egghead Posted May 14, 2019 Report Share Posted May 14, 2019 18 hours ago, Nefarious Banana said: Your speculation is as relevant as mine . . . I think Horgan could win an election without the Green Party. Weaver just isn't taken seriously . . . . he's against everything. Ya, Horgan can win the re-election, since JT gives liberals (I know BC liberals are conservatives) a bad name now. However,, this morning Jagmeet Singh said no to fracking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realitycheck Posted May 14, 2019 Report Share Posted May 14, 2019 1 minute ago, egghead said: Ya, Horgan can win the re-election, since JT gives liberals (I know BC liberals are conservatives) a bad name now. However,, this morning Jagmeet Singh said no to fracking. Jagmeet is already well down his death spiral which is a good thing as it will further remove the NDamnableP as even a minor factor in the upcoming vote. I just wonder how many more seats they will lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egghead Posted May 14, 2019 Report Share Posted May 14, 2019 18 hours ago, Argus said: Under 2% growth and yet we're supposed to believe more jobs were created last month than in any other month since 1976. Did you watch TSN's sportscentre before and after the "jay and dan" return? Just no more OT for the existing hosts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted May 14, 2019 Report Share Posted May 14, 2019 (edited) 16 hours ago, Realitycheck said: Of course you do. You believe that of everything which goes contrary to your narrow beliefs. No, I believe that of anything that goes contrary to logic. And I'm not the only one. A loss of 7,200 jobs in March, and then a gain of 106,500 jobs in April. For David Rosenberg, Canada’s latest employment data just doesn't add up. Statistics Canada said Friday that Canadian employment increased by 106,500 positions in April, the biggest one-month increase in data going back to 1976. The country's jobless rate fell to 5.7 per cent, compared to 5.8 per cent in March. But Rosenberg, chief economist and strategist at Gluskin Sheff + Associates, says the country's latest jobs numbers are hard to believe, given what's happening in the Canadian economy. "Did you really believe that the Canadian labour market is so volatile that we could have a [7,200] decline in the labour force in one month, followed by an 100,000-increase in the next month? Is our labour market more volatile than the stock market is? It's hard to believe," Rosenberg said in an interview with BNN Bloomberg Friday. https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/rosenberg-on-canada-s-record-jobs-gain-i-don-t-give-it-an-a-1.1257136 Edited May 14, 2019 by Argus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Anthony Posted May 16, 2019 Report Share Posted May 16, 2019 Folks, Avoid thread drift. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 So two items of interest. First, the Senate Energy committee has made 187 amendments to Bill C-69. We'll see if the overall Senate supports that. I consider it unlikely but who knows. https://ottawacitizen.com/news/senators-adopt-187-amendments-to-c-69-setting-up-another-fight-over-controversial-legislation/wcm/0315f42c-9ed8-45d1-96f5-c4adb9b05d1f Second, this excellent article puts the oil sands and Canada's contribution to world C02 into context, as well as the danger if we let blind zealots like Trudeau and McKenna damage the oil and gas industry. Canada – as the fourth-largest oil exporter in the world – is positioned to play an important role in supplying the developing world. That’s certainly to our benefit: Within Canada, our oil-and-gas-extraction and pipeline industry is the second largest subsector of the economy (based on GDP), employing 500,000 people across the country. It is also Canada’s largest employer of Indigenous peoples. Despite the criticism of the oil sands over greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, most people are surprised to learn that our oil sands emissions account for only 0.15 per cent of global emissions. In addition, despite this being a small number on a global basis, the industry has been focused on reducing its GHG output; emissions per barrel have decreased by 29 per cent between 2000 and 2016, and a report by research firm IHS Markit expects that will fall by another 16 per cent to 23 per cent by 2030. Progress is becoming truly profound. New oil sands projects are generating GHG emissions that are on par with – or less than – the average barrel refined in the United States. So on what basis, then, can it be argued that we should curtail production when our emissions are at the same level as other producers? Further, if the oil sands were phased out, as some are advocating, the lost volumes would merely be replaced by other heavy oil suppliers, such as Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Venezuela and Mexico. ARC and Viewpoint have calculated that the net reduction in global GHGs would be 0.03 per cent if Canada’s entire oil sands stopped production. It’s insignificant, and at best, symbolic. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-canadas-energy-policy-and-its-increasingly-fact-free-discourse/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 18, 2019 Report Share Posted May 18, 2019 (edited) From the article Argus quoted. Quote ...most people are surprised to learn that our oil sands emissions account for only 0.15 per cent of global emissions. This is bullshit as the stories I've linked to below (and elsewhere several times now) show. In addition to which what about the CO2 that will emitted when oil sands are finally burned by the people we're shipping it to? Most supporters of Canada's oil industry expect Canadians to overlook that question or better yet treat it like it was our asbestos or garbage and not our problem or responsibility once we've shipped it. Quote If all the bitumen in those sands could be burned, another 240 billion metric tons of carbon would be added to the atmosphere and, even if just the oil sands recoverable with today's technology get burned, 22 billion metric tons of carbon would reach the sky. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tar-sands-and-keystone-xl-pipeline-impact-on-global-warming/?redirect=1 One hell of a lot more than the candy-coated lies the oil industry is spewing. Quote the industry has been focused on reducing its GHG output; emissions per barrel have decreased by 29 per cent between 2000 and 2016, and a report by research firm IHS Markit expects that will fall by another 16 per cent to 23 per cent by 2030. Effing liars and you can bet the government's deliberately looking the other way too. Quote https://globalnews.ca/news/4176459/pollution-from-canadian-refineries-an-embarrassment-compared-to-u-s/ The key culprit behind the Canada/U.S. emissions gap, say experts, is less rigorous industry regulation and enforcement in Canada. Quote A number of major oilsands operations in northern Alberta seem to be emitting significantly more carbon pollution than companies have been reporting, newly published research from federal scientists suggests, which could have profound consequences for government climate-change strategies. https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/oilsands-carbon-emissions-study-1.5106809 So...yeah, everything Argus just posted is a pile of crap. Everything. Edited May 18, 2019 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 18, 2019 Report Share Posted May 18, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, eyeball said: So...yeah, everything Argus just posted is a pile of crap. Everything. Yeah, because if they stopped producing from the oilsands everyone who is currently using it would immediately stop using hydrocarbons completely. Cold turkey! Crap. I was just reading about China's development of new coal fired power plants for pretty much any country that wants one. The notion that we should suddenly stop billions of dollars worth of work for what would essentially be nothing is risible. Get the world to join in and we'll see. Edit> It just gets so tiring hearing what we should do when you realise that no one else actually gives a shit. Edited May 18, 2019 by bcsapper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 19, 2019 Report Share Posted May 19, 2019 4 hours ago, bcsapper said: Edit> It just gets so tiring hearing what we should do when you realise that no one else actually gives a shit. It is exhausting isn't it? The Dark Side of the Force isn't more powerful its just easier. Just how many people is no-one-else anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 19, 2019 Report Share Posted May 19, 2019 18 minutes ago, eyeball said: It is exhausting isn't it? The Dark Side of the Force isn't more powerful its just easier. Just how many people is no-one-else anyway? Pretty much all of them. I don't have their names and addresses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queenmandy85 Posted May 19, 2019 Report Share Posted May 19, 2019 5 hours ago, bcsapper said: The notion that we should suddenly stop billions of dollars worth of work for what would essentially be nothing is risible. Why would the work disappear? Instead of bitumen, we transition to extracting and refining western Canada's uranium and export nuclear power plants. Premier Moe is proposing this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 19, 2019 Report Share Posted May 19, 2019 1 minute ago, Queenmandy85 said: Why would the work disappear? Instead of bitumen, we transition to extracting and refining western Canada's uranium and export nuclear power plants. Premier Moe is proposing this. That would be different work. By all means do that as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 19, 2019 Report Share Posted May 19, 2019 10 minutes ago, bcsapper said: By all means do that as well. There it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 19, 2019 Report Share Posted May 19, 2019 1 minute ago, eyeball said: There it is. Somewhat cryptic. Bad? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 19, 2019 Report Share Posted May 19, 2019 19 minutes ago, bcsapper said: Somewhat cryptic. Bad? More revealing I thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 19, 2019 Report Share Posted May 19, 2019 10 hours ago, eyeball said: More revealing I thought. Well, I can't think of anything to hide, that's for sure. 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.