The cost of building a pipeline that no private company will commit to.
(I known, I know… "but but but the unspecified regulations )
Are you claiming that approvals have gotten easier since then?
Are you claiming that an independent Alberta will be able to override regulations from Canada or the provinces?
Energy East would have reduced natural gas transportation to the east coast in favour of bitumen, how would that have cuts down on LNG importation to Eastern Canada.
Again, it’s the Shrodinger’s pipeline. It carries the material that will give you the biggest complaint against the federal government.
Because there can only be one pipeline, correct? That was an example of regulations and politics causing a company to stop building a project. The product being carries was irrelevant. Please provide your business case that transporting LNG across the globe is better economically or environmentally than building a pipeline within the country to do so? How many billions of dollars have left Canada (and Alberta) for the east to buy petroleum from other sources because we weren’t allowed to deliver it ourselves? How many billions of dollars has the west sent to Ottawa for them to distribute to those provinces that are buying those products from foreign countries rather than within Canada? IF there ever was a case for a government funded pipeline this would be it. At least the money would be cycled within Canada.
You mean a Shrodinger project? If it fits your narrative then it proves your point. If it doesn’t then you ignore it. You asked for regulations that the government implemented that caused or blocked a project. I gave you a project where the proponents pulled out due to regulations and politics. And now you move the goal post. But I’m pretty sure any amount of evidence won’t shake your narrative.
Unfortunately, I can only point to projects that were stalled and cancelled AFTER they started the approval process. I can’t point to all the projects that never materialized due to a company not wanting to start that process. From the school of Eby: there is no business case for an oil pipeline to the west coast. Ignoring the fact that it is illegal for tankers to pick up that oil even if the pipeline was pre-existing. So, yes, when it is illegal to do something, there is no valid business case to do it, nor funny enough, do companies create business cases for untenable projects. The logic is astounding. That’s Bill C-48. A regulation that prevents large tankers from loading oil in northern BC. Oil is the product that Alberta wants to move and that law specifically targets that industry.
Please provide a business case why it makes sense to spend up to $14B to convert an existing NG pipeline to a diluted bitumen pipeline and then spend more $XB to build a new NG pipeline.
And I rest my case as to why Alberta needs to leave this madhouse.
Because reality won’t conform to your desires and complaints.
Got it.
Because you can’t admit, for whatever reason, that over regulation prevents investors from wanting to invest in Canada even when Carney’s actions confirm this.
You can’t even acknowledge that Alberta has legitimate gripes. Even a basic acknowledgement that Alberta contributes more to confederation than it gets out. Let alone that shipping LNG across the world makes no sense when the west, or even Quebec, could provide it locally and that by doing so it is just another sign of disrespect.
What keeps you, and the other people in this thread, from acknowledging this basic stuff?
First Nations don’t think much of the proposal
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/first-nations-chiefs-alberta-non-confidence-vote-9.7109712
Before we invest more in the O&G industry, I’d like to know when existing companies and former users are going to clean up their abandoned wells and mines?
When the taxpayers cover the bill.
They already do but that’s a general observation for almost every extraction industry.
So, the Alberta separatists have finished collecting signatures for their petition to leave Canada.
Yes, there was a prior successful petition to remain in Canada last year, but the Alberta Conservatives are ignoring it, and will not put it to a vote in the legislature, nor will they have a referendum on this question. They are pretending it never happened.
So they helped facilitate this new citizens initiative petition, by lowering the number of signatures needed, and extending the time. Nice of them.
Now, it appears that a far-right wing party in Alberta (with no seats in the Legislature) leaked the entire voters list information database to the separatist cause, who then spread it far and wide to volunteers and lots of others. Now it’s out in the wild, accessible by scammers, political operatives, and importantly to the separatists who are collecting signatures.
So the fear is that the separatists have added names to the petition directly from the voter list. Fraudulently.
Elections Alberta will fix this up, right? No. Other recent laws passed by the Conservative party in power mean that Elections Alberta cannot tell you if your name is on the list, and cannot remove your name if you tell them to. You must contact the separatists and ask them to please remove your name that may have been fraudulently put on there by the … separatists.
Does this make any sense? No it does not.
What will happen now? I imagine Alberta will be headed to a formal referendum, while the entire voters database is available to bad actors all over the world, and particularly in the United States who would love to have Alberta. (Not a state mind you… A territory with no voting rights)
Only in ‘Berta. Also you have no way of knowing if your identity was used fraudulently for this petition unless Elections Alberta randomly contacts you to verify your participation. If they don’t contact you, you name could still be on the petition and you have no way of knowing.
Paraphrasing a pithy saying that’s been repeated here in so many situations in the last umpteen years:
If the Right isn’t winning democratically, they won’t abandon their right-wingery. Instead they’ll abandon democracy.
Well, it looks like a legal challenge has found the separatist citizens initiative petition to be invalid.
“(Judge) Leonard found the provincial government failed to meet its constitutional “duty to consult” First Nations, who argued Alberta separation would infringe on treaty rights.”
Naturally, premier Smith is going to appeal, as she is a full-on separatist. Just won’t admit it out loud.
The first successful citizens initiative, which called for the MLA’s in the legislature to vote on staying in Canada and putting the whole separation nonsense to bed is, of course, still being ignored by the premier, in contravention of the law. She does not want to go on record, as her party has been taken over by the separatists.
For the Americans in the audience, Google informs me that an “MLA” is a Member of the Legislative Assembly, Alberta’s parliament.
This is a bad thing.
It has the appearance that a judge’s opnion is overruling the right of people to vote on a matter of importance.
What would ideally happen is the referendum would happen, and soon, because every indication is that if it had just gone ahead it’d be crushed by a huge margin. Telling the province it can’t hold a vote is something that will move people TOWARDS sympathy for separatism, not away from it.