Official (Alberta) Oil Discussion Thread

[CroFlames]

This seems like as good a place as any to ask the question:

What are some predictions for the exchange rate? CAD continue to tumble? It's been rising slightly over the past week.

[chedder]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

This seems like as good a place as any to ask the question:

What are some predictions for the exchange rate? CAD continue to tumble? It's been rising slightly over the past week.

In my opinion, it will go wherever oil goes. So, hopefully slowly up by year end. But don't expect it to very high.

[SeeGeeWhy]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Tinordi is lukewarm on nuclear power and thinks SeeGeeWhy hasn't really afforded renewable energy an honest and recent assessment.

Most of SGW's points on renewables are from 5-7 years ago which leads me to believe he hasn't kept pace with what's been happening in renewble energy.

If he actually took a deep dive like what he probably did 5 years ago on renewables he'd have different conclusions.

Interesting, I'd love to review recent information. Care to share any sources you trust?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Kavvy

Harper's hard line approach failed us. He help create an "us vs them" mentality across this country; which is now playing out in Quebec right now with Energy East.

I find it rather adorable that you actually think Harper created the "us vs. them" attitude in this country. You should probably pick up a book on Canadian history. Our nation's entire existence is a series of "us vs. them" battles.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

This seems like as good a place as any to ask the question:

What are some predictions for the exchange rate? CAD continue to tumble? It's been rising slightly over the past week.

As chedder says; the Loonie is a commodity based currency. It will rise and fall with commodity prices, of which oil is by far the biggest 'shareholder'.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Kavvy

I love this new approach - and I have Harper to thank for my new love of this approach.

Harper's hard line approach failed us. He help create an "us vs them" mentality across this country; which is now playing out in Quebec right now with Energy East.

This is fiction at its finest, that us versus them has been around since the Nations founding. you also merely have to look at Trudeua's old man for creating a more fractured nation, then his protege Jean Chretien widened the gap with his discussions about how he doesn't understand Albertan's at all and how they think differently then all Canadians.

Harper's creation of the distinct nation of Quebec within a Nation admission significantly cooled the ardor and destroyed the separatist movement.

Originally Posted by Kavvy

Will Mr Good Hair's approach of bringing stakeholders to the table work any better? I honestly don't know, but, lets give the guy a chance and see where we stand in 6 months instead of just calling him whishy washy. I know many people in AB love to see someone they disagree with fail, but his failure is bad for us in the end.

I personally think pipeline companies do a great deal of public consultation along with the NEB approvals, but, if bringing more people to the table (including environmentalists) helps us get media on our side, like Rick Mercer, it will be worthwhile. Also, just maybe, people will actually learn the real economics of our country through this process.

I disagree with you on this approach. We already study the crap out of these things and have a pretty stringent environmental checklist in place that surpasses most other energy dealing nations. All we've seen with this so called consultation approach of bringing everyone to the table to make people happy is the special interest groups basically make approvals these long drawn out hijacked affairs.

I'm fine with running thousands of trains a year across the country with Oil in it because from a carbon based perspective it shows the hypocrisy of things, when compared to the impact of pipelines.

Trudeau's response to me was stupid. These projects like Energy East, and Kinder and other's have had the crap studied out of them. For him to basically put the power back into the hands of these individual tin potted mincing morons who basically are self interested is a fail. Grow a back bone, take control federally where it belongs.

[puckedoff]

I do like how Trudeau wants the pipeline analysis to consider the upstream impact of the pipeline. Should be fairly easy to determine that a pipe in the ground creates less emissions than a train, but what do I know, I'm no scientist (don't even own a lab coat).

[PeteMoss]

I have learned that some in Alberta have a serious persecution complex.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

I have learned that some in Alberta have a serious persecution complex.

Ha! Thats cute.

You respond to something where the Mayor of Montreal is opposed to a pipeline because 'there isnt enough in it for Montreal or Quebec' after Quebec successfully cashed just shy of $10B of our dollars last year alone.

I wonder where that money came from? Can you tell me? I just cant seem to figure it out.

So really, they want their money but they dont want it unless we wrap it in more money so they can enjoy their money-wrapped money.

