Why aren't we building more pipelines right NOW?

[waldo]

Considering Harper outright killed Kyoto in 2006, just why is this such a topical point for y'all? I mean, other than a means to showcase your own particular brand of... hippo-crisy!

Might have something to do with building more pipelines, increasing bitumen production, and exporting "ethical oil". The title of the thread would be the first clue.

so... the foundation of all your arm-waving and false narrative over Kyoto - long since dead from a Harper Conservative perspective - is the current state of Harper Conservative wants/desires toward expanded pipeline/bitumen production/oil exports? Really?

[Argus]

yes, clearly... your own revisionism is so framed. And it is quite illuminating to read, yet another guy, criticize Kyoto compliance efforts, while at the same time being so adamantly against the Kyoto Protocol (while equally commending Harper for blocking it at every step). Considering Harper outright killed Kyoto in 2006, just why is this such a topical point for y'all? I mean, other than a means to showcase your own particular brand of... h[/size]ippo-crisy!

Sorry. I can see your hypocrisy. I mean, you are fanatical in your support of any and all efforts to reduce emissions, yet praise Chretien for doing nothing while making excuses for him. My hypocrisy, however,is not so evident. I thought Kyoto was a stupidly expensive waste of time and effort so of course I don't care that Harper rejeted it. I'm glad Chretien did too, of course, but I feel free to critisise the man's basic dishonesty in signing the a treaty he had no intention of respecting. For you, it seems, style matters far more than substance, so the act of smiling for the cameras, and pledging himself to Kyoto was more than enough.

[bush_cheney2004]

so... the foundation of all your arm-waving and false narrative over Kyoto - long since dead from a Harper Conservative perspective - is the current state of Harper Conservative wants/desires toward expanded pipeline/bitumen production/oil exports? Really?

It's not about me...just an alignment of priorities in Canada. Now that Kyoto is not only dead, but truly and sincerely dead (expired), Canada (Alberta) can get on with the business at hand without any of the nonsense proposed, ratified, and ignored by Chretien/Martin/Liberals. All is well in the energy universe. Now if those pesky Americans would just approve another big ass pipeline....

[waldo]

It's not about me...just an alignment of priorities in Canada. Now that Kyoto is not only dead, but truly and sincerely dead (expired), Canada (Alberta) can get on with the business at hand without any of the nonsense proposed, ratified, and ignored by Chretien/Martin/Liberals. All is well in the energy universe. Now if those pesky Americans would just approve another big ass pipeline....

you (finally) acknowledge the state of Kyoto - for all purposes officially dead-in-the-water in 2006 ala Harper Conservatives. And yet, for some reason, making it all about you, you flogged Kyoto post after Kyoto post, for something you well knew/understood to be "dead". Of course, repeating once more with emphasis: your country has no standing in regards to criticizing others for Kyoto commitments, realized or not... your country abrogated it's own written agreement!

[waldo]

Sorry. I can see your hypocrisy. I mean, you are fanatical in your support of any and all efforts to reduce emissions, yet praise Chretien for doing nothing while making excuses for him. My hypocrisy, however,is not so evident. I thought Kyoto was a stupidly expensive waste of time and effort so of course I don't care that Harper rejeted it. I'm glad Chretien did too, of course, but I feel free to critisise the man's basic dishonesty in signing the a treaty he had no intention of respecting. For you, it seems, style matters far more than substance, so the act of smiling for the cameras, and pledging himself to Kyoto was more than enough.

as I said, your own revisionism is well framed. I've not, as you say, "praised Chretien" one bit... the extent that I've gone is to emphasize the concerted effort it took to actually ratify the treaty. You are aware that the provinces are involved - yes? You are aware that business is a key stakeholder - yes? Somehow, you feel emboldened to discount all the efforts taken to realize acceptance from the provinces/business toward ratification... how conveniently revisionist of you!

