Alberta Pleads Keystone XL Case in NYT Ad

[bush_cheney2004]

Looks like Alberta wants to put the fix in for approval of the cross border Keystone XL pipeline project. I don't want to read any more about Palestinian or Israeli lobbyists in the USA after this...LOL!

EDMONTON, Alberta, March 17 (UPI) -- Alberta's
provincial government took out a half-page ad in The New York Times
Sunday, seeking to influence American thinking on the Keystone XL
pipeline.

Environmental activists have been trying to pressure the U.S.
government to deny permits for the pipeline, which would carry Western
Canadian oil sands crude to Texas.

Alberta, where the crude is produced, spent $30,000 for the newspaper
ad, titled "Keystone XL: The Choice of Reason," MINING.com, a Web-based
mining publication, reported.

The ad in the Times calls the Keystone XL pipeline "The Choice of
Reason," and tells readers Alberta shares Americans' desire to balance
strong environmental policy and clean technology with oil production
that helps provide energy security and jobs.

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2013/03/17/Ad-in-NY-Times-pushes-Keystone-pipeline/UPI-75341363561978/

As Kojak use to say, "Who Loves Ya Baby !! "

[waldo]

didn't the thread title/OP initially speak to Alberta "begging"???

surprising a $30K ad gets you so excited - I quite regularly read about Alberta lobbying efforts in the U.S. --- why, Alberta even has/had a dedicated, "Minister-Counsellor of the Province of Alberta to the United States of America", resident right in Washington... working from the Alberta Washington D.C. Office since 2004!

.

[bush_cheney2004]

The price for a full page ad may be $30K, but the obvious and continued Kyoto FAIL is priceless !!

[waldo]

what's priceless is you getting excited over a measly ad buy while having absolutely no clue as to extent of formal lobbying being done by the province of Alberta.

what's even more priceless is seeing you flail about with yet another ready-reach to your favoured, of late, "Kyoto FAIL". The burn! The burn! As I said, as I'll continue to say, you/your country has no standing in questioning any other country's participation/results in the Kyoto Protocol... again, your country abrogated its signed commitment to the treaty. As an aside, I'm still waiting for you to present your case that, overall, the realized results for Annex I countries was a failure... are you still working on that - will we see it soon?

[bush_cheney2004]

what's priceless is you getting excited over a measly ad buy while having absolutely no clue as to extent of formal lobbying being done by the province of Alberta.

Not so, as I have long recognized the extent of not just Albertan, but widespread Canadian lobbying in the United States. It's just fun when the situation requires such an overt and obvious act in such a public way, as if to appeal to New Yorkers and Americans in general, when they care more about why Georgetown got the #2 seed in the NCAA basketball tournament.

what's even more priceless is seeing you flail about with yet another ready-reach to your favoured, of late, "Kyoto FAIL". The burn! The burn! As I said, as I'll continue to say, you/your country has no standing in questioning any other country's participation/results in the Kyoto Protocol... again, your country abrogated its signed commitment to the treaty. As an aside, I'm still waiting for you to present your case that, overall, the realized results for Annex I countries was a failure... are you still working on that - will we see it soon?

I am sorry that you cannot move on from the colossal Kyoto Fail and associated international embarrassment among like minded folk, but it really is time to move on. That you continue to depend on the climate change data and research from my 'denier' country only undermines your compromised position.

As for Alberta, I am happy to see the expression of solidarity with/for American values, jobs, and national security. We know that many Canadians really don't mean it when they get their hate on, because it only comes back to bite them in their economic ass.

[waldo]

Not so, as I have long recognized the extent of not just Albertan, but widespread Canadian lobbying in the United States. It's just fun when the situation requires such an overt and obvious act in such a public way, as if to appeal to New Yorkers and Americans in general, when they care more about why Georgetown got the #2 seed in the NCAA basketball tournament.

fun??? Your described overt/obvious act was, in itself, a direct response to last weeks NYT editorial calling for Obama not to approve KXL... apparently, the New York Times interprets some Americans 'caring', hey?

I am sorry that you cannot move on from the colossal Kyoto Fail and associated international embarrassment among like minded folk, but it really is time to move on. That you continue to depend on the climate change data and research from my 'denier' country only undermines your compromised position.

I can't move on??? Is that why you continually drop your 'Kyoto-FAIL' reference? I can't move on!!! Yes please... keep fronting your "denier country" strawman nonsense. You substitute trolling/strawmen for an inherent lacking in knowledge and an inability to articulate. My, as you say, "position", is anything but compromised - I will continue to choose whatever sources I like. I give and will continue to give a rats-patooey over your extreme sensitivities. My only concerns lie in how your purposeful efforts act to undermine discussion and derail/distract threads.

[bush_cheney2004]

fun??? Your described overt/obvious act was, in itself, a direct response to last weeks NYT editorial calling for Obama not to approve KXL... apparently, the New York Times interprets some Americans 'caring', hey?

I'm sure some do...but Keystone XL is not a pressing matter for a large majority of Americans, and I suspect not even for a majority of Canadians.

I can't move on??? Is that why you continually drop your 'Kyoto-FAIL' reference? I can't move on!!! Yes please... keep fronting your "denier country" strawman nonsense. You substitute trolling/strawmen for an inherent lacking in knowledge and an inability to articulate. My, as you say, "position", is anything but compromised - I will continue to choose whatever sources I like. I give and will continue to give a rats-patooey over your extreme sensitivities. My only concerns lie in how your purposeful efforts act to undermine discussion and derail/distract threads.

I merely continue to point out the obvious and unreconciled dichotomy of using an abundance of climate change research and data from a 'denier' nation, much of it paid for by American public and private sources. That you chooses to ignore this issue is clearly understood for obvious reasons. I recommend that you ignore such posts in the future as it seems to be upsetting.

[Accountability Now]

Not so, as I have long recognized the extent of not just Albertan, but widespread Canadian lobbying in the United States. It's just fun when the situation requires such an overt and obvious act in such a public way, as if to appeal to New Yorkers and Americans in general, when they care more about why Georgetown got the #2 seed in the NCAA basketball tournament.

I have to agree with you on this part. Why would the Alberta government spend any money on convincing the uneducated public when these decisions are made by those outside of public infulence. Even the article in the New York times suggested that Keystone will be approved. Not sure what was to be gained by making the ad. It is clear the article was written not in hopes of stopping the pipeline but rather to incite anger after this goes through.

As for Alberta, I am happy to see the expression of solidarity with/for American values, jobs, and national security. We know that many Canadians really don't mean it when they get their hate on, because it only comes back to bite them in their economic ass.

As much as I apprecitate your humor with the US/Canadian relations, I think its fair to say both sides will prosper from Keystone. More imporatntly, its our own economic stimulus that drives us. If Keystone doesn't go then Gateway becomes the priority. Or the West to East pipeline. We'd love to take your money but really any buyer will do.

[bush_cheney2004]

I have to agree with you on this part. Why would the Alberta government spend any money on convincing the uneducated public when these decisions are made by those outside of public infulence. Even the article in the New York times suggested that Keystone will be approved. Not sure what was to be gained by making the ad. It is clear the article was written not in hopes of stopping the pipeline but rather to incite anger after this goes through.

The ad itself was not surprising so much as its source, an apparent and direct office of provincial government. It's like Germany taking out ads during WWI concerning unrestricted submarine warfare and ocean liner travel.

As much as I apprecitate your humor with the US/Canadian relations, I think its fair to say both sides will prosper from Keystone. More imporatntly, its our own economic stimulus that drives us. If Keystone doesn't go then Gateway becomes the priority. Or the West to East pipeline. We'd love to take your money but really any buyer will do.

I guess....Alberta/Canada would/should have made such east-west and refinery investment years ago. The Americans and others made it too easy in the past with lots of capital, pipeline distribution, refining capaciy, and most important of all, market size. Keystone is like the softwood lumber dispute....big news in Canada but not in the U.S. after election time.

Edited March 18, 2013 by bush_cheney2004

[waldo]

I think its fair to say both sides will prosper from Keystone. More imporatntly, its our own economic stimulus that drives us. If Keystone doesn't go then Gateway becomes the priority. Or the West to East pipeline. We'd love to take your money but really any buyer will do.

no - the U.S. has little to gain directly from KXL expansion... other than increased refinery output in the Gulf region... with most of that refined tarsands sludge intended for Asian markets.

if Gateway happens, its far off... what's more current, what's more directly meaningful to the U.S. is the somewhat "under the cover" actions in play with Enbridge and it's expansion intentions for it's "Alberta Clipper" pipeline... although, similarly, the target market for most of that expansion is also Asian markets:

First, Enbridge is trying to expand the “Alberta Clipper” pipeline, which brings tar sands oil from mines in Alberta across the U.S. border to Wisconsin. Second, they would connect the Alberta Clipper to “Line 61,” which runs from Wisconsin to Illinois. Line 61 would link up to the “Flanagan South” pipeline (which isn’t built yet, but Enbridge is working feverishly to get permitted) that runs from Illinois to Oklahoma. And last, the “Seaway” pipeline would carry that oil from Oklahoma to Houston, TX, where it could be refined and shipped overseas for billions in profits

Enbridge's expansion intent is to increase the current pipeline's 450,000 to 500,000 barrels per day throughput to an eventual transport rate of 880,000 barrels per day ---- larger than the 830,000 barrels per day for the Keystone XL Pipeline.

.

[Accountability Now]

The ad itself was not surprising so much as its source, an apparent and direct office of provincial government. It's like Germany taking out ads during WWI concerning unrestricted submarine warfare and ocean liner travel.

I get it when you say the US people don't care either way about the pipeline but your Germany example makes it seem like Canada and US majority are against it. I know there are always going to be people on both sides but would you say that most Americans (that know of Keystone) approve of it?

Keystone is like the softwood lumber dispute....big news in Canada but not in the U.S. after election time.

Agreed.

[bush_cheney2004]

I get it when you say the US people don't care either way about the pipeline but your Germany example makes it seem like Canada and US majority are against it. I know there are always going to be people on both sides but would you say that most Americans (that know of Keystone) approve of it?

I don't think the majority of Americans feel strongly either way. It's just another pipeline that had the unfortunate timing to become a wedge issue for President Obama and environmentalists. If Bush were still president, it's a non-issue. It is in the U.S.A's best short and long term interests to approve the pipeline across the border (as you know, other segments are already being built in country).

Canada and Alberta needs to do what is in their best interest as well, and that would include more independence from U.S. capital, infrastructure, and market.

[Accountability Now]

Canada and Alberta needs to do what is in their best interest as well, and that would include more independence from U.S. capital, infrastructure, and market.

I think that's the thing though....what is in Canada/Alberta's best interests? On one side we don't want to be tied to the US hip but eventually you are tied to someone if you aren't shipping the final refined product. Speaking only for myself....I would rather lose a few points and sell to a stable market than sell to a relatively unknown market. Having said this, what is stopping Canada from refining and selling themselves? Is it political posturing? Or does it just not make economic sense?

[bush_cheney2004]

....I would rather lose a few points and sell to a stable market than sell to a relatively unknown market. Having said this, what is stopping Canada from refining and selling themselves? Is it political posturing? Or does it just not make economic sense?

The bean counters say that as long as there is excess capacity for bitumen refining in the USA, it does not make economic sense to invest $5 - $10 billion for domestic capability. Part of the paralysis stems from the NEP disaster from years ago.

The U.S. is going nuts in North Dakota right now to develop shale oil and gas.

[Accountability Now]

The bean counters say that as long as there is excess capacity for bitumen refining in the USA, it does not make economic sense to invest $5 - $10 billion for domestic capability. Part of the paralysis stems from the NEP disaster from years ago.

I figured there was a financial reason to it. You have to think there is some political posturuing too. Like it or not, we have to play nicely with our largest importing partner.

The U.S. is going nuts in North Dakota right now to develop shale oil and gas.

And California is next up.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/14/news/economy/california-oil-boom/index.html

[bush_cheney2004]

In other news, the expected internecine fighting has broken out in earnest:

NDP Leader Tom Mulcair was "irresponsible" and acted in a way that
was a "fundamental betrayal" of Canada's economic interests by
undercutting efforts to win U.S. approval for the Keystone XL pipeline,
says Alberta Premier Alison Redford.

In an interview Monday on CBC News Network’s Power & Politics,
Redford accused Mulcair of spreading misinformation when he criticized
Canada’s environmental record and warned of massive job losses that
could result from the contentious pipeline project.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/03/18/pol-redford-slams-mulcair.html

[shortlived]

Mulcair is a small fry compared to the players in the US

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/billionaire-joins-fight-against-keystone-xl/article9938490/

Its clear it is because it is a Canadian company behind the pipeline .. it would probably be in process of being built right now if it were an American company.

If TransCanada was prudent it would have set up a subsidary or partner in the US well in advance of launching the project to have it covertly built.

It was a poor exercise in public relations and marketing.

Russia is still possible though if the US can be put on board for a Bering Tunnel. THat project development needs to commence as it will take at least 10 years to get online. Russian and Chinese markets are real boons, and the Bering tunnel will provide for that. If its not being shipped south, then it might as well be shipped east but not by developing infrastructure on the Canadian coast.

Open up the North and connect into Alaska, resource development in the North will continue to be a focus over the coming decades, so it works hand in hand with developing the Bering.

Now, keystone could still be approved but it shouldn't. Rail is a fine way of shipping oil. Less supply higher demand higher prices.

Its easier to inspect pipe in the form of a car than by sending people in a car in remote areas.

Also at those prices you might want to just buy a whole rail line and leave the rail cars sitting there and connected in a mobile pipeine.

Like what about just buying CN and shipping form Louisiana to Texas by rail?

An American owns the most shares..

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2011/04/25/gates-cn-railway-shareholder.html

Bill Gates? Really? (12% ownership...)

Majority ownership in CN is a paltry 15 billion... which comes with links as far as louisiana, why doesn't alberta just BUY Majority ownership in CN. Then you have a route to the BC coast and texas...

Alberta would be well benifited by buying majority stake in CN.

“The only person who beneficially owns, or exercises control or direction over, directly or indirectly, shares carrying 10 per cent or more of the voting rights attached to any class of shares of the company is Mr. William H. Gates III,” the circular said.

Edited March 19, 2013 by shortlived

[Topaz]

Well, it a done deal, the US senate has passed the way to the pipeline to go through, now, I've got to go and find some money to invest! http://ca.news.yahoo.com/senate-endorses-construction-keystone-xl-oil-pipeline-canada-230707660--finance.html

[Guest American Woman]

Well, it a done deal, the US senate has passed the way to the pipeline to go through, now, I've got to go and find some money to invest! http://ca.news.yahoo.com/senate-endorses-construction-keystone-xl-oil-pipeline-canada-230707660--finance.html

I think you're misinterpreting what the vote means; the Senate vote was simply a symbolic vote of support. It doesn't make the pipeline a "done deal."

[Topaz]

I think you're misinterpreting what the vote means; the Senate vote was simply a symbolic vote of support. It doesn't make the pipeline a "done deal."

Ok, then what's stopping it?

[Guest American Woman]

Ok, then what's stopping it?

Obama, at this point.

[Topaz]

I found a more in depth article on this and yes, its not quite there but I can't see Obama turning it down, since the US needs the jobs and the oil http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/keystone-wins-big-in-senate-89242.html

[Guest American Woman]

I'd have agreed with you - up until now. I've always said that when all is said and done, the pipeline was going to be approved. Now I wouldn't bet big money on it. I thought it was going to be approved once Nebraska approved of the alternate route, but it looks as if Obama might be putting more weight on what the environmentalists are saying.

[Smallc]

How can Obama put more weight on what the environmentalists are saying when the State Department basically said that they're full of it? If the pipeline doesn't get approved, after that assessment, I'll be very surprised.

Edited March 23, 2013 by Smallc

[bush_cheney2004]

I'd have agreed with you - up until now. I've always said that when all is said and done, the pipeline was going to be approved. Now I wouldn't bet big money on it. I thought it was going to be approved once Nebraska approved of the alternate route, but it looks as if Obama might be putting more weight on what the environmentalists are saying.

The pipeline is proceeding in other sections anyway, so once the aquifer issue was addressed the only real issue is whether to make an example out of the 'dirty' oil patch in Alberta. Given the other albeit difficult options to move bitumen to refining and market, there is little to be gained for the CO2 emissions opponents by stopping another pipeline into America.

I think it will/would be more difficult to get B.C. and First Nations on board the bitumen train than to get KeystoneXL approved through "the states". Canada should still pursue that option as a matter of national economic interest, IMHO. Canada is operating under a new N.E.P.....as in No Energy Plan.