alberta pipeline

youtube

fishermod  asked:

What impacts do you yhink cancelling the KM pipeline will have on the economy? My mom thinks the voiding of all these contracts will cause a big recession, and KM will just ship the oil by truck and make the environmental situation even worse than it would with the pipeline. I'm suspicious, but don't have any hard data to counter it with.

It won’t have any immediate effect, because Construction will still take several years to build the pipeline. Any economic benefits from the twinning of Kinder Morgan’s pipeline are years away. And no province is dependent on any 1 single project. That holds true for Alberta too.

Also one of the major arguments of oil pipelines to the coast is to sell oil overseas, but that has shaky economic logic:

Kinder Morgan Approval Insults Democracy, Science and Economic Logic

Economist warns insufficient oil demand hinders Trans Mountain pipeline

Eco-tourism worth billions trumps value of Kinder Morgan project, new report argues

Kinder Morgan pipeline spill could cost Vancouver $1.2 billion

Plus, Oil Spills from Bitumen pipelines like Kinder Morgan cannot be effectively cleaned up:

Review of 9,000 Studies Finds We Know Squat About Bitumen Spills in Ocean Environments

Nobody ships oil by truck in any capacity. Fear mongering over oil by rail is also a misnomer:

Pipeline Versus Rail ‘Debate’ Sticks Canadians With A False Choice

How the Spectre of Oil Trains is Deceptively Used to Push Pipelines

Also its not as if Alberta has a shortage of pipelines, besides Kinder Morgan, Line 3 and Keystone XL has been approved, and Energy East could come online too (along with the many other pipelines Alberta already has online right now). And Kinder Morgan’s pipeline already exists. Its already sending oil.

Also Alberta doesn’t need Kinder Morgan to meet capacity:

The ‘Canada Needs More Pipelines’ Myth, Busted

“In the briefing, titled “Canada Not Running Out of Pipeline Capacity,” authors Adam Scott and Greg Muttitt point out that there’s around 400,000 barrels/day of unused capacity in the network, easily accommodating exports for projects currently operating and under construction.

This calculation was derived from the organization’s Integrated North American Pipeline model, which then concluded the network was 89 per cent full.

As a result, the only reason that new pipelines like Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain and TransCanada’s Energy East would be required is if there’s a massive expansion of the oilsands, a move that would arguably undermine the Paris Agreement and other international climate commitments (an argument also made by David Hughes in his thorough June 2016 report for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives).”

2

PRIME MINISTER HARPER INTENTIONALLY CUT BUDGETS OR CANCELLED THESE GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS TO ENSURE BIG OIL COMPANIES WOULD BE ABLE TO BUILD PIPELINES WITHOUT ANY OBSTACLES. 

Wealth for Big Oil Corporations is his priority over Canadians. Leads one to wonder what Incentives have been offered to Prime Minister Harper from Big Oil Corporations?

Reblog: Spread the word, we deserve to know the truth. We deserve a better Prime Minister. 

The Canadian government has approved the Northern Gateway oil pipeline from Alberta to the coast of British Columbia, despite protests from environmental groups. The Northern Gateway pipeline would carry 500,000 barrels of bitumen a day, compared to the Keystone XL pipeline at 700,000. Keystone XL’s approval is still under dispute in Washington. 

To learn more about Keystone XL and large-scale oil pipelines check out our interview with journalist Ryan Lizza. He explains the environmental consequences, the Canadian energy industry, and what Obama can do about this issue. 

Photo of cranes in a port in British Columbia by Julie Gordon/ Reuters via NYT

Clinton Foundation received up to $3 million from fossil fuel giants in 2008-09.  #ImSoSick #DidTheResearch

Hillary is so sick of the allegations?

Hillary Clinton’s family foundation took millions of dollars from fossil fuel giants, according to a report, but this past week the Democratic presidential front-runner snapped at a Greenpeace activist, claiming to be “sick” of such allegations.

Follow the money:

IBT reported that Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and ExxonMobil all contributed funds to Clinton’s campaign and super PAC during her 2008 presidential bid, just a year before she approved the 400-mile Alberta Clipper pipeline, for which those three companies had long been lobbying.

I’m in Oahu right now and in case you didn’t know the president is also here somewhere chilling out and thinking about building a huge oil pipeline from Alberta to Texas and some people are obviously not happy about it so they have hired a literal FURRY in a POLAR BEAR SUIT named FROSTPAW to follow old obabo around and just. Stare at him

Submitted by classicalmonoblogue

Canadian “Regionalism” in federal politics is Such Bunk - I’m from about as west in western Canada as you can get. We had a PM for what felt like a hundred years who made a big stink about being all about representing the too-oft-forgotten West, and the only time he remembered BC existed was when he was cutting our funding, removing our coast-guard stations, and screwing us with his pipeline (Alberta gets the revenue, BC gets the spills! Yay!). Now we’ve gotten the most Eastern of old guard Easterners in the PMO, and in a hot minute he’s made specific, important, active policy changes to undo Harper’s damage and save BC (tanker ban, reinstated coast guards, &c.).
Trudeau has done more for the west in ten minutes than Harper did in ten years.

bananasandmoustaches  asked:

Not sure if you've had this question before, but I'm just curious if you're even following - from an economical standpoint, how do you think the outcomes of the American election are going to effect us here in Canada? If at all?

I do follow US politics.

The US presidential election will effect Canada economically. That’s a guarantee. 

The US is either Canada’s #1 or #2 trading partner (and vice-versa). Both presidential candidates have taken protectionist stances, and since Canada does a lot of trade with the US this will matter. Donald Trump has come out strongly against NAFTA. Should he win, that could create economic/trade issues. Both candidates oppose the TPP. Canada seems to want the controversial trade agreement ratified, but either of the candidates could either reject it or make changes to it. The future of which if any Alberta oil pipelines into the US from Canada will depend on the election (Donald Trump for example wants the Keystone XL pipeline to come back into consideration).

I’m not an economist, but there’s clearly a lot at stake for Canada.

mattykinsel  asked:

Just curious: I'm assuming you don't support pipelines, so regarding The Issue (as it were) (i.e., the energy easy pipeline), what are we to do if we don't go forth with it? We need the jobs desperately on both sides of the country. What else are we going to do? You know? Idk. I feel like I'm against them myself but I really feel the labour side of the "opposition's" argument ,

I do not support mega pipelines in Canada.

Its not just environmentally. It is going to be just about impossible for Canada to meet even weak climate change targets if any large pipeline is built. That is a fact. I’m an Environmental Chemistry major. I know the science of climate change deeply. If we build these pipelines we are screwed.

The other issue is that building pipelines no longer makes economic sense. These are good reads on the subject:

Dilbit Dogma? The Myth of Tidewater Access

Build a dozen pipelines, Alberta. It won’t help.

The business case for Energy East just fell apart

You say that jobs depend on it, that’s true. But we have to keep this issue in context.

Oil Sands jobs are not the majority of jobs in Canada. They’re not even the majority of jobs in the energy sector. 

2 years ago Renewable energy overtook the oil sands for total jobs created:

Green energy sector jobs surpass total oil sands employment

Renewable energy is outpacing the oil sands despite not receiving billions of dollars of investment and subsidies as oil has.

Obviously I feel bad for oil workers who lose their jobs. The Canadian and Alberta governments should financially invest in them and provide them access to education and retraining programs so that they can get new, high paying energy jobs.