A climate success story: How Alberta got off coal power

[fjlip]

could you imagine if our imaginary news media people actually reported on this scam

THEY are paid NOT to, as are others paid to spread the lies wind/ solar is the answer.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

could you imagine if our imaginary news media people actually reported on this scam

Imagine the conundrum Chuck would face if CBC reported actual news on this front. He would probably join the Defund the CBC chorus.

Wind generation fell as low as 1 MW a few minutes ago. That is 0.009% of total internal load. But maybe solar will save the day. Brooks solar now averaging 2% capacity factor in the past week.

[Guest]

I’m curious
What is the best day ever for one of these ?
What percentage of actual claims ?

[oneoff]

You are f u c k I n g hilarious
It doesn’t matter how many facts or figures contradict your horseshit , you just keep spewing it out
You seem to be oblivious to the fact that you missed the boat

I had hoped to capture the quote that prompted this response.

But the message is that this Government of Canada website may have ever detail and analysis to determine what is being done to Western Canad on Reducing Methane Upstream Emisissions. Right down to zeroing in on one Member of Parliament who the ruling Parliament might be most listening to. Who knows...maybe even feeding the propaganda/media machine that is totally agreeable with "green environmental beliefs". The website link is at the end ; but see if you find a connection between the pie graph of 44% methane emissions from oil type activity; and I believe 28 % from agriculture and why it is worth everyone's attention if you have conventional farming interests..

What are the odds that agriculture is next on the hit list (you know...synthetic fertilizer production; its breakdown to bad gases and cow farts; and shit you never thought about.

https://pollution-waste.canada.ca/environmental-protection-registry/regulations/view?Id=146


and where's the concern about how those agriculture CH4 emmissions affect you as a farmer. Also figure out that unamed MP's name and maybe it will all connect right back to how we get propaganda on agriville theads.

Here's the link

[Austrian Economics]

Taxing one type of economic activity and predictably seeing demand for it fall is not, in and of itself, a "success" story.

"Converting coal plants to gas created jobs and economic activity." So does paying some people to dig holes and other people to fill them in. This creates jobs in the same sense that Soviet workers had jobs, but these projects are the negation of economics. Since they require the consumption of resources for activities for which there is no actual consumer demand, there is only a net loss to the economy.

Scrapping a perfectly good coal fired generating system for the politically motivated goal of conversion to natural gas is a net loss. If it was a net benefit (i.e. profitable), the owners of the coal stations would have done it a long time ago all on their own.

[Hamloc]

Imagine the conundrum Chuck would face if CBC reported actual news on this front. He would probably join the Defund the CBC chorus.

Wind generation fell as low as 1 MW a few minutes ago. That is 0.009% of total internal load. But maybe solar will save the day. Brooks solar now averaging 2% capacity factor in the past week.

Yup at 1:49 wind was 23 mw being produced out of 1781, 0 out of solar, just charging the h**l out of those imaginary batteries that are supposed to save the day.

[oneoff]

Yup at 1:49 wind was 23 mw being produced out of 1781, 0 out of solar, just charging the h**l out of those imaginary batteries that are supposed to save the day.

The problem with even current state of art imaginary batteries is that they only are enough for minutes or at most hours of backup. That is; because unless if charged up within a recent time period.... they are going to self-discharge (go dead on their own) when left sitting for weeks and certainly if not "used" for months. So much for dreaming of June 21 sunlight charging and recapturing any power in the next season or two.

Not to even mention the stupidity of cycling any battery only a few times a year.

[checking]

There was a second opinion piece on cc.'s link. This one dealing with BC's emission effort titled "BC behind on climate goals, sets new 2025 emissions target to stay on track". This from BC, " The biggest factor in the gap was a change in data and methodology at the federal level that lowered BC's 2007 baseline estimates.

One would almost think that the rejuggling of data of BC's 2007 baseline estimates by the feds was just recently done. Did it really take the feds 13 years to catch their mistake, or is throwing out existing 2007 baseline data just common practice for the feds? You know, a lot like changing years of weather data to prove temperature has risen in the north so a chart can reflect the prediction. Or in this case, BC, you have got to do better because my changed data beats your data.

[furrowtickler]

Is there not a big new coal mine being developed on one of the passes on the Alta / B/C border ?

[furrowtickler]

Yup ...
https://calgaryherald.com/business/local-business/joint-review-panel-hearing-into-proposed-800-million-crowsnest-pass-coal-mine-begins

[furrowtickler]

I wonder how BC will get exempt for carbon tax like Quebec ?
So exporting coal from B.C. is ok and oil from Sask bad ?
Thousands of tons of coal exported through Vancouver , never makes headlines
One oil pipeline from Alberta / Sask is a catastrophe..... interesting times

[furrowtickler]

Have First Nations ever blockaded the port at Vancouver over coal exports ??

[Guest]

and the hypocrisy , and bullshit of it all fly right over the heads of sheeple like chuck
idiots that wanna shoot themselves in the foot
while quebec and bc do whatever they want
like both of them putting raw shit into the rivers and oceans
people in western canada need to wake to f u c k up

[blackpowder]

Yup, quebec on a different carbon tax scheme altogether. Cap and trade with California, along with their hydro means they skate. While still being a large net beneficiary of equalization.
Beginning to understand why we'll never have Senate reform?

[oneoff]

The key words could well be the "equivalency agreement" Who has seen the wording. But the Federal Government has gazetted an agreeable equivalency agreement.

That surely means the wording ISN'T the 56 page Federal Regulations Respecting Reductions of Methane and Certain Volatile Organic Compounds (Upstream Oil and Gas Sector).. And remember that Sask already had a Made in Sask of to achieve the same 40 to 45% reduction from 2005 Sask CH4 levels. Further the gazetted reports are the Federal gov't has agreed that the Sask proposal does do more than even what the Feds were demanding in the first 5 year time frame. However; the Federal Environment officials don't swallow the projected 8% shortfall for 2025 to 2030 period; but have agreed to talk about and address that some more.

That sort of leaves the amount someone is to get for a carbon tax. CBC apparently says its increasing $10 to 40 dollars. The Made in Sask schedule (now the law in Sask if reported equivalency agreement isn't quite yet finalized) says increasing by $10 in 2021 to a figure of $20 per tonne. Haven't seen it etched in stone by the Queen's Printer

All I know is environmental issues are a joint concern of Government Environmental Ministries. And its probably completely fair to say that those buerocrats (sp) are not known as a bunch of open minded individuals and don't readily accept someone else's plan. Real life experiences tend to confirm that statement....and if every issue had the same basic attitude the world is what it is DIFFICULT to govern . Endless arguing; slow slow progress but a clear agenda that will get at least incremental gains; whilst taking full advantage of any sign of weakness.