Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

Still workshopping a slogan

"I have Diarrhea"

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by surferguy

Would it be possible for The feds to resurrect these pipelines (buy the plans) and have a nationalized pipeline network?

Those "plans", all the detailed work that took years to do have been tossed. Most of it would be obsolete anyway. The routes are a known thing, so there isn't much to buy.

The thing is, these companies plan them to integrate into their systems, so a lot use existing infrastructure/land. The most straight forward solution would be for those companies to go back to the drawing board, but they'd need incentive to do it. Perhaps having them be government funded with large ownership stakes might be the best way to move forward. The economics for private companies are iffy, and probably look worse during a global recession. But it's also a big employer if we insist on Canadian steel, though we may not even have the factories to manufacture it.

There are some quicker ways to move forward, I suspect. EE was mostly converting the gas mainline to Ontario, with extensions in Alberta(easy) and extensions throguh Quebec and NB(politically hard, but maybe not now). So we could get the oil to Ontario fairly quickly, but that's to Ottawa and there are no refineries to just plug in to. We could shipped refined product, but I doubt we have the capacity in Alberta to feed the east. And we also lose the gas shipping capacity of that line.





https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/applica...e/energy-east/

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Slava

Okay, not that I disagree, but which pipeline and which corporation is ready to build this? This "solution" keeps coming up, but Energy East was abandoned years ago, and Gateway was quashed before it even got out of the blocks.

I think people need to start wrapping their heads around the fact that as costly as TMX was to get done by having the government buy the project, it’s likely the only way we’re going to get those kinds of projects completed right now. If we’re being honest with ourselves even if things like the “anti-pipeline” bills get repealed we’ll still face similar court challenges that were happening before, even if it may be to a lesser extent due to not having to go through BC.

Not an ideal situation but paying $30B with public money to build a pipeline that will generate revenue more revenue, helps lower the price differential thus increasing existing energy revenues, while creating 100’s of not 1000’s of jobs along the way and can be sold once completed to recoup at the very least a large chunk of the costs is better than a privately funded $10B pipeline that will never get built.

The biggest benefit would be no longer having to rely so heavily on a trading partner who have made it clear that they can’t continue to be relied on.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by chemgear

Unlikely with Carney's long history with net zero and being against Canadian pipelines like Northern Gateway nevermind Guilbeault being the usual economic terrorist throwing is support behind him already. Didn't he also promise Quebec no pipelines?

Maybe with the other liberal candidates though. Or another party.

Except Carney has supported and invested in more pipelines over his career than any other candidate or party leader.

But good effort.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Except Carney has supported and invested in more pipelines over his career than any other candidate or party leader.

But good effort.

They love to make money off O&G and pipeline investments but they hate to promote the projects for "moral" standing.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

They love to make money off O&G and pipeline investments but they hate to promote the projects for "moral" standing.

Heaven forbid we elect someone who bases decisions on what makes good financial sense.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Heaven forbid we elect someone who bases decisions on what makes good financial sense.

Good financial sense for Brookfield and their investors?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Good financial sense for Brookfield and their investors?

That and all of his other employers.

Sorry, I forgot conservatives hate people that have work experience.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

That and all of his other employers.

Sorry, I forgot conservatives hate people that have work experience.

The grasping at straws phase has been highly entertaining.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

https://davidcoletto.substack.com/p/...y-have?r=o45a2


This is interesting, because really all that matters is voter perception. Truth doesn't matter, so if 55% of voters think PP would have voted for Trump, that is going to be a near impossible bar to clear. And given the trajectory, this is going to be a heavier and heavier millstone to carry. This is actually way higher than I would have guessed.

This is neither here nor there but the colour mis-match hurts my brain.

Red Liberal votes Blue Democrat
Blue Conservative votes Red Republican.

The colours are supposed to make reading the graph easier, EASIER!

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Dozer

Just gotta find something that rhymes . Common sense conservatives will Dump the Trump Tarrifs. Carbon tax Carney has no chance with Vance negotiating an end to tarriffs

How about "Punt the......Cheeto Tarrifs".

[Ped]

Who are the idiot 6 percent that think Trudeau would have strongly supported Trump?

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Ped

Who are the idiot 6 percent that think Trudeau would have strongly supported Trump?

There’s a lot of idiots represented in that chart.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I think people need to start wrapping their heads around the fact that as costly as TMX was to get done by having the government buy the project, it’s likely the only way we’re going to get those kinds of projects completed right now. If we’re being honest with ourselves even if things like the “anti-pipeline” bills get repealed we’ll still face similar court challenges that were happening before, even if it may be to a lesser extent due to not having to go through BC.

Not an ideal situation but paying $30B with public money to build a pipeline that will generate revenue more revenue, helps lower the price differential thus increasing existing energy revenues, while creating 100’s of not 1000’s of jobs along the way and can be sold once completed to recoup at the very least a large chunk of the costs is better than a privately funded $10B pipeline that will never get built.

The biggest benefit would be no longer having to rely so heavily on a trading partner who have made it clear that they can’t continue to be relied on.

I would like to see a number of mega-projects done in the national interest, including appropriate pipeline(s); northern ports and base(s); upgraded transportation networks. Something in the scale of the US interstate highway system. Use national interest to drive them through but encouraging involvement of affected parties.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Ped

Who are the idiot 6 percent that think Trudeau would have strongly supported Trump?

What about the 11% of respondents who thing that Singh and May would have supported Trump?

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Those "plans", all the detailed work that took years to do have been tossed. Most of it would be obsolete anyway. The routes are a known thing, so there isn't much to buy.

The thing is, these companies plan them to integrate into their systems, so a lot use existing infrastructure/land. The most straight forward solution would be for those companies to go back to the drawing board, but they'd need incentive to do it. Perhaps having them be government funded with large ownership stakes might be the best way to move forward. The economics for private companies are iffy, and probably look worse during a global recession. But it's also a big employer if we insist on Canadian steel, though we may not even have the factories to manufacture it.

There are some quicker ways to move forward, I suspect. EE was mostly converting the gas mainline to Ontario, with extensions in Alberta(easy) and extensions throguh Quebec and NB(politically hard, but maybe not now). So we could get the oil to Ontario fairly quickly, but that's to Ottawa and there are no refineries to just plug in to. We could shipped refined product, but I doubt we have the capacity in Alberta to feed the east. And we also lose the gas shipping capacity of that line.





https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/applica...e/energy-east/

I didn’t realize the extent of pipeline reuse. Would that by itself mitigate the line 5 detour into the US? That would be a win for energy security alone.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by edslunch

I would like to see a number of mega-projects done in the national interest, including appropriate pipeline(s); northern ports and base(s); upgraded transportation networks. Something in the scale of the US interstate highway system. Use national interest to drive them through but encouraging involvement of affected parties.

Nope. No new funding for road infrastructure from the feds from now on as promised by Guilbeault. Not allowed.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Except Carney has supported and invested in more pipelines over his career than any other candidate or party leader.

But good effort.

Happy to make money from foreign pipelines development. But not inside Canada, that's not allowed lol.

[Fuzz]

Looks like line 5 is 500k BPD, and the conversion was to be 500-1000k(probably depends on section) so ya, it does look like it could handle the same capacity. Ontario has more Enbridge lines coming in from the states though, so I'm not sure what a comfortable replacement capacity would need to be.



https://www.enbridge.com/~/media/enb...tureassets.pdf

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by chemgear

Nope. No new funding for road infrastructure from the feds from now on as promised by Guilbeault. Not allowed.

Good lord, do you believe everything you see tweeted? Go look that one up, I'll wait.