Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Exclusive! Politician gives birth to alien baby | Main | When's a cabinet not a cabinet? »

Tuesday, August 14, 2007

A toxic pivot point

Former Alberta Premier Peter Lougheed knows a thing or two about federal-provincial showdowns over the province's oil and gas reserves, so his speech yesterday to the Canadian Bar Association merits our attention.

In it, he predicts a major constitutional clash between Alberta and Ottawa over the fate of the oilsands. Constitutionally, Alberta has the right to develop its own natural resources, of course, but the impact of federal environmental legislation over the resource is unclear. Lougheed predicts the issue will eventually wind up in front of the Supreme Court of Canada.

I explored all this in my March 12, 2007 cover story for the Western Standard, "Target: Alberta's Oilpatch," in which I reviewed the old National Energy Program, and explained how some believe that Ottawa's designation (under the Paul Martin government) of carbon dioxide as a toxin should give the feds the power to regulate CO2 emissions in Alberta.

Posted by Terry O'Neill on August 14, 2007 in Canadian Politics | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/22305/20831689

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A toxic pivot point:

Comments

"... how some believe that Ottawa's designation (under the Paul Martin government) of carbon dioxide as a toxin ..."

I suppose one could make a joke about new regulations for politicians' speeches...

However, on a more serious note, I would think that this designation should be able to be challenged. After all, if the emission of CO2 is toxic and the solution to this problem is a desired reduction in CO2 levels, one could argue that the forests of the world should be destroyed - as long as they are not destroyed by burning. Why should hydrocarbon fuels be singled out?

Hmmm....

Posted by: Brent Weston | 14-Aug-07 1:53:43 PM

If Ottawa gets it greasy fingers around Alberta's neck, you can say good bye to prosperity in Canada generally and a depression in Western Canada will be assured.

Climate change is indeed the phony religion that will led itself to the purpose of ever more central control and loss of economic and other freedoms.

Time to go.

Posted by: John | 14-Aug-07 2:03:48 PM

The climate change theory, its gurus and adherents will go down in history as one of the shortest-lived cults of all time.

Their underlying assumptions are unable to defend themselves either scientific scrutiny or positive religious outcomes.

Posted by: set you free | 14-Aug-07 2:17:57 PM

Meanwhile, Ontario's auto industry gets to emit as much carbon as it likes, because the Liebral/Dipper Party needs Ontario votes. Fabulous! And they wonder why Albertans get angry.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 14-Aug-07 2:54:46 PM

The risk and danger to Alberta seems clear and I fear Alberta will cave in as it did before when Trudeau did his number. Unless Alberta has a serious political party supporting separation, which it doesn't, Ottawa will feel safe to carry on.

We need such an option in the west for as long as we refuse to entertain separation and independence we shall be milked and abused by the eastern establishment.

Posted by: Alain | 14-Aug-07 3:10:40 PM

Alain:

A seperatist movement in Alberta will quickly arise should a federal Liberal government be elected.

Posted by: set you free | 14-Aug-07 3:17:31 PM

SYF:

A secession movement won't arise - instead the existing party (the Liberals and Dippers don't count) will embrace it as the final resort in the event of a federal attack on Alberta. The majority of Albertans will rally to the cause of our freedom and our right to be equal with others.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 14-Aug-07 3:25:04 PM

...separate? dream on. Alberta will do what it is good at - whining.

With all the easterner's working here also you think they'd vote to separate?

We had many a chance in the past - our downfall is that we are too patriotic.

Once we have our own police force and pension in place, then i'd say maybe, till then 'dream on'.

Oh, who'd run this new country?

Roger?

Posted by: tomax7 | 14-Aug-07 3:43:33 PM

Tomax,

Unlike the rest of Canada that is whining for more of Alberta's money, Alberta is whining at being robbed.

What's wrong with that. Do you like the Feds as deeply into your walled as they are? Or have ever thought of whining about it just a bit?

Posted by: John | 14-Aug-07 4:38:37 PM

tomax:

Please send all your money to Alberta.

No whining now, please.

