Alberta Politics Thread

[puckedoff]

Is your bunker solar powered? I'm rockin' a Honda EU3000 for the end-of-times.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

All this talk and no mention of the bunker fuel percentages? Those don't make a lick of sense.

Yeah, I had no idea how to interpret those numbers. That is partially why I think the %'s have something else factored into them.

[Resolute 14]

Ignoring the Fraser Institute's numbers and dumb table entirely, it is still self-evident that Notley's plan will eliminate billions of dollars from Alberta's economy. Still waiting on her plan to replace those dollars. Personally, I doubt we ever see one.

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Ignoring the Fraser Institute's numbers and dumb table entirely, it is still self-evident that Notley's plan will eliminate billions of dollars from Alberta's economy. Still waiting on her plan to replace those dollars. Personally, I doubt we ever see one.

The NDP in Alberta is all about taking money out of business and putting it in the hands of government. They do not understand that it is better to get 20% in taxes from a thriving economy than 40% from the kind of economy they are creating. By the time they face the electorate they will have shrunk Alberta's economy significantly.

[RubberDuck]

This is what I read:

Cost to Canadians - massive
Environmental benefits - minuscule

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by RubberDuck

This is what I read:

Cost to Canadians - massive
Environmental benefits - minuscule

Environmental Social License - priceless?

[cal_guy]

Originally Posted by Kavvy

Yes!

I don't have enough knowledge to speak to the carbon tax, but comparing a carbon footprint of northern nation whose population is extremely far apart to a southern nation with a compact population is wrong.

Lastly, the world needs resources, no matter the view on climate change. I would argue resource based nations will innately have a higher carbon footprint per person then a nation with clean tech. If we throw out the resources, we throw out the clean tech.

What does Norway emit per person? Russia?

Russia around 12.6 T per capita
Norway around 11.7 T per capita
Canada around 16 T per capita
Alberta around 60 T per capita

[GGG]

Originally Posted by cal_guy

Russia around 12.6 T per capita
Norway around 11.7 T per capita
Canada around 16 T per capita
Alberta around 60 T per capita

The biggest issue in comparing our CO2 to Russia's is the reporting of CO2 is based on a countries own numbers. Its likely about as good as relying on countries to be in charge of their own doping program.

Also putting Alberta on their as an extreme number is disingenuous the emissions due to extraction of Oil which is used elsewhere should be tied to the users of the commodity and not to the extracter.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Delgar

The NDP in Alberta is all about taking money out of business and putting it in the hands of government. They do not understand that it is better to get 20% in taxes from a thriving economy than 40% from the kind of economy they are creating. By the time they face the electorate they will have shrunk Alberta's economy significantly.

Well, if the "thriving economy" is twice as productive as the "NDP economy" then yeah, sure. However, if not, the cost-benefit analysis is presumably a little more complex.

[Tacopuck]

Originally Posted by cal_guy

Russia around 12.6 T per capita
Norway around 11.7 T per capita
Canada around 16 T per capita
Alberta around 60 T per capita

Do these numbers factor in the CO2 offsets that Canada's forests provide?

[Igniter]

Originally Posted by GGG

The biggest issue in comparing our CO2 to Russia's is the reporting of CO2 is based on a countries own numbers. Its likely about as good as relying on countries to be in charge of their own doping program.

Also putting Alberta on their as an extreme number is disingenuous the emissions due to extraction of Oil which is used elsewhere should be tied to the users of the commodity and not to the extracter.

I agree completely and would like to add:

You cannot compare a dense industrial region of a country to other countries that represent amalgamations of multiple regions. By averaging over a country, industrial regions are balanced with regions more geared toward services, education, research, and or government.

I think it is also important to recognize that resource extraction will always have a larger impact on the environment when compared to a tertiary or quaternary sector of the economy. However, it is naive to think that primary industries are NOT important to a Nation's economy because of this. It is a balancing act. Lean too much towards all tertiary or quaternary sectors, and you've got the leap manifesto...

[Igniter]

CO2 Emissions by state

It's Wikipedia, but sources from the EPA and EIA (both legitimate reporting and monitoring agencies within the United States).

We can see the disparity between a small, dense, information/knowledge dominated economy in the District of Columbia and larger more resource based states such as Wyoming, North Dakota, Alaska, and Texas. It's unfortunately a function of the fact that resources we are extracting (that are still used) were concentrated within a specific region or arbitrary boundary and not universally and equally distributed throughout the entire country.

Again, this does not mean as a province/country we shouldn't reduce our emissions, but as long as resource extraction (and to a certain extent manufacturing) is a required part of our economy, there will be regions with higher per capita emissions.

Edit: And to add, if we transferred the emissions created from extraction or manufacturing along the value chain to the consumer on a per unit basis, you'd obviously see the emissions of low per capita regions increase... Which supports the point that the products created or resources extracted are very important to the rest of the nation...

[Makarov]

Its a complicated issue: how to share/distribute both the costs (emissions) and benefits (wealth) of resource extraction among Albertans, Canadians, and indeed all people on earth. No easy answers.

[Igniter]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Its a complicated issue: how to share/distribute both the costs (emissions) and benefits (wealth) of resource extraction among Albertans, Canadians, and indeed all people on earth. No easy answers.

One would argue that Albertans have shared the benefits of our wealth via transfer payments and that the entire confederation has benefited greatly... which dovetails into a lot of the frustration that myself, many posters, and many Albertans currently have towards the rest of this country. Now, when we need Canada to help us out, we are ignored or scorned.

We are not requesting free reign to produce as much as we can with no environmental standards. All we are requesting is that we be given access to tidewater to sell a resource that the rest of the country and the rest of the world will continue to use is measurable quantities for years to come. We ask that our ability to compete is not completely destroyed by policy and regulation. All we are requesting is that we can continue to be a strong part of this nation's economy and we receive some acknowledgement of our contribution.

I honestly think that if Ontario had this resource (Oil Sands) in their backyard... this nation's viewpoint on the whole issue would be very different.

Aside: This isn't directed at you Makarov, I just found that my thoughts were spawned from your post. It's more a rhetorical rambling than a true reply.

[Wiggum_PI]

AHS faces costly upgrades to linen facilities, after minister cancels privatization plan

Alberta Health Services’ plan to avoid multimillion-dollar upgrades to its laundry facilities by outsourcing the service to a private company were undone late last year by the NDP government, Postmedia has learned.

Documents obtained through an access to information request show AHS executives grew concerned in recent years about the decaying state of their linen and laundry sites around the province — facilities that supply clean bed sheets, gowns and surgical clothing at top sanitary standards.

Estimated costs to build sufficient new facilities have ranged from $54 million to $200 million, an expense the executives decided was prohibitive at a time when funding was needed for more direct clinical care areas, the documents show.

“AHS has reached a critical point where the only viable option for sustaining linen services that are core to patient care is to work with our existing linen contract provider and transition AHS facilities to them as effectively as possible,” says a briefing note from June last year.

That provider, K-Bro Linen Systems, has been used for years by AHS to provide medical linen in the Calgary and Edmonton regions, and the health authority planned to expand the contract to include the rest of the province. The executives noted other health regions, including some in Saskatchewan, B.C., Ontario and Quebec, had gone the outsourcing route.

But Health Minister Sarah Hoffman said she personally intervened late last year, telling AHS to look at other options since the strategy ran afoul of NDP policy to prevent further privatization of health services.

The plan would have led to the elimination of 130 to 140 full-time equivalent jobs at AHS.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Wiggum_PI

AHS faces costly upgrades to linen facilities, after minister cancels privatization plan

The unions win again.

[Robbob]

That is just stupid. Outsourcing the laundry is practical not privatization.

[Igniter]

Look who is buying US oil

The article does not state where the US imports were used... but likely on the eastern side of the country.

The 53.5 million barrels of crude oil would represent approximately $2.4 billion based on the current oil price of $45/barrel (which it wasn't for most of the year - but looking to the future is a good benchmark).

That is $2.4 billion of trade deficit that could have come from within Canada. $2.4 billion that would have gone to into predominantly (not all) Canadian company pockets... safely employing Alberta workers, paying Albertan and Canadian income tax...

Oh and this has been since December of 2015. Assuming that this is up to end of month July, the minimum monthly import volume is 6.7 million barrels.

[LanceUppercut]

Originally Posted by Igniter

Oh and this has been since December of 2015. Assuming that this is up to end of month July, the minimum monthly import volume is 6.7 million barrels.

6.7 million barrels a month works out to about 220000 barrels a day. I'd be curious as to how this oil is being transported to Canada and to the refineries that end up using it. I would bet a portion of it at is coming via pipeline.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Wiggum_PI

AHS faces costly upgrades to linen facilities, after minister cancels privatization plan

Utterly ridiculous. We must protect our own. The NDP is putting their own voter self interests over everything else with this move.

I guess they listened when the AEUPE head screamed in the paper not to fight us or piss us off.