NDP to American's don't buy our tar sands

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

How do you figure that? They'd have to #### up pretty badly to do that, and I doubt anyone who voted for them (especially in Quebec) is going to oppose their actions so far, including going to Washington and questioning the tar sands.

It's so easy for Albertans to lay the smack down on the NDP, yet people on the other side of the country think quite differently - and that is unlikely to change.

Oh so that's why they formed official opposition all those times previously?

Barack wants to re-examine bypassing a fragile part of Nebraska's ecosystem.

Obama wants to get re-elected, and this political hot potato is now off the agenda until after the elections. As soon as it comes back up (after yet another enviromental study) whomever is in office will rubber stamp it so fast, it will be hilarious.

Seems like they're trying to do their job to me.

Who is? The NDP? I thought their agenda was to make sure everyone in canada had a good and fair paying job...not to stump them from happening. Oh I forgot...the NDP doesn't really bcare one bit about Canada, but much moreso about Eastern Canada.

Supporting job creation and growing the economy is not the sole job of an elected official. A good elected official should consider all the concerns of their constituents, both short and long term, and then make their decisions based on their analysis of those concerns. If an elected official determines that it is better (preferably in the long term, but it's usually a short-term consideration, and ideally the consideration should be the actual well being of their constituents, not merely the political repercussions) for them to oppose a particular project then they should do so.

Dont disagree, but in tis case it is irrelevant. that oil is going to come out of the ground at some point whether or not the NDP opposes it or not...and it will be sold most likely to the USA at that time as well.

So what's the point of opposing it? There is no question that the pipeline will create thousands and thousands of good paying jobs on both sides of the border, something they claim to be all about btw, yet here they are trying to minimilze it under the guise that somehow this oil is worse than other oil even though that has proven to not be true.

Its nothing but a bunch of abre-rattling from a group enjoying their 15 minute of fame...and i really want to hear from the NDP rep from Alberat...you know where the mot affected people are...on thi. But we wont...some dbag policy maker sitting in his Ottawa office who hasnt a freaking clue how real world matters are handled will simply continue their charade until they get buried again in the next election.

Its so annoying because at their root, they have a great message and ideals that would be great for many but instead they are playing games with peoples livlihoods to try and be relevant.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

How do you figure that? They'd have to #### up pretty badly to do that, and I doubt anyone who voted for them (especially in Quebec) is going to oppose their actions so far, including going to Washington and questioning the tar sands.

It's so easy for Albertans to lay the smack down on the NDP, yet people on the other side of the country think quite differently - and that is unlikely to change.

So when are the NDP going to go down and tell the American's not to buy Canadian manufactured goods because of the carbon footprint created by Ontario factories.

Or urge American's not to buy paper products because of the horrendous environmnental damage that the Pulp in paper industry creates?

And when the NDP go down to the States on this mission of mercy, they are not representing their constituants, they are representing the country as a whole. A U.S. Senator is not going to say, hey well the people of Quebec city are oppossed to the Tar Sands (Not oil sands, because people like using that name) they are hearing this party that represents the Canadian people do not want us to buy oil.

[Brewmaster]

To the comment about Alberta having all its eggs in one basket... I say the province has some significant diversity in its resources, having large deposits of both oil and natural gas. As the world migrates towards 'clean' energy in the future, the first steps will be moving away from coal and gasoline and the most practical replacement is natural gas.

[simonsays]

This is exactly the type of thing that the NDP ad was supposed to spark. If they spend 10k on an ad in an American paper they'll generate far more interest (controversy) at home than that 10k could ever do.

It's simple, Nycole Turmel isn't exactly a household name yet even among NDP supporters. This move isn't aimed at shutting off the oil, it's about pandering to the base and winning the leadership convention in March.

[troutman]

Green Jobs Are Real: German and American Solar Industry Both Employ More People Than U.S. Steel Production

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/...eel-production

There are now more than 100,000 workers employed in the German solar PV industry alone.

The solar industry is just getting started here in America. Solar is a high-growth industry with the potential to create millions more jobs in a diverse range of sectors

[I heard Bill Clinton talk last week about all the solar jobs created in Germany]

[Barnet Flame]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

europe talking about "dirty oil" these days is as see through as Gillis complaining about reffing to distract everyone from his moody goaltender.
\

Each time a bureaucrat in europe says "dirty oil" the immediate response should be:

how is the ____ economy these days?

(fill in the blank with: Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy)

That makes no sense.

[zuluking]

Originally Posted by Gozer

Barack wants to re-examine bypassing a fragile part of Nebraska's ecosystem. The route favoured by Nebraska was deemed to expensive by the State department; a state department that is being accused of being in bed with a former-Clinton aide / current-lobbyist for an oil company.

http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2...scanada-elliot


Seems like they're trying to do their job to me.

Obama doesn't want this to affect his chances next November...period. He didn't stick his nose in it until it affected his own aspirations. Some group or another will be annoyed with an actual decision, so by not making a decision, he really only pisses off TCPL and Canada (except the NDPs and Greens, of course.) This has nothing to do with pipeline routes or lobbyists or fragile Nebraskan ecosystems or anything else.

