Topic
Two reasons why claims that pipeline resistance hurts their bottom line are, well, crude at best.
Is Canada subsidizing the U.S. with its lack of pipeline capacity? Not really. Teardrop image via Shutterstock.
Stepping out of energy talks looks bold, but she's chosen a bad path for BC and Canada.
So states Enbridge's expensive ad blitz. Here's what they don't say.
Pipes could carry 60 per cent more than now proposed. Result: hundreds more tankers off BC's coast.
Cenovus CEO Brian Ferguson, speaking at a Whistler investor's forum Jan. 24, 2013, claimed the double discount in crude prices from a lack of pipeline capacity is a "subsidization to the United States consumer by the Canadian economy" which he calculated is "$1,200 per Canadian."
The message he's sending? If each one of us wants to keep that $1,200 a year instead of providing income support for Americans, then get on the pipeline band wagon and become like him -- "in favour of all pipelines, going anywhere."
Ferguson's message is a variation of a theme we've been hearing from big oil for a couple of years -- echoed by the Canadian and Alberta governments. They get away with this tall tale because most of us do not understand how oil is traded and crude prices are set. Nor do we realize that the majority of crude oil produced belongs to integrated operations that own refineries too -- so if they lose on the one hand, they make it up on the other.
The narrative goes like this: resistance to oil pipelines like Keystone XL, Northern Gateway and Trans Mountain's twinning means an ever increasing supply glut in the U.S. Midwest, forcing the price of Western Canadian crude oil downwards as compared to the North American crude oil benchmark West Texas Intermediate -- WTI.
WTI is trading at about $96 US a barrel while key oil sands blended crude called Western Canadian Select -- or WCS -- is currently selling at a deep discount to WTI at $31 US per barrel. If Canadian oil could find its way to new markets it would command higher prices and improve producer revenues. But the problem, according to pipeline advocates, doesn't stop there.
The discount becomes a double discount when they bring in what's happened since 2010 between WTI and another important world benchmark called Brent. Brent is a pricing mechanism relied on by many export nations including Saudi Arabia and other OPEC countries.
Historically, WTI was considered marginally superior to Brent and traded at a close, but slight premium. This is why for decades it did not matter so much that Atlantic Canada, Quebec, and to some extent Ontario, relied on foreign imports from countries that use Brent pricing to sell their oil to eastern Canadian refineries. Except for the past few years, it was slightly cheaper for them to do so.
Twisting the double discount
Things have changed. Brent priced oil is selling at around $113 US a barrel -- a $17 US per barrel premium to WTI. When the oil sector talks about the double discount, this is what they are referring to -- WTI deeply discounted from Brent and WCS priced against WTI, deeply discounted again. They run the numbers as if western Canadian crude will command world prices once it finds its way onto new pipelines and into new markets -- even though they know this is false.
Oil sands crude takes more energy, and therefore costs more to process into finished products like gasoline, jet fuel and diesel. Even before there was any evidence of a glut in the U.S. due in part to the expansion of U.S. production from the Bakken, there was a natural discount for WCS related to product quality. Between 2005 and 2010 the discount of WCS to WTI ran at an average of $18 US per barrel.
Enbridge CEO Al Monaco told the Toronto Board of Trade last June that pipeline delays on projects like Northern Gateway is costing billions. He said our oil is "selling for $20 to$30 off world prices. If you do the math, that translates to lost value of some $60 million a day. A massive loss of value for Canadians." To get this figure, Monaco took Western Canada's crude oil exports by volume and pretended it captured Brent prices. The discount related to quality was ignored.
CIBC last March estimated the loss at $50 million a day or $18 billion a year. "We consider the current discounting of WTI vs Brent, and the more recent discounting of Canadian crudes vs. WTI (i.e., double discounted vs. global crudes) as a major issue."
Cenovus' Ferguson, in his talk to investors last week, pointed to the CIBC report and claimed "that number, I think is about double that given today's differentials" and raised the CIBC estimate to $36 billion a year.
But if you look at the differentials last March and compare them to today, they are almost the same. Last March Brent traded at about $124 US a barrel, WTI at $106 US and WCS at a discount to WTI of $31 US -- total double discount of $49 US. Awfully close to the current $48 US double discount Ferguson laments.
Not only did Ferguson double the hit, he took the tragedy to new extremes by suggesting this lost opportunity is tantamount to each Canadian handing over a cash subsidy to U.S. consumers.
How is it he could simply double the total, call it $36 billion, divide it by the population of Canada, and claim its costing us each $1,200? Great headlines, but not remotely true.
The refining factor
U.S. consumers are not benefiting at our expense. A benefit from lower-priced Western Canadian crude oil at the refinery gate in the U.S. is not passed onto U.S. consumers in the form of lower prices for gasoline, jet fuel or diesel. U.S. consumers in the Midwest are price gouged.
It's the refining sector that sees the benefit of lower priced WCS in the form of windfall profits from low feedstock costs. To the extent U.S.-based refineries are owned by companies producing oil in Canada, there are no losses -- real or imaginary. Cenovus is one of those companies. After claiming a huge hit for the industry, and by implication, Cenovus, five minutes later Ferguson told his audience, "we are substantially benefiting (from the wide differentials) at our refinery in Wood River" where 130,000 barrels a day -- the majority of crude Cenovus produces -- is delivered.
So Ferguson's company is not suffering. And any other integrated oil company with refinery interests is not suffering. Let's run down the list.
There's Imperial Oil, Canada's second largest integrated oil company who reported a 21 per cent rise in third quarter profits due to higher mid-continent refining margins. Imperial has a dominant position in the oil sands, and they also have refineries where they capitalize on lower feedstock costs.
Husky Oil is also well positioned and benefits from the deep discount. Husky has a half ownership in a Toledo, Ohio plant which processes Canadian heavy crude. This plant is doing very well because of the spread. And its 82,000 barrel a day Lloydminster upgrading plant in Alberta, which turns heavy crude into refinery-ready light synthetic oil, has its highest returns when the spread between the two grades is widest. No pain there.
Canada's largest integrated oil company, Suncor, recorded record cash flow in their latest quarterly report because refinery profits increased due to lower cost feedstocks. Suncor has refineries in Edmonton, Sarnia, Ontario, and Commerce City, Colorado. They all take advantage of lower-priced western Canadian crude.
By the time we run through Ferguson's numbers they are no longer believable. Half his number is apparently from double counting; the next half is from lost opportunity that's not lost opportunity at all -- it's due to a quality differential between grades like WCS and WTI. Any remaining potential loss to large producers is pretty much picked up by their refineries in the U.S. and here in Canada.
So please, stop with the crocodile tears. ![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
53
Login or register to post comments
Hakuin
16 weeks ago
Nationalize the lot of them
That will shut them up.
Frank
16 weeks ago
Thank you Robyn
Always nice to read a column of yours, you cut through the BS very well.
temposetter
16 weeks ago
I'd love to know why
I should care about their bottom line anyway.
EcoCollectivist
16 weeks ago
Nationalize!!
Nationalize!!
Fiat lux
16 weeks ago
For one thing, there's no
For one thing, there's no "bottom line" any more that there's "wealth creation".
These are words invented by PR hack to fool the public into "believing".
I was in business for many years and know that what they call "bottom line" is a temporary figure taken from endlessly moving lines of figures, that change up and down by the minute, therefore eliminating any possibility of a "line".
Exactly the way as shown in the stock and money market rackets. One minute you're up the next down.
There was a guy by the name of Shepherd interviewed on Global TV last night, who said the utmost idiocy our whole fraudulent system is built on": "If we don't create wealth we can't distribute it"
And people fall for this nonsense by the millions.
We can't "create" anything, only convert resources into other forms and take the resulting benefits one way, or another.
The question is who takes the benefits and what are the results and effects of resource conversion, who pays for them, when and how ?
Where are the articles and scientific studies examining this simple problem, apart from calling it "climate change", without daring to mention the causes, or blow holes into the present system claiming "bottom lines" and "growth of the GDP" without liability columns?
I wish I could have run my businesses without debits and liabilities.
Ed Deak.
AlbertanAl
16 weeks ago
Follow the logic
Very nice half researched article Ms Allan has put together. I won't go into the full explanation of the bottlenecks and oil prices, but it at least seems that she agrees that the discounting exists, it's large, and it is being borne by Canadian producers to the advantage of refiners (mostly in the US). That's good enough, so now some points to help steer her towards the right conclusion for Canada.
1) Wood River refinery is only 50% owned by Cenovus, as many of the integrated assets of producers are. These are joint ventures that allow the refiner and producer to partially hedge against disastrous price movements. Some may know this as business strategy. Cenovus sold production assets for that hedge, so now production is owned by a US company. And yes, Cenovus is large enough to do this but there are a lot of small and medium producers that cannot use this option.
2) These refineries are _IN THE US_. They pay US taxes, employ US workers. Most notablly, they DON'T pay Canadian taxes, royalties, or employ Canadian workers. It is a complete wealth transfer from citizens in Canada to citizens in the US through jobs and taxes. Yes, the profits go to the company but the business world is global anyway so even profits of Canadian companies go to US shareholders and vice versa.
3) Companies provide jobs. As an economist, Ms Allan knows this, and she knows that companies will try to operate where they can make money. So although existing producers are trying to weather low prices for now you are not going to see these businesses invest new money. New money, with jobs and taxes, will go where it can generate returns and that will be outside of Canada.
Those are the tears. Canada takes the environmental risks, loses scarce resources, while giving the benefits away to others.
Frank
16 weeks ago
AlbertanAl
It doesn't help Canada to increase the environmental risks and ship out its scarce resources faster. As you said, it only enriches others.
As for the jobs, if you guys want to keep more of the jobs, perhaps you should build more refineries in Alberta.
Hakuin
16 weeks ago
American jobs
Coming to YOU:
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/26/the-rise-of-the-permanent-temp-economy/?src=recg
Right now little cristy is wrecking as many BC jobs as she can before being tossed. This is at the direct behest of the ppeline companies since they know they can get both cheap labour and less resistance to their planned environmental rape if their jobs are the only game in town.
Balfain
16 weeks ago
Cherry pick much?
Have a look at the historical WTI-WCS differential from 1990-2012. From 1990 - 2005 the average is $6. That's the crude quality plus transportation discount. From 2005 (the date you chose to reference) the differential has been ~$20, same as it is today. Your last paragraph is not correct, over that time period the crude grading has not changed.
Chart 10 has a plot of it if your interested:
http://research-ca.bmocapitalmarkets.com/documents/03E67CC5-1B63-42A9-B475-C89D832CB481.PDF
wiley
16 weeks ago
"...it's far, far worse"
Are these tar babies, cry babies, or just pipe-dreamin' has-beens at the gates of hell?
http://tinyurl.com/b75gyle
jdornski
16 weeks ago
Leave it in the ground
If pricing conditions are not favourable today, please leave the tar in the ground. Maybe by the time there is greater demand and better pricing for WCS there will be improved technology that will not destroy the environment and be cost effective.
mission impossible
16 weeks ago
There is much more
With Alberta Tar oil discounted, tar digging companies pay less royalties, they also pay less income tax..
They even can report losses on one hand while the other hands rakes in large sums of money..
It`s a scam, all designed to push pipelines..
Fiat lux
16 weeks ago
The present so called
The present so called "economic system" has no debits, therefore can not measure the real costs of the damages caused, which could easily cancel out any imaginary benefits, and worse.
Especially when the tens of thousands who work and live around there start coming down with the worst cancer epidemic in history, from the pollution caused by that "wealth creating" crime wave.
Ed Deak.
Elizabeth R
16 weeks ago
Remember the Triple Bottom Line?
When will we finally accept that it shouldn't only be about money?
When will we have a government with the balls to put a price on the environmental damage and insist that this too is a cost of doing business?
When will we begin to think long-term the way some First Nations people are urging us to do?
One day we'll look back on this period and shake our heads that we misunderstood true value and were so very cavalier with the land, water and air.
Habos
16 weeks ago
Ah, Big Oil.....
Yer breakin' my heart with yer infantile blubberin'.
Yer killin' our ecosystem in yer race for the bottom.
I'm sure yuh care.
mission impossible
16 weeks ago
@Balfain..You are wrong
"Not everyone is buying it, though. Gil McGowan, president of the Alberta Federation of Labour, for example, says “the differential has been around for years, it’s just now being used as a scapegoat to draw attention away from the government’s failed revenue policies.”
And it’s true that differentials are nothing new. Canadian heavy oil takes more energy – and therefore more cost – to process into fuels like gasoline or diesel, so it’s always sold for cheaper. According to Patricia Mohr, the Bank of Nova Scotia economist, that discount averaged $18.19 between 2005 and 2009. (Alberta budgets on a $15.97 differential.)
So a $40 discount for Canadian heavy oil is big – but nearly half that discount is perfectly normal. And over the past 12 months, the differential has averaged just over $25, which means it hasn’t been much bigger than average.
Still, the current differential is obviously much bigger – and there are ways to sort out what it could be if there was plenty of space on pipelines. Take, for example, the differential between Louisiana light sweet oil (LLS) and Maya oil. Those two blends of crude traded on the U.S. Gulf Coast are roughly comparable to Canadian light oil and Western Canadian Select, respectively. In recent trading, the gap between LLS and Maya has been roughly $13. Some argue that in a logical world, the Canadian heavy oil discount would look more like that – a possibility that emphasizes how much is being lost today.
But the many different ways of calculating things have led to widely varying estimates of the missed revenues for energy companies today. The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers did a back-of-the-envelope sketch and came to roughly $15-billion, based on current pricing. Martin King, a commodities analyst with FirstEnergy Capital Corp., pegs it at $18-billion.
The numbers are necessarily guesses, since they are based on estimates of what oil prices could be if pipelines weren’t effectively full and product went to market unobstructed.
That said, the numbers can also be crunched to show much larger losses. If Canadian crude could make it to tidewater, it would access the kind of international prices that drive LLS and Maya. Compared to that, far more revenue is being forfeited – Mr. King puts it at nearly $30-billion, in the vicinity of the Alberta estimates. Still, that’s far more hypothetical, since it’s less certain that Canadian oil will achieve international prices"
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/oil-differential-darkens-albertas-budget/article7647602/?service=mobile
AlbertanAl
16 weeks ago
Look at the trend
Canadian oil can achieve international prices and was achieving it until about two years ago. The discount is growing. Just because there was no discount two years ago, or that the discount was smaller one year ago, doesn't say abything about the future. Imagine you're driving a car. You can see an obstacle in front of you. Just because you haven't destroyed your car in the past doesn't mean you shouldn't act based on what is happening. We're spinning out right now and headed for worse as far as pricing.
Maybe you disagree with the concept of fossil fuels, but that isn't a reason to pretend that something doesn't exist.
AlbertanAl
16 weeks ago
@Frank
#1 I agree that it doesn't help Canada to ship out scarce resources for the benefit of others, but it's classical economics: Even though companies sink billions into the projects they are still incented to produce even if prices go below all-in costs. It is very very hard to decide to stop producing once a project is running.
#2 Alberta is building a new refinery (Redwater). Did you know Alberta refines much of the fuel that BC consumes? Alberta takes on environmental risk for BC consumption right now.
I do agree that the full cost of oil extraction is not on the producers. But that isn't the fault of pipelines or discounts. Should be an environmental tax.
Frank
16 weeks ago
Hi Al
Thanks for the reply.
I don't understand what you want though. You say this isn't good, and this isn't good. But no solution.
frank2
16 weeks ago
One aspect of this issue
One aspect of this issue which bears repeating is that IF access to higher price markets remains impaired, this will have the desirable effect of stopping the bubble in foreign investment into oil sands (and gas, including fracking if we include gas pipelines in the analysis). Canada's dollar will fall, and other export activities than fossil fuels will be encouraged.
In addition, the environment will benefit from less production and consumption of fossil fuels. Same analysis applies to coal, where BC is hell bent on increasing export capacity -- and encouraging foreign workers to man the mine face.
Al is quite right: once the capacity is built, the variable costs are low enough that production will continue without providing sufficient funds to repay investors.
An altogether more "efficient" way of dealing with these issues would be to ramp up royalty rates to levels at which investors can't expect to make a return on investment. Gov't increases revenues from existing production. And the environment is protected. If we want to REDUCE current levels of production, just increase royalty rates further.
Rainbird
16 weeks ago
WCS on the world market
I know nothing about all this and so I am getting a great education by reading the article and the subsequent discussion. Thanks.
What someone can do for me is explain why or why not WCS will rise substantially if a pipeline is built. and just how much would it rise? It seems this is a very important issue.
If the price of WCS rises, wouldn't it be bad for the large integrated companies, no matter where they are located? Or would the increased price of the crude compensate for the higher refining cost? My head is spinning.
Cool Hand
16 weeks ago
BC Coast - Forget Pipelines - Now Rail
Currently, ~300,000 barrels/day of syncrude/bitumen is moved via rail in Canada, mostