Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[Locke]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

She may know there is no way she could fool enough Canadians as easily as her ucp base

Ironically this part of her plan works against her. By her grandstanding BS and essentially making Alberta and it's citizens inherently unlikeable the rest of the country would probably tell her to pound sand just out of pure spite.

The way it should be.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

That effectively makes the oil sands a Canadian resource as much as an Alberta one. Like it not, facts are facts. So pipelines too benefit all Canadians by allowing for more production. That narrative needs to be amplified because continued development of the oil sands (which could be doubled in terms of daily production) would result in a meaningful improvement in public services across the country without needing to increase personal or corporate income tax to pay for it.

I'm dont work in oil and gas (nor am I invested in it), but I genuinely appreciate what a gift the oil sands are, allowing us a substantially higher level of public services relative to the taxes we pay. I think we'd all be better off as Canadians if that was more widely appreciated. There's a reason why Saudis, Norwegians, Emeratis, Kruwatis, etc have a consensus to maximize oil and gas production. It's because the citizens can clearly sees how much they benefit from it.

That only works as long as you prescribe to the OPEC forecast of "OIL FOREVER".

The fact is, there are a lot of experts who believe that peak oil demand could be in the next 5-10 years (depending on how much sabotage we see from the right wing politicians and their O&G overlords).

Looking at facts around the world:

• The speed in which China is electrifying their country and their ability to control that change within their nation, it is reasonable to expect that China could be off oil faster than any other country
• Japan, South Korea, and Malaysia are all working hard to electrify their nations as well. (I've been personally very interested in watching Japan's effort because their Perovskite solar cells are going to be transformative.)
• In the UK and EU, they are also driving green initiative, carbon taxes, and electrification of their industries. (I think the archimedes wind turbine looks like an impressive scientific feat to maximize energy generation while reducing noise)
• North America was moving quickly toward electrification but Trump has put a stop to a lot of that

From a capitalistic point of view, it is very interesting to see the momentum building up to replace O&G. The market knows that the end is coming (even if they do not know when) and now it is a race to see what will replace the mighty Oil and who can make the most money in the new energy technology markets.

All of this is to say that there is another reason that there may be no private company willing to invest money into a new Alberta to coast pipeline: There is a huge risk that the pipeline won't be completed until after peak oil and the profitability of the pipeline would then be unlikely or could even be a huge loss. Again, from a capitalism point of view, if this new pipeline was easy money then there would be a line of companies kicking down the door to the Canada MPO to be the proponent. However, they are not doing so and it is likely because of the risk that it won't actually be profitable. Corporations do not like risk, they only like profit.

As for the "reason why" the Saudis, Norwegians, Emeratis, Kruwatis, etc are maximizing production right now... that could simply be an attempt to maximize profit before peak oil demand hits. Essentially, they are cashing out. If you believe that the peak oil demand is on the horizon then the next logical step is to consider why OPEC is lying (to make mountains of money, duh!). The Saudis are actually investing a lot of money into renewables, almost as if they want to be on the other side of the energy transition BEFORE the O&G industry peaks and starts to decline. (Their target is to be 50% renewable energy by 2030 and they are investing billions into making that happen)

Personally, I would rather see Alberta invest heavily into the energy transition and industry diversification of our province. Whether you believe peak oil demand is 5 years or 30 years away, transforming our province to that degree needs a lot of runway. We can still produce and sell oil at high amounts but we should strive to no longer be dependent on the industry. Once we are reliably independent of O&G, the continued revenue from that industry would be a bonus to the betterment of our people instead of our one and only lifeline.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Locke

Ironically this part of her plan works against her. By her grandstanding BS and essentially making Alberta and it's citizens inherently unlikeable the rest of the country would probably tell her to pound sand just out of pure spite.

The way it should be.

Trouble is, thats what they want. Alberta Conservatives thrive on the idea that somehow they are victims. People scoffing at their misgivings is porn for UCP types.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Wolven

That only works as long as you prescribe to the OPEC forecast of "OIL FOREVER".

The fact is, there are a lot of experts who believe that peak oil demand could be in the next 5-10 years (depending on how much sabotage we see from the right wing politicians and their O&G overlords).

Looking at facts around the world:

• The speed in which China is electrifying their country and their ability to control that change within their nation, it is reasonable to expect that China could be off oil faster than any other country
• Japan, South Korea, and Malaysia are all working hard to electrify their nations as well. (I've been personally very interested in watching Japan's effort because their Perovskite solar cells are going to be transformative.)
• In the UK and EU, they are also driving green initiative, carbon taxes, and electrification of their industries. (I think the archimedes wind turbine looks like an impressive scientific feat to maximize energy generation while reducing noise)
• North America was moving quickly toward electrification but Trump has put a stop to a lot of that

From a capitalistic point of view, it is very interesting to see the momentum building up to replace O&G. The market knows that the end is coming (even if they do not know when) and now it is a race to see what will replace the mighty Oil and who can make the most money in the new energy technology markets.

