jdobbin Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/National Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff continued his courtship of Western Canada yesterday, promising a Winnipeg business audience that a Liberal government would build a new energy grid to ship more of Manitoba's ample hydroelectric power to Canadian markets."Right now, Manitoba sends more electricity south than it does east or west," he said. "We need to build a 21st-century, west-east energy corridor." The main stumbling block to a sale is the $1 billion transmission line. One that was in place, it would provide Ontario the power it needs and Manitoba the sales it needs to emerge as a more self sufficient province. It is the type of national program that spurs economic activity and one that the federal government could make happen. Rae cancelled the deal but it seems former opponents of the dam now support it. It makes sense now more than ever given the economy, given the need for renewable resource based energy and the potential gains to be made from retiring coal fired plants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 (edited) I heard a similar speech later that day. It was a good speech. I definitely know who I'm voting for after hearing it...and I very much liked that he was in favour of the east west grid idea. He compared such a grid to the original building of the railroad. He said that as long as he is leader, he'll never take the west for granted, and he'll never campaign against the west. Edited March 22, 2009 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noahbody Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 He said that as long as he is leader, he'll never take the west for granted, and he'll never campaign against the west. That's quite a statement coming from a guy who campaigned for the Green Shaft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted March 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 That's quite a statement coming from a guy who campaigned for the Green Shaft. But you supported a leader who campaigned on cap and trade which many predict will be more expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Progressive Tory Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 But you supported a leader who campaigned on cap and trade which many predict will be more expensive. ...and half as effective and twice as confusing (MacLean's magazine) Harper warns higher energy bills ahead March 25, 2008 ESTEVAN, Sask. — Prime Minister Stephen Harper is warning Canadians to expect higher energy bills as new technologies such as the underground storage of carbon dioxide develop and come online.... Clean coal and the ability to capture greenhouse gas emissions from large polluters for storage underground is a key plank in the Conservative government's plans to address climate change. When asked what effect these costly and experimental technologies will have on the average power consumer, Mr. Harper offered a warning. “All the cost pressures on energy, including admittedly cost pressures around environmental regulation, are likely to lead to upward pressure on power prices across this country in years to come,” Mr. Harper said. “Canadians have to understand that there is a price to this.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 That's quite a statement coming from a guy who campaigned for the Green Shaft. Although I didn't like the greenshift, truth is, it would have been good for 2 out of the 4 western provinces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alta4ever Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 Is this the beigning of a NEP style program for Manitoba, be wary of the liberal hidden agenda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted March 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 (edited) Is this the beigning of a NEP style program for Manitoba, be wary of the liberal hidden agenda. Please explain how an infrastructure program to help Manitoba export energy to the east is a bad thing? You do realize that there are Conservatives who support this idea as well, right? Edited March 22, 2009 by jdobbin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 Is this the beginning of a NEP style program for Manitoba, A program that Manitoba has been pushing for for years. There's no bogeyman here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alta4ever Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 Be explain how an infrastructure program to help Manitoba export energy to the east is a bad thing. You do realize that there are Conservatives who support this idea as well, right? I do I would suuport as well, but beware that their aren't plans to nationalize the your energy industry to subsidize power sales to ont. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 beware that their aren't plans to nationalize the your energy industry to subsidize power sales to ont. Well....our power industry is already owned by the government...and it subsidizes our own prices. This isn't the NEP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted March 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 I do I would suuport as well, but beware that their aren't plans to nationalize the your energy industry to subsidize power sales to ont. Manitoba Hydro sells at market rates outside the province. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 I heard a similar speech later that day. It was a good speech. I definitely know who I'm voting for after hearing it...and I very much liked that he was in favour of the east west grid idea. He compared such a grid to the original building of the railroad. He said that as long as he is leader, he'll never take the west for granted, and he'll never campaign against the west. Do Liberal supporters not see the hypocracy in such a statement? It's an admission that the Liberal party did take the WEST for granted and did campaign against the West.....all to support their divisive quest to remain in power. It goes back to Trudeau and had remains to this day. Just because a Johnny-come-lately leader decides it's no longer a smart move doesn't excuse decades of abuse that brought the country to the brink of breaking up. Similarly, the hypocracy in wooing Quebec. Decades of heavy-handed Liberal centralization and, to use a Duceppe phrase, a "Father knows best" attitude - choked soft nationalists in Quebec and fanned the separatist flames. And now they are playing nice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noahbody Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 But you supported a leader who campaigned on cap and trade which many predict will be more expensive. Harper's plan was the original Clean Air Act. That is still by far the most/only sensible plan and best for the economy. But that's another thread. As far as the Green Shift goes, Ignatieff has admitted it didn't work for the energy sector (Western Canada). So, his latest