[bush_cheney2004]

you (finally) acknowledge the state of Kyoto - for all purposes officially dead-in-the-water in 2006 ala Harper Conservatives. And yet, for some reason, making it all about you, you flogged Kyoto post after Kyoto post, for something you well knew/understood to be "dead".

The "state of Kyoto" is obvious....FAIL....and thankfully....DEAD. How do you feel about this in global warming alarmist land ?

Of course, repeating once more with emphasis: your country has no standing in regards to criticizing others for Kyoto commitments, realized or not... your country abrogated it's own written agreement!

"My country" never ratified the treaty, so it couldn't be "abrogated". The U.S. Senate was smart enough to realize in 1998 that which lingered on in name only for 8 more years in Canada.

Meanwhile, Canada's GHG emissions increased at a faster rate than in the U.S. = PUNCHLINE

[waldo]

The "state of Kyoto" is obvious....FAIL....and thankfully....DEAD.

you really should do some research... for a change! The fact Harper chose to weasel out of penalty payments... and make official what was actually the case, has nothing to do with Kyoto Phase 2. Perhaps you could up your game and do some wild-assed arm waving over Phase 2... or... you could quit detracting from this thread. Your choice, hey?

"My country" never ratified the treaty, so it couldn't be "abrogated".

try a dictionary... yes, most certainly, your country abrogated the Kyoto Protocol treaty it signed.

[WWWTT]

'Twasn't me...PM Harper killed Kyoto just like George Bush. Most of Canada's pipeline capacity goes south, not to the east or west...ever wonder why ?

Nope never have wondered,know exactly why someone who will not disclose their political contributors does what they do!

Still want the consolation prize for running away from question after question?

Its a shiny one!

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

this thread shows just how 'anal' you truly are/can be... why deny it? You've trotted out more graphs than anyone - unfortunately for you, they keep coming back to bite you! Whereupon you throw-up the, "I'm not as anal as some around here"!

Actually BC is notorious for digging in even deeper to avoid the obvious!

WWWTT

[bush_cheney2004]

Actually BC is notorious for digging in even deeper to avoid the obvious!

The obvious is that you want the Americans to approve construction of a pipeline from Alberta to Texas. That will involve a lot of "digging".

[jbg]

Obama and his ambassador are threatening Canada's economy again with their whining about the oil sands and climate change. Canada's economy is losing billions and tens of billions because of being unable to ship oil at world prices. And that cost is only going to get worse as our ability to develop oil continues but our ability to ship it anywhere goes nowhere.

Do I need to point out the US has done basically NOTHING about climate change, that Clinton couldn't get even his own party to support Kyoto, and that there is not a chance in hell the current congress would agree to anything related to fighting climate change? Yet we're expected to do so or face an attack on our economy!

Canada currently ships over 2 billion barrels a day to the US. That amount would rise as we develop more oil, but without Keystone we have no ability to ship it anywhere. We can ship some of it east, once we reverse the pipelines there, but we currently only import about .69bbd so that would only use up a little over a quarter of our current production.

The current cost to our economy is $2.5 billion PER MONTH. That's $30 billion a year for the math challenged among you. And that figure is going to dramatically INCREASE if we don't find a way to expand our exports.

We need to build another pipeline to the west coast, and we need to do it as a national project which is in the national interest. Over the bodies of anyone who stands in the way, if necessary. We need to be able to remove the US from our customer list and ship ALL our oil overseas where we can get the world price for it. Doing so would mean tens of billions extra to our economy each year.

Let the Americans freeze in the dark, or get their oil from those fun loving people in Iran and Venezuela.

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...ead-report.html

http://www.theglobea...article8718582/

Not all Americans are on Obama's page on this.

I happen to favor freewheeling fracking and imports from Canada. I'd much rather the Saudis, Iranians and Venezuelans (or at least their "leaders") lose their recreational money.

[waldo]

Meanwhile, Canada's GHG emissions increased at a faster rate than in the U.S. = PUNCHLINE

punchline??? Oh, no... that's not the punchline. Notwithstanding you failed on your attempt with per-capita emission rates (Canada's per-capita rate is not larger than the U.S.), the real punchline requires appropriate full disclosure/perspective, particularly against overall emissions. Yup, the real punchline is highlighting that Canada has 'closed the gap' on overall U.S. emissions over the 1990-to-2010 period... by a full percentage point! Wow! Just wow!

of course, that's dovetailed with the ever-increasing and record U.S. imports of Canadian Crude Oil & Petroleum Products. Certainly, Canada takes the 'emissions bullet' in extracting/processing in order to help meet the 'great Satin's' insatiable appetite!!! You're welcome.

[bush_cheney2004]

the real punchline requires appropriate full disclosure/perspective, particularly against overall emissions.

Sounds like excuses to me, especially for a nation that proudly declared that it had ratified the Kyoto Protocol (but promptly did nothing to reduce emissions).

How could this happen? Think fast....blame the Americans !!!

[waldo]

still with Kyoto? Like I said, you're welcome... have another look at that latest graphic I just put up - the one showcasing the 1990-2010 overall emissions percentage spread measured in balance with the increasing/record U.S. import of Canadian crude oil/petroleum products. Think of it each and every time you presume to, as you say, "bludgeon" someone over supposed emission reductions. Have you no shame in your hippo-crisy, sir?

if you really persist, we can take this to the next level... the one where I bring forward the numbers/analysis in highlighting the CO2 emissions that the U.S. outsources to 'developing countries'... you know, given you're the world's number one consumer and you rely so heavily on the manufacturing of developing countries to meet your insatiable crass consumerism! Your choice...

[jacee]

We need to build another pipeline to the west coast, and we need to do it as a national project which is in the national interest. Over the bodies of anyone who stands in the way, if necessary.

...

Let the Americans freeze in the dark, or get their oil from those fun loving people in Iran and Venezuela.

That's precisely the arrogant attitude that will sink the oil sands.

Edited February 18, 2013 by jacee

[bush_cheney2004]

....if you really persist, we can take this to the next level... the one where I bring forward the numbers/analysis in highlighting the CO2 emissions that the U.S. outsources to 'developing countries'... you know, given you're the world's number one consumer and you rely so heavily on the manufacturing of developing countries to meet your insatiable crass consumerism! Your choice...

Losing stategy....I support all of that in spades...and actually went to China to show them how to do it ! That's why you can never win these global warmng climate change teapot tempests. See my previous thread about hearings into why Canadians have to pay so much more for the same "crass consumerism".

[bush_cheney2004]

That's precisely the arrogant attitude that will sink the oil sands.

No worries...we know who will have to freeze in the dark first. The U.S. should cut a deal with Alberta, and ignore the whiners in Ontariario and B.C. No pipeline for you !

[waldo]

Losing stategy....I support all of that in spades...and actually went to China to show them how to do it !

you can support it all you want... while you're doing that, make sure you acknowledge the emissions at play, hey? You're quite quick off the mark to ignore the overall emissions of your country and to denigrate others that incur emissions output, directly and indirectly (i.e., outsourced) to meet your country's needs. Effectively, your country gets a significant free-ride on the emissions back of other countries. Like I said, could your hippo-crisy be any more pronounced? Have you no shame, sir?

but this is rich... we need more personalization - just how did you, as you say, "show China how to do it"? Inquiring minds, hey?

[bush_cheney2004]

.... Effectively, your country gets a significant free-ride on the emissions back of other countries. Like I said, could your hippo-crisy be any more pronounced? Have you no shame, sir?

None whatsoever...but I (and other members) have correctly said last rites for Kyoto, predicted long ago. I kinda feel sorry for all those wide eyed rubes who thought Canada and Kyoto were going to make a difference, only to do worse than the Big Bad U.S.A. under George Bush. Remember the fun? "Hey, let's sequester all the CO2 in a big hole in North Dakota !!? Good times.....

but this is rich... we need more personalization - just how did you, as you say, "show China how to do it"? Inquiring minds, hey?

It's posted here somewhere....go search for it. God, the air in Shanghai was very bad even back then (late 1990's). Don't they know anything about "emissions" ?

[waldo]

None whatsoever...but I (and other members) have correctly said last rites for Kyoto, predicted long ago.

more Kyoto? More? Still? You know nothing of the overall results of Kyoto... why not show your real ignorance and present the overall collective emission target/results total for Annex I countries. Sure you can!

It's posted here somewhere....go search for it. God, the air in Shanghai was very bad even back then (late 1990's). Don't they know anything about "emissions" ?

oh my... you mean the kind of emissions where you showed the ladies how to, 'love for a long time'?

[bush_cheney2004]

more Kyoto? More? Still? You know nothing of the overall results of Kyoto... why not show your real ignorance and present the overall collective emission target/results total for Annex I countries. Sure you can!

Kyoto....R.I.P.

oh my... you mean the kind of emissions where you showed the ladies how to, 'love for a long time'?

That didn't take long....the very predictable and pathetic retort when faced with an obvious Kyoto FAIL. In keeping with forum rules, I will not lower myself to your personal attack level.

[waldo]

you're not being attacked - grow a set, hey?

Kyoto Phase 1... where's your figures to show the overall result for Annex 1 countries? As for Phase 2, I've already referenced the EU's positive comments toward meeting it's targets. You can continue to derail this thread with your trumped up fake concerns over Kyoto... or...

I thought this idea of pipelines to the east was a nonstarter because of the distance.

there is some expansion consideration in regards the Enbridge proposal... however, the main thrust of it is a direction reversal of the existing Sarnia-Montreal pipeline. TransCanada's proposal has it reversing the direction of an existing natural gas pipeline and reusing it for tarsands sludge.

I thought I had read TransCanada had already filed for regulatory approval... apparently not... reference now suggests TransCanada intends to apply by "year end", either waiting on the Keystone outcome, or perhaps waiting to gauge the outcome of Quebec-New Brunswick discussions => Pauline Marois, David Alward Discuss Pipeline Though Quebec To New Brunswick

[waldo]

per the OP (outside and beyond the fixation of some with Kyoto)... perhaps pipelines aren't being built, right now... cause, tarsands by rail is filling the gap (presently, upwards of 300,000 barrels a day), with 'big-time' intentions by Nexen for significant rail shipments to the Prince Rupert port. Which, of course, ties quite well into the Harper Conservatives sanctioning the sale of Nexen to China's Cnooc... with the final sale piece realized just days ago with U.S. approval of the sale of Nexen to China's Cnooc granted.

as for those Nexen rail shipment to Prince Rupert intentions:

Nexen has pursued the rail-to-water concept with the encouragement of the Port of Prince Rupert, which in late 2011 selected land that could be used for the export of oil. Prince Rupert’s Ridley Island is already serviced by a Canadian National Railway Co. track, and the port has plans for substantial rail infrastructure.

[Guest Derek L]

per the OP (outside and beyond the fixation of some with Kyoto)... perhaps pipelines aren't being built, right now... cause, tarsands by rail is filling the gap (presently, upwards of 300,000 barrels a day), with 'big-time' intentions by Nexen for significant rail shipments to the Prince Rupert port. Which, of course, ties quite well into the Harper Conservatives sanctioning the sale of Nexen to China's Cnooc... with the final sale piece realized just days ago with U.S. approval of the sale of Nexen to China's Cnooc granted.

as for those Nexen rail shipment to Prince Rupert intentions:

[/size]

What would the Waldo’s opinion be on moving oil via train in lieu of a pipeline? What’s the carbon footprint, coupled (pun intended) with the frequency of train derailments versus pipeline leaks/spills?

[kairos]

Why aren't we building renewable energy now? Oil is the resource of the dinosaurs.