fellowtraveller

I generally respect your opinions and comments but in this case you are wrong in all regards. Please research the history of the first semi-major project in the oil sands, which started as GCOS and later became wholly owned by Suncor. They have also greatly expanded the project, but they DID NOT fund the experiment that was the oil sands startup. Note also that neither Suncor/GCOS or the much larger Syncrude had much if any risk to their capital in their projects. The governments proviuded about 30% of the project capital. They also inplemented royalty agreeemnts/tax stuff that meant that Syncrude culd amortize 100%+_ of all capital costs and more of their operating costs before paying one penny in tax or royalty. Syncrdue(until recentlky mostly US corps) paid absolutely nothing to Canada or Alberta for decades other than through employment and contracting opportunties. So don't lecture me on the capital risk of foreign money, there wasn't any. And yes, I am aware that central Canada is serviced mostly by oil from elsewhere. The US Midwest is also closer to the Gulf of Mexico or Texas or Oklahoma than it is to Zama Lake Alberta, but that is where the Mdiwest gets its oil and gas from. What is your point?

Your character defect is duly noted.And only a few days ago she was one of your NDP heroes.

Just an aside, but have you ever seen Anderson in an unscripted situation? The reality is that she is as smart as they come, totally self aware and very funny to boot. Note that she has made millions off minimal talent other than a great relationship with the silicone manufacturers. She is very far from being dumb.

I find it odd that I have not seen a single protest about the endless fleets of tankers that bring oil to Central Canada from Venezuela and the Middle East for many decades. Isn't it filthy too?

No, I am saying that world class experience in any field of endeavour is gained by education, training and long experience in your field. You don't become a pre-eminent scholar in global environmental issues sitting in your parents basement, it takes involvlement with global scholarship. Same for the oil business, or pipeline technology. You have to talk with foreigners, learn from foreigners, work with multinational corporations and travel the world observing best practices. That is how you become an expert. Making movies or singing songs doesn't get you there. James Cameron is not an exp[ert on anything except sucking dollars out of the pockets of people sitting in the dark eating popcorn. There is no need to value his opinion on the environment. You have not checked anything at all if you think that the NEB hearings are only about the environment. They have three objectives in their mandate, and the environmental issues are one of them. Please inform yourself.

Did it really? In the end, the project was all about the money, with First Nations groups holding out for more and failing to initially get it. Round two in the 90s saw them gain a 1/3 share of the project, followed by a ten year(!) review process which ended in 2011 with NEB approval. of course, the entire natural gas market in North America had changed before then and the people with the money had lost interest completely. I doubt the Mackenzie pipeline will be done for at least another generation, if then. Meanwhile, there are no jobs for First Nations people anywhere in the Mackenzie corridor and of course zero royalties. Bullshit. There would be less development if it was entirely funded within the country, and it would be slower, but those dead dinosaurs would still rise to the surface eventually.Want some examples of why you are wrong? 1) first oil sands project was called GCOS(now Suncor) built in the 1960s and was largely financed by the Alberta govt . . A big chunk of the money was raised locally, there was so much public interest in investing that Albertans were offered the opportunity to buy one share for $100. The interest was so overwhelming they had to hold a lottery for shares. I know this because my mother won the right to buy one share. My father also applied but didn't get one. 2) the governments of Alberta, Canada and Ontario all provided big chunks of cash for the startup for Syncrude, the whopper project that launched in the 1970s. Without that seed money plus a guaranteed return on investment(guaranteed by the taxpayers of Alberta and Canada), it would never have been built as the risk was sseen as high by the oil companies. Once it became cleaer that Syncrude ansd Suncor were profitable- which took 20+ years- all the rest has followed. But your assertion that there would be no oil snds develpment without foreign money is wrong. The reality is that without public funding and Canadian governments assuming ALL the risk, there would be no development or more accurately it would have taken far longer.

Um, you did when you stated Anybody who is an expert in the Gateway project must have knowledge of global business and environmental issues, or they won't be an expert will they? How would they gain the knowledge to become an expert without that experience?

It sounds like we agree that a 2013 deadline for the NEB to finish their work is appropriate, as does the govt. It is entirely within the govts purview to make it plain that the schedule will not be altered or delayed by anybody.

If they don't know anything about oil, business or the environment, what sort of 'experts' would you like to hear from?

