• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Pipelines, energy and natural resources

  • Thread starter Thread starter QV
  • Start date Start date
I was only answering what you actually said, not speaking to hypotheticals.

If it is in fact ‘known, needed, and profitable’, then the Alberta government, which seems keen to champion this, should have no difficulty finding the needed private sector partners.

It’s unfortunate that bad government policy to this point has prevented more infrastructure from going in, and the reticence of industry to jump at it is understandable. For the feds to make decisions on a project, however, there will have to actually be a project to decide on. I’d be happy to see either private industry, or a public-private partnership bring one to the table.
if the federal government can buy/build a pipeline then maybe Alberta can too?

There are I think expansion efforts to TM that can be done short of building another pipeline.
 

Boris - I went too far too fast. He let his enthusiasms get the better of him.

Hammond - friend of Carney - It wasn't me. It wasn't me.

"I gave this figure in parliament.....the Treasury estimated between 1 and 2 Trillion pounds as the net cost to the UK economy of delivering net zero by 2050.

"That's one or two Trillion pounds we could have invested in other productive activity, but have chosen to invest in decarbonisation."

(Decarbonisation as in the Carbon Capture projects being set as a pre-condition to a BC pipeline).

Blair - called for a rethink of net zero which is doomed to fail in its current form.

.....

Ralph Klein's parade: he said to lead is to find a parade and get out in front of it. This parade is ignoring the people at the front and they fear being trampled.

Their solution? Postpone.

They weren't wrong, just over eager. They are now talking about pushing net zero as a target back beyond 2070 and work with the "natural" decommissioning and replacement of plants as they wear out.

At that point the market will continue its ancient pursuit of efficiencies in the cause of making money.

....

Carney's budget is going to be interesting.
 
CBC is reporting that the Keystone XL project was discussed yesterday between PM Carney and Trump. Looking back to last winter, Trumpnhad made a lot of noises about wanting to see the project revived. Putting this back on the table as a potential cookie could be leveraged in the push to reduce tariffs.


I have no clue how realistic a revival of that project would be, but it is a nice simple instance of something he clearly wants that we can offer discussion on. I’d still rather see a pipeline to pacific tidewater, but putting any pipeline on the table at all could also help soothe Alberta.
 
CBC is reporting that the Keystone XL project was discussed yesterday between PM Carney and Trump. Looking back to last winter, Trumpnhad made a lot of noises about wanting to see the project revived. Putting this back on the table as a potential cookie could be leveraged in the push to reduce tariffs.


I have no clue how realistic a revival of that project would be, but it is a nice simple instance of something he clearly wants that we can offer discussion on. I’d still rather see a pipeline to pacific tidewater, but putting any pipeline on the table at all could also help soothe Alberta.
I'd want to see both - oil pipeline to the west coast and Keystone - built. Along with few more LNG to the west coast and 2-3 east, maybe one to Churchill and a pair to Quebec/NB.
 
I'd want to see both - oil pipeline to the west coast and Keystone - built. Along with few more LNG to the west coast and 2-3 east, maybe one to Churchill and a pair to Quebec/NB.

And much easier to get underway than another attempt at a Northern Gateway, which might have to wait for the Eby government to go away ...

Carney raised Keystone XL pipeline revival in meeting with Trump​

U.S. president was receptive to idea of energy partnership that could lead to lower tariffs, source says​

 
I'd want to see both - oil pipeline to the west coast and Keystone - built. Along with few more LNG to the west coast and 2-3 east, maybe one to Churchill and a pair to Quebec/NB.

Perhaps something like a Keystone in return for East/West/Churchill funding type thing?
 
Meanwhile, in la la Land ;)

Les Leyne: Pipeline argument looms over legislature agenda

All Premier David Eby has to do to keep opposition critics, Alberta and likely the federal government happy is surrender his anti-oil pipeline stance.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s accusation Tuesday that Premier David Eby is being “un-Canadian” in dismissing her oil pipeline idea is dead wrong.