Posted by: set you free | 14-Aug-07 5:03:17 PM

Can I buy clean water?

Posted by: virgin | 14-Aug-07 5:29:54 PM

As long as you stay a virgin.

Posted by: set you free | 14-Aug-07 5:31:43 PM

Where? I have the ring and a framed agreement. I shouldn't need pollutants in my body. Pure is pure.

Posted by: virgin | 14-Aug-07 5:38:51 PM

Good luck to you.

With love in your heart toward your fellow human beings, anything is possible.

Posted by: set you free | 14-Aug-07 5:41:42 PM

I guess I need to trust everyone here. Thank you. I just wondered about oil, sands and water because of what I read.

Someday, I do want a baby. You know the Fort is so ugly.

Posted by: virgin | 14-Aug-07 5:48:20 PM

Roger said: "ALBERTA IS POLLUTING THE WATER, THE AIR, THE RIVERS, THE SOIL."

So is every volcano in the world, the difference is the wealth being created in Alberta by Albertans is giving me a darn good standard of living. I am willing to trade a little clean air for better health care, more expensive and safer cars, better education for my kids, better quality food, a better and earlier pension, etc, etc. And if you want to see serious pollution, go the the former East Bloc countries, socialism is the real enemy of clean air, water, soil, etc. Not capitalism.

Posted by: Tom | 14-Aug-07 9:14:14 PM

SYF: "Please send all your money to Alberta."

...umm I already do.

No whining please, you're just enforcing what I stated.

Posted by: tomax7 | 14-Aug-07 10:16:24 PM

John: "Alberta is whining at being robbed."

Case in point.

Posted by: tomax7 | 14-Aug-07 10:17:17 PM

Hmm, The Alberta Firewall proposal sounds pretty good right now.

Posted by: DML | 14-Aug-07 10:46:32 PM

First post- ok, you are on the mark. Second post, the firewall idea may enhance Confederation even as it weakens central authority. That isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Posted by: DML | 14-Aug-07 11:44:53 PM

Ontario and Alberta are provinces that give funds to the Canadian Equalization program, correct? Based on this, is not the interference in tar sands development going to decrease the standard of living of all Canadians based on this logic? However, if I hear, read, or see a story on Oil effecting Alberta's water quality then there should be something done. Since fresh water will be the new resource in the future that future World Superpowers (China), will be fighting over, in my opinion.

P.S. Air quality is another issue but once again there is not really any evidence of it being a health issue so far in Alberta.

Posted by: Edmontonian | 15-Aug-07 12:59:02 AM

A China Booster! Or should I say a commie cheerleader? One & the same, I suppose.

Posted by: obc | 15-Aug-07 7:27:48 AM

Ltes' hope when this crisis hits that it is handled better than Lougheed handled the NEP crisis. This time, we need to play REAL hardball. Je Me Souviens, indeed.

Posted by: John Luft | 15-Aug-07 8:51:35 AM

Water shortages and globull warming are not mutually exclusive, Edmontonian.

More heat = more evaporation = more rain.

Can't have it both ways.

Secondly, how the Hell do you export water to China. Impossible. Let 'em desalinate seawater with all those US dollars they are hoarding.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 15-Aug-07 10:55:17 AM

No wonder more peopole are becoming environmental skeptics!

"Aussie 'missing link' ocean current found"

al-Reuters

Australian scientists have discovered a giant underwater current that is one of the last missing links of a system that connects the world's oceans and helps govern global climate. New research shows that a current sweeping past Australia's southern island of Tasmania toward the South Atlantic is a previously undetected part of the world climate system's engine-room, said scientist Ken Ridgway.


Wait a minute there. They were making climate predictions to a tenth of a degree without knowing about at least one major ocean current? How is that possible? (sarcasm)

Posted by: obc | 15-Aug-07 2:18:04 PM

It's possible and also predictable OBC, because GW is nothing more than a fraud.

As for this water thing, if Globull Wormening is indeed ocurring, then there should be plenty to go around, what with all the glaciers melting and such. And if not, what's wrong with a couple of million Chi-Coms doing without?

