Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 401 to 450 of 450

Thread: Premier Notley's Fourth Year

  1. #401
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    I can't wait to see her leave!
    i'd have never guessed...
    I know, I'm so subtle..

  2. #402

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by gwill211 View Post
    The list of oil sands players who are no longer around is massive and too long to list. Many sold at a loss or at fire sale prices.
    That's no fun. Give it a shot.

    It's hard to have an intelligent discussion with someone making broad-brush statements who fails to back them up with facts or sources.
    Ah yes, if you can pretend like it's not happening then it must not be happening. Feel free to continue living under a rock.

    Meanwhile I'm still waiting for all the gsa loving ndp supporters to address why it's a good idea for schools to allow strangers the ability to take our kids out of class to bring them into their home.

  3. #403
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gwill211 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by gwill211 View Post
    The list of oil sands players who are no longer around is massive and too long to list. Many sold at a loss or at fire sale prices.
    That's no fun. Give it a shot.

    It's hard to have an intelligent discussion with someone making broad-brush statements who fails to back them up with facts or sources.
    Ah yes, if you can pretend like it's not happening then it must not be happening. Feel free to continue living under a rock.

    Meanwhile I'm still waiting for all the gsa loving ndp supporters to address why it's a good idea for schools to allow strangers the ability to take our kids out of class to bring them into their home.
    The Herald article about that GSA club didn't provide any read details about what allegedly happened, just the outline from an affidavit submitted in a court case. which doesn't even give the name of the school.

    So, it would be something like if I said "Hey, I hear there's a court affidavit that says a UCP MLA was cheating on his taxes. What do the UCPers have to say about this?" There really isn't a lot of conversation to be had around that, given the information provided.

  4. #404

    Default

    ^The second paragraph in the news articke mentions specific evidence that was submitted to the courts on a so called facilitor who took kids out of school. KIDS. Not kid.

    This isnt make believe. These are facts backed by evidence that was submitted to the courts. How do you think they got super specific on the school, the number of kids and where this guy lived when he took the kids to his own personal residence.

    Oh that's right you want to believe it didnt happen and it's not true.

  5. #405
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,053

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gwill211 View Post
    ^The second paragraph in the news articke mentions specific evidence that was submitted to the courts on a so called facilitor who took kids out of school. KIDS. Not kid.

    This isnt make believe. These are facts backed by evidence that was submitted to the courts. How do you think they got super specific on the school, the number of kids and where this guy lived when he took the kids to his own personal residence.

    Oh that's right you want to believe it didnt happen and it's not true.
    would you abolish police forces because one cop demonstrated he shouldn’t be one? what about social workers? or teachers? or priests? would you abolish home care and schools and churches? there is no accepting what might have been done here but your solutions and equivalencies seem to be a touch draconian and disconnected.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  6. #406

    Default

    Go see "Boy Erased" to see the kind of damage that these so-called religious people would prefer to inflict upon other people especially their own children.
    Last edited by The Man From YEG; 11-12-2018 at 09:08 AM.

  7. #407

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by gwill211 View Post
    ^The second paragraph in the news articke mentions specific evidence that was submitted to the courts on a so called facilitor who took kids out of school. KIDS. Not kid.

    This isnt make believe. These are facts backed by evidence that was submitted to the courts. How do you think they got super specific on the school, the number of kids and where this guy lived when he took the kids to his own personal residence.

    Oh that's right you want to believe it didnt happen and it's not true.
    would you abolish police forces because one cop demonstrated he shouldn’t be one? what about social workers? or teachers? or priests? would you abolish home care and schools and churches? there is no accepting what might have been done here but your solutions and equivalencies seem to be a touch draconian and disconnected.
    There’s guys taking advantage of kids everywhere. Summer camps, daycares, after school activities, all sports (hockey, gymnastics, etc.) at home with fathers, sons, brothers, uncles, boyfriends all have been caught abusing kids. It’s not the programs is the guys.

  8. #408
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,253

    Default

    Of course it is, but we don't need to add to the creeps!