The govt is publicly stating a national strategy, and something that should have been initiated perhaps 15 yeasrs ago: expansion of energy marketing beyond a single customer. Would you prefer that they sat on their thumbs as is the usual Canadian practice while events run over us? There is another option that is more expensive, but also feasible: shipping oilsands products by largely existing pipelines or in new lines in existing right of ways to Montreal, and from there by tanker to new markets in Europe and/or Asia. Nobody could object to that, since the tankers already run the routes for decades and the pipleines have been in the ground for nearly as long. Plus, all those jobs for Quebec.......

Both parties are rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. zzzzzzzzz.......

I apologize for giving the impression I was laughing at you, when I was just laughing near you. Actually, I do see the role of govt as being involved in difficult decisions. In this case, their interference has been to set a reasonable time limit on how long the NEB has to do its work. They did so for two reasons: 1) they see the dependence of Canada on a single export market(USA) for a commodity that is crucial to the financial health of the country and 2) the track record in regard to time frames for regulatory reviews is that they take an inordinate amount of time. I see nothing wrong at all with the Canadian Government telling one of its agencies to put this project on the front burner and keep it there until complete. The decsion to proceed or not proceed is made by Cabinet in any case. The NEB- like all govt agencies with the exception of the courts- exist in an advisory capacity. Is that news to you? Is it disturbing?

the environmental review is part of the NEB project review process, not all of it.

The hearing schedule does just that, they started yesterday in a First Nations community neasr Kitimat. You can look it up. The NEB will present their report in 2013 and I expect Cabinet will make the final decision very soon after. None of that time frame will sit well with project opponents.

Isn't that what has happened, the govt intervening to limit the review process for Gateway to two years?

is this intended as comedy?There is no decision possible that will be accepted by all Canadians. The NEB loses integrity and credibility when it takes nine years to cme to a decision. By that time, the decision is more or less pointless anyway, since at least one of the three parts of the NEB mandate will be terminally warped by the time 'required'. For early opponents of any project requiring NEB review, this unlimited time frame works perfectly. The Mackenzie Valley fiasco is an example. The NEB has three angles on projects: environmental impact, economic impact and is the project in the best interests of Canada. None of thoise questions should take nine years, two should be sufficient and apparently will be in this project.

The local apaper in Edmonton randonly picked 500 names out of the 4500 or so registered as 'interveners' and checked their stated place of origin. 5 were from Alberta, 428 were from BC and the balance were from all over the world.

missing from that info is the fact that 60% of bitumen output from the oil sands is already upgraded in Alberta, into synthetic crude

I see, so you were not aware of the massive tankers that have been moving oil down your very own coast for decades, from a place called Alaska? So a supertanker that runs aground near Montreal in the St Lawrence River would only foul Ireland coasts? I did not know that. It is so hard to convince places like Chicago to shut down and move everybody to , say, Red Deer. The most energy efficienet and safest way to move hydrocarbons like oil around is, surprisingly, in pipelines. Who would have guessed?

Damn straight I am. The Canadian Navy should be blockading the port of Montreal and the giant Irving refineries in New brunswick. Every day huge tankers from Venezuela and the Middle East go there with filthy crude oil that could wipe out coastlines and baby seals for generations. Greenpeace should be sabotaging the giant pipeline between Montreal and Sarnia that threatens all of Ontario with ecological Armageddon. I know that environmentalists organizations have these abominations high on their target lists for protests. Could you spare a few dollars to save the East Coast?

There has to be a return on the time invested required to learn investing tactics thoroughly, and the time required to monitor and manage the accounts. The risk is just not worth the possibility of reward, especially since there is an obvious option to gain as much or more income safely. I think my time is better spent earning income and investing it in either boring investemtns I trust like GICS and low risk funds, or in high risk activities in areas that I can undertand thoroughly, control directly and get a large return on a lveraged investment- like local real estate. So I understand investing small time as a hobby, since you likely won't make or lose much if you invest the time and money at a hobby level. But no way am I going to spend all day trading unless I am pretty near certain I am taking home $70 to $100k per year, every year.

As I understand it, the OP is cranky that Caterpillar is cutting labour costs at a time when they are profitable. Would he prefer that the company become unprofitable first? Would that satisfy some dark and primal need?

You'd better stock up now then on locomotives with a 'Made in Canada' sticker then, they won't be around much longer.Neither will Ontario auto and auto parts industry, most of those jobs will be going bye bye soon too.

You are seriously deluded if you equate how Putin operates with any Western leaders.

If they want stoners to practice on, there is no need to go anywhere further south than the Kootenays or Lower Mainland. And they are not buzzed on some crap Mexican ragweed, but on good old ultra high quality locally produced BC bud.