Status of Keystone XL?

[blackpowder]

Michigan wants L5 shut down now.
Eastern press starting to blubber.
Tough.

[jazz]

Answer the question chuck and stop dodging. Shouldnt we shut down L5 because climate change and risk of a spill? We dont have much time left so this should be the first section of pipeline to be shut in permanently.

I am really worried about climate change and the glaciers and the polar bears like you are and I want renewables to replace dirty tar sands oil.

Lets start with L5, agreed?

[chuckChuck]

Kenney just wasted 1.5 billion of taxpayers money with a subsidy on a pipeline that wasn't needed and you got nothing to say! I thought Conservatives like Kenney wanted government out of the way!

No doubt you voted for him.

Kenney also floated the idea of a provincially owned and run oil company to prop up oil sand investments. So who you calling a commie there comrade? LOL

[jazz]

Ha the Tyee? Wasnt an article from Pravda available? Like I listen to anything coming out of the heart of marxist commie BC.

But back to L5. This pipeline is clearly dangerous and a threat to climate change and the environment. It needs to be closed immediately.

Dont you agree chuck?

[chuckChuck]

https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2021/01/24/Alberta-Rumpelstiltskin/ https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2021/01/24/Alberta-Rumpelstiltskin/

Four Pipeline Realities for Alberta’s Rumpelstiltskin
Jason Kenney rants and raves over Keystone XL’s cancellation. But let’s look at the facts.
Andrew Nikiforuk 24 Jan 2021 | TheTyee.ca

As Alberta Premier Jason Kenney rants and raves like Rumpelstiltskin over the cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline project, you might want to consider some other realities that you won’t read on the website of the Canadian Energy Centre, the much-trashed propaganda agency funded by the Kenney government.

1. Investing in the pipeline expansion was an enormous gamble.

Ignoring all prudent forecasts about climate change and oil price volatility, Kenney invested $1.5 billion in the controversial Keystone XL pipeline last March.

In so doing he gambled that then-president Donald Trump, a man who poo-pooed climate change the same way he dismissed the coronavirus, would get re-elected. Kenney was so confident in his decision that you could imagine him dancing in the moonlight, singing: “Tonight tonight, my plans I make, tomorrow tomorrow, the pipeline I make.”

Some of his cabinet ministers proudly wore MAGA hats. And Kenney called a Democrat governor “braindead” because of her concerns about leaky pipelines.
In other words, he showed no respect for reality, let alone his province’s main market. He violated the precautionary principle, insulted Americans and exercised the poorest of political judgments.

2. The cancellation won’t badly hurt the oilsands.

Next comes a comment from Rystad Energy, a prominent Norwegian oil analyst firm. (Alberta might want to invest in such a thing, or actually hire someone to read Rystad’s output.)

Unlike Rumpelstiltskin, Rystad did not rail about the highly predictable cancellation. Instead, using the power of thoughtful analysis (a scarce resource in Alberta), Rystad concluded that the oilsands would not be hugely affected in the short term because industry has pursued other options with fewer risks.

Other pipelines will give the industry additional capacity of nearly one million barrels until 2025, Rystand found. In other words, the killing of the pipeline would have a muted impact on Western Canadian oil production.

“The truth is, KXL never quite escaped the shadow of uncertainty in the eyes of many producers,” explained Thomas Liles, Rystad’s vice-president for North American shale. “Canadian oilsands producers have become accustomed to bad news over the past six years — be it global price routs, demand destruction or local infrastructure constraints — and have adjusted the scale and pace of upstream development accordingly.”

Rystad Energy also talks about the industry’s dirty laundry: carbon dioxide emissions.

It calculates that the carbon intensity of the U.S. shale industry’s CO2 emissions is about around 12 kilograms per barrel of oil equivalent.

In contrast, the oilsands is calculated “at a staggering 73 kilograms” per barrel of oil equivalent. Conventional onshore producers such as Saudi Arabia have a footprint of 19 kilograms per barrel of oil equivalent.

This math results in one obvious conclusion. “Investors will increasingly be looking at their target’s carbon footprint before making any business decisions, and the best-in-class companies will be prime investment targets.”

3. Oil demand is almost certainly going to change. And even if it doesn’t, we wouldn’t need Keystone XL.

Another piece of reality comes from the Canada Energy Regulator, which used to be known as the scandal-ridden National Energy Board. In November, the regulator published a report on Canada’s energy outlook.

