Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

Fuzz, you have lots of intelligent things to say and even if I don't always agree, I'm usually impressed by your ability to make rational and educated arguments.

This isn't one of them. This literally makes no sense. You can't just reference real oil prices as some sort of silver bullet, and completely ignore how much cost structures have changed in the upstream space (for the better, significantly more efficient), and also ignore how much cost structures have changed in the midstream space (for the worse, partly and significantly due to the abhorrent regulatory conditions we subject them to).

I mean, it is hard to be an expert in everything. His Noodly Appendages certainly knows that most people Fuzz is arguing with are not even trying.

I think the point still lands. One of the main reasons that no big oil companies are looking to pony up big money to build a new pipeline is because most CEOs know that their industry is running out of runway.

They won't say it out loud because they want us all to think that Oil profits will last forever but the definition of non-renewable resources is that they cannot last forever.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

Fuzz, you have lots of intelligent things to say and even if I don't always agree, I'm usually impressed by your ability to make rational and educated arguments.

This isn't one of them. This literally makes no sense. You can't just reference real oil prices as some sort of silver bullet, and completely ignore how much cost structures have changed in the upstream space (for the better, significantly more efficient), and also ignore how much cost structures have changed in the midstream space (for the worse, partly and significantly due to the abhorrent regulatory conditions we subject them to).

To the point, how many companies have come forward and said they have an economic case for a pipeline if the government changes this and that?

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I'm not sure where my brain is.

It's a little pickled.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

It's a little pickled.

I wish! Needs more pickle juice.


I'll freely admit that post didn't make any sense, and retract it's sillyness.

[ThePrince]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

To the point, how many companies have come forward and said they have an economic case for a pipeline if the government changes this and that?

The problem is very chicken and egg. The pipeline companies don’t want to deal with the regulatory burden and risk on a project that’s probably 10 years out because of how cumbersome that process is, without assurance from operators that volumes will be there, and the operators don’t want to provide assurance because that’s too far a time horizon to commit volumes to.

And to answer your question, here’s an open letter to Canada’s government from Executives at Canadian companies stating exactly what we’ve been saying.

https://www.wcap.ca/open-letter-to-party-leaders

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

To the point, how many companies have come forward and said they have an economic case for a pipeline if the government changes this and that?

https://www.pembina.com/media-centre...aaabc047abc17/

*Removed the unnecessary snarky comment.

[Firebot]

The 2014 oil crash / downturn has caused significant efficiency revision where oil and gas companies can be profitable at previously unheard of amounts, and this was done in an environment of continuously rising costs and inflation. Also Oil and gas companies, and pipeline companies are typically separate entities with different structures.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...lays-1.7586510

Suncor credits efforts including standardizing maintenance practices across mines and improving management of site water to get more production out of existing assets for contributing to the company's $7 US per barrel reduction in its West Texas Intermediate (WTI) break-even price in 2024 to $42.90.

This long-term focus on cost-cutting means Canada's five biggest oilsands companies can break even — and still maintain their dividends — at WTI prices between $43.10 and $40.85, according to a Bank of Montreal analysis for Reuters.

That means oilsands producers have lowered their overall costs by approximately $10 a barrel in about seven years. Oilsands had an average break-even price of $51.80/bbl between 2017 and 2019, according to BMO.

Companies like Shell did not leave previously extremely profitable oil sand projects in Canada such as Albian Sands because of economics, they left because of toxic Canadian politics and carbon pricing debate that were raging especially in 2015-2019 and promised an extraordinarily challenging business outlook.

Ironically, Shell has mostly diverted its attention in recent years to LNG, something that our previous government heavily downplayed. Yet all of a sudden, with changing political tides Shell is sneaking fossil fuel right back into their long term strategy (and the 2050 zero emission plan silently goes poof) after kicking out their CEO in 2023. And with Trump in power in the US this only shifting further.

https://financialpost.com/pmn/busine...ay-in-new-york

His presentation in the city is set to hone in on fossil fuels, cementing Shell’s retreat from clean energy after a push into renewables earlier this decade. For BP, too, green businesses are taking a back seat following calls from investors for better returns.

