I wasn’t sure Obama would survive his two terms (hatred in the Deep South) and I’m surprised someone hasn’t gone after Trump. Maybe there have been plots that have been quietly shut down by law enforcement.
As consumers, we need to reduce. And we need to start now. (this was Cali's, and others, initial point)
As producers, we should be producing as much as we can, while the demand exists. This was what Cali then agreed to. And this is what Canadians just can't seem to grasp.
Yes, thank you. But I will also say that it would be wise for energy companies to begin transition strategies and get ahead of the tech so that they can still remain viable in the emerging green energy markets. That's easier said than done obviously, but the big companies are starting to do it.
Energy consumption isn't going anywhere, but the type of energy demand that will be out there in the coming years is going to change significantly. It would be wise to get ahead of that trend.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ResAlien
If we can't fall in love with replaceable bottom 6 players then the terrorists have won.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Cali Panthers Fan For This Useful Post:
There are multiple LNG plants coming online in BC, each with a subsequent lessor rate in C02 emissions per tonne of LNG produced.
So nothing proven or tangible to support this claim, only an article from an industry source of propaganda suggesting the advantage from plants not yet online? Nothing scientific that can actually look at the difference? So this is a black box where they are making claims of an advantage but no real data to support such a claim, and then no comparison between the local market products and then what the cost of condensation and transport of the product?
I've always been amazed at how underwear is something many people choose not to spend money on. Is there any item of clothing more important to your comfort?
Not that I wear Saxx or similar every day - but certainly having comfy undies is key.
It’s terrifying that the “greatest country in the world” can have such voter fraud. That’s a Russia thing.
The thing is, we don't. Voter fraud is at such a low level as to be inconsequential to any election here. Sure you may have a couple of cases per election, but nothing that would sway a decision.
From.snopes:
Quote:
We looked over the database for listings related to the two main presidential candidates over the last 20 years (George W. Bush v. Al Gore in 2000; George W. Bush v. John Kerry in 2004; Barack Obama v. John McCain in 2008; Barack Obama v. Mitt Romney in 2012; and Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton in 2016), and we found only four listed criminal convictions related to absentee-ballot fraud. One instance involved a person voting for the Democratic candidate (Kerry in 2004), while the other three involved people voting for the Republican presidential candidate (Romney in 2012 and Trump twice in 2016).
And for overall elections, including state/local things like school board, etc the total is just as minuscule:
Quote:
This database catalogs various types of election fraud, such as altering vote counts, buying votes, and duplicate voting — adding up to a total of “1,290 proven instances of voter fraud” (in more than 30 years), according to the site’s own summary.
Cali started by taking the stand that we need to reduce oil production, like it or not. No more negotiation, it's time to reduce.
Jayswin correctly pointed out that the US is not reducing oil production, they are (effectively) reducing Canadian oil production with very protectionist strategies, while simultaneously running the taps wide open at home. And US citizens seem completely unaware of this fact (Canadians as well).
Cali then pretty much did a full reversal, by admitting that yes, the US has been protectionist, as opposed to trying to cut back. And then said Alberta should do the same. I am not sure how this view reconciles with needing to reduce, but yes, as far as each is in competition with the other, both sides should in fact be trying to produce as much as possible. The world is still using oil, so each producing nation should be working to get much of theirs out of the ground as quickly as possible.
Which is exactly what Alberta has been trying to tell the rest of Canada, but Canada is too stupid to listen.
Then you show up with the above comment, clearly oblivious to what actually transpired with this conversation. I am going to go ahead and guess that you live in BC, as you just did a perfect impression of the completely clueless, from a Canadian perspective, view of the situation that we have been hearing from BC for some time.
We can battle the above out in the Alberta Oil thread if you like as I don't want to detail this thread into another oil talk.
As for CFP her answers were very similar to a lot of O+G's customers. It's always interesting that when they voice these opinions they're shouted down as not being educated. I mean they're telling everyone what they want, you can't tell them that they have no alternative forever.
You must remember that there is certain collective here that openly brag about spending $20+ for a single pair (why do they call it a pair?) of underwear. Blowing money on stuff like is crazy, but it's what some people like to do.
I feel personally attacked!
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to malcolmk14 For This Useful Post:
The thing is, we don't. Voter fraud is at such a low level as to be inconsequential to any election here. Sure you may have a couple of cases per election, but nothing that would sway a decision.
From.snopes:
And for overall elections, including state/local things like school board, etc the total is just as minuscule:
So nothing proven or tangible to support this claim, only an article from an industry source of propaganda suggesting the advantage from plants not yet online? Nothing scientific that can actually look at the difference? So this is a black box where they are making claims of an advantage but no real data to support such a claim, and then no comparison between the local market products and then what the cost of condensation and transport of the product?