The publication ran two scenarios on oil demand. One assumed the world would do nothing about climate change. But the “evolving scenario” imagined “increasing action on climate change,” such as those policies just enacted by the Joe Biden administration.

Unfortunately for Alberta, Kenney can’t imagine such realities or accept such a scenario.

In any case, here’s what the regulator’s super-cautious analysis concluded about oil demand in a world that modestly responds to climate change and in which fossil fuel consumption still makes up 60 per cent of Canada’s fuel mix in 2050.

The analysis forecast that Canada’s consumption of fossil fuels will not grow beyond its 2019 peak. It would fall 12 per cent by 2030 and 35 per cent lower by 2050. Meanwhile, under this “evolving scenario” Canada’s crude oil production will increase from 4.9 million barrels a day in 2019 to 5.8 million barrels per day by 2039.

And what about the export pipelines? The regulator assumed three pipelines would be built: the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, Keystone XL and Enbridge’s Line 3. And it found that “crude oil available for export is significantly lower than total pipeline capacity.”

The regulator hastily added that “this should not be interpreted as the Energy Futures Report concluding that any pipeline should or should not be built.” (Even under its business-as-usual scenario, which forecast Canadian oil production at seven million barrels a day, there remains excess pipeline capacity.)

Energy analyst David Hughes checked the math on both production and Canada’s emission targets. He also calculated that even in CER’s “evolving scenario” forecast in a world serious about reducing carbon emissions, neither Trans Mountain nor Keystone XL would be needed.

“If you include what [the regulator] didn’t in their analysis — the announced expansions of the Enbridge mainline, additional capacity approved on the existing Keystone pipeline, and the announced reversal of the Southern Lights pipeline, there is more than enough pipeline-only capacity to meet the CER forecast without rail, Trans Mountain or Keystone,” he said.

Hughes makes another point: The regulator’s “evolving scenario” is highly optimistic about the industry’s ability to lower its carbon footprint.

“It is likely that Canada’s oil production will have to be much less than the [evolving case scenario], as emissions just from oil and gas production would exceed an 80-per-cent emissions reduction target by 2050 by 38 per cent, even if there is a 30-per-cent decrease in emissions per barrel from the oilsands, as assumed by [the regulator], and all other sectors of the economy were reduced to zero.”

Meanwhile, the Canadian government, which has never met a carbon reduction target, has pledged to reduce emissions to net zero by 2050 in Bill C-12. (Net zero means clouds of carbon dioxide will hopefully be neutralized by a wonderful invention called “negative emission technologies.”)

4. Alberta failed to make an alternate plan.

Last but not least, good governments plan for changes in economic and political fortune.

Because bitumen has always been a high-cost and poor-quality substitute for conventional oil, it has experienced greater oil price volatility. Former Alberta premier Peter Lougheed anticipated this risk by insisting on high royalties and building a Heritage Savings Trust Fund.

Successive governments over nearly half a century abandoned those conservative principles. They lowered royalties and saved none of the revenue. Both Conservative and NDP governments ignored growing price volatility and other risks created by overproduction.

To this day, the government of Alberta still has no plan to deal with price volatility other than bashing its citizens with cycles of bust and boom followed by political denial and blame.

And so Rumpelstiltskin now raves and rants, a Grimm strategy for a petro state.

[WiltonRanch]

I own a swack of enbridge stock but I will gladly take a loss to see Toronto and Montreal get a little taste of their own medicine and watch skippy squirm like the weasel he is.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/its-a-big-threat-canadian-officials-say-u-s-has-resisted-efforts-to-avoid-shutdown-of-key-line-5-oil-pipeline 'It's a big threat:' Canadian officials say U.S. has resisted efforts to avoid shutdown of key Line 5 oil pipeline

Line 5 is yet another point of contention between the U.S. and Canada on the energy file after President Joe Biden revoked a permit for Keystone XL

Let er buck. They can decouple from carbon first to show us what it’s like.

[jazz]

I own a swack of enbridge stock but I will gladly take a loss to see Toronto and Montreal get a little taste of their own medicine and watch skippy squirm like the weasel he is.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/its-a-big-threat-canadian-officials-say-u-s-has-resisted-efforts-to-avoid-shutdown-of-key-line-5-oil-pipeline 'It's a big threat:' Canadian officials say U.S. has resisted efforts to avoid shutdown of key Line 5 oil pipeline

Line 5 is yet another point of contention between the U.S. and Canada on the energy file after President Joe Biden revoked a permit for Keystone XL

[Oliver88]

Did you read Rex Murphy’s piece?
I am a little confused why you hate Kenney so much and Trudeau gets a free ride ?
Rachel never got any pipelines ?