  9. #409
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,053

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Of course it is, but we don't need to add to the creeps!
    ????

    the gsa legislation didn't "add to the creeps"... those creeps existed before the legislation was enacted.

    the gsa legislation was and is intended to protect vulnerable children from creeps, albeit perhaps a different kind of creep. was it perfect legislation? perhaps not and perhaps it needs to be amended so as to try and eliminate a much less prevalent form of creep from taking advantage of children but, on balance, it's still good legislation that deserves to be improved, not repealed.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  10. #410
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,053

    Default

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...CCeXtWBLxN8Xdk

    interesting analysis that might not be popular with the ucp crowd but seems to reflect the sentiment of many people i talk to in the business community and at large. it will be interesting to see whether it continues to takes away even more support from the ucp or from the other not quite yet mainstream but centrist parties.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  11. #411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by gwill211 View Post
    ^The second paragraph in the news articke mentions specific evidence that was submitted to the courts on a so called facilitor who took kids out of school. KIDS. Not kid.

    This isnt make believe. These are facts backed by evidence that was submitted to the courts. How do you think they got super specific on the school, the number of kids and where this guy lived when he took the kids to his own personal residence.

    Oh that's right you want to believe it didnt happen and it's not true.
    would you abolish police forces because one cop demonstrated he shouldn’t be one? what about social workers? or teachers? or priests? would you abolish home care and schools and churches? there is no accepting what might have been done here but your solutions and equivalencies seem to be a touch draconian and disconnected.
    How is that the same as a random adult stranger picking kids up from school and taking them to his/her house?? There isn't a parent in the world that would allow this but our govt legislation created the secrecy that leaves no choice.

    It's a simple fix to address this issue. Have the gsa's but set some basic rules for accountability and safety.

    I used this analogy already but my kid needs to sign off on all sorts of waivers and permission slips to do stuff IN SCHOOL yet we let total strangers to do as they please with zero over sight. How does that make any sense?

  12. #412
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,053

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gwill211 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by gwill211 View Post
    ^The second paragraph in the news articke mentions specific evidence that was submitted to the courts on a so called facilitor who took kids out of school. KIDS. Not kid.

    This isnt make believe. These are facts backed by evidence that was submitted to the courts. How do you think they got super specific on the school, the number of kids and where this guy lived when he took the kids to his own personal residence.

    Oh that's right you want to believe it didnt happen and it's not true.
    would you abolish police forces because one cop demonstrated he shouldn’t be one? what about social workers? or teachers? or priests? would you abolish home care and schools and churches? there is no accepting what might have been done here but your solutions and equivalencies seem to be a touch draconian and disconnected.
    How is that the same as a random adult stranger picking kids up from school and taking them to his/her house?? There isn't a parent in the world that would allow this but our govt legislation created the secrecy that leaves no choice.

    It's a simple fix to address this issue. Have the gsa's but set some basic rules for accountability and safety.

    I used this analogy already but my kid needs to sign off on all sorts of waivers and permission slips to do stuff IN SCHOOL yet we let total strangers to do as they please with zero over sight. How does that make any sense?
    don't ask me how something that i didn't say makes sense, makes sense.

    i acknowledged that what was described shouldn't be possible for gas's any more than for football or cheer-leading or chess.

    but i also recognize that unlike football of cheer-leading or chess, gsa's should not require waivers and permission slips from the very people who are sometimes least capable and/or least willing to provide them advice and direction and support.

    perhaps the issue at its core is less about having to go off grounds to access those things - which shouldn't be the case - than it is to ensure those things are available in all schools for all students. having the latter would eliminate the former in its entirety and it would do so in a location where suitable controls and supervision are also available just as they are- or should be - for teachers and coaches and staff in all other areas.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  13. #413

    Default

    The "confidentiality" rule for GSAs really makes no sense. Yes, I get that it's imagined to be protecting kids from a poisoned relationship with a parent, but....there are all kinds of things that could negatively affect kids home lives that we make sure we inform parents about. I imagine report cards have played a part in more than a few broken relationships in the past, maybe we should keep those secret from parents? What about those times police would bring kids home "with a warning"? I'm sure there are parents out there who would verbally abuse their daughter if she tries out for a team, or their son if he gets cut. Should those be secret too?

    Secrecy for only one thing and not for another doesn't make sense.
    There can only be one.

  14. #414

    Default

    Seeing as we haven't seen any of the so called evidence that a random stranger took kids out of school, I'd be very wary of anything that these people say. First off, giving them the benefit of the doubt about someone taking kids to their home, you say on one hand it was a facilitator and on the other claim it was a random stranger. Which is it?

    Let's not forget that the group brining this suit is headed by John Carpay who last month equated the rainbow flag with the swastika. The same guy that Jason Kenny claims he doesn't have the power to boot from the UCP despite Kenny previously saying he had removed white supremacists who had been working for the UCP.