Again, politics is the biggest driver. To look at this purely from a $ per barrel perspective is wholly misinformed. The politics behind a new pipeline makes the prospects far too costly to ever consider, and right now in Canada the prospects are still too dangerous. Even when proposals go ahead, workers are at constant physical threat

https://www.coastalgaslink.com/whats...of-axe-attack/

What Carney has done with C-5 is a great positive step, but much more must be done before the pipeline companies that can actually build a cross country pipeline will get on the table (some of which are outside of federal hands). There is a decade of disastrous policies and bills to dissolve to make it palatable again. The prospects of progress are growing though, even if just slightly.

[Regorium]

Nov 4 for the first budget.

Really interested to see what Carney does on the climate file. So far he's just dismantled everything (EV mandate, carbon tax, emissions cap) and curious what he's planning to replace them with.

[simmer2]

Not sure if anyone has seen the TV show Utopia. Australian show in The Office style documentary...premise of the show is Australia has created a new department called the "Nation Building Authority" responsible for overseeing major infrastructure projects. This was back in 2014.

I'd forgotten about the series until now but it's brilliant...and it's what I will now think of thanks to Carney lol.

Here's a link to some small excerpts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iagc0tSjt5s

[Regorium]

Now he's getting rid of the interest free loan.

I mean he's gotta do SOMETHING to replace it right? How can he be so bad on the climate file? It's worse than what I'd have expected the Conservatives to do.

[direwolf]

Carney was in Mexico today meeting with President Sheinbaum in regards to strengthening trade between the two countries amidst the uncertainty around Trump's tariff bulls*** and the upcoming CUSMA review.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/can...ship-1.7637709

"Today, we're beginning a new era of elevated co-operation," Carney said during a news conference with Sheinbaum on Thursday evening.

"We are both undertaking massive transformations of our economy … our efforts will be strengthened by working together."

Sheinbaum, meanwhile, said she expects the agreements made between herself and Carney would bear fruit in the near term.

"Mexico and Canada will continue walking together, with mutual respect and with a certainty that co-operation is the path to overcome any challenge," Sheinbaum said in Spanish.

Through this new partnership, the two leaders agreed to develop further trade and security relationships, invest in infrastructure and work together on climate and conservation initiatives.

Sheinbaum has been openly discussing her desire for Canada to build up its infrastructure, including ports, to create trade and energy corridors — a wish that would align with Carney's push to build major projects.


The new partnership comes as CUSMA is facing a review next year.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Companies like Shell did not leave previously extremely profitable oil sand projects in Canada such as Albian Sands because of economics, they left because of toxic Canadian politics and carbon pricing debate that were raging especially in 2015-2019 and promised an extraordinarily challenging business outlook.

Do you have an actual verifiable source for this statement for any company?

At some point people need to realize that production never stopped. Facility Projects slowed down because once facilities are built during a boom they can produce on automation and a typical plant might need five people on staff for the next three decades.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Now he's getting rid of the interest free loan.

I mean he's gotta do SOMETHING to replace it right? How can he be so bad on the climate file? It's worse than what I'd have expected the Conservatives to do.

I don't give a bolloxs about the climate at this point, not because I don't believe in global warming, I do, but because I see no point in Canadians taking it up the arse financially when it will make sod all difference to climate change

Unless it comes on a global level then piss on it, might as well march to our extinction reasonably well off as a country

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I don't give a bolloxs about the climate at this point, not because I don't believe in global warming, I do, but because I see no point in Canadians taking it up the arse financially when it will make sod all difference to climate change

Unless it comes on a global level then piss on it, might as well march to our extinction reasonably well off as a country

How exactly will that happen without at least some countries like Canada taking the lead. The major countries signed treaties and then the right got their way and they reneged.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I don't give a bolloxs about the climate at this point, not because I don't believe in global warming, I do, but because I see no point in Canadians taking it up the arse financially when it will make sod all difference to climate change

Unless it comes on a global level then piss on it, might as well march to our extinction reasonably well off as a country

Stop being such an American. It is that kind of attitude that will turn Alberta/Canada into Blockbuster instead of Netflix.

