|
Author |
Topic Options
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:16 am
Reverend Blair Reverend Blair: It's not just the money though, Ruez. Everything goes back to oil. Even sustainable energy projects such as their development of wind power is, in the end, there to service the oil patch.
When the oil money goes away, so does everything else and the money to diversify is no longer there. Sorry but the power generated by the wind farm here does not go to service the oil industry. One of Canada's biggest wind farms I might add. How's that for diversity?
|
Posts: 15102
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:26 am
ziggy ziggy: Sorry but the power generated by the wind farm here does not go to service the oil industry.
One of Canada's biggest wind farms I might add. How's that for diversity? When I lived in Edmonton Epcor was offering power generated by renewable methods to homeowners. That was back in 2001. It was a little more expensive but they guaranteed you that any power you used was taken from green sources.
|
Posts: 2928
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:33 am
Reverend Blair Reverend Blair: The first is that the expansion of the oil sands simply isn't sustainable over the long term, so the jobs will disappear anyway. There's something like $10,000,000,000,000 in revenues awaiting to be drawn out of the oil sands, so I'm not sure what you mean by "long-term" or "sustainable."
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 10:31 am
Toro Toro: Reverend Blair Reverend Blair: The first is that the expansion of the oil sands simply isn't sustainable over the long term, so the jobs will disappear anyway. There's something like $10,000,000,000,000 in revenues awaiting to be drawn out of the oil sands, so I'm not sure what you mean by "long-term" or "sustainable." And if you take into account the amount of environmental damage from the mining then you can see thats really a very small footprint on the land and most of it get's reclaimed back to or better then original. Not like clearcutting which makes good temp. jobs but then you have all that forest that looks like hell for many years. There's many experts at the oilsands where reclamation is concerned. I worked with many of them when they were with shell in BC and winning the jade award for having the best reclamation in the mining industry for most of the early 80's.
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 10:45 am
RUEZ RUEZ: ziggy ziggy: Sorry but the power generated by the wind farm here does not go to service the oil industry.
One of Canada's biggest wind farms I might add. How's that for diversity? When I lived in Edmonton Epcor was offering power generated by renewable methods to homeowners. That was back in 2001. It was a little more expensive but they guaranteed you that any power you used was taken from green sources. They still do,it's an option depending on which supplier you choose to use. funny but it was a farmer a half hour from me who had the first tiny commercial wind turbine and he took on the govt. and transalta to get his power sold back through the grid at a fair price as they were ripping him off with their monopoly. That started the ball rolling and theres now hundreds of huge turbines in his area. You can apply for one if you have at least a 1/4 section and good steady winds. You get revenue and never have to pay for the juice again. They dont kill birds off either as the invirofoilers would have you think. Cats are #1 killers of birds followed by cars,wind turbines are way down at the bottom of the list.
|
Reverend Blair
Forum Super Elite
Posts: 2043
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 7:43 pm
$1: There's something like $10,000,000,000,000 in revenues awaiting to be drawn out of the oil sands, so I'm not sure what you mean by "long-term" or "sustainable."
Quite simply that it's gone bust before and it will go bust again. There are already groups, like the US mayors, and countries in Europe saying they don't want our oil because it comes from such a dirty source. It also requires a higher international price per barrel. Then there are water problems...what happens when you run out...and so on.
|
Posts: 8738
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 8:11 pm
ziggy ziggy: Guess no one watch's CBC. I would love to find a video montage of that interview last night,Layton proved he hasnt a clue about the west or the jobs he would kill here. Funny how he waited untill he was in his jet above Alberta to make all his shut em down comments. I saw it. Layton didn't do too bad. And it's not just Layton who has ideas like this.
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:00 pm
Reverend Blair Reverend Blair: $1: There's something like $10,000,000,000,000 in revenues awaiting to be drawn out of the oil sands, so I'm not sure what you mean by "long-term" or "sustainable."
Quite simply that it's gone bust before and it will go bust again. There are already groups, like the US mayors, and countries in Europe saying they don't want our oil because it comes from such a dirty source. It also requires a higher international price per barrel. Then there are water problems...what happens when you run out...and so on. Right,just admit that your jelous of Alberta's prosperity and how it's helping all of Canada's economy keep afloat. Your pretty ignorant as far as energy matters in Alberta are concerned. Who care's about some US mayors or countries in Europe? Northern Canada has had a fuel shortage for 3 years,Why arent you worried about that rev? Why arent you worried about the Canadian's that have to pay ten times the amount for fuel that you have to just to stay warm? Can you answer that or will you continue to post anything that trys and make's Alberta look bad without anything to back it up with?
|
Posts: 2928
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:24 pm
Reverend Blair Reverend Blair: Quite simply that it's gone bust before and it will go bust again. That's the nature of all commodities. $1: There are already groups, like the US mayors, and countries in Europe saying they don't want our oil because it comes from such a dirty source. It doesn't matter. Energy is a fungible commodity, with prices set on the world markets. Besides, almost all our energy is sold to the US because its the cheapest destination for transport. US mayors can't do anything. $1: It also requires a higher international price per barrel.
Then there are water problems...what happens when you run out...and so on. Yes, it does require a higher international price. The marginal cost of a new barrel of oil is ~$80. However, it was $35 a few years ago. When the commodity boom goes bust, the marginal cost of inputs will fall and so will the marginal price needed to extract the marginal barrel of oil. We won't run out of water. There's too much in Canada.
|
Reverend Blair
Forum Super Elite
Posts: 2043
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 7:57 am
How much water there is in Canada isn't the point, Toro. How much there is close enough to the tarsands is, and so is the effect of taking that water and efectively destroying it.
The last bust in Alberta was very much caused by world prices dropping to a point where it wasn't economical to recover Albertan oil. I know you guys like to jabber about the NEP being the cause, but the fact is that world prices dropped through the floor.
Just like now, everybody said it couldn't happen then...including smart-ass economists who never changed their theories when those theories turned out not to match the facts.
|
Posts: 3230
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 8:02 am
WTF?
|
Reverend Blair
Forum Super Elite
Posts: 2043
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 10:08 am
WTF indeed. How come these guys are making the same mistake again.
|
Posts: 4247
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 4:33 pm
ziggy ziggy: The best part was; Mansbridge-so you fly over the oilsands and say no more development yet say nothing about the job's that will be lost yet have a bailout plan for ontario's manufacturing sector,dont you have a plan for those jobs that will be lost if you shut down development at the oilsands?
I know I'm chiming in a bit late on this but man that was precious! You could all most here the "needle scratching against a record" sound when Mansbridge hit him with that question. And Jack's face, I wish I had Tivo! I remember during the last election when Mansbridge did the same sort of "sit down with the leaders" thing (or maybe it was the election prior to that). He treated Martin with kid gloves. I forget what the question was but in one reply Martin stated that Steven Harper was the only person who had ever threatened to use the "not with standing" clause when in fact Martin himself had just finished threatening to use it twice over the course of the year leading up to that election. Mansbridge didn't even flinch! Not one word of a challenge on it. I was so mad I don't think I watched the National for all most a year afterwards. Mansbridge's political leanings are no secrete to anyone who has watched him over the last few years. I imagine he'll offer Dion a nice fluffer prior to his interview. For as much as I like his work he should have left his partisanship back at the airport when they hired him.
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 5:17 pm
dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno: ziggy ziggy: The best part was; Mansbridge-so you fly over the oilsands and say no more development yet say nothing about the job's that will be lost yet have a bailout plan for ontario's manufacturing sector,dont you have a plan for those jobs that will be lost if you shut down development at the oilsands?
I know I'm chiming in a bit late on this but man that was precious! You could all most here the "needle scratching against a record" sound when Mansbridge hit him with that question. And Jack's face, I wish I had Tivo! I remember during the last election when Mansbridge did the same sort of "sit down with the leaders" thing (or maybe it was the election prior to that). He treated Martin with kid gloves. I forget what the question was but in one reply Martin stated that Steven Harper was the only person who had ever threatened to use the "not with standing" clause when in fact Martin himself had just finished threatening to use it twice over the course of the year leading up to that election. Mansbridge didn't even flinch! Not one word of a challenge on it. I was so mad I don't think I watched the National for all most a year afterwards. Mansbridge's political leanings are no secrete to anyone who has watched him over the last few years. I imagine he'll offer Dion a nice fluffer prior to his interview. For as much as I like his work he should have left his partisanship back at the airport when they hired him. I was amazed when I watched that,it was like Mansbridge was told to rake him over the coals. Maybe the CBC is worried about who get's in? He literally ripped him a new you know what,cant wait for it to come out on youtube.The con's would be smart to use that clip in their next ad.
|
|
Page 3 of 3
|
[ 44 posts ] |
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest |
|
|