canadian economy. At a time of great global trade uncertainly, the importance of Canada's role in the global energy market is bigger than individual projects and provinces."
"A company cannot resolve differences between governments," Kean said.
"While we have succeeded in all legal challenges to date, a company cannot litigate its way to an in-service pipeline amidst jurisdictional differences between governments."
This country sometimes. Sigh.