Is someone drinking the Liberal koolaid?

Did you read Rex Murphy’s piece?
I am a little confused why you hate Kenney so much and Trudeau gets a free ride ?
Rachel never got any pipelines ?

[dmlfarmer]

But you put it out as fact , from “a Calgary lawyer” , not the one sided liberal columnist piece it is ??
And Rex murphy , he’s full of shit right ? And everyone knows who he is ; a CBC columnist who got woke and told them to take a hike
Because he doesn’t agree with you , he is not important
Forgive me if I seem a little testy , just looked at my sask energy bill , 86$ carbon tax to stop from freezing to death , which will be $140 after April fools , more than the f u c k en cost of the gas itself
One shop at 35 degree , one at 50 degrees , house at 65 degrees
What do you wing nuts advise I do to chase your imaginary demon away ?

This is what I said about the blog post I shared.

Following is a blog post by a Calgary lawyer who has spent 26 years working in the oil industry. In her post she answers a number of questions that have been asked in this thread. She also contradicts a number of claims posters have made on this thread.

Many of you will disagree with most if not all she says, but I suggest you read and consider her arguments given her position and experience. Unless you understand and can actually refute an opponents position there is no way your position will be ever accepted.

I pointed out it was a blog post. Nowhere do I claim it was fact, I wrote that participants of this thread need to consider her arguments. I encouraged everyone to read the post to see if you could refute her position. No one has, they have only attacked her for her politics. And she is a working Calgary lawyer who wrote a blog on something she is familiar with.

Learn to read Case!

Of course there is bias in blog posts. It is an opinion piece the same type of writing as Rex Murphy or Peter Zeihan opinion columns; only from a different point on the political spectrum.

Too bad the best you can do to refute anything she says in her post is that she is a liberal and CBC broadcaster. You should take your own advice and think. Show us how smart you are by pointing out what she says that is not true. Make sure you can prove your claims because calling a lawyer a liar without a factual basis for such a statement could get costly.

But you put it out as fact , from “a Calgary lawyer” , not the one sided liberal columnist piece it is ??
And Rex murphy , he’s full of shit right ? And everyone knows who he is ; a CBC columnist who got woke and told them to take a hike
Because he doesn’t agree with you , he is not important
Forgive me if I seem a little testy , just looked at my sask energy bill , 86$ carbon tax to stop from freezing to death , which will be $140 after April fools , more than the f u c k en cost of the gas itself
One shop at 35 degree , one at 50 degrees , house at 65 degrees
What do you wing nuts advise I do to chase your imaginary demon away ?

[jazz]

I can change my handle to “Best Regina Lawyer”. You think DML will repost my expert opinion? Does he really think we are that stupid. Maybe the snowflakes will buy it, pas moi!

Whatever that lawyers credentials or bias, nothing is funny about our country being poorer and trying to put blame on the wrong person but thats a tactic the left uses without remorse.

I am surprised the pipeline wasnt called racist.

[sumdumguy]

Oh, it’s jimmy what the ****s his name ?
And this from the bullshit cop
If one of us posted shit like that DML would be all over it

I can change my handle to “Best Regina Lawyer”. You think DML will repost my expert opinion? Does he really think we are that stupid. Maybe the snowflakes will buy it, pas moi!

[samhill]

Re: “like” on DML

Was a fat finger mistake, IDK how to remove.

[dmlfarmer]

really , a political commentator for the state broadcaster ??????? who ran for the liberal party, surely no bias in that column ????
i don't agree with much kenney is doing , but fuvk man , try and think for yourself https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/author/susan-wright-1.4916766 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/author/susan-wright-1.4916766
you are getting hilarious also

Of course there is bias in blog posts. It is an opinion piece the same type of writing as Rex Murphy or Peter Zeihan opinion columns; only from a different point on the political spectrum.

Too bad the best you can do to refute anything she says in her post is that she is a liberal and CBC broadcaster. You should take your own advice and think. Show us how smart you are by pointing out what she says that is not true. Make sure you can prove your claims because calling a lawyer a liar without a factual basis for such a statement could get costly.