When is the next rocket to the Sun leaving?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

I have learned that some in Alberta have a serious persecution complex.

Thanks for your feedback . . . no really. . . thanks.

When you have provinces outside of Alberta bleating about our Dirty Oil Sands, shutting down pipelines, and basically telling us to get stuffed even after our Premiere goes hat in hand with an aggressive environmental strategy put in place to please them.

On top of that this countries government has a history of going after Alberta before.

So our so called persecution complex is well earned.

[Leeman4Gilmour]

Originally Posted by Locke

Ha! Thats cute.

You respond to something where the Mayor of Montreal is opposed to a pipeline because 'there isnt enough in it for Montreal or Quebec' after Quebec successfully cashed just shy of $10B of our dollars last year alone.

I wonder where that money came from? Can you tell me? I just cant seem to figure it out.

So really, they want their money but they dont want it unless we wrap it in more money so they can enjoy their money-wrapped money.

When is the next rocket to the Sun leaving?

I've learned facts stated on forums should be double checked before taken as gospel. More often than not, the "facts" are inaccurate. So I checked your $10B fact. It was accurate...puke.

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

I have learned that some in Alberta have a serious persecution complex.

I'd say Alberta's persecution complex is roughly equal to Eastern Canada's sense of entitlement.

[puckedoff]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

I have learned that some in Alberta have a serious persecution complex.

You're not wrong, many here do. But I like to think we come about it honestly - For years Western Canada has gotten the shaft politically (because we have less population, and far fewer eligible voters here in AB than on ON or QC), while writing cheque after cheque to be cashed by the same people who are publicly criticizing and making demands of our way of life. I think many western Canadians feel rather unappreciated by their Eastern counterparts.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by puckedoff

I do like how Trudeau wants the pipeline analysis to consider the upstream impact of the pipeline. Should be fairly easy to determine that a pipe in the ground creates less emissions than a train, but what do I know, I'm no scientist (don't even own a lab coat).

The issue is that no other industry considers upstream/downstream impacts.

We don't calculate the GHG generated from the lifetime usage of the cars that a GM factory produces. Nor do we calculate the impact of GHG of the steel foundry or tire maker where the factory would get their raw material.

Why should pipelines have to consider where their oil comes from, and also the impact of burning that product at the end?

The upstream impact is a burden that should be completely isolated to the oil producers. The downstream impact is a burden shouldered by the consumer.

The pipeline company should be responsible for the GHG that is directly involved in constructing and operating the pipeline, including planning for the risks of a pipeline failure.

Now, if we want to argue that every single major infrastructure project and business needs to be accounting for the upstream and downstream impacts of the production, I'm okay with that. For example, the TransCanada highway encourages so much economic activity which all generate GHG, and thus the highway is environmentally untenable. I won't agree, but at least it will be consistent.

PS. I'm aware that Trudeau specifically mentioned upstream impacts, but my point regarding how no other industry or business is subject to the upstream impacts still stands even when most of my examples are downstream impacts. Also a lot of the rhetoric is also talking about downstream impact - the "oil must stay in the ground" narrative is all about what happens when it is burned, and not the pipeline itself.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Leeman4Gilmour

I've learned facts stated on forums should be double checked before taken as gospel. More often than not, the "facts" are inaccurate. So I checked your $10B fact. It was accurate...puke.

Sorry...

[the_only_turek_fan]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Trudeau knows that if he comes out on the side of the Pipelines and Alberta that he'll piss off his voting base in Ontario and Quebec, he'll also piss off the deep red liberals in his party.

What really pisses me off is that Brad Wall seems to be fighting our battles for us, Notley mumbles from the Pembina Institute guideline. Brad Walls basically stands up and says this is ridiculous, you people are hypocrites and morons, do you know what this means to everyone, clearly not.

Trudeau made it pretty clear when he said that he doesn't want this country known for its resources but its resourcefulness, whatever in the hell that means. But it goes to the message that everything can run on good intentions, which is simply not true. To have a great country where everyone has a good standard of living you have to have a vibrant economy, and some of it might be considered by some to be, and its the wrong choice of words, unsavory.

But the fact is that economically this country won't survive economically without resource exploitation.