Posted by: atric | 15-Aug-07 3:44:10 PM

Let them drink tea! (Sorry, Marie Antoinette)

Posted by: obc | 15-Aug-07 3:53:34 PM

Let OBC Drink his own Bathwater!

(whoops, he does!!!!)

Posted by: munroe | 15-Aug-07 7:49:48 PM

As stupid as the current Administration is in the US. I would rather have them as a super-power instead of China. A lot of people here think that Islamo-fascists are conspiring to take over the World. Is it not the Chinese who are the biggest threat USA's Colonial Empire? The fact that China owns 1 trillion in US public debt is great tool for them to push US around. If China ever sells the US bonds then the US dollar would collapse, crippling the economy.

Posted by: Edmontonian | 15-Aug-07 10:37:22 PM

I need to have info on the problems faced by the oil sands people when it comes to cleaning the water after it has been used to process the tar sands. Evaporation is one thing but what about the sludge? Is there a problem? What about the lakes in the region and do we have a problem with the evaporation taking the air-born water molecules to other locations? This kind of environmental concern might need to be addressed. Anyone want to contribute?

Posted by: DML | 15-Aug-07 10:59:16 PM

Germany's pebble bed nuclear reactor might solve part of the problem. Thanks for the info. there is a large price for everything.

Posted by: DML | 15-Aug-07 11:24:21 PM

WTF is ROGER doing here?

I thought he was ritually beheaded?

Epsi

Posted by: epsilon | 16-Aug-07 7:58:27 AM

Pussies have 9 lives unfortunately.

Posted by: obc | 16-Aug-07 8:19:30 AM

Roger just stated some technical related items re oil sands recovery. Is he wrong or right?

Posted by: gary e | 16-Aug-07 9:08:17 AM

Roger does deserve an intelligent response to any legitimate questions.

Posted by: set you free | 16-Aug-07 9:16:59 AM

ROGER is doing 2 things, he is stating the obvious and he is stating the ignorant.

First, the obvious. Yes, energy is used to make synthetic oil. Energy is used to make everything we use. So what is the point? But most of the CO2 comes from burning the oil in your car, motorcycle or lawn mower. If you want to descend back into the stone age and remove all forms of industrial agriculture, technological development and human process and starve 75 % of the population to death, then that is the ridiculous option.

Now for the ignorance. Virtually all steam is recovered as condensate and reused. Little if any boiler water is wasted. Most of the water from the tailings ponds comes from washing the sands as part of the oil-sand sepration process. THis water is re-used and recycled countless times before it is sent to the tailings ponds.

No water, not a drop, is sent back to the Athabasca River. It is all impounded.

Obviously the industry is working very hard to reduce even further the amount of water it uses and to remediate the tailings ponds. There has been a lot of success in this area. It is a shame no one gives the oil sands companies any credit for the excellent work they do in environmental remediation, the millions that they have spent and are committed to spend and most of all the wonderful work by very dedicated technical staff that are working hard to make things better.

Kudos to them. Not to you ROGER. YOu just complain but do nothing to make this world better.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 16-Aug-07 9:49:15 AM

Epsi:

It's good to hear from somebody who's well-versed in these issues.

I was also under the impression that the steam is somehow trapped under the rock formations.

Of course, nuclear is the ultimate way to go because the created energy would have many uses, in the extraction of the resource that's much in demand in this world.

Posted by: set you free | 16-Aug-07 10:20:19 AM

epsilon, do you have the numbers of how much energy is required to extract a crude oil from the sands, as a percentage?

Posted by: gary e | 16-Aug-07 10:36:50 AM

Gary e, I'm not your friggin' secretary. Go look up the numbers yourself and tell us.

syf, you are referring to SAGD, Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage. In this process, steam is pumped underground and the softened bitumen can now be pumped to the service. The steam is recovered again as condensate and re-used. THis process is less environmentally intensive because it does not require pit mining ans is used for deeper deposits.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 16-Aug-07 10:50:11 AM

Epsilon
Since you seem to be well versed in the technology, I thought you would know. I guess you do not.

