Official (Alberta) Oil Discussion Thread

[guzzy]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

I'm interested to hear your perspective on how Krause is a conspiracy clown, it's a proven fact that Canada's oil sector has been specifically targeted by American NGOs and "charities".

He can't because you can't discredit accuracy and honesty just because it doesn't support your social or political stance/views.

Even the Debunked article in energy.media talks about the flaws in her reporting but does more to bury facts than debunk anything. At the end of the day, she shows the Rockefellers/Koch money flowing to Canadian enviro-support "charities", native bands and others. She traced the money. You can't debunk that. You don't see Koch brothers funding environmental charities in Texas.

[peter12]

I'm amazed that people think a few million dollars pumped into Canadian ENGOs is the reason we can't get pipelines built. I'm absolutely blown away by that naivete. It's grasping.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by peter12

I'm amazed that people think a few million dollars pumped into Canadian ENGOs is the reason we can't get pipelines built. I'm absolutely blown away by that naivete. It's grasping.

Its not the only reason, but it is a large one. To speak otherwise is rather naive on your part.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Its not the only reason, but it is a large one. To speak otherwise is rather naive on your part.

It is probably almost inconsequential, honestly.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by peter12

It is probably almost inconsequential, honestly.

Speaking of naivete.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Speaking of naivete.

Court challenges and public relations campaigns? This is all legal in Canada.

EDIT: That's fine. I can accept those things happen. All but one of the court challenges have failed, and the one that didn't was based on the court's interpretation of long-standing common law, and concluded that the Crown didn't meet its duty to consult with Indigenous communities.

I don't dispute Krause's findings that millions of dollars have been legally funnelled into Canadian ENGOs, but rather her insane and hysterical what-if conclusions - like that Canadian ENGOs were able to get the government to remove online charity records or that they were able to influence Alberta's emissions cap or that ALL reasonable criticism of her work is funded by Tides.

She's a conspiracy nut, not this humble citizen reporter.

It's insane and I get why people are buying into it - because they are desperate and grasping for a scapegoat - but Krause's whole agenda is just a time-waster.

[burn_this_city]

Bankrolling various legal challenges has definitely had an impact. I think you underestimate the effect on investors watching the court system casino.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Bankrolling various legal challenges has definitely had an impact. I think you underestimate the effect on investors watching the court system casino.

What court system casino? Our courts that actually strengthened the legal groundings to properly build a project?

No, if we want to lay the blame anywhere, we have to lay it on our electorate and our political class.

[burn_this_city]

Ah yes, the always crystal clear duty to consult with First Nations. The system hasn't strengthened anything, it's still pretty clear you can keep throwing up vexatious challenges and hope one sticks. Who actually knows if the consultations this time were sufficient? The day of the cabinet announcement there was already grumbling that it wasn't enough in the eyes of certain bands.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Ah yes, the always crystal clear duty to consult with First Nations. The system hasn't strengthened anything, it's still pretty clear you can keep throwing up vexatious challenges and hope one sticks. Who actually knows if the consultations this time were sufficient? The day of the cabinet announcement there was already grumbling that it wasn't enough in the eyes of certain bands.

It's clear enough, actually. This all boils down to political will.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by peter12

It's clear enough, actually. This all boils down to political will.

If that was the case why wasn't Northern Gateway rammed through by the Cons before the last election? I don't actually believe it matters what party is in power or approves these things, it's all down to the courts. Every challenge adds years to the project timeline and eventually backers give up.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

If that was the case why wasn't Northern Gateway rammed through by the Cons before the last election? I don't actually believe it matters what party is in power or approves these things, it's all down to the courts. Every challenge adds years to the project timeline and eventually backers give up.

Yeah, because there are unique constitutional circumstances in British Columbia - a lot of which haven't been tested by the courts.

I swear to god, it's like people don't want to understand how this process actually works.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by peter12

Yeah, because there are unique constitutional circumstances in British Columbia - a lot of which haven't been tested by the courts.

I swear to god, it's like people don't want to understand how this process actually works.

Wouldn't this make it a courtroom casino then? I understand the complexity pretty well. You just made the assertion it boils down to political will, and now you're saying its the untested constitutionality? I don't get what you're trying to say.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Wouldn't this make it a courtroom casino then? I understand the complexity pretty well. You just made the assertion it boils down to political will, and now you're saying its the untested constitutionality? I don't get what you're trying to say.