There’s something called engineering where they design to meet specific outcomes. True it’s not proven until built but it’s not a case of building a random plant and hoping it works.
There’s something called engineering where they design to meet specific outcomes. True it’s not proven until built but it’s not a case of building a random plant and hoping it works.
It is just theoretical and has no empirical evidence to support the claim. That is kind of important, don't you think. Especially considering the claim? Consider this is the claim.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Overall, Canadian LNG releases 25% less emissions compared to Chinese/India sourced LNG.
This is suggesting that Canadian LNG, essentially super-cooled methane gas, releases less carbon dioxide than LNG from China or India when burned. How is this possible? LNG is super-cooled methane, regardless of location it came from. Unless someone is suggesting that the process used to cool methane is superior in Canada than anywhere else that claim doesn't make sense. To make that claim there needs to be some empirical evidence to support that theory that Canadian LNG has 25% less carbon. If you buy this, then don't you have to consider the cost and impact of shipping the LNG to other countries, which certainly has to have a significant impact, no? I get that we have pride in the things we produce, but there has to be something behind the claims? I'm just asking, how the hell this claim makes sense in any way? Seems like it is something that just doesn't add up?
So it turns out those screenshots of Hunter Biden's emails that were released were taken from a phone connected to a cell phone carrier that only operates in Russia. They could not get any more obvious. https://twitter.com/user/status/2F1319393617757208576
The Following User Says Thank You to FlameOn For This Useful Post:
So nothing proven or tangible to support this claim, only an article from an industry source of propaganda suggesting the advantage from plants not yet online? Nothing scientific that can actually look at the difference? So this is a black box where they are making claims of an advantage but no real data to support such a claim, and then no comparison between the local market products and then what the cost of condensation and transport of the product?
You can look up the CO2 composition of various natural gas reservoirs around the world if you would like to contest that particular assertion
You can also look at the power sources that run the plant and evaluate if the energy used to compress the gas runs greener. These are easily disprovable if you doubt the information Azure provided. It is certainly reasonable at face value.
You are correct the the main LNG process for essentially every plant in the world is engineered by either Choyota or JGC or in some cases like LNG Canada, Both. So the tech used within is relatively similar.
Pembina Institute has an excellent report on the opportunities For reduction of GHGs from an LNG. You can go through these and evaluate if you believe that Canada does a better job of managing these sources as other jurisdictions.
Not to get too off topic (and I totally agree with his take on Biden vs. Trump), he talks about the fall of the Roman Republic, but the Roman Republic wasn't even close to being a democracy by modern standards.
Roman law not only allowed for dictatorships, but actually called on it in times of external or internal strife. Interestingly, the system actually worked for a long time and dictators typically stepped down once they weren't required. It was this realist position that allowed the Republic to survive as long as it did. The problem is when the times of strife became too frequent to allow for "democracy" to succeed. I think this is a human tendency and Trump is a symptom of the overall situation the country (and world) is in. Democracy isn't a natural state, but a fleeting luxury that occurs far less often in human history than the alternatives.
Not making excuses for Trump, but until the internal and external situations currently causing anxiety are dealt with, I don't think Biden or anyone else will change the trajectory towards authoritarianism.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Not to get too off topic (and I totally agree with his take on Biden vs. Trump), he talks about the fall of the Roman Republic, but the Roman Republic wasn't even close to being a democracy by modern standards.
Roman law not only allowed for dictatorships, but actually called on it in times of external or internal strife. Interestingly, the system actually worked for a long time and dictators typically stepped down once they weren't required. It was this realist position that allowed the Republic to survive as long as it did. The problem is when the times of strife became too frequent to allow for "democracy" to succeed. I think this is a human tendency and Trump is a symptom of the overall situation the country (and world) is in. Democracy isn't a natural state, but a fleeting luxury that occurs far less often in human history than the alternatives.
Not making excuses for Trump, but until the internal and external situations currently causing anxiety are dealt with, I don't think Biden or anyone else will change the trajectory towards authoritarianism.
The US isn't really a Democracy by modern standards either, Losers can win, 1/3 of the real power base is appointed, there are active voter suppression efforts.....
This isn't to be critical of the US system as it was founded, it is just been 250 years and desperately in need of an update. I think the Canagdian system isn't far behind, eventually as system that doesn't allow for rank choice voting and/or proportional representation will seem barbarically out of date too.
Also more wishful thinking on my behalf, but in the Canadian system I wouldn't mind seeing a term limited upper house that is appointed by sortation. Get a diverse group of career professionals randomly selected to sit in review and approval of decisions from the commons.
The Following User Says Thank You to #-3 For This Useful Post:
