Official (Alberta) Oil Discussion Thread

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

http://calgaryherald.com/business/en...s-to-head-west



Ugh. I don't want your money, Feds. You can keep it. Seriously. Spare me the political capital. I want a pipeline. We need a pipeline. Spend your political capital there.

Trudeau's answer to the one Alberta Oilfield worker last night on his Q+A when asked about the Alberta Economy

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Trudeau's answer to the one Alberta Oilfield worker last night on his Q+A when asked about the Alberta Economy

To be fair, that's a great answer. That's all we can do. We're part of an industry that's naturally boom and bust. When times are bad, some of us are going to get laid off and have to leave. When times are good, some of us are going to be paid and employed above our true level of competency. Them's the breaks.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Trudeau's answer to the one Alberta Oilfield worker last night on his Q+A when asked about the Alberta Economy

Was he supposed to go all "Chavez" and pay off his mortgage and credit cards?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Reaper

Was he supposed to go all "Chavez" and pay off his mortgage and credit cards?

How about not putting out Mandate letters that basically kill Pipeline's to the west, nor making an announcement that pipeline assessments are going to be longer so they can give special interest groups more time to plug them up?

It will be interesting to see what he says when he's out here, I don't expect anything.

And his $250 million dollar aid package is insulting when he's looking at pumping a solid billion into one company in Quebec.

We don't need aid as Albertan's, we need efficient transportation of our product to its markets.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

How about not putting out Mandate letters that basically kill Pipeline's to the west, nor making an announcement that pipeline assessments are going to be longer so they can give special interest groups more time to plug them up?

It will be interesting to see what he says when he's out here, I don't expect anything.

And his $250 million dollar aid package is insulting when he's looking at pumping a solid billion into one company in Quebec.

We don't need aid as Albertan's, we need efficient transportation of our product to its markets.

Clearly something that could have been done within the oil field worker's ten minutes with the PM.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

How about not putting out Mandate letters that basically kill Pipeline's to the west, nor making an announcement that pipeline assessments are going to be longer so they can give special interest groups more time to plug them up?

You say kills pipelines to the West, they say protects the coastline. Again, he ran on that as part of his platform and it helped him get elected. Turning around and doing the exact opposite would be a massive betrayal of BC voters.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by rubecube

You say kills pipelines to the West, they say protects the coastline. Again, he ran on that as part of his platform and it helped him get elected. Turning around and doing the exact opposite would be a massive betrayal of BC voters.

Oh yeah, sorry, I forgot that he's only there to represent his voters and not the rest of Canada, and its interests across the board.

[CampbellsTransgressions]

Perhaps he shouldn't be pitting Canadians against Canadians in order to win elections? That's all his pandering has done.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Oh yeah, sorry, I forgot that he's only there to represent his voters and not the rest of Canada, and its interests across the board.

Should politicians not be held accountable for their campaign promises?

[CaptainCrunch]

Yes they should, especially if they are damaging to other regions, unfortunately history shows that this region won't have a say in this government because as a province there is little faith in voting for the Liberals enmasse, and we get into a circle of punishment with them.

Why issue a mandate letter, why not, and fair is fair here, open up the suspension of tanker traffic to the same kind of open discussions that he wants to have with pipelines. I'm sure that Albertan's would have at least liked to have a say in something that was economically harmful to our economy.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Oh yeah, sorry, I forgot that he's only there to represent his voters and not the rest of Canada, and its interests across the board.

Yeah, but the "representation of interests" isn't exactly a catch-all term in this country, even before Justin Trudeau. It varies from province to province and it's just not black and white as much as we want it to be.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

I think the bigger question is, "okay, you don't want any tanker traffic in the following locations. So, given that, what solutions do you offer to get Canadian product to tidewater on the West Coast, and how does it get from there, to market?"

If the political will says that the environmental risk associated with tankers outweighs the benefits, I can understand, even if I don't necessarily agree (not an issue I'm closed on). However, given the enormity of the issue economically, the governing majority needs to provide SOME solution that balances those environmental interests with the economic ones.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I think the bigger question is, "okay, you don't want any tanker traffic in the following locations. So, given that, what solutions do you offer to get Canadian product to tidewater on the West Coast, and how does it get from there, to market?"

If the political will says that the environmental risk associated with tankers outweighs the benefits, I can understand, even if I don't necessarily agree (not an issue I'm closed on). However, given the enormity of the issue economically, the governing majority needs to provide SOME solution that balances those environmental interests with the economic ones.

Yeah, it's a difficult discussion. I think prior to last year even there was probably more support for tankers, or at least not the staunch resistance there was following the spill in English Bay. It was another example of the Harper government's policies coming back to bite the O&G industry in the ass, or at least that was the narrative that came out of it (funding cuts led to poor response time for clean-up, etc.).

[GGG]

We'll see when it comes to twinning the Kinder Morgan line. There is no ratioral reason to oppose that one. All risks remain constant.

Gateway and Kitamat has real new risks when it comes to the coastline.

Energy East and kinder Morgan don't and should be quickly approved.

[peter12]

TMEP basically follows the highway for 99% of its route. In terms of best practices, that is pretty much straight out of the book. The problem is the general hysteria against all pipelines, hydrocarbons, productivity, dignified work for the middle class... etc... I was on a geotech test for a potential HDD under the TC Highway. We were protested because there was a drainage ditch that protesters called "salmon habitat." You cannot reason with these people, and to give them a seat at the table is to court disaster.