    GROUP MAKING INCENDIARY ‘IDEOLOGICAL SEXUAL CLUBS’ CLAIM ABOUT GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES HAS HISTORY OF BACKING SOCIAL CONSERVATIVE CAUSES

    In reality, however, the JCCF only supports certain freedoms. For example, it would support the freedom of religious groups to engage in behaviour many of us would define as discriminating against members of the LGBTQ community, but not necessarily the right to be free from such discrimination.


    Its social conservative leanings are quite clear from the types of cases it has championed since it was established in 2010, among them:


    Defending campus anti-abortion groups that have been denied status as clubs at Canadian universities or that engage in actions deemed offensive by other students


    Representing a “men’s rights” group that was denied club status at Ryerson University in Toronto


    Supporting the unsuccessful effort by British Columbia’s evangelical Trinity Western University to force provincial law societies to admit graduates of its law program despite a policy requiring students to live a supposedly Christian lifestyle, as defined by the institution


    Sued the Ottawa Public Library to allow a group to show a video described by opponents as Islamophobic on its premises


    Forcing the St. Catherines Public Library in Ontario to distribute a community newsletter that accused “Apostates and Atheists” of trying “to install their undemocratic rule of terror”


    Defence of physicians who wish to deny access to medical procedures, or even refuse to provide information about them, if they believe they violate their personal religious convictions


    Representing a “human rights advocacy” organization that wanted to make controversial claims about the Islamic religion in transit advertisements in Edmonton


    Legal support for individuals challenging public health insurance so they can have the right to pay extra to jump the queue for health care in Canada


    Support for a Manitoba marriage commissioner who refused to perform marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples


    A significant number of the group’s current cases involve support for anti-abortion groups and individuals as well as for groups and individuals opposed to efforts to protect the rights of LGBTQ community members.


    The group also publishes an annual document it calls a “Campus Freedom Index” that purports to measure the state of freedom of expression on Canadian campuses. The list makes a particular bugbear of student unions at Canadian universities for, among other things, adopting “political positions on issues not directly related to their mandates.”


    The JCCF was founded by Calgary lawyer John Carpay, a former Wildrose Party and Reform Party candidate, as well as a former Alberta director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

    https://albertapolitics.ca/2018/06/g...vative-causes/

  15. #415
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,053

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    The "confidentiality" rule for GSAs really makes no sense. Yes, I get that it's imagined to be protecting kids from a poisoned relationship with a parent, but....there are all kinds of things that could negatively affect kids home lives that we make sure we inform parents about. I imagine report cards have played a part in more than a few broken relationships in the past, maybe we should keep those secret from parents? What about those times police would bring kids home "with a warning"? I'm sure there are parents out there who would verbally abuse their daughter if she tries out for a team, or their son if he gets cut. Should those be secret too?

    Secrecy for only one thing and not for another doesn't make sense.
    really???

    how many false equivalencies do you think you can make in a single post?
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  16. #416

    Default

    None. That's how many.
    There can only be one.

  17. #417

    Default

    Ken I dont think written permissions should be required for the GSA's. I was making a point that my kids need explicit permissions and waivers for absolutely everything they do off school grounds and ON school grounds.

    So why would the schools think its ok for our kids to be taken out of classes and allowed into strangers personal homes or vehicles with no oversite or accountability. Kids shouldn't be allowed to miss days of classes under the guise of a GSA trip.

    Let's ask ourselves a very important question. What can be taught or discussed in someone's personal home that cant be done at school??? Oh that's right... nothing.

    We need better rules that dont leave the gsa's a free for all like they seem to be. This seems to be difficult for some to understand.
    Last edited by gwill211; 11-12-2018 at 01:17 PM.

  18. #418

    Default

    Notley calls for a new refinery to process more value added resources here.

    Speaking personally, it's about bloody time. And don't just offer loans or guarantees. Take an ownership stake in this project.

    Alberta looking to build a new refinery in face of ongoing oil price crisis

    For decades, Albertans have been talking about getting more value for our oil at home,” Notley said in a statement Tuesday. “So let’s stop the talk, end the decades of dreaming and start making more of the products the world needs here at home.


    “It’s time to grab the bull by the horns and to do more refining and upgrading that adds value and creates jobs here.”


