B.C. can’t stop the oil, but it sure can screw with Canada’s interests

小黄

http://business.financialpost.co ... rests#comments-area
- k4 L9 w( C5 |! h1 }: g7 J
Their outrage would be more credible if Vancouver wasn’t about to become the world’s largest coal exporting port

Let’s pretend that discussions about pipelines in British Columbia could, at least for a moment, be rational.

There seem to be three general streams of opposition to Kinder Morgan’s proposed expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline: First, that it could harm the coastal environment in the event of a spill; second, that any such infrastructure only serves to increase production in Canada’s oilsands and, therefore, overall carbon emissions; and third, that while B.C. is taking all of the so-called risk associated with the pipeline, Alberta gets all the benefits.

  X5 O: s+ R0 H! T2 N7 ODespite the almost cartoonish hysteria of the proponents of each of these flawed arguments, none of them ultimately hold up to even a moderate dose of reality.
: J) j% O8 w" `; I* g3 J$ t
On the potential harm to B.C.’s stunningly beautiful Pacific Coast, the argument comes down to a matter of degrees: Oil tankers have been departing the Westridge marine terminal in Vancouver weekly since 1956. Additionally, bulk tankers come from Alaska, down the west coast of Vancouver Island, through the Juan de Fuca strait, past Victoria and into oil refineries in Cherry Point and Anacortes in Washington state.

So, the presence of oil tankers in and around B.C. waters will hardly be a new feature, should the expansion go forward; it’s simply that the number of tankers might — might — increase.


9 R0 y2 U& Z' c: [2 I% F& v# X4 `On concerns about climate change and the impact of Canada’s oilsands on global climate emissions, two thoughts spring to mind: First, no government in Canada (or anywhere else) can regulate global oil demand out of existence; and second B.C.’s concern about oilsands emissions might seem more credible if Vancouver wasn’t poised to become the largest exporting port for coal in the world.
' S8 V9 b; w& W/ z
B.C. produces about 26 million tonnes of coal every year. The extraction, production and transportation of that product generates significant amounts of greenhouse gases (somewhat ironically, mostly due to the oil, imported from Alberta, that’s used to run the machinery and locomotives used by the industry) all before the actual coal itself is consumed. As of 2008, the total emissions associated with B.C. coal — including when it is burned somewhere else in the world — were equivalent to 61.4 million tonnes.

& }+ J/ o/ o/ Q3 a8 }. F6 NIs coal dirtier than oil? Is one supposed sin greater than another? Who’s going to win Celebrity Big Brother? All equally meaningless questions. The point is that no province is without environmental sin and pretending otherwise is either ignorant or hypocritical.
& |9 i& N3 H. b7 V5 e& q
* q+ z5 G" L4 g9 S8 F; I5 b& {Finally, on the question of risk versus reward, former B.C. premier Christy Clark had a very solid, defensible position via the “five conditions” she set for any pipeline project to receive the support of her provincial government. Since taking power last spring, B.C. Premier John Horgan has abandoned any such rational approach and now finds himself making ultra vires threats against his neighbour, fellow-NDP premier Rachel Notley.

. z; ]$ L, D* Q5 D9 }  H9 ]6 U/ XBut the investigator’s question of cui bono — who benefits? — is where, perhaps, the greatest irony of the whole debacle may play out.

+ H8 C7 v* M+ H7 N: i2 J/ OOpponents (and, indeed, regulators) of Canadian resource projects often express shocking ignorance of the global nature of those industries. Oil, for example, is one of the most fungible, politically driven, ubiquitous commodities on earth. The price of a barrel of oil at tidewater (i.e., at a port that can access global markets) is more or less the same anywhere in the world.

While oil is a nationally significant industry here, Canada produces only about three per cent of global oil supply. As a result, the notion that whether or not Canada allows a pipeline’s capacity to be increased will have some meaningful effect on the global oil industry — or its carbon emissions — is pure idiocy.