Companies hire guys like Elliott because of their connections and understanding of how beurocracy and lobbying works. So long as companies have to gain government approval, these positions filled by these types of people will persist. Heck, Nexen had Lingenfelter as their VP, Gov't Relations - y'know, the recently new / former NDP leader in Sask. He'll probably go back to a job like that in the future.

[Brewmaster]

Some interesting comments from T. Boone Pickens on the Keystone XL decision:

"You can't delay the pipeline. Get serious. I'm not kidding you...The United States is silly enough to think Canada is a
part of the United States because they are both in North America and so they treat the Canadians like step children. The
Canadians are going to sell their oil and we are sitting here, with a wonderful relationship - could have - with Canada and what's
gonna happen? Obama is going to put this thing off, and they’re going to permit a pipeline and that oil is headed for China and
we’re fools. That's the way it's going to come out. Historically, when they go back and look at us we'll be the dumbest people
that ever came to town...How many pipelines do you think cross Nebraska? I think it's over 50 and nobody has said anything up
until now. That Ogallala Aquifer extends from midland Texas to South Dakota across eight states. Now can you imagine how

many pipelines cross that Aquifer? Hundreds...Remember, I use to be a Canadian."

[zuluking]

Originally Posted by troutman

Green Jobs Are Real: German and American Solar Industry Both Employ More People Than U.S. Steel Production

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/...eel-production

There are now more than 100,000 workers employed in the German solar PV industry alone.

The solar industry is just getting started here in America. Solar is a high-growth industry with the potential to create millions more jobs in a diverse range of sectors

[I heard Bill Clinton talk last week about all the solar jobs created in Germany]

A couple words of caution: These figures are comparing solar manufacturing, sales and installation to steel production alone. If one were to factor in products made from steel, the industry would be up around 160,000 workers.

[zuluking]

Originally Posted by troutman

Green Jobs Are Real: German and American Solar Industry Both Employ More People Than U.S. Steel Production

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/...eel-production

There are now more than 100,000 workers employed in the German solar PV industry alone.

The solar industry is just getting started here in America. Solar is a high-growth industry with the potential to create millions more jobs in a diverse range of sectors

[I heard Bill Clinton talk last week about all the solar jobs created in Germany]

This article is very interesting and demonstrates how these jobs became "real." I sense the law of unintended consequences sweeping down upon the solar energy industry in Germany in the near future.

http://www.economist.com/node/15213817

It is already becoming a bit too real for Obama as well.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinio...ent-investment

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Brewmaster

Some interesting comments from T. Boone Pickens on the Keystone XL decision:

And that, right there, is the crux of the whole stupid debate.

America is going to buy oil...period.

Canada is going to sell oil....period.

So instead of streamlining this thing and benefitting thousands of people on both sides of the border, the whackadoodles who are opposing this and have now caused a significant delay in it, instead will see the US getting those supplies from countries much less desirable than ours. And now a Federal party sitting in official opposition is complicit in that very scenario.

Its such a charade its laughable.

[Tinordi]

There's still significant overcapacity of pipelines from the oil sands to refineries in the U.S. I think that oil sands production could grow another 30% without any new capacity added. The whole business case of Keystone XL was in covering the Brent/WTI spread. This was not an issue of not being able to sell our oil to the U.S. It was about getting as much money possible for our oil.

And low and behold the real reasons for the pipeline are still coming to fruition with both Transcanada and Enbridge engaging in projects that will link Cushing to the gulf.

[zuluking]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

There's still significant overcapacity of pipelines from the oil sands to refineries in the U.S. I think that oil sands production could grow another 30% without any new capacity added. The whole business case of Keystone XL was in covering the Brent/WTI spread. This was not an issue of not being able to sell our oil to the U.S. It was about getting as much money possible for our oil.

And low and behold the real reasons for the pipeline are still coming to fruition with both Transcanada and Enbridge engaging in projects that will link Cushing to the gulf.

If they could blink their eyes and magically have a pipeline constructed the length of North America, I'd agree with you (again...) However, mega-projects like these take time to come online. In a previous post, you discussed rapidity in oil sands development. You have to have transportation availability to match production growth.

Yes, it covers the Brent/WTI spread, but it is more about throughput. Because it's the throughput and ability to move the product to the US as it comes online which minimizes the spread. They are intrinsically linked.

If it was only about the spread, then wouldn't the projects you've mentioned above be enough?

[seattleflamer]

Originally Posted by zuluking

If they could blink their eyes and magically have a pipeline constructed the length of North America, I'd agree with you (again...) However, mega-projects like these take time to come online. In a previous post, you discussed rapidity in oil sands development. You have to have transportation availability to match production growth.

Yes, it covers the Brent/WTI spread, but it is more about throughput. Because it's the throughput and ability to move the product to the US as it comes online which minimizes the spread. They are intrinsically linked.

