Alberta Politics Thread

[Locke]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

This is certainly a much better way to go. Raising the minimum wage to $15 won't necessarily make anyone richer if the cost of living increases as well.

The political optics are good though. It looks better to say "we have helped Albertans by raising the min. wage to $15" vs getting into details on nitty gritty social programs which actually benefit disparaged individuals or families under selective criteria.

And see, this is where I get lost because I'm not a Poli-Sci major, I really am not interested in the 'Political Optics' of it. Are they actually trying to help people or not? Or is it as simple as 'make it look good so we get votes'?

Raising the minimum wage was certainly an easier way of doing it, but at the same time if all of the costs go up correspondingly or even more then they've hurt this demographic more than they've helped them and political optics are all well and good until these people realize that they just got screwed in a political shell-game and those potential votes will dry up rather quickly.

So back to the question of: Are they actually trying to help low-income families or are they just trying to set themselves up for the next election?

Because if its the former then they're incompetent, and if its the latter then...well, they're incompetent. All roads are sort of leading to Rome here.

[indes]

Originally Posted by Locke

And see, this is where I get lost because I'm not a Poli-Sci major, I really am not interested in the 'Political Optics' of it. Are they actually trying to help people or not? Or is it as simple as 'make it look good so we get votes'?

Raising the minimum wage was certainly an easier way of doing it, but at the same time if all of the costs go up correspondingly or even more then they've hurt this demographic more than they've helped them and political optics are all well and good until these people realize that they just got screwed in a political shell-game and those potential votes will dry up rather quickly.

So back to the question of: Are they actually trying to help low-income families or are they just trying to set themselves up for the next election?

Because if its the former then they're incompetent, and if its the latter then...well, they're incompetent. All roads are sort of leading to Rome here.

I think the reason that most people are fairly apathetic towards politics these days is that almost everything is about getting re elected. When was the last time a leader went against their political ideologues for the sake of improving things? The NDP got voted in on a platform and they're sticking to it regardless of the real life consequences, like any other party has been since politics has become a dog and pony show in the last 25 years.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by indes

I think the reason that most people are fairly apathetic towards politics these days is that almost everything is about getting re elected. When was the last time a leader went against their political ideologues for the sake of improving things? The NDP got voted in on a platform and they're sticking to it regardless of the real life consequences, like any other party has been since politics has become a dog and pony show in the last 25 years.

Totally agreed, but that platform was primarily to aid the working class and low-income families and 'save the environment.'

Their actions on the other hand have done pretty much the opposite.

[CaptainCrunch]

I wouldn't be all that surprised if by the time everything is said and done that lower income people receiving the minimum wage boost will end up even further behind economically.

The NDP plan is baffling in that they're going to increase the costs of everything across the board with the Carbon Tax, minimum wage increase, business tax increase and everything else that's going to be bumped, and they think that the solution is going to be the increase in minimum wage.

The base effect is that I believe at the end of the day that those low paid workers at the bottom of the economic scale with the bosted wage will be joined by a whole new group of people that are in the mid salary wage that aren't going to see these increases but are going to see their cost of living accelerate.

This government seems more anti little guy then I could have believed. They're not going to hurt the bigger businesses because those guys will bump their prices or even decide to shutter and leave. But the small businesses are going to get squeezed on all sides.

The economic's don't make sense for a party that built its reputation around helping out the poor and down trodden.

Utility bills and food costs and gas costs don't differentiate based on income, they're equal opportunity money vaccums.

[Bootsy]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I wouldn't be all that surprised if by the time everything is said and done that lower income people receiving the minimum wage boost will end up even further behind economically.

The NDP plan is baffling in that they're going to increase the costs of everything across the board with the Carbon Tax, minimum wage increase, business tax increase and everything else that's going to be bumped, and they think that the solution is going to be the increase in minimum wage.

The base effect is that I believe at the end of the day that those low paid workers at the bottom of the economic scale with the bosted wage will be joined by a whole new group of people that are in the mid salary wage that aren't going to see these increases but are going to see their cost of living accelerate.

This government seems more anti little guy then I could have believed. They're not going to hurt the bigger businesses because those guys will bump their prices or even decide to shutter and leave. But the small businesses are going to get squeezed on all sides.

The economic's don't make sense for a party that built its reputation around helping out the poor and down trodden.

Utility bills and food costs and gas costs don't differentiate based on income, they're equal opportunity money vaccums.

It makes perfect sense in the NDP way of thinking , they aren't trying to help the poor or the little guy, they are trying to get them more dependent on the government.

[GaiJin]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I wouldn't be all that surprised if by the time everything is said and done that lower income people receiving the minimum wage boost will end up even further behind economically.

The NDP plan is baffling in that they're going to increase the costs of everything across the board with the Carbon Tax, minimum wage increase, business tax increase and everything else that's going to be bumped, and they think that the solution is going to be the increase in minimum wage.

The base effect is that I believe at the end of the day that those low paid workers at the bottom of the economic scale with the bosted wage will be joined by a whole new group of people that are in the mid salary wage that aren't going to see these increases but are going to see their cost of living accelerate.

This government seems more anti little guy then I could have believed. They're not going to hurt the bigger businesses because those guys will bump their prices or even decide to shutter and leave. But the small businesses are going to get squeezed on all sides.

The economic's don't make sense for a party that built its reputation around helping out the poor and down trodden.

Utility bills and food costs and gas costs don't differentiate based on income, they're equal opportunity money vaccums.

Try getting that into the average left wingers head though... Their party could possibly do no wrong, remember its corporations and wealthy that cause all the little people problems.

[cal_guy]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

But the question is simple

I get getting rid of the coal plants, that's inevitable. But they haven't even started to really pull in bids on constructing new sources of energy, frankly they don't even really have a plan in place that I've seen in terms of what alternatives they're going to use.

So these replacements are at best years away.

Yet they're jacking up the costs now when there's no real alternatives.

Most operators are waiting for electricity prices to recover before they go ahead with projects which will start happening once the first remaining group of coal plants start retiring. They'll also benefit from the replacement of the SGER with the Carbon levy.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by cal_guy

Most operators are waiting for electricity prices to recover before they go ahead with projects which will start happening once the first remaining group of coal plants start retiring. They'll also benefit from the replacement of the SGER with the Carbon levy.

So there's no alternative, and probably not one for at least half a decade. So by pumping up the Levy on the coal emitters to a almost punative level (An increase from 15 million to 150 million, which is ludicris) is nothing more then taxation without a choice. I can see why these companies wanted to jump out of the PPA's.

Right now there's not even much of a plan by the government in terms of what the alternative energy plan is going to be.

By putting in the levey without giving the companies the ability to actually reduce their carbon footprint or even reduce the effects or the costs to them is simply greed by the government and without a thought of protecting Albertans because they knew no matter what because they were aware of this clause that they were going to screw everyone over by the costs being added on.

Man this government is ludicris. I think one of the columnists said it best when he said if anyone in a normal life made a $2 billion dollar mistake at work that they'd be thrown out of their job.

There's no way that some senior NDP'er including Hoffman, the Ministor in charge of Energy, and the Minister of the Environment shouldn't be fired, they've shown either gross incompetence, or even worse gross disdain for the people in this province that pay the bills.

Honestly if they go to court with this and lose, Notley who it feels like is throwing Hoffman under the bus needs to resign over this $2 billion dollar mistake or plan that she had to have a hand in, if she had any integrity anyways. Redfords transgressions are starting to look very minor in terms of costs.

[Shazam]

And see, that's absolutely terrible, because it takes years for a power plant to be built. Look at Enmax's Shepard plant - it took four years from ground breaking (so not even planning and design) to operational.

Christ people, you don't just buy a goddamned plant off of Amazon. Try to think about these things.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Shazam

And see, that's absolutely terrible, because it takes years for a power plant to be built. Look at Enmax's Shepard plant - it took four years from ground breaking (so not even planning and design) to operational.

Christ people, you don't just buy a goddamned plant off of Amazon. Try to think about these things.

And that was a conventional Power Plant.

They want a revolutionary 'Green' Power Plant that basically has to be invented from scratch. Whats the timeline on something like that?

NDP Answer: Who Cares?

[para transit fellow]

Originally Posted by Locke

And that was a conventional Power Plant.

They want a revolutionary 'Green' Power Plant that basically has to be invented from scratch. Whats the timeline on something like that?

NDP Answer: Who Cares?

I think Sheppard is a more complex power plant, one that uses the waste heat to run a secondary turbine, similar to the Calpine plant built in Balzac

However, The Nexen power plant in Balzac was a simple gas turbine with no extra heat recovery and took only a couple of years to build start to finis (the biggest challenge is ordering the gas furbine).

Enmax's crossfield plant similarly took only a couple of years to put online

FYI. About 1.5 gigawatts of generation capacity has been built in the Calgary region since the de regulation of electricity

[Fuzz]

Ya, but if you want the best efficiency and lowest GHG you need a combined cycle like Sheppard. I mean ya, we can probably quickly build some coal power plants, but that defeats the purpose...

[cal_guy]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

So there's no alternative, and probably not one for at least half a decade. So by pumping up the Levy on the coal emitters to a almost punative level (An increase from 15 million to 150 million, which is ludicris) is nothing more then taxation without a choice. I can see why these companies wanted to jump out of the PPA's.

Bear in mine that coal power plants brought in about $1.3 Billion in revenue last year. If price recover they might see $1 Billion this year, otherwise they're looking at maybe $800 million.The most significant issue for coal is the low prices, especially since the most significant changes to the SGER don't occur until next year.

Originally Posted by Shazam

And see, that's absolutely terrible, because it takes years for a power plant to be built. Look at Enmax's Shepard plant - it took four years from ground breaking (so not even planning and design) to operational.

Christ people, you don't just buy a goddamned plant off of Amazon. Try to think about these things.

Right now there's 12631 MW of combined cycle, cogeneration, and coal generation in Alberta. Our all time record in electrical demand was 11229 MW so that's a huge amount of power from effectively baseload plants. It's not a surprise that a bunch of companies have delayed their gas plants until after the first batch of coal plants are decommissioned.

[puffnstuff]

Originally Posted by Locke

And that was a conventional Power Plant.

They want a revolutionary 'Green' Power Plant that basically has to be invented from scratch. Whats the timeline on something like that?

NDP Answer: Who Cares? We won't be the government then.

fyp hopefully

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by cal_guy

Right now there's 12631 MW of combined cycle, cogeneration, and coal generation in Alberta. Our all time record in electrical demand was 11229 MW so that's a huge amount of power from effectively baseload plants. It's not a surprise that a bunch of companies have delayed their gas plants until after the first batch of coal plants are decommissioned.

The majority of coal plants were going to be shut down anyhow. Just not soon enough according to the NDP.

Presumably the goal is to have them replaced by things that don't emit CO2, so NG is out of the question. Nuclear scares greeny losers (the trick is to build them without them noticing). So slap on solar panels, stick 1000 lbs of lithium batteries in your basement and put a windmill in your backyard.

Don't know what you guys in apartments will do. Tell you what I'll sell you my excess power at $20/kwh.

[cal_guy]

Originally Posted by Shazam

The majority of coal plants were going to be shut down anyhow. Just not soon enough according to the NDP.

Presumably the goal is to have them replaced by things that don't emit CO2, so NG is out of the question. Nuclear scares greeny losers (the trick is to build them without them noticing). So slap on solar panels, stick 1000 lbs of lithium batteries in your basement and put a windmill in your backyard.

Don't know what you guys in apartments will do. Tell you what I'll sell you my excess power at $20/kwh.

Here's AESO 2016 Long term outlook.
http://www.aeso.ca/downloads/AESO_20...utlook_WEB.pdf

Under it's reference case it forecasts for 2030:
1) Wind generation grows by 4200MW fulfilling the Climate Leadership plan's call for 2/3 of coal generation to be replaced by renewables.
2) Co-generation increasing by 1188MW, Combined-cycle growing by 6825MW , simple cycle by 1311MW which account for the remaining 1/3 of coal's generation plus nearly all the growth in demand.
3) Peak demand is projected to grow 4001MW to 15230MW.

[Fuzz]

For perspective, that is 8.5 new Shepard Energy Centre's worth of CC power alone in 14 years just to reach the Combined Cycle target. Shepard cost $1.4 billion, so about $12 billion.

At $1.5 per MW we are looking at another $6.3 billion for wind.

Throw in roughly another $1.5 billion for solar, Co-gen($2billion?), Simple cycle($2 billion?) and we start to talk about real money here...Looks like we've found the solution to our unemployment problems.

Alberta's got it's own New Deal!

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Locke

Totally agreed, but that platform was primarily to aid the working class and low-income families and 'save the environment.'

Their actions on the other hand have done pretty much the opposite.

It's a nostalgic attempt to reforge the relationship between Big Government and Big Industry. The problem is, industry no longer has the bucks to play, so government will force their hand.

Also, difficult to raise wages for the service sector, which is primarily marginally productive.

Seattle's social experiment - although initially promising - is proving to be a disappointment to raising general worker wages.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...gs-in-seattle/

However, raising the minimum wage can help firms in the long run by encouraging good workers to stay, and giving firms an excuse to lay-off unproductive workers or cut their hours. Some people do benefit.

[cal_guy]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

For perspective, that is 8.5 new Shepard Energy Centre's worth of CC power alone in 14 years just to reach the Combined Cycle target. Shepard cost $1.4 billion, so about $12 billion.

At $1.5 per MW we are looking at another $6.3 billion for wind.

Throw in roughly another $1.5 billion for solar, Co-gen($2billion?), Simple cycle($2 billion?) and we start to talk about real money here...Looks like we've found the solution to our unemployment problems.

Alberta's got it's own New Deal!

Unlike the New Deal nearly all the investments will be privately financed.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by cal_guy

Unlike the New Deal nearly all the investments will be privately financed.

Except that how many private organizations are going to trust this government.

No action is in a vacuum.

We want you to build all these powerplants.

We want a escape clause in the agreement if things go south?

Nope

See ya