All of this is to say that there is another reason that there may be no private company willing to invest money into a new Alberta to coast pipeline: There is a huge risk that the pipeline won't be completed until after peak oil and the profitability of the pipeline would then be unlikely or could even be a huge loss. Again, from a capitalism point of view, if this new pipeline was easy money then there would be a line of companies kicking down the door to the Canada MPO to be the proponent. However, they are not doing so and it is likely because of the risk that it won't actually be profitable. Corporations do not like risk, they only like profit.

As for the "reason why" the Saudis, Norwegians, Emeratis, Kruwatis, etc are maximizing production right now... that could simply be an attempt to maximize profit before peak oil demand hits. Essentially, they are cashing out. If you believe that the peak oil demand is on the horizon then the next logical step is to consider why OPEC is lying (to make mountains of money, duh!). The Saudis are actually investing a lot of money into renewables, almost as if they want to be on the other side of the energy transition BEFORE the O&G industry peaks and starts to decline. (Their target is to be 50% renewable energy by 2030 and they are investing billions into making that happen)

Personally, I would rather see Alberta invest heavily into the energy transition and industry diversification of our province. Whether you believe peak oil demand is 5 years or 30 years away, transforming our province to that degree needs a lot of runway. We can still produce and sell oil at high amounts but we should strive to no longer be dependent on the industry. Once we are reliably independent of O&G, the continued revenue from that industry would be a bonus to the betterment of our people instead of our one and only lifeline.

I don’t have an issue with investing in renewables.

I don’t think you have this right. I think people have been calling “peak oil” since the ‘70’s or maybe even earlier. Oil is going to be around a long time. Same with gas and derivative products from those substances. There’s thousands of them. You also have developing countries that don’t give a #### about climate change and who’s standard of living is catching up to western places so I don’t think just based on the math you have the whole peak oil thing correct. Coal is still used in massive quantities, I think demand is like more than ever?

It would be a huge mistake to continue fumbling the ball on oil and gas. Especially when it’s such a huge geopolitical lever with the USA.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I don’t have an issue with investing in renewables.

I don’t think you have this right. I think people have been calling “peak oil” since the ‘70’s or maybe even earlier. Oil is going to be around a long time. Same with gas and derivative products from those substances. There’s thousands of them. You also have developing countries that don’t give a #### about climate change and who’s standard of living is catching up to western places so I don’t think just based on the math you have the whole peak oil thing correct. Coal is still used in massive quantities, I think demand is like more than ever?

It would be a huge mistake to continue fumbling the ball on oil and gas. Especially when it’s such a huge geopolitical lever with the USA.

Back in the '70s and '80s everyone thought we were going to run out of oil. It was all about when we would hit "peak oil supply" and then run out of reserves.

Now the conversation is about "peak oil demand", which implies that the supply will still be there but the market will be displaced by alternative technologies. As demand peaks and starts to decline, the profits will start to decline and the prices will drop as the cheapest suppliers will try to squeeze value out of the remaining market and essentially kill off the more expensive producers.

If the Oil Sands production stays profitable at $20/barrel, then things will get tighter and tighter as the prices go down but the market here will not crash. The moment that the Saudis or whoever pushes the price down to $15/barrel or $10/barrel then that is game over for Alberta.

Also, if you look at those developing countries, a lot of them are looking to leapfrog into electrification. With the new technology advancements and lowering cost of green technology it is becoming more and more reasonable for them to go green immediately and skip having to invest a bunch of money into legacy combustion technology just to have to invest a bunch more money to replace it all. A lot of the developing countries are in good locations for solar and wind which also makes it easier for them to go straight to those options instead of trying to stand up a coal plant or whatever. So while they might not care about the climate, they definitely care about effective spending of their money.

(In short, they are not stupid)

Fumbling the ball with oil and gas won't matter if the industry dies, but if we double and triple down on oil and gas and then the O&G industry crashes then the province would quickly become a "have not" province relying on equalization payments to come our way just to survive. Our priority should be diversification above all else.

[chedder]

Originally Posted by troutman

I don’t think so - her fantasy is to be PM.

She is utterly unelectable outside rural Alberta and the suburbs of Calgary.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by troutman

I don’t think so - her fantasy is to be PM.

God forbid that ever happens.