Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1690060516897468416

[powderjunkie]

Not gonna quote the jabroni who doesn't read the articles he posts, but he's done us a great service by pointing out just how little the regulations will matter:

Environment and Climate Change Canada officials said in a technical briefing that the national average household energy bill would increase by between $35 and $61 per year when the regulations are adopted by 2040, although the government says that only two per cent of this increase would be the result of the regulations. It also projects that the increase would be offset by savings when consumers reduce their dependency on fossil fuels, for instance the savings from the cheaper cost of recharging an electric vehicle (EV) compared to filling up with gasoline.

So at the worst we're talking $5 per month, but if we take the gov't at face value (which we shouldn't) it's more like $2 per year based on the regulations themselves. I'm afraid I won't clutch my pearls for any less than $3.75 per year.

Of course one would need to delve into the referenced report to understand what will drive the cost increase (simply inflation?)

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1690486312103731200

[Street Pharmacist]

Once again, it will surprise no one that Smith is lying. It does not say that a peaker plant may not run for more than 450 hours per year. It says that there must be CCUS attached and then it can run all they want!. They simply can't run unabated for more than 450 hours. That's it.


The reason the CAPP is so concerned about this, is that CCUS is very expensive and gas may lose market share to cheaper "peaker" options like battery storage and imports.

It will also surprise no one that Yoho will not respond

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Not gonna quote the jabroni who doesn't read the articles he posts, but he's done us a great service by pointing out just how little the regulations will matter:



So at the worst we're talking $5 per month, but if we take the gov't at face value (which we shouldn't) it's more like $2 per year based on the regulations themselves. I'm afraid I won't clutch my pearls for any less than $3.75 per year.

Of course one would need to delve into the referenced report to understand what will drive the cost increase (simply inflation?)

National average is a pretty poor way to estimate the affect to Albertans. You could assume (which seems reasonable) that bills in the hydro-dominated provinces of BC, ON (hydro+nuclear), QC, and MB won't be affected. That's pretty close to 80% of the population, and the feds are subsidizing new transmission for hydro to the maritimes.

So it seems likely that pretty much all of that national increase is coming in Alberta and Saskatchewan.

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Once again, it will surprise no one that Smith is lying. It does not say that a peaker plant may not run for more than 450 hours per year. It says that there must be CCUS attached and then it can run all they want!. They simply can't run unabated for more than 450 hours. That's it.


The reason the CAPP is so concerned about this, is that CCUS is very expensive and gas may lose market share to cheaper "peaker" options like battery storage and imports.

It will also surprise no one that Yoho will not respond

To what? Your opinion? Sorry I don’t care.

I’ll take the subject matter expert’s over internet rando.

You want to call the Premier a liar good for you.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Yoho

To what? Your opinion? Sorry I don’t care.

I’ll take the subject matter expert’s over internet rando.

You want to call the Premier a liar good for you.

The experts have said that these regs allow the use of natural gas in perpetuity. Even I was surprised by how much support natural gas got from Guilbeault.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Yoho

To what? Your opinion? Sorry I don’t care.

I’ll take the subject matter expert’s over internet rando.

You want to call the Premier a liar good for you.

Well she was just forced to apologize for lying, and we have the receipts for many other lies in the past, so I'm not sure how intelligent you have to be to give Smith blanket trust at this point. Pretty gullible, probably.


Here's her most recent one. I don't blame you for missing it, it was dumped on Friday afternoon before the long weekend.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1687596835018551297

[FormerPresJamesTaylor]

The f your feelings crowd sure are sensitive

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Well she was just forced to apologize for lying, and we have the receipts for many other lies in the past, so I'm not sure how intelligent you have to be to give Smith blanket trust at this point. Pretty gullible, probably.


Here's her most recent one. I don't blame you for missing it, it was dumped on Friday afternoon before the long weekend.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1687596835018551297

Real watergate moment nice catch

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Yoho

Real watergate moment nice catch

You are the one arguing Smith should be trusted. Their is ample, well, endless evidence that doing that is foolish. Could you explain why someone who constantly lies should now be given the benefit of the doubt? Even when others have already posted actual facts disproving her words?



Or do you just trust her on faith?

[indes]

Originally Posted by Yoho

To what? Your opinion? Sorry I don’t care.

I’ll take the subject matter expert’s over internet rando.

You want to call the Premier a liar good for you.

I thought experts were out and impulsive, reactionary, consequence damning decisions were the way to do things going forward?

Wasn't that the mandate from the supreme leader?

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Yoho

To what? Your opinion? Sorry I don’t care.

I’ll take the subject matter expert’s over internet rando.

You want to call the Premier a liar good for you.

It's not my opinion.

Here's the actual words Smith is lying about. There's no opinion. Maybe she is not lying. Maybe she just didn't read the words right before the part she clearly did?

You can read them too and then you don't need to rely on propaganda!

https://www.canada.ca/en/services/en...egulation.html

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1690468200691998720

Def not a slam dunk for Feds.

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

It's not my opinion.

Here's the actual words Smith is lying about. There's no opinion. Maybe she is not lying. Maybe she just didn't read the words right before the part she clearly did?

You can read them too and then you don't need to rely on propaganda!

https://www.canada.ca/en/services/en...egulation.html

Thanks for this. Nice to get unfiltered sources these days.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

It's not my opinion.

Here's the actual words Smith is lying about. There's no opinion. Maybe she is not lying. Maybe she just didn't read the words right before the part she clearly did?

You can read them too and then you don't need to rely on propaganda!

https://www.canada.ca/en/services/en...egulation.html

These exceptions may or may not be reasonable considering their economic impacts (I have no idea or opinion) but it’s infuriating that the province doesn’t acknowledge them as at least a reasonable starting point to accommodate Alberta’a needs.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Yoho

To what? Your opinion? Sorry I don’t care.

I’ll take the subject matter expert’s over internet rando.

You want to call the Premier a liar good for you.

Like seriously. There should be a rule where you have to post at least 100 times in the Flames Forum before you are allowed to post in the Off Topic.

Go back to The Rebel Cory!

[curves2000]

I don't know if I buy any of the federal government's analysis that this change on the power grid is only going to cost a few dollars a month. It doesn't matter which way anybody slices it when it comes to anything energy cost related for any government.

AB Power deregulation, City of Calgary and never ending Enmax issues, Ontario power and hydro costs under (insert government) The Federal Government and their carbon tax/rebate. Assurances and confidence that without a doubt, the vast majority of people will be getting a lot more of a rebate than paying out in costs.

Bottom line is that we are going to be paying more and so will everybody else like businesses and more. Those costs get passed on. Sometimes when people believe or think that this analysis will play out, they forget the basic logic at play.

Carbon taxes and rebates higher than costs?? Sure, let's apply a carbon tax to almost everything so that we can cash more chq!

Moving to this net zero energy grid and more of a clean tech future? Sure, I guess since we won't be paying carbon taxes, fuel taxes, oil and gas companies, we will pay significantly less in overall taxes and costs for virtually everything. Goverment's will haver to make do with a LOT less tax revenue going forward. Hurray for the little guy!!

[Yoho]

/\ agreed nothing free but the cheese in the trap.

https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6935028

“ B.C. Hydro wants to raise EV charging fees, but customers say the time-based fees are unfair”

https://twitter.com/user/status/1690751554457145344

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Like seriously. There should be a rule where you have to post at least 100 times in the Flames Forum before you are allowed to post in the Off Topic.

Go back to The Rebel Cory!

I don’t think posting 100 Corey Morgan tweets in the Fire On Ice category is going to be particularly helpful.