5 W  k/ ]3 z7 a3 xCanadian producers want pipelines simply so they can capture the discount they currently lose on Canadian oil because their access is right now limited to only one export customer, the U.S.

. @' i/ u' u# D2 vSo, what’s the most likely outcome if B.C. does somehow manage to stop Kinder Morgan’s nefarious plans? My guess is that the pipeline will still be expanded but, instead of ending at the Vancouver terminus, it would follow the existing secondary route from Sumas, B.C. into Washington state, taking Alberta oil to the aforementioned three existing refineries in Cherry Point and Anacortes, Wash.
1 y, z) ^8 |0 V" Y: ~2 h7 G, \8 O. D
Those refineries are currently supplied by oil shipped down from the Alaska North Slope fields by boats that regularly transit B.C. waters. Production from that field is expected to decline by more than 150,000 barrels per day between now and 2026. Replacing that supply with what will again be discounted Canadian crude would almost certainly be an attractive proposition for those refiners.
5 \0 L) O3 {8 e2 p
Where would that leave Canadian interests? Well, Canadian oil would still be held ransom to a single, monopsony buyer at a discounted price; every planned drop of oil will still be produced; whatever risk there is to the Pacific Coast would simply be moved 60 miles south and put under American control; whatever economic benefits British Columbians might have enjoyed would be lost; and Albertans could be denied access to B.C.’s fine wines indefinitely.
. F% L" h: ~- d, H9 ]6 i+ T. B
But, like I said, to talk about how foolish that would be we would have to pretend discussions about pipelines in B.C. could be rational — even for a minute.

湖紧掏

阿省应该马上拒交联邦税款，bc和魁北克拿到多少就拒交多少。

SheJing

所以女省长才说，不能让一个省，甚至是省里面的一个区，来绑架别省乃至整个加拿大的经济。

2 r" B5 b& h0 Z4 p% U# i说句题外话，“一个区”指的是BC省西南大温地区。因为BC省北部, 全是油气重镇，杠杠的亚省油砂粉丝，往东朝拜爱屯卡屯，而不往西朝拜温哥华那群绿茶婊政客。街上皮卡窗外飘扬的是油人火焰队旗，建个娱乐城还起名叫能量中心。油价下降你们只看到亚省的悲惨，却不知道东北BC更惨。前几天连灰狗都宣布减少去那里的班次了。居民们纷纷抱怨“我们对BC省来说微不足道”，恨死温哥华了。

陈海峰

话是这样说，但是BC省民都是BC自由党的拥趸
: C2 w4 X; N: Z5 X1 g7 sBC自由党执政16年，房价、汽车保险、渡轮、电费，年年上涨，民不聊生，但是总是能当选，这是咋回事？
现在BC的NDP执政，马上一大堆人跳出来说NDP的不好，极度怀念BC自由党

小黄

陈海峰 发表于 2018-2-23 12:16
$ ?# U) M4 K! }( x' K话是这样说，但是BC省民都是BC自由党的拥趸
BC自由党执政16年，房价、汽车保险、渡轮、电费，年年上涨，民 ...

4 v5 |- B* n) I/ I- @* R( `说句挨骂的话。

这个问题和移民（含中国移民）选票有很大问题。移民往往只看宣传口号，以为左翼党亲近移民。殊不知左翼党破坏了社会秩序和经济发展真正倒霉的还是移民。
+ n7 f6 p5 P8 h: w1 A: H$ x5 o
你看50,60年代，古巴卡斯特罗是中国人民老朋友搞国际主义，美国麦卡锡搞右翼白色恐怖。结果呢，华人在美国发展的比古巴好得多。
1 m6 d. m* D$ F" N& d8 k! F+ E
$ [1 c0 L) Q$ @7 e9 q- m只能预祝BC人民自己约的炮含泪也要打完。

sabsabsab

AB refuse to pay federal tax, that's good point. We do not need to pay Ferdal.