My point is, there will clearly be court challenges for major projects like this which test so many fundamental issues - both with provincial authority to regulate projects as well as Indigenous land claims etc...

That said, the courts have overwhelmingly supported proponents. Canadian jurisprudence over the past 5 years has provided an overwhelming legal case for why and how projects can be built expediently and safely.

Governments know that these projects are unpopular - especially on the coast and in Quebec - and are obviously moving tentatively in order to maximize electoral chances.

For better or worse, we also had a regulatory regime that was not viewed as neutral or competent to adequately judge or approve these projects.

Now you tell me where the ENGOS fit into all this.

[burn_this_city]

They sign on to every single legal challenge brought by Indigenous bands. They have been providing funding to these groups for years. They are constantly making outlandish claims to move the needle on public opinion. There's no market for dilbit, dilbit sinks, its game over for climate change if tmx or kxl are built, a catastrophic spill is inevitable, the whales are on death row ect.

How is it that political will, which has no impact on investor confidence in the face of unrelenting legal opposition, will somehow carry these things to completion? Is the government going to buy every proposed energy project? No one will tie up billions in uncertain outcomes, unless it's the government.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

They sign on to every single legal challenge brought by Indigenous bands. They have been providing funding to these groups for years. They are constantly making outlandish claims to move the needle on public opinion. There's no market for dilbit, dilbit sinks, its game over for climate change if tmx or kxl are built, a catastrophic spill is inevitable, the whales are on death row ect.

How is it that political will, which has no impact on investor confidence in the face of unrelenting legal opposition, will somehow carry these things to completion? Is the government going to buy every proposed energy project? No one will tie up billions in uncertain outcomes, unless it's the government.

Yeah, they say and do that all that stuff, but has it made a demonstrable difference? They do the same EVERYWHERE.

Polling support for pipelines has increased dramatically in every single province outside of Quebec. These aren't very effective public relations campaigns.

[you&me]

Originally Posted by peter12

Yeah, they say and do that all that stuff, but has it made a demonstrable difference? They do the same EVERYWHERE.

Polling support for pipelines has increased dramatically in every single province outside of Quebec. These aren't very effective public relations campaigns.

Or perhaps the counter-campaigns are gaining in their effectiveness?


And the problem is, they don't "do the same EVERYWHERE"... there is not an equal or blanket denouncement of other industrial and commercial activities... More cruise ships? Good. More oil tankers? Bad.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by you&me

Or perhaps the counter-campaigns are gaining in their effectiveness?


And the problem is, they don't "do the same EVERYWHERE"... there is not an equal or blanket denouncement of other industrial and commercial activities... More cruise ships? Good. More oil tankers? Bad.

Sure. The oil companies and Alberta governments have spent a magnitude of ten times more in public relations campaigns.

And yes, they do it everywhere. ENGOs have been very vocal here on the coast in the recent debate to shut down the salmon fisheries as part of efforts to protect the SRKW.

This is fine. We live in a free country and people are allowed to speak their mind in support or protest of whatever they want.

EDIT: Just a disclaimer here. I work in government relations/public affairs for a company that regularly goes toe to toe against the ENGOs, so it's not like I'm just some Joe on the sidelines.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by peter12

Yeah, they say and do that all that stuff, but has it made a demonstrable difference? They do the same EVERYWHERE.

Polling support for pipelines has increased dramatically in every single province outside of Quebec. These aren't very effective public relations campaigns.

Public opinion in BC has bounced below majority support for TMX at various times in the last few years, probably in response to whatever bold faced lie was floating at the time. Lest we forget TMX anchor loop was built 11 years ago with no discernible outcry, right around the time the Tarsands Campaign was launching. Are you trying to convince me that this stuff just organically became a national hot button issue? People didn't give two ####s about energy infrastructure until the last decade

[peter12]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Public opinion in BC has bounced below majority support for TMX at various times in the last few years, probably in response to whatever bold faced lie was floating at the time. Lest we forget TMX anchor loop was built 11 years ago with no discernible outcry, right around the time the Tarsands Campaign was launching. Are you trying to convince me that this stuff just organically became a national hot button issue? People didn't give two ####s about energy infrastructure until the last decade

People in the Lower Mainland are against ANY kind of development. You should see the crowds that pour out to protest a 16 storey condo building.