Some of the interior pipes, yeah, I get the concern. There will be some clear-cutting of actual, pristine wilderness forest. ROWs ain't that harmful, but they ain't pretty. Plus you've got at least one potential crossing of the Skeena River on the way to Kitimat, and that is understandably a big no-no for a lot of residents, and FNs.

When people blame the Harper government's policies, well, they don't really understand the assessment process at all. You go through the regulator. By empowering the NEB (and like 40 others regulatory agences), the Harper government actually made things a lot more transparent than they were before. If you have the patience, you can actually look at all of the environment documents filed for each project that has had public hearings, and you can look at the mitigation discussion. Trust me, every step, and every recommendation we made was in close consultation with established guidelines that were world-class. This is how regulatory bodies make their decisions.

Then, in 2013, we started to see more partisan members of boards, particularly when it came to FN issues. The process became intensely politicized from the inside-out, and at that point, the process became illegitimate. When you are trying to have an effective discussion with a concerned stakeholder, your job is made doubly-hard when the regulator is stabbing you in the back.

So, I am all for making the guidelines more strict, and transparent. Adding timelines is just a sign that the government has no clue what to do. Clean up the boards, make turn-arounds tighter, establish specific targets that companies can actually push to meet during the actual assessment phase. Scrap the ludicrous archaeological requirements for federal assessments, and create a stronger guidebook for companies to consult with FNs on projects with long, and impossibly wide footprints.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by GGG

We'll see when it comes to twinning the Kinder Morgan line. There is no ratioral reason to oppose that one. All risks remain constant.

Gateway and Kitamat has real new risks when it comes to the coastline.

Energy East and kinder Morgan don't and should be quickly approved.

This is sort of my (admittedly uneducated) view. Gateway seems to have legitimate concerns, but the concerns about EE & KM are just NIMBYism.

[peter12]

So honestly, Gateway is a strange fish, and I think that a lot of the concern over it had to do with Enbridge's many, many fumbles. Come on, in an cultural environment charged with concern over tanker spills, don't photoshop out those inconvenient little islands. Whoever was the comms person in charge of that little mistake is hopefully shoveling coal in China.

I don't know if I buy the Kitimat BS though. There is a Tinto Alcan mine right outside of Kitimat, and I know that I saw a million tankers, trawlers, and container ships sailing past Prince Rupert. It isn't exactly pristine.

I know that there was a lot of heat on the ground in Terrace, Prince Rupert, and Kitimat between anti-pipeline and pro-pipeline people. The situation isn't one-sided at all. These places need the work, and the government should have taken that into account. People in Terrace were excited that multiple pipelines, mines, and a terminal were being built in the region. Lots of the FN communities didn't exactly mind Gateway or the proposed Spectra line. If you were like the Nisga, and actually had some economic independence, you might even be fighting for contracts.

Complicated situation made worse by a government that doesn't know how to lead or stay out of the way.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by peter12

Complicated situation made worse by a government that doesn't know how to lead or stay out of the way.

Yeah, it's actually unfair of me to pin it entirely on Harper. The BC Liberals have been just as poor at advocating/communicating and have gotten completely clowned by the environmental groups. If there's one thing the BC Liberals have demonstrated they're completely incompetent at, it's public relations.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Yeah, it's actually unfair of me to pin it entirely on Harper. The BC Liberals have been just as poor at advocating/communicating and have gotten completely clowned by the environmental groups. If there's one thing the BC Liberals have demonstrated they're completely incompetent at, it's public relations.

Well, Clark just sways wherever the winds of potential revenue-generation blow her. Shakedown artist extraordinaire.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by peter12

I don't know if I buy the Kitimat BS though. There is a Tinto Alcan mine right outside of Kitimat, and I know that I saw a million tankers, trawlers, and container ships sailing past Prince Rupert. It isn't exactly pristine.

I know that there was a lot of heat on the ground in Terrace, Prince Rupert, and Kitimat between anti-pipeline and pro-pipeline people. The situation isn't one-sided at all. These places need the work, and the government should have taken that into account. People in Terrace were excited that multiple pipelines, mines, and a terminal were being built in the region. Lots of the FN communities didn't exactly mind Gateway or the proposed Spectra line. If you were like the Nisga, and actually had some economic independence, you might even be fighting for contracts.

Complicated situation made worse by a government that doesn't know how to lead or stay out of the way.

I've spent quite a bit of time up there, mostly in Prince Rupert. It is pristine and beautiful as can be. However it is not virgin. It has a massive coal terminal, a massive wood chip terminal and a massive container terminal. There are tons of container & bulk carrier ships and there will be more in the future (the terminalling area is currently undergoing a large scale expansion to support more commodity terminals).

Heck, when the coal market exploded around 2010-2012, US companies were shipping it all the way from the midwest US. Talk about a cross-border commodity transportation asset contributing to global warming, you two-faced hypocritical *****.

I think the Alcan facility is closed though, isn't it? That was not a pretty facility.

Oil would be new for the area though. And an oil spill is much more damaging than any of the above listed commodities. They've got a point. There's no denying it.

LNG is different though. That stuff would just evaporate as soon as it got to atmosphere. Much safer.