Official (Alberta) Oil Discussion Thread

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

This says - literally - nothing

This to me is what bugs me just not about Trudeau but politicians as a whole over the last 20 years.

Basically every answer is, we're going to have discussions. We're going to talk to some guys. We're going to have frank conferences.

At some point, stfu and do something.

For Trudeau, every answer is we're going to talk, and make people feel good about talking.

But I fear that when it comes time to do anything, nothing is going to be the answer.

It reminds me of a joke that we used to tell where a politician is asked about his position on something and the answer was

"Well I can't give you an answer to this question now except to let you know that we're taking it seriously, but as a government we're going to form a committee to look at it, and discuss it and debate all points of it, and get to the meat of the matter. But until we have a chance to fit this into the calendar, I can give you a clear answer that its a definite, probable maybe"

[Slava]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

This to me is what bugs me just not about Trudeau but politicians as a whole over the last 20 years.

Basically every answer is, we're going to have discussions. We're going to talk to some guys. We're going to have frank conferences.

At some point, stfu and do something.

For Trudeau, every answer is we're going to talk, and make people feel good about talking.

But I fear that when it comes time to do anything, nothing is going to be the answer.

It reminds me of a joke that we used to tell where a politician is asked about his position on something and the answer was

"Well I can't give you an answer to this question now except to let you know that we're taking it seriously, but as a government we're going to form a committee to look at it, and discuss it and debate all points of it, and get to the meat of the matter. But until we have a chance to fit this into the calendar, I can give you a clear answer that its a definite, probable maybe"

OK, so lets hear what the plan should be? Given that the pipelines haven't been approved by the NEB, and they have to go through that process, what exactly would you like to see?

I know the answer that is coming is along the lines of "he should say he will definitely approve them." I actually think he is right in his approach to not wade into that before the NEB conducts their review though. If the pipelines are going to be rammed down peoples throats with no consultation, you will have other problems with implementation. I'm a pretty firm believer that if Northern Gateway was going to go forward with that kind of attitude you would have seen a Supreme Court challenge by the First Nations in BC. So yeah...maybe this process is going to take some time, but things that would take even longer. That doesn't even get to the point of blockades and all kinds of other civil disobedience and disruptions.

And lastly, his quote (which wasn't a direct quote by the way), does say something. It says we tried the other way for ten years and it didn't work. He is trying a different tact and thinks it will work. Seems straight-forward to me actually.

I might just be eternally optimistic that it will work. But really I hope that his tactics are successful in getting at least one if not more pipelines built. I think its long overdue, and if getting that done means some consultation and pacification then I'm more or less fine with that. Just find a way to get it done.

[ranchlandsselling]

Build a nuke plant beside Edmonton already.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Locke

Conclusive evidence that you know nothing about solar power.

You should probably tell my boss that then.

And yay for more abject cynicism.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by SebC

Yeah and how's that going for them?

Pretty well actually if you read independent research on the outcomes so far.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Pretty well actually if you read independent research on the outcomes so far.

Isn't it only close to profitable due to the subsidies though?

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Slava

Isn't it only close to profitable due to the subsidies though?

So if we subsidize something it's automatically bad? Do the unconventional oil subsidies that were implemented in this very province fail your test as well, y'know for being consistent and all?

Solar really is not that huge a loser, energy returned in capital invested is approaching the oil sands and solar's net energy return is higher than oil sands.

Don't listen to me though because I don't know anything.

[Slava]

^ lol, take it easy, it was a pretty simple question. Judging by that though, no its not profitable without the subsidy?

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Slava

^ lol, take it easy, it was a pretty simple question. Judging by that though, no its not profitable without the subsidy?

So what's the point of your question?

[Slava]

I just wondered if its profitable. I haven't seen how it is, but figured you would have more up to date info to add. Its bizarre because solar isn't new technology. I guess its just not that efficient or is there another reason?

[Tinordi]

Solar has the highest net return in Alberta of anywhere in Canada because Alberta's solar resource (sunny days) are the highest. Meaning as the cost of PV continues to decline it will be able to compete the best without subsidy based on the raw performance characteristics in Alberta. The bigger issue will be the market framework and how it will value solar.

This won't be far off either. Solar is approaching grid parity in a number of southern states right now.

Just another note on subsidy, coal power releases criteria air contaminants with clearly researched health impacts on Albertans yet the generators don't pay for that. Is that a subsidy?

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Solar has the highest net return in Alberta of anywhere in Canada because Alberta's solar resource (sunny days) are the highest. Meaning as the cost of PV continues to decline it will be able to compete the best without subsidy based on the raw performance characteristics in Alberta. The bigger issue will be the market framework and how it will value solar.

This won't be far off either. Solar is approaching grid parity in a number of southern states right now.

Just another note on subsidy, coal power releases criteria air contaminants with clearly researched health impacts on Albertans yet the generators don't pay for that. Is that a subsidy?

It should be acceptable on both sides of the political spectrum (I know it's not, but it should be) to tax and subsidize energy sources based on their impact to the society of a country. That should include air quality, climate, health, and long term wealth and employment factors.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

OK, so lets hear what the plan should be? Given that the pipelines haven't been approved by the NEB, and they have to go through that process, what exactly would you like to see?

I know the answer that is coming is along the lines of "he should say he will definitely approve them." I actually think he is right in his approach to not wade into that before the NEB conducts their review though. If the pipelines are going to be rammed down peoples throats with no consultation, you will have other problems with implementation. I'm a pretty firm believer that if Northern Gateway was going to go forward with that kind of attitude you would have seen a Supreme Court challenge by the First Nations in BC. So yeah...maybe this process is going to take some time, but things that would take even longer. That doesn't even get to the point of blockades and all kinds of other civil disobedience and disruptions.

And lastly, his quote (which wasn't a direct quote by the way), does say something. It says we tried the other way for ten years and it didn't work. He is trying a different tact and thinks it will work. Seems straight-forward to me actually.

I might just be eternally optimistic that it will work. But really I hope that his tactics are successful in getting at least one if not more pipelines built. I think its long overdue, and if getting that done means some consultation and pacification then I'm more or less fine with that. Just find a way to get it done.

Fine you want my plan

First of all, if I was prime minister, I would announce that on Monday, all Unemployment insurance benefits for Alberta and workers laid off from the Oil patch have been extended by a minimum of 6 months.

I would list the pipelines that are under review and set a firm date of a maximum of 18 months for the review. If we have to hire more people to do it, then I would do that.

I would also announce that anyone that is receiving funding from a out of Canada environmental group will not be allowed to participate, also we will only see Canadian based Environmental groups.

I would strongly announce that if it goes through the NEB process and is approved within that next 18 months that the Federal Government will not oppose it.

I would also remind Provincial and Municipal Governments that the transport of Canadian goods across provincial lines is a Federal matter and that we will do what's best for Canada Economically

I would declare a economic state of emergency and announce that whats good for Quebec is good for Alberta and would increase the joke of an emergency fund at $250 million will increase to a billion dollars to help the workers with retraining, relocation credits if it has to happen to find employment, and other programs.

I would release the funds slated for infrastructure spending as soon as the budget was released.

Then because I have a majority government I would suspend democracy and declare myself dictator for life.

[CampbellsTransgressions]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

So if we subsidize something it's automatically bad? Do the unconventional oil subsidies that were implemented in this very province fail your test as well, y'know for being consistent and all?

Solar really is not that huge a loser, energy returned in capital invested is approaching the oil sands and solar's net energy return is higher than oil sands.

Don't listen to me though because I don't know anything.

Within reason, it shouldn't be a problem to subsidize. I'm all for homeowner subsidies.

Ontario is a case of why you shouldn't get too extreme with your subsidies.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Fine you want my plan

First of all, if I was prime minister, I would announce that on Monday, all Unemployment insurance benefits for Alberta and workers laid off from the Oil patch have been extended by a minimum of 6 months.

I would list the pipelines that are under review and set a firm date of a maximum of 18 months for the review. If we have to hire more people to do it, then I would do that.

I would also announce that anyone that is receiving funding from a out of Canada environmental group will not be allowed to participate, also we will only see Canadian based Environmental groups.

I would strongly announce that if it goes through the NEB process and is approved within that next 18 months that the Federal Government will not oppose it.

I would also remind Provincial and Municipal Governments that the transport of Canadian goods across provincial lines is a Federal matter and that we will do what's best for Canada Economically

I would declare a economic state of emergency and announce that whats good for Quebec is good for Alberta and would increase the joke of an emergency fund at $250 million will increase to a billion dollars to help the workers with retraining, relocation credits if it has to happen to find employment, and other programs.

I would release the funds slated for infrastructure spending as soon as the budget was released.

Then because I have a majority government I would suspend democracy and declare myself dictator for life.

A lot of that though is stuff that the federal government has already taken the lead on. They brought up the stabilization fund, improvements to Alberta workers for EI and fast-tracking the infrastructure spending. They haven't named you dictator, but its early in their mandate!

I do totally agree that foreign funded environmental groups should not be involved in the decision, and I do agree that this is a matter under federal jurisdiction so at the end they get the final say (not cities or provinces as much as they might like to think they should).

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

You should probably tell my boss that then.

And yay for more abject cynicism.

I probably should. And I dont consider it 'abject cynicism' I consider it 'informed opinion.'

"Solar has the highest net energy return!!!"

Yeah, only if you totally 'Tyler Dellow' all the statistics.

I've actually seen the process involved in actually manufacturing solar panels and batteries and it is unbelievable. It is horrendously toxic and ridiculously oil-intensive. Its as though people have no concept of how much oil and toxic chemicals are involved in the process of manufacturing a solar panel or how many rare-earth and toxic minerals and materials are involved in producing a solar battery just to harmlessly collect the beautiful rays of the sun and do pretty much absolutely nothing with it.

So yeah, solar power is awesomesauce if you ignore the fact that its incredibly expensive and can only be accomplished via government subsidies, its incredibly toxic and dangerous to manufacture, it requires the highest amount of constant monitoring and maintenance, it generates very little actual energy and what it does generate is difficult to store in any ecological or efficient capacity or transport to where its required and it has to have a constant backup system which is typically fossil-fuel based.

Brilliant. Where do we sign up?

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Locke

I probably should. And I dont consider it 'abject cynicism' I consider it 'informed opinion.'

"Solar has the highest net energy return!!!"

Yeah, only if you totally 'Tyler Dellow' all the statistics.

I've actually seen the process involved in actually manufacturing solar panels and batteries and it is unbelievable. It is horrendously toxic and ridiculously oil-intensive. Its as though people have no concept of how much oil and toxic chemicals are involved in the process of manufacturing a solar panel or how many rare-earth and toxic minerals and materials are involved in producing a solar battery just to harmlessly collect the beautiful rays of the sun and do pretty much absolutely nothing with it.

So yeah, solar power is awesomesauce if you ignore the fact that its incredibly expensive and can only be accomplished via government subsidies, its incredibly toxic and dangerous to manufacture, it requires the highest amount of constant monitoring and maintenance, it generates very little actual energy and what it does generate is difficult to store in any ecological or efficient capacity or transport to where its required and it has to have a constant backup system which is typically fossil-fuel based.

Brilliant. Where do we sign up?

Yeah - remember we must consider all upstream emissions and pollution as well!

Consider that a lot of the solar panels are currently being made in China, where they literally dump rare earth metals into the river, and use electricity from the dirtiest coal power you can find.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Yeah - remember we must consider all upstream emissions and pollution as well!

Consider that a lot of the solar panels are currently being made in China, where they literally dump rare earth metals into the river, and use electricity from the dirtiest coal power you can find.

And the thing is if solar actually generated a reasonable amount of power that could be diverted to where it was needed one could try and and consider all of the pursuant costs as 'short-term pain for long-term gain.'

But they dont.

[Faust]

Why The Marcellus Shale Play Could Spell The End For Canadian Natural Gas:

http://www.albertaoilmagazine.com/20...n-natural-gas/

[indes]

Wow now that is some terrible news