This is a global issue that is being taken seriously by all of the countries that are not circling the drain with right wing governments (bought and paid for by big O&G). Being a global leader in green technology will be a huge benefit to whatever country is smart enough to make it a priority.

For example, one of the main reasons that Canadian aluminum is going to start being exported to Germany is because Germany has put carbon taxes on the whole supply chain of refining of aluminum. So even though the shipping from Canada to Germany is far more expensive than closer options, those closer options are using coal to refine the aluminum and the carbon tax is going to make Germany switch suppliers to Canada because Quebec is using Hydro power to refine the aluminum. Germany went from near zero to 18% this year.

Many countries are taking this seriously and they are going to start excluding countries that are not taking this seriously from trade. Since Canada can no longer rely on America as a trade partner we need to fast track green initiatives in order to get the EU, UK, Japan, etc. interested in building stronger trade relationships.

Also, if you are keeping up on the latest breakthroughs in solar and wind and household battery options, there is a very real acceleration of technology that could cause fossil fuel consumption to drop off faster than Alberta will ever be willing to accept as reality.

In Japan we have Canon (yes, the printer company) making a massive breakthrough on Perovskite solar cells. These new cells are cheaper and cleaner to make as they no longer use silicon, they are lighter and flexible with more versatile applications than current solar panels, and they have at least the same solar capture rate with less degradation over time. This is a big breakthrough and the moment they achieve mass production (which they plan to do in 2025) there is a very real scenario where they will make a LOT of money transitioning a lot of society away from fossil fuels.

More recently, there was another breakthrough with Perovskite-silicon solar cells at King Adbullah University of Science and Technology to hit a new record of 33.1% efficiency which blows away the best possible capture that legacy silicon cells could achieve. If Saudi Arabia is willing to get onto the bleeding edge of solar innovation then it makes me wonder why Alberta is fighting it....

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Do you have an actual verifiable source for this statement for any company?

At some point people need to realize that production never stopped. Facility Projects slowed down because once facilities are built during a boom they can produce on automation and a typical plant might need five people on staff for the next three decades.

This response to a post about the Albian Sands plant is wild, especially when you’re asking to see verifiable sources, time to pony up your sources here chief.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

How exactly will that happen without at least some countries like Canada taking the lead. The major countries signed treaties and then the right got their way and they reneged.

It won't happen, that's my point, it isn't going to happen and frankly no country is actually doing anything real it is all performative

Electric cars will do nothing, you want to stop global warming we have to ride bikes, take buses, cars have to be got rid of and no one is going to do that, everything we do is purely performative

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

It won't happen, that's my point, it isn't going to happen and frankly no country is actually doing anything real it is all performative

Electric cars will do nothing, you want to stop global warming we have to ride bikes, take buses, cars have to be got rid of and no one is going to do that, everything we do is purely performative

People and countries aren't even remotely willing to talk about slowing down having kids. When having a single kid more than offsets dozens upon dozens of people that might actually throw their car into the junkyard or switch to electric. It's the single most destructive thing you can choose to do regarding global warming. If anything, there is encouragement for people to have more kids.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

It won't happen, that's my point, it isn't going to happen and frankly no country is actually doing anything real it is all performative

Electric cars will do nothing, you want to stop global warming we have to ride bikes, take buses, cars have to be got rid of and no one is going to do that, everything we do is purely performative

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by chemgear

People and countries aren't even remotely willing to talk about slowing down having kids. When having a single kid more than offsets dozens upon dozens of people that might actually throw their car into the junkyard or switch to electric. It's the single most destructive thing you can choose to do regarding global warming. If anything, there is encouragement for people to have more kids.

Aren’t willing to talk about slowing down having kids ?

Almost every (every?) 1st world country has been having less kids for the last 20 years