Posted by: gary e | 16-Aug-07 10:54:48 AM

Epsi:

I appreciate your obvious expertise in this area.

Thanks for your answer.

Posted by: set you free | 16-Aug-07 11:13:38 AM

gary e is like the fellow in class who looked over to see the answers during a test.

Posted by: obc | 16-Aug-07 11:19:08 AM

Epsi- I also appreciate your expertise and it is the area in which I was looking for an answer.

Posted by: DML | 16-Aug-07 11:19:18 AM

gary e:

How much of your health is ruined by negative energy created by your unwillingness to search for the truth?

Check out the facts for yourself, then you will be better prepared for debate.

Posted by: set you free | 16-Aug-07 11:21:32 AM

syf, was I proposing a debate when asking a simple question of an expressed expert? I wanted to know.
Playing the politics of information is rather old school.

Posted by: gary e | 16-Aug-07 11:27:20 AM

gary e:

I assume you have the ability to find answers for yourself.

Just do it.

I instructed my three children from the time they were young enough to understand that life is much simpler when you spend your energy working toward solutions.

It's one thing I never regret.

So, if you'd like an answer, the best way is to search for it yourself. Please do so and quit wasting time on reprecussions.

How much energy is used to produce a barrel of oil?

Frankly, I don't care as much as you do.

Why don't you go and search out the answer and report back?

Posted by: set you free | 16-Aug-07 11:36:11 AM

Roger does deserve an intelligent response to any legitimate questions.

Posted by: set you free | 16-Aug-07 9:16:

So, if you'd like an answer, the best way is to search for it yourself. Please do so and quit wasting time on reprecussions.

Posted by: set you free | 16-Aug-07 11:36:11 AM

So which one is it, syf? Sticking up for Roger's question, but not mine?

Posted by: gary e | 16-Aug-07 11:48:38 AM

Fisrt of all, I am no expert either. I'm just an interested girl.

I found out all this in just a few minutes on the net.

Gary, I don't wipe other people's asses unless they are whiny little babies. If that is you then I concede the point. If not then go look it up yourself if you want to know the answer.

Geezus Krist, how helpless are you? Is that why you love the nanny state so much? Because you are essentially useless?

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 16-Aug-07 12:32:33 PM

Epsilon~

You've unmasked gary e's failing!

Posted by: obc | 16-Aug-07 12:49:02 PM

One of the features of leftist's language, is the pretext that all things "natural" are pure. It is an extension of the doctrine of the Nazis, that there really is something that is so naturally pure, and that everything that is not done by the "pure" race, is impure, and can be destroyed.

Nature, in and of itself, is in a constant state of flux--therefore there is no state--not ever--that is pure. In fact, the only place you can find pure water, is when it is distilled, and even then, there is no such thing as 100.00% pure water. Close, but that only works in horse shoes. There is always a small amount of impurity--no matter what is done.

And where ever you see the Globull Warming people discussing something, they say they are protecting something--as if it were all static.

Even the weather freaks are all excited about changes in the weather patters, as if weather patterns were also static.

In Canada, where there have been a few forests wrecked by recent storms, whether Halifax or Vancouver, you see the Globull warming people out there, behaving as if trees would never have falled down--not ever. Fact remains, there is a life cycle. And those trees, many have grown taller than others, and have not been touched by weather for some time now. In many of those locations, the trees had been permitted, to grow very very tall. There have been some incredible storms in recent years (decades) and those very same trees had not fallen down. But then back then, they were much shorter. Now that those trees have reached the total extent of their potential, and a storm has come along, many have come down. It is the natural cycle--and yet according the the Globull Warmingists, they have made it appear as if it is totally unnatural. They have used this data as material to support their aims.

And let me say, their aims are to continually get more money from people, governments, and corporations, in order to sustain their own lifestyles.

Meanwhile, so many people choose to stay, like mushrooms, in the dark, and fed BS.

You want to know how to make a leftist squirm.