It’s as Canadian as all get out to have provinces fighting each other over resource issues while appealing for a prime minister to sort things out.

This latest classic example of Confederation in action could come to a head by Grey Cup day, Nov. 16, the date Smith arbitrarily set for Prime Minister Mark Carney to make the next move.

It could make for quite a half-time show.

Carney has to determine whether his emergency nation-building program to counter U.S. threats includes a multi-billion-dollar north coast pipeline project that has already foundered more than once, has to run through an assortment of First Nation objections and reconciliation protocols, and exists only in Smith’s mind, since there are no private-sector proponents at this time.

It makes the next month even more uncomfortable for Eby, beset by a public-sector strike that is going to escalate sharply, and starting a legislative sitting where all the knives are out.

Smith’s remarks at an Ottawa news conference came after Eby took an online dig at her by releasing a video in which he called it a “fictional Alberta bitumen pipeline project” that makes no sense.

He said it would threaten billions of dollars’ worth of job-creating projects and put the Great Bear Rainforest at risk.

 
Well Eby was originally against the Site C project which is now operational and still BC purchases 25 - 30% of hydro from the USA. And he still wants only EV's by 2035.

Eby is smart.
 
Well Eby was originally against the Site C project which is now operational and still BC purchases 25 - 30% of hydro from the USA. And he still wants only EV's by 2035.

Eby is smart.

He’s a big baby, you can tell he was holding back tears yesterday yelling at the camera.
 
Well Eby was originally against the Site C project which is now operational and still BC purchases 25 - 30% of hydro from the USA. And he still wants only EV's by 2035.

Eby is smart.
Keep in mind that BC Hydro for a very long time has bought US electric energy when it is at low cost, conserving water so they can sell electricity to the US at peak demand times for more than what they bought at. BC Hydro made a lot of money doing that, till the government started interfering with their business model. Such as forcing BCH to buy electricity from small Independent Power Producers at a fixed rate, higher than what BCH could actually make the same energy for.
 
Keep in mind that BC Hydro for a very long time has bought US electric energy when it is at low cost, conserving water so they can sell electricity to the US at peak demand times for more than what they bought at. BC Hydro made a lot of money doing that, till the government started interfering with their business model. Such as forcing BCH to buy electricity from small Independent Power Producers at a fixed rate, higher than what BCH could actually make the same energy for.

A great example of social purpose goals tripping up rationale business models ;)
 
I'd want to see both - oil pipeline to the west coast and Keystone - built. Along with few more LNG to the west coast and 2-3 east, maybe one to Churchill and a pair to Quebec/NB.
I doubt enbridge or anyone else wants to get bogged down by the legal issues BC pipeline will get caught in, while courts have ruled BC cant block it, they will absolutely drag their heels and FN will protest out the ying yang. You would have better luck getting a pipeline to Anchorage, Alaska via the NWT and Yukon
 
Today's techno-miracle.

Tardis. Larger inside than outside.


Applications are already in service.

One description read in the Telegraph: sugar cube size lump with more internal surface area than a football field.

Tailor to lock up the fluid of your choice.
 
On the pipeline front, survey says even +50% of those surveyed in BC want a pipeline ....
1760107592425.png
... and as for who should have a veto of any kind?
1760107675360.png
Also archived here.
 
Keep in mind that BC Hydro for a very long time has bought US electric energy when it is at low cost, conserving water so they can sell electricity to the US at peak demand times for more than what they bought at. BC Hydro made a lot of money doing that, till the government started interfering with their business model. Such as forcing BCH to buy electricity from small Independent Power Producers at a fixed rate, higher than what BCH could actually make the same energy for.
Question: How many of those 'small Independent Power Producers' were Ingenious owned/operated?
 
Here is the route a tanker has to take from Burnaby to Buoy J and the Pacific,

1760111266572.png

And here is the route a tanker would take to get from Prince Rupert to the Pacific.
PR to the Pacific.jpg
Which one do you think is safer?
 
Back
Top