If it was only about the spread, then wouldn't the projects you've mentioned above be enough?

That spread is a not an insignificant loss of a billion a month to Canadian oil currently.

[transplant99]

Speaking of NDP MP's....this guy lost his nut last night.

Martin dropped a few F- and S- bombs Wednesday night after the Conservative government shut down debate on a budget bill.

"This is a (expletive) disgrace ... closure again. And on the Budget," Martin tweeted.

"There's not a democracy in the world that would tolerate this jackboot (expletive)."

One fellow Twitter user called Martin a "foul-mouth socialist." "(Expletive) you," was Martin's blunt retort. When another Twitter user criticized him, Martin replied with "eat my shorts."

And he isnt even sorry for it....nor is his boss.

"I don't apologize for what I said. It was a legitimate reaction to a genuine frustration," Martin said Thursday in Ottawa.

"If anybody took offence to it, I'm sorry. I wouldn't say that in the House of Commons, but I was talking to the people that follow me on Twitter."

Interim NDP Leader Nycole Turmel appeared to defend Martin's actions.

"His language was not appropriate and could have been offensive to some," Turmel said in a written statement.

"That said, the Conservatives' actions are not appropriate in a democracy and offensive to all Canadians."

So the guy admits he would never talk like that in the House but has no problem doing so to a constituent? Really nice.


http://home.mytelus.com/telusen/port...CatID=National

[zuluking]

Originally Posted by seattleflamer

That spread is a not an insignificant loss of a billion a month to Canadian oil currently.

Short-term, but long-term less significant than getting volume to the refineries.

[FlameOn]

Forgive my ignorance for this, but why don't we have the refinery capacity locally in Canada? It seems like there are always so many problems pipelining to the US refineries and refineries seem to get hit or knocked out every couple of years when a hurricane hits in the gulf.

Wouldn't it be more prudent to have more refineries located in a wider number of locations in case of natural disasters? Is it because refineries so expensive that it's still cheaper to build a huge pipeline? Or is a problem if distribution and location?

[Calgaryflamesgirl34]

Isn't all our oil going to China now anyways?

[SebC]

Originally Posted by driveway

This is something I feel often gets left out of debates on oil sands usage. The move, globally, is towards carbon-capture technologies and programs. I don't think it's unreasonable to think that Alberta could be a global leader in this industry. Given regulatory incentive I think Albertan companies could become the premier innovator and supplier of carbon capture technologies and systems globally.

I do think the regulatory incentive is required. It needs to be a good idea NOW for companies to develop and implement these technologies in order for us to be able to dominate the industry in the future.

It's why I don't think it actually matters if global warming/climate change is anthropogenic or not. The impetus to economic and technological development which will result from tackling carbon and other greenhouse-gas emissions will prove beneficial alone, regardless of their ecological impact.

That's silly. You want to direct your labour and capital towards things that are actually useful, such that you're either improving quality of life or building equipment and infrastructure that will fuel further economic growth. Paying people to move a pile of rocks back and forth (which is about what CO2 abatement would be, if global warming wasn't caused by humans) is stupid when you can pay them to do useful things instead.

As for regulating CO2 ahead of the curve, I don't think it's a good idea. We won't get that much advantage from being ahead because the intellectual property will be distributed by the companies that develop it. It would be a big competitive disadvantage now, for a tiny competitive advantage later. Not worth it, not even from an altruistic percentage (0.1% of global CO2 emissions).

Originally Posted by FlameOn

Forgive my ignorance for this, but why don't we have the refinery capacity locally in Canada? It seems like there are always so many problems pipelining to the US refineries and refineries seem to get hit or knocked out every couple of years when a hurricane hits in the gulf.

Wouldn't it be more prudent to have more refineries located in a wider number of locations in case of natural disasters? Is it because refineries so expensive that it's still cheaper to build a huge pipeline? Or is a problem if distribution and location?

Both? Refineries produce multiple products... to transport oil you need one pipeline. To transport refinery products you'd need several. Makes sense to put the refineries where the products will be used, and also on a coast where you have easy access to tankers. Then the fact that you don't need to build them where the oil is makes them alot less lucrative than extraction, which is why we don't really have them.

Originally Posted by Calgaryflamesgirl34

Isn't all our oil going to China now anyways?

Nope, need a new pipeline to get it there (Northern Gateway). That ones got issues with First Nations people and BCers who don't want tanker ships on the coast.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by troutman

Green Jobs Are Real: German and American Solar Industry Both Employ More People Than U.S. Steel Production

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/...eel-production

There are now more than 100,000 workers employed in the German solar PV industry alone.

The solar industry is just getting started here in America. Solar is a high-growth industry with the potential to create millions more jobs in a diverse range of sectors

[I heard Bill Clinton talk last week about all the solar jobs created in Germany]

The the Canadian Wind Energy Association wants 55,000MW of wind power in Canada by 2025, fulfilling 20% our our energy needs.

Apparently it would create around 50,000 jobs, and around $79 billion in investment.