    Notley says new refining capacity will help lower the oil price differential over the long term. It’s unclear from the news release what the province’s financial involvement would be in such a project.

    https://www.fortmcmurraytoday.com/ne...9-0ee6a25442b2

  19. #419
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,871

    Default

    Public monies should absolutely not be committed to building a refinery that will almost certainly be unprofitable. Refining capacity in North America is quite underutilized, and there's little need for it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    None. That's how many.
    Not from where I stand. You directly compared bad marks and/or wanting to join a sports team with one of the most fundamental aspects of someone's life: their sexual orientation. Those are huge false equivalencies.
    Last edited by Marcel Petrin; 11-12-2018 at 03:36 PM.

  20. #420
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,583

    Default

    Point of information...

    I was involved in the yearbook club back in high school, mid-80s, and I don't remember that my parents had to give permission for that. Have things changed since then, so now a club not requiring parental permission would be the exception, not the rule? Or am I misremembering the mid-80s?

    (FWIW, I also remember on at least one occassion a teacher sending me to run a school-related errand at the local mall. This was in a non-core class that I was hopeless in. Pretty sure they didn't notify my mother that I was leaving the school grounds.)

  21. #421

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Public monies should absolutely not be committed to building a refinery that will almost certainly be unprofitable. Refining capacity in North America is quite underutilized, and there's little need for it.
    Then we are locked into having very few option for bitumen since the refineries that can process it are in the States. I'd much rather keep it here and bring back Energy East, this time as a crude pipeline that the eastern refineries can use as opposed to a bitumen pipeline that they can't.

    Mine/pump it here. upgrade it here, refine it here. Why ship a low end product to the States so they can make more off of our resources than we do?

    Maybe we could even get the eastern refineries off of Saudi oil.

    But what about the American refineries, you may ask?

    What about them? I answer.

  22. #422

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    Point of information...

    I was involved in the yearbook club back in high school, mid-80s, and I don't remember that my parents had to give permission for that. Have things changed since then, so now a club not requiring parental permission would be the exception, not the rule? Or am I misremembering the mid-80s?

    (FWIW, I also remember on at least one occassion a teacher sending me to run a school-related errand at the local mall. This was in a non-core class that I was hopeless in. Pretty sure they didn't notify my mother that I was leaving the school grounds.)
    I get a permission slip a week needed notifying me of something my kids want to be involved in. Simple things like sports, field trips or anything out of the school or after class...but what blows my mind are the permission slips that get sent home asking for permission for an in school field trip.

    Class happening in the gym instead of the classroom? Permission slip needed. Class happening outside instead of inside? Permission slip needed.

    It's out of control for really basic simple stuff.

  23. #423
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,583

    Default

    ^ So, what if your kid just wants to join the chess club that meets in the library every Tuesday during lunch hour?

  24. #424
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,714

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Public monies should absolutely not be committed to building a refinery that will almost certainly be unprofitable. Refining capacity in North America is quite underutilized, and there's little need for it.
    A wide differential between Alberta crude prices and crude oil prices elsewhere (including the US Gulf Coast) is exactly the correct time to build profitable refining (as well as petrochemical and other energy value added) projects in this province.

  25. #425
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,253

    Default

    I thought she was looking for financial backing, like anyone would be interested..

  26. #426

    Default

    "Like anyone would be interested".

    You mean like the people complaining they have too much bitumen? The companies with upgraders and refineries were opposed to the production cut. I wonder why?

    You think that people pushing bitumen pipelines aren't looking for financial backers?

    "I would prefer...we process the bitumen from the oilsands in Alberta and that would create a lot of jobs and job activity," he said.


    "That would be a better thing to do than merely send the raw bitumen down the pipeline and they refine it in Texas that means thousands of new jobs in Texas."

    Peter Lougheed, 2011, speaking in opposition to Keystone XL.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...line-1.1078801
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 11-12-2018 at 06:12 PM.

  27. #427

    Default

    If we can build the refinery in-province to upgrade dil-bit to light crude, we take away the biggest argument over shipping oil out of Vancouver. We could then ship that light crude at full market value to China and other markets out of Vancouver. The Alberta government needs to finance this on our end, since the oil companies would rather make the money refining out of existing refineries in the States; they have no interest in building existing refinery space here to help our market, as they only care about their overall world bottom line.

  28. #428
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,253

    Default

    Can she leave now? instead of 2019?

  29. #429

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Can she leave now? instead of 2019?
    How about you first?

  30. #430

    Default

    H.L. wants the UCP in power now as her SOO membership is about to expire.

  31. #431
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Man From YEG View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Can she leave now? instead of 2019?
    How about you first?

    So witty, you with your teeny appendage

  32. #432
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    7,381

    Default

    SOO ?