Our people make too much and our costs for materials and transportation is too high to compete in the manufacturing sector. We're too small and not ruthless enough to compete in the high tech sectors to the point of driving a nation economy. Our wages are so high that we're losing mundane jobs to outsourcing due to businesses seeing a better return on investment through outsourcing.

We can compete agriculturally, but Canada can't survive purely on a agrarian economy.

The bottom line is its not going to effect all that much this year, but over the next few years, things like Transfer payments and equalization are going to reduce, Alberta isn't going to have the revenue base or the tax base that it did when it was the engine of the economy, and by denying pipeline access Quebec and the other provinces are going to cut their own throats.

At the same time, you can't have a government that is going to write a check to a failing company like Bombardier who's primary revenue stream is government bailouts, and then look at an entire industry that's getting hammered and say, we'll here's the billion in infrastructure spending that we promised you, but we don't have plans to help out your industry, but we'll bail out auto and companies that have direct lines to the Liberal Party (Chretien and Bombardier)

At the same time, we have a weak and flustered premier and government who are clearly not in love with the golden goose here and so their support is half hearted, and when the chips are down and people are being tossed out of work they jack up taxes, add a carbon tax, put in policies to basically wreck small and medium businesses in the service and labor sector.

And with the Carbon tax, they implemented it as a general tax not as some environmentally sound encouragement platform, but as what is basically going to be a ponzi scheme, on the vague soul crushing premise that, now that we're doing our progressive thing environmentally, Quebec and Ontario and BC will become supporters in our ability to save this provinces and thus Canada's economy. But then and who couldn't see this coming? She got stabbed in the back and looked even more foolish.

At this point we have multiple things that need to happen.

Trudeua needs to stand up and say that this economic slide in Alberta is an emergency that effects the entire country, so STFU and lets find a way to get these pipelines done, quick fast and in a hurry. Need to complete the environmental assessment, I'll bring in more people to do this, and limit the consultations so that the wack jobs funded by Tides and other groups aren't invited in to throw shoes into the process.

Notley and Wall need to work together to create a strong and united front, period, I know that he's a flintstones loving Fiscal Conservative, but he can do what you can't Rachel, and that's stand up and make your discomfort known.

Trudeau needs to put together a package to assist the Oil sector in this province, and if that means, no more purchasing out of country oil and gas and energy then that's the way its got to be. Break Nafta? Tough Titties said the Kitty to the States you did it first when you screwed us to make Darryl Haanah and Kenye West happy.

If you want to diversify the economy and implement green energy strategies, then great, do it, but you can't do it without a strong economy in place to pay for generational changes.

This is my Rant, this is my Song

S-A-T-U-R - T- U- R - Night

Thanks for that.

Another thing that needs to be added is that folks in the commercial buildings business and infrastructure business (and I know lots of them) are busy as hell. They are working 50+ hours a week still.

Notley and Trudeau's idea of using borrowed money to build new buildings and bridges, won't do a thing to help the laid off process engineer or pipe fitter, or procurement professional.

This idea to spend 1B in AB and SASK clearly illustrate the drama teacher from Montreal has no clue what is going on.

As bad as it is, the government needs to bail out the big oil companies and give them money to spend on capital projects. That will get jobs going again.

[Resolute 14]

No, the O&G sector does not need a bail-out. Certainly not the big companies, which all have the assets to weather the storm. Many smaller players will fail, but when the prices recover, many new smaller players will take their place. And since a bail-out can't raise the price of oil, it won't do anything to create jobs.

What the government should be doing is fighting to ensure the industry can move its product. Notley is an anti-oil, anti-pipeline fool, so that is going to hurt us badly. But maybe Justin will actually demonstrate he does care about Alberta. His comments thus far have not reduced my cynicism on that point either.

[GGG]

Well if we get rid of roads, we can get rid of cars, which gets rid of the need for pipelines which gets rid of the need for oilsands.

So roads really are the most upstream effect as they create the place to use the gas.

This is the problem with our whole look at greenhouse gases. It needs to be fixed by a change in behaviour of the end user and not the producer.

[Frequitude]

No roads
No Transcanada
No Problem

[CaptainCrunch]