comments are a little flakey. Canadians are gullible and they do have short memories, so many will eat this up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 (edited) Do Liberal supporters not see the hypocrisy in such a statement? Why should we? Conservative supporters rarely see the hypocrisy in their own statements. Mr. Ignatieff doesn't need your approval, but that doesn't mean he won't try to get it. Edited March 22, 2009 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFCaper Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 I always thought that the power grid should be owned by the federal government. And then purchase the electricity from private companies. That is from watching what is happening in Atlantic Canada. Nova Scotia is privatized. Now they probably have the most unreliable grid outside of third world countries. Also, they were supposed to have built a natural gas generator, but when the price of natural gas went up, the business case to re sell the gas and burn coal was more profitable. Newfoundland wanted to over double the size of the Churchill falls generation plant, but Quebec would only allow the transmittion of this energy if they were able to keep 95%+ of the profit. So we burn more coal because of the righteous Quebecers... The more interlaced we all are, the more clean energy we wil all be able to get cheap access to it. Too bad Newfoundland couldn't transmit electricity directly to Ft Mac..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFCaper Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 Do Liberal supporters not see the hypocracy in such a statement? It's an admission that the Liberal party did take the WEST for granted and did campaign against the West.....all to support their divisive quest to remain in power. It goes back to Trudeau and had remains to this day. Just because a Johnny-come-lately leader decides it's no longer a smart move doesn't excuse decades of abuse that brought the country to the brink of breaking up. Similarly, the hypocracy in wooing Quebec. Decades of heavy-handed Liberal centralization and, to use a Duceppe phrase, a "Father knows best" attitude - choked soft nationalists in Quebec and fanned the separatist flames. And now they are playing nice? Did Chretien do more against the west and suck up to Quebec more than Harper??? Harper, being the great hope frm the west has sucked up to Quebec, and ignored the west. In fact he has squashed social conservatism out of Canadian politics... Having said that, the Liberals really need to work on growing popularity outside of the MTV... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/NationalThe main stumbling block to a sale is the $1 billion transmission line. One that was in place, it would provide Ontario the power it needs and Manitoba the sales it needs to emerge as a more self sufficient province. It is the type of national program that spurs economic activity and one that the federal government could make happen. Rae cancelled the deal but it seems former opponents of the dam now support it. It makes sense now more than ever given the economy, given the need for renewable resource based energy and the potential gains to be made from retiring coal fired plants. What's wrong with sending power south? It's cheaper to send her south and American money is just as good as Ontario money. Manitoba exports far more of its goods out of the country than to Ontario, it would make sense hooking the states up with cheap power as they need renewable energy far more than we do. But if Ontario wants to pay us a premium, then build away. Or we could send the power west, to the tar sands and help clean that up. However, it was mentioned somewhere that building long transmission lines causes some "loss" of electricity as it flows longer distances. The bigger problem is that there are customers to the East, West, and South of us that want clean, renewable power, and we have a do nothing NDP government that hampers hydroelectric development. The beauty of a crown corporation is that they have no problem in securing funding, and the end result could hopefully be in the long term tax rates comparable to Alberta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 What's wrong with sending power south? Nobody said anything was wrong with it. That doesn't mean that we can't also send it east. It doesn't mean that we shouldn't construct a Canadian power grid that can be self sufficient if necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted March 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Harper's plan was the original Clean Air Act. That is still by far the most/only sensible plan and best for the economy. But that's another thread. The original act was not an emissions policy. As far as the Green Shift goes, Ignatieff has admitted it didn't work for the energy sector (Western Canada). So, his latest comments are a little flakey. Canadians are gullible and they do have short memories, so many will eat this up. Some form of carbon tax will always be cheaper than cap and trade. Unfortunately, we look to be headed for full on cap and trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted March 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 What's wrong with sending power south? It's cheaper to send her south and American money is just as good as Ontario money. Manitoba exports far more of its goods out of the country than to Ontario, it would make sense hooking the states up with cheap power as they need renewable energy far more than we do. But if Ontario wants to pay us a premium, then build away. I think you forget that we had already sold as much as we could sell to the U.S. at the point that Conawapa was being proposed. It is why were looking for new markets in the first place. In addition, to sell to U.S. markets, we needed Bipole III which as you know id being proposed now. Or we could send the power west, to the tar sands and help clean that up. Manitoba is selling energy to Saskatchewan via the three high powered lines that connect us already. We are looking to sell more now but it was not enough to trigger Conawapa. However, it was mentioned somewhere that building long transmission lines causes some "loss" of electricity as it flows longer distances. Hence, Bipole III. Just wish the province had to sense to send it down the east side since they are proposing a road there anyways. The bigger problem is that there are customers to the East, West, and South of us that want clean, renewable power, and we have a do nothing NDP government that hampers hydroelectric development. The beauty of a crown corporation is that they have no problem in securing funding, and the end result could hopefully be in the long term tax rates comparable to Alberta. It has been NDP governments that have built many of the big dam projects, not the PCs. The PCs probably want to sell Hydro when they get in power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.