Tell him that it is possible to have an industrialized free society, that has a small environmental footprint, that includes an oil based economy.

Posted by: Lady | 16-Aug-07 12:51:35 PM

Posted by Epsilon (Member # 3271) on 01-29-2007 07:53 AM:

"Jennifer ",

Listen up young lady and listen good while I talk to you woman to woman. Only a fool uses her real name on the internet. There are a lot of creeps out there and identity thieves not to mention government computer spooks keeping information on you. I know you are not that stupid so cut the nonsense about this being your real picture and real name.

It's not. Your not fooling anyone. You are a charlatan.

Of course I do not use my real name. No one here does. And as for being a clown, at least I am a REAL clown, not some pathetic drama student studying to be a clown. If your powers of observation and analysis were a little more keen you would be aware, that it is actually satire. But your ADD and shallow celebrity addicted generation is too naive to pick this up.

I look forward to inflicting gaping wounds on your new forum when it starts up.

And dearest Sophie, you were never my enemy. If anything, it was your patience, tolerance, acceptance and understanding that made me feel at home here!

Epsilon Gooderich

Good to know you're a real clown. Explains much.

Posted by: gary e | 16-Aug-07 1:06:24 PM

Yeah, I run a discussion forum. So what is your point?

And I have altered my name a little. True. I've been e-harrassed and have had an identity theft. YOu just infringed on my electronic communication privacy just now and proved my point. I've had lunatics like ROGER and others cyberstalk me. It is not fun. I would not wish that on anyone except you.

So again wtf is your point?

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 16-Aug-07 1:19:38 PM

No, dear, you've harangued me to do my own research, so I did. Your email is included on all of your postings here, as is mine.

I wouldn't call googling someone's email address infringement.
You're out there.
Google me.

Posted by: gary e | 16-Aug-07 1:25:31 PM

I don't give a damn if you Google me. What I resent is you reprinting it here in a fashion that is utterly irrelevant to the conversation. Wow, you can surf the net. Big deal. You don't have to be a smart ass about it.

Can you not have a little respect for someone's privacy?

I really resent what you have done here.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 16-Aug-07 1:32:28 PM

gary:

There's a reason epsi would not answer you question.

I'm not going to tell you what it is even if you stamp your feet and hold your breath.

Posted by: set you free | 16-Aug-07 1:34:19 PM

What a low and cheap bastard you are.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 16-Aug-07 1:34:47 PM

Above comment applies to Gary, not you syf.

Posted by: Epsilon | 16-Aug-07 1:36:37 PM

Ditto for me as well.

Posted by: obc | 16-Aug-07 1:51:11 PM

Epsilon, if you're going to dish it out, you need to thicken your skin.

Posted by: gary e | 16-Aug-07 3:33:56 PM

And more deadly news from China:

"China Counterfeit Diabetes Tests Tracked by J&J"

Bloomberg News, by Allan Dodds Frank & Lisa Rapaport

New York - A global manhunt launched by Johnson & Johnson has tracked to China counterfeit versions of an at-home diabetes test used by 10 million Americans to take sensitive measurements of blood-sugar levels. Potentially dangerous copies of the OneTouch Test Strip sold by J&J's LifeScan unit surfaced in American and Canadian pharmacies last year.


Despite Chinese gov. promises to crack down counterfeit products coming from China are increasing in both numbers and types and are generally of inferior quality if not outright frauds in performance. And in cases like this they are becoming potentially deadly.

Posted by: obc | 16-Aug-07 4:46:40 PM

Gary, if you ever have a logical rebuttal to anything me or anyone else says, present it logically and feel free to present it aggresively. I do have a thick skin and am willing to admit I am wrong when the facts merit.

But I am afraid when it comes to fools, I lose all patience. I am sorry you are so sensitive about that.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 16-Aug-07 5:20:38 PM

We do not suffer fools easily here.

Posted by: obc | 16-Aug-07 5:21:48 PM

In regards to the amount of energy it takes to extract oil from oilsand, I heard Al Gore go on about the amount of natural gas it took to get one barrel of oil. I believe he described it as the same amount of gas that it takes to heat a house for three days or some such number. According to him this was evidence of how unsustainable the whole oilsands industry was. Then the same news cast had a rep from Syncrude on who was asked about this consumption of gas. He said "yes, it was true that it took the same about of gas to produce a barrel from the sands as it does to heat a house for three days, but this amount of gas only cost 3 dollars and the oil was worth 60 dollars so it made sense.".... I agree with the syncrude guy.

Posted by: Tom | 16-Aug-07 6:54:14 PM

. . . and now it's worth a bit over $70 a barrel.

Posted by: obc | 16-Aug-07 6:58:45 PM

What does it matter how much it costs to remove a barrel of oil from the sand ? They spent over a billion dollars to clean up much less oil from the Exxon Valdiz. The tar sands projects are the biggest cleanup of the enviroment in history. How come the tree huggers are not all on side ?

Posted by: hopfully | 16-Aug-07 7:55:46 PM

Much too logical for Leftoids to explain.

But if truth be told, it's not really about the environment. Envirowhackos are anti-capitalists who yearn for wealth distribution from the First World democracies to communist China, Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela. Anything that weakens our economy is chalked up as a success to them.

Posted by: obc | 16-Aug-07 8:00:48 PM

I know that obc. My sarcasm was stuck on.

Posted by: hopfully | 16-Aug-07 8:22:25 PM

And as the cost of that natural gas accelerates as it is presently doing, industry will try to find ways to produce that oil more efficiently and cheaply. That is the way of business and its a darned good thing.

Posted by: DML | 16-Aug-07 9:46:03 PM

Yeah. I read last night about how you can use raw bitumen to make steam instead of natural gas. Bitumen is extremely inexpensive. Just need a scrubber of sorts to get rid of sulphur apparently.

Epsi

Posted by: Epsilon | 17-Aug-07 8:55:53 AM

Hello

For some people online flash games are a passing distraction to fill the hours between lunch and home time. For others online flash games are a passionate hobby that keeps glued to their monitors while they try and beat their last score. We've put together a list of the top ten best flash games ever, in no particular order. From simple animal cruelty to complex platform puzzles, these should keep you entertained all day long.

1. Beejeweled

[url=http://webhunt.in/res.php?key=b25saW5lLWZsYXNoLWdhbWVzLTE=][img]http://webhunt.in/online-flash-games-1.jpg[/img][/url]

Originally called Diamond Mine, this classic flash game involves moving multicoloured gems around in order to create sets of three. It's simple, but incredibly addictive.

2. Chimgam

[url=http://webhunt.in/res.php?key=b25saW5lLWZsYXNoLWdhbWVzLTI=][img]http://webhunt.in/online-flash-games-2.jpg[/img][/url]

We're not sure where this game came from -- and we're not sure we want to know. This is one of the craziest games we've ever played and one of the funniest. It's not big and it's not clever, but we can't stop playing it.

3. Bow Man

[url=http://webhunt.in/res.php?key=b25saW5lLWZsYXNoLWdhbWVzLTM=][img]http://webhunt.in/online-flash-games-3.jpg[/img][/url]

Set in a time when a bow and arrow was the best way to stick it to the man -- as opposed to playing silly games on company time -- Bow Man challenges you to shoot your enemy by calculating the correct angle and power of your bow. Robin Hood eat your heart out.

4. Desktop Tower Defense

You're sitting at your desk, avoiding work, on your fourth cup of tea when suddenly you're attacked by a group of creeps. What do you do? You set up canons of course, and blow them to smithereens. Desktop Tower Defense is a personal favourite of ours and a must-play game.

5. Neopets Hasee Bounce

Dodging dung might not sound like fun, but as you've already found out playing Chimgam, it can be a blast. Hasee Bounce sees you control cute creatures that bounce in the air and eat doughnut fruit. If only doughnut fruit was real. Sigh.
[img]http://kakvsegda.com/cnt/6.gif[/img]

to be continued.

Posted by: TermoBaby | 16-Jan-08 3:19:17 PM

Post a comment