  33. #433
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    7,381

    Default

    The world loves light sweet crude.

  34. #434

    Default

    Solders of Odin

    Seen here with UCP candidates. The people that Jason Kenny called a baseball team.


  35. #435
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,871

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Public monies should absolutely not be committed to building a refinery that will almost certainly be unprofitable. Refining capacity in North America is quite underutilized, and there's little need for it.
    A wide differential between Alberta crude prices and crude oil prices elsewhere (including the US Gulf Coast) is exactly the correct time to build profitable refining (as well as petrochemical and other energy value added) projects in this province.
    It takes 5-10 years and 10-15 billion dollars to build a refinery. Given that no one is even interested in building a pipeline in the current political climate, what are the chances of a privately financed refinery? Roughly zero. And there's no guarantee that in 5-10 years' time the differential will be as large as it has been recently, which is a big part of the reason why private investment wants nothing to do with a new refinery. Not to mention that we are supposed to be moving away from fossil fuels over the coming decades. While that's certainly not going to happen overnight, a refinery that isn't even going to be operating until the late 2020's would be the very definition of a "stranded asset" shortly after it was completed.

    The Northwest Upgrader was already a bad enough investment. I'd rather we not double or triple down on it.

  36. #436

    Default

    You could make the same argument against pipelines but that doesn't seem to be stopping people from advocating for them. Besides, oil can be used for things besides fuel.

    What we need to do is stop selling the base resource for the lowest possible price. It's like we're clearcutting the forests and just selling the logs.

  37. #437

    Default

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/alb...atch-1.4941644

    In the article it says Notleys refinery plan wreaks of desperation. Hard to think a refinery makes much sense after reading that article.

  38. #438
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gwill211 View Post
    https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/alb...atch-1.4941644

    In the article it says Notleys refinery plan wreaks of desperation. Hard to think a refinery makes much sense after reading that article.
    Of course it does, good lord, anyone knows that.

  39. #439

    Default

    So, what is your solution? Another pipeline? Which will increase exports and production and, thus, undo the price increase that the production cut has brought. Brilliant! We'll continue to sell our base stock at a lower price, we'll just sell more of it. And the next time the price of oil drops, we're right back where we are now.

  40. #440

    Default

    How about skipping Quebec entirely by shipping our oil on barges down the St Lawerence river?
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  41. #441
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,714

    Default

    ^^^^Do you mean the North West Redwater Partnership (CNRL and Ian McGregor's company) that jointly own the Sturgeon Refinery? Why do you think this is a bad investment?

    McGregor said this evening on CBC that they are looking to expand the Sturgeon Refinery. What's wrong with putting out an EOI to see if there are other companies who would like to build either a greenfield or expanded refinery/upgrader?

    For instance, it would be interesting to know if one of the incumbent refiners (e.g. Suncor, Esso, Shell, Alberta EnviroFuels) might be looking to expand and under what terms and conditions?

  42. #442
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,346

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Solders of Odin

    Seen here with UCP candidates. The people that Jason Kenny called a baseball team.


    Isn't that Ted Nugent I see in there somewhere?
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  43. #443

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    So, what is your solution? Another pipeline? Which will increase exports and production and, thus, undo the price increase that the production cut has brought. Brilliant! We'll continue to sell our base stock at a lower price, we'll just sell more of it. And the next time the price of oil drops, we're right back where we are now.

    read the article you *****. Throwing tens of billions into a refinery that will never earn that money back makes zero sense. But hey notley suggested it therefore you think it's a good idea right???

    Its interesting she campaigned on adding refineries during the last election but it was put on the back burner for closing the coal Industry and introducing our carbon tax that would be the social license to get our pipelines built.

    If she had any interest in getting more refineries built why would she wait until the next election cycle to gather some ideas from our oil and gas industry.

    It's a weak and desperate move on her part. Shows she doesnt have a clue.

  44. #444

    Default

    It's a response to the collapse of the oil prices. How dare she not respond to something that hasn't happened yet.

    It's interesting that the companies that own the upgraders and refineries are opposed to the production cut while those that are only shipping bitumen are for it. I wonder why that is? Could it be that the latter don't want to invest any more in Alberta than they have to?

  45. #445
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,253

    Default

    It's a weak and desperate move on her part. Shows she doesn't have a clue.
    100 %. √√√√√√√√√

  46. #446

    Default

    The case for more refining in Alberta from a refinery operator.

    Q&A: The case for more Alberta refineries
    'We've got to sell finished goods,' says chair of North West Refining

    What do you think of the premier's announcement?
    "I think all refining in the province is good for Alberta. All refining in Canada is good for Canada. We should be making export products, and we should be trying to get to the end market and not relying on others to do processing for us or it's going to end bad."


    Why is that? Why is this something we must do?
    "Because we've seen constraints. We've seen what a constraint does in the transportation system. People in the government have been saying not having Trans Mountain cost us $80 million dollars a day. So we have to figure out a way to make something that's valuable enough that we can ship it and get it out of here."


    "If we refine 100,000 barrels, we avoid shipping about 125,000 barrels because we don't ship diluent around in a circle. What that means is we can make the transportation system bigger by refining things here. It's a lot more valuable because what we're sending down the transportation system is worth three times as much as the raw materials that we send down."


    Despite the length of time it's taken to build the Sturgeon refinery and the amount of investment, is it worth it?
    "Absolutely, there's no question. Anybody who looks at the numbers … is going to be in favour of this economically.


    "We can't consume everything we can make here. We're going to have to export it. But if I'm putting something in that pipeline I can either put bitumen in or [Western Canadian Select] that's worth $40 a barrel, or in the same pipeline I can put diesel in that's worth $120 a barrel.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/q-a...ries-1.4942710

  47. #447

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gwill211 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    So, what is your solution? Another pipeline? Which will increase exports and production and, thus, undo the price increase that the production cut has brought. Brilliant! We'll continue to sell our base stock at a lower price, we'll just sell more of it. And the next time the price of oil drops, we're right back where we are now.

    read the article you *****. Throwing tens of billions into a refinery that will never earn that money back makes zero sense. But hey notley suggested it therefore you think it's a good idea right???

    Its interesting she campaigned on adding refineries during the last election but it was put on the back burner for closing the coal Industry and introducing our carbon tax that would be the social license to get our pipelines built.

    If she had any interest in getting more refineries built why would she wait until the next election cycle to gather some ideas from our oil and gas industry.

    It's a weak and desperate move on her part. Shows she doesnt have a clue.
    Somewhat valid. Similarly so for all those that allowed the overproduction situation to develop in the first place. Notley was dealt these cards. Who created it?

  48. #448
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,053

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by gwill211 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    So, what is your solution? Another pipeline? Which will increase exports and production and, thus, undo the price increase that the production cut has brought. Brilliant! We'll continue to sell our base stock at a lower price, we'll just sell more of it. And the next time the price of oil drops, we're right back where we are now.

    read the article you *****. Throwing tens of billions into a refinery that will never earn that money back makes zero sense. But hey notley suggested it therefore you think it's a good idea right???

    Its interesting she campaigned on adding refineries during the last election but it was put on the back burner for closing the coal Industry and introducing our carbon tax that would be the social license to get our pipelines built.

    If she had any interest in getting more refineries built why would she wait until the next election cycle to gather some ideas from our oil and gas industry.

    It's a weak and desperate move on her part. Shows she doesnt have a clue.
    Somewhat valid. Similarly so for all those that allowed the overproduction situation to develop in the first place. Notley was dealt these cards. Who created it?
    it should be pretty clear by now that the federal government created it. the additional production you note was brought on stream based on having additional pipeline capacity coming on stream with it. that’s been the case for the past 70 or 80 years and the industry had reasonably - and correctly - assumed that would continue.

    obama was the first to change the rules but at least he was shooting someone else in the foot, unlike our current prime minister who by all rights should be walking with a pronounced limp.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  49. #449

    Default

    You quoted the chairman of the sturgeon refinery that was 6 billion over budget and many years behind schedule on a project that will never make the money back. You realize it mostly makes diesel and with that it makes very little of it for the 10 billion that was spent building it.

    I think I read we have no shortage of diesel production in alberta.

    He's your typical big wig cheering for the over spending govts to throw more money at another wasteful project like that one. Sounds like your typical NDP supporter.

  50. #450
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,714

    Default

    ^The Sturgeon refinery partners funded the cost over-runs, not the province. The provincial government does not have an equity position in the refinery.

    The province's main involvement is a long-term contract through the Alberta Petroleum Marketing Commission to provide the refinery with an assured bitumen supply. The Commission also provided a $392 million loan as of December 31, 2017, on which it earned net income of $35.1 million in 2017.

    All of this is fully disclosed in the audited financial statements of the Commission. See page 172 of the Department of Energy Annual Report here: https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/cbd7...-2017-2018.pdf

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •