margrace Posted February 19, 2006 Report Posted February 19, 2006 Oil isn't the future anyway...it's going to run out soon. Will Alberta become another Newfoundland, when the Cod ran out. Short sighted greed, is that all we want? Quote
GostHacked Posted February 19, 2006 Report Posted February 19, 2006 I stopped reading after ... "You have nine more, plus three territories. You can keep the ones named after a dog (Labrador) and an SUV (Yukon)" Cause we all know that during the Gold Rush, everyone was using the Yukon to get the goods. Quote
margrace Posted February 19, 2006 Report Posted February 19, 2006 I stopped reading after ... "You have nine more, plus three territories. You can keep the ones named after a dog (Labrador) and an SUV (Yukon)" Cause we all know that during the Gold Rush, everyone was using the Yukon to get the goods. So what happens when the oil runs out I guess the Alberta's will sell their water. Remember tho you can survive for a long time without food but only about three days without water. Quote
tml12 Posted February 19, 2006 Report Posted February 19, 2006 Margrace, What I Want: NOW: A positive, open trading relationship with the States. LATER: A better way of creating fuel efficiency and cars that are not oil dependant. Alberta and Texas will run out of oil eventually, that is true. The point is we plan now for then and we create better trade relationship with the U.S. Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
margrace Posted February 19, 2006 Report Posted February 19, 2006 Margrace,What I Want: NOW: A positive, open trading relationship with the States. LATER: A better way of creating fuel efficiency and cars that are not oil dependant. Alberta and Texas will run out of oil eventually, that is true. The point is we plan now for then and we create better trade relationship with the U.S. So how do we do that. The US made a mess of our beef cattle farming, they owe us millions on the Nafta agreed lumber deal, they have the oil deal set up so that we cannot give our own people cheaper oil. So what is next Water. Yes lets do some real planning and quit giving everything away. Quote
GostHacked Posted February 19, 2006 Report Posted February 19, 2006 I stopped reading after ... "You have nine more, plus three territories. You can keep the ones named after a dog (Labrador) and an SUV (Yukon)" Cause we all know that during the Gold Rush, everyone was using the Yukon to get the goods. So what happens when the oil runs out I guess the Alberta's will sell their water. Remember tho you can survive for a long time without food but only about three days without water. When the oil runs out, all machines will come to a screeching halt. Quote
newbie Posted February 20, 2006 Author Report Posted February 20, 2006 BTW, it's not ALBERTA'S oil -- we live in a country, all together -- it's called Canada The last guy that said that was Trudeau. And you know what happened to the NEP. The thing I worry about is that when the U.S. enters a transaction, they tend to do it only if they get the better deal or upper hand. That's been their tradition. Of course. And why shouldn't it? If I were PM, I would want to do what's best for my country, regardless who I was entering into agreement with. The U.S. has got a bad name for this exact reason. Banning our beef by closing the borders, the softwood lumber deal, trying to access the caribou reserve for oil, and on and on. I'm just saying it's a pattern with the U.S. gov't. I don't know if they understand the term "fair deal." Quote
tml12 Posted February 20, 2006 Report Posted February 20, 2006 "So how do we do that. The US made a mess of our beef cattle farming", A cow in Alberta made a mess of our beef cattle farming...surely this is obvious but if you're blaming the U.S. for that you must be a real lefty. "they owe us millions on the Nafta agreed lumber deal," That's true and thankfully we have a Conservative government that will negotiate in good faith and not use it as an election issue based on typical anti-American Liberal rambling. "they have the oil deal set up so that we cannot give our own people cheaper oil. So what is next Water. Yes lets do some real planning and quit giving everything away." Now you're just getting annoying. You're as bad as you say the Americans are. Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
tml12 Posted February 20, 2006 Report Posted February 20, 2006 BTW, it's not ALBERTA'S oil -- we live in a country, all together -- it's called Canada The last guy that said that was Trudeau. And you know what happened to the NEP. The thing I worry about is that when the U.S. enters a transaction, they tend to do it only if they get the better deal or upper hand. That's been their tradition. Of course. And why shouldn't it? If I were PM, I would want to do what's best for my country, regardless who I was entering into agreement with. The U.S. has got a bad name for this exact reason. Banning our beef by closing the borders, the softwood lumber deal, trying to access the caribou reserve for oil, and on and on. I'm just saying it's a pattern with the U.S. gov't. I don't know if they understand the term "fair deal." It's never good policy to bitch, it's always good policy to negotiate with your friends. Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
Montgomery Burns Posted February 20, 2006 Report Posted February 20, 2006 http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P138885.asp They want to BUY our oil--a little distinction you omitted. No wonder you never posted a couple of paragraphs from the article. Or is Halliburton going to invade Canada to "steal" our oil? NO BLOOD FOR OOOIIIILLLLL!!! Quote "Anybody who doesn't appreciate what America has done, and President Bush, let them go to hell!" -- Iraqi Betty Dawisha, after dropping her vote in the ballot box, wields The Cluebat™ to the anti-liberty crowd on Dec 13, 2005. "Call me crazy, but I think they [iraqis] were happy with thier [sic] dumpy homes before the USA levelled so many of them" -- Gerryhatrick, Feb 3, 2006.
geoffrey Posted February 20, 2006 Report Posted February 20, 2006 Oil isn't the future anyway...it's going to run out soon. Will Alberta become another Newfoundland, when the Cod ran out. Short sighted greed, is that all we want? Well the oil sands have a sustainable supply for at least 70 years proven reserves. I feel we should extract it as fast as possible, maybe in 50. That way we can sell it before the new fuel comes around, which will probably be within 25 after oil gets too expensive. Thats if you subscribe to the peak oil theory (which I do). There is also these guys. Kind of interesting, considering methane (Natural gas) does exist on other planets without life... but I'm not geologist, so I think its kind of questionable. Take a look though, maybe if you know something on the topic you could pitch in some info. I can tell you one thing though. Alberta will move on. Newfoundland will sit impoverished for decades yet. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
margrace Posted February 20, 2006 Report Posted February 20, 2006 [i can tell you one thing though. Alberta will move on. Newfoundland will sit impoverished for decades yet. Ever heard of Palisers Triangle in Southern Alberta, with the weather changes, change of climate, do you think it will grow? Then what happens to Alberta? Quote
fellowtraveller Posted February 20, 2006 Report Posted February 20, 2006 Oil isn't the future anyway...it's going to run out soon. Will Alberta become another Newfoundland, when the Cod ran out. Short sighted greed, is that all we want? Nope, when the oil runs out we'll start on the methane gas deposits, then the thousand year supply of coal, then the uranium and diamonds........ Quote The government should do something.
GostHacked Posted February 20, 2006 Report Posted February 20, 2006 Oil isn't the future anyway...it's going to run out soon. Will Alberta become another Newfoundland, when the Cod ran out. Short sighted greed, is that all we want? Nope, when the oil runs out we'll start on the methane gas deposits, then the thousand year supply of coal, then the uranium and diamonds........ Coal will run out around the same time as oil. If your machines that run on oil no longer work. Pick up that shovel and start diggin my friend. Quote
Riverwind Posted February 21, 2006 Report Posted February 21, 2006 Coal will run out around the same time as oil. If your machines that run on oil no longer work. Pick up that shovel and start diggin my friend.This planet has more than enough coal which produces electricity to run machines - the problem is the greenhouse gases. Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.
fellowtraveller Posted February 21, 2006 Report Posted February 21, 2006 Oil isn't the future anyway...it's going to run out soon. Will Alberta become another Newfoundland, when the Cod ran out. Short sighted greed, is that all we want? Nope, when the oil runs out we'll start on the methane gas deposits, then the thousand year supply of coal, then the uranium and diamonds........ Coal will run out around the same time as oil. If your machines that run on oil no longer work. Pick up that shovel and start diggin my friend. Coal will run out with the oil? No, it won't. source Machines run fine on electricity. Coal can be used to make electricity. I like electricity. This is like a conversation with Homer Simpson. Alberta is watching a pilot project in the US that features a zero-emissions coalfueled generating station. The greenhouse gases have a future being pumped back into the ground to extract low pressure, big value coalbed methane. The future looks rosy. Quote The government should do something.
GostHacked Posted February 21, 2006 Report Posted February 21, 2006 Oil isn't the future anyway...it's going to run out soon. Will Alberta become another Newfoundland, when the Cod ran out. Short sighted greed, is that all we want? Nope, when the oil runs out we'll start on the methane gas deposits, then the thousand year supply of coal, then the uranium and diamonds........ Coal will run out around the same time as oil. If your machines that run on oil no longer work. Pick up that shovel and start diggin my friend. Coal will run out with the oil? No, it won't. source Machines run fine on electricity. Coal can be used to make electricity. I like electricity. This is like a conversation with Homer Simpson. Alberta is watching a pilot project in the US that features a zero-emissions coalfueled generating station. The greenhouse gases have a future being pumped back into the ground to extract low pressure, big value coalbed methane. The future looks rosy. Just make the tires out of something else, engine oil out of something else, plastics out of something else.. and all will be well. Quote
Riverwind Posted February 21, 2006 Report Posted February 21, 2006 Just make the tires out of something else, engine oil out of something else, plastics out of something else.. and all will be well.Many plastics can be manufactured from plant fibre - it just takes 4 times as much energy as using oil.The aviation is the one industry that will be killed when the oil runs out - there are just no alternatives available that would not turn an aircraft into a flying bomb. Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.
geoffrey Posted February 21, 2006 Report Posted February 21, 2006 Just make the tires out of something else, engine oil out of something else, plastics out of something else.. and all will be well.Many plastics can be manufactured from plant fibre - it just takes 4 times as much energy as using oil.The aviation is the one industry that will be killed when the oil runs out - there are just no alternatives available that would not turn an aircraft into a flying bomb. Human power? Have all the passengers flap their wings... it'd a great national fitness program too! Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
speaker Posted February 22, 2006 Report Posted February 22, 2006 I think that if I was a Canadian I wouldn't want to sell off our oil as quickly as we can. and I am Canadian. Counting on the alternatives without having any resources committed to their enhancement seems like a fools paradise to me. The true cost of our oil has to include the depletion factor so that we can be prepared when oil doesn't merely run out but becomes so expensive that we can't afford to use it. On our farms, in our fishboats, in the forests and factories. If the only ones willing to pay the price continue to be the American Military we would be better off providing them with an alternative before the need gets too much for the poor guys. Quote
geoffrey Posted February 22, 2006 Report Posted February 22, 2006 I think that if I was a Canadian I wouldn't want to sell off our oil as quickly as we can. and I am Canadian.Counting on the alternatives without having any resources committed to their enhancement seems like a fools paradise to me. The true cost of our oil has to include the depletion factor so that we can be prepared when oil doesn't merely run out but becomes so expensive that we can't afford to use it. On our farms, in our fishboats, in the forests and factories. If the only ones willing to pay the price continue to be the American Military we would be better off providing them with an alternative before the need gets too much for the poor guys. You have a somewhat valid concern. However, the world market determines prices so depletion world wide is going to raise prices here anyways. Unless you follow the Trudeau idea of limiting oil prices in Canada, and taking the producers right out of the market (and into the government's control). This was a huge failure if you can remember, and caused an oil shortage in Canada. Business packs up and goes elsewhere, and takes their jobs and money with them when you impose a price control on them. I understand your concern, sadly there is no solution to the problem that is pragmatic. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
speaker Posted February 22, 2006 Report Posted February 22, 2006 Do you think then that allowing our oil to go at lower than cost of replacement is pragmatic? The world market couldn't care less about tomorrow. Leaving anything of such impotance to our future up to the marketplace is shortsighted. There is nothing that restricts our ability to impose a tax on exported oil and gas, and using that income to develop alternatives in Canada, for our climate and for our needs. Quote
GostHacked Posted February 22, 2006 Report Posted February 22, 2006 Just make the tires out of something else, engine oil out of something else, plastics out of something else.. and all will be well.Many plastics can be manufactured from plant fibre - it just takes 4 times as much energy as using oil.The aviation is the one industry that will be killed when the oil runs out - there are just no alternatives available that would not turn an aircraft into a flying bomb. Human power? Have all the passengers flap their wings... it'd a great national fitness program too! Spending 4x as much energy to create a plastic like product from plant fiber is crazy. It will get more efficient in the future (I hope) But if you are using the coal plants to power the process then that is 4x the amount of coal you would need in the first place. That is not saving or conserving our resources at all. This all plays out like a huge Real Time Strategy game, BUILD STRUCTURES, GET RESOURCES, BUILD ARMY, ATTACK!! 'Fusion Reactor Reseach complete' Quote
Riverwind Posted February 22, 2006 Report Posted February 22, 2006 Spending 4x as much energy to create a plastic like product from plant fiber is crazy. It will get more efficient in the future (I hope) But if you are using the coal plants to power the process then that is 4x the amount of coal you would need in the first place. That is not saving or conserving our resources at all.I am certain most people will gladly choose inefficiency when it comes time between letting civilzation as we know collapse or burning up lots of coal to keep things going. There are simply too many people on this planet to sustain without access to a lot of energy and conservation will only get us so far. Nor will alternate source of enegry: fusion is a fantasy that will never happen this century, wind power and solar do not produce power in the quantities required.The future is coal and I hear BC has mountains of it. That also means things are going to get a lot warmer on this planet before the get colder. Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.
geoffrey Posted February 23, 2006 Report Posted February 23, 2006 Do you think then that allowing our oil to go at lower than cost of replacement is pragmatic? The world market couldn't care less about tomorrow. Leaving anything of such impotance to our future up to the marketplace is shortsighted.There is nothing that restricts our ability to impose a tax on exported oil and gas, and using that income to develop alternatives in Canada, for our climate and for our needs. Sure there is, the rest of the world would buy from somewhere else! Capacity exists elsewhere to fill in our share, we aren't that big of a player yet. We have reserves, we don't have production. Why would a company sell to Canadians for less than they can sell to Americans? Spending 4x as much energy to create a plastic like product from plant fiber is crazy. It will get more efficient in the future (I hope) But if you are using the coal plants to power the process then that is 4x the amount of coal you would need in the first place. That is not saving or conserving our resources at all.I am certain most people will gladly choose inefficiency when it comes time between letting civilzation as we know collapse or burning up lots of coal to keep things going. There are simply too many people on this planet to sustain without access to a lot of energy and conservation will only get us so far. Nor will alternate source of enegry: fusion is a fantasy that will never happen this century, wind power and solar do not produce power in the quantities required.The future is coal and I hear BC has mountains of it. That also means things are going to get a lot warmer on this planet before the get colder. Global warming and CO2... where have we had this discussion before. Clean coal is a pretty reasonable direction to head in, and I think its a great idea overall. My bigger environmental concerns over global warming (all natural I assure you!) is water pollution and damage by expansion and industrial development. I am concerned about what further development into coal will do to the environment... have you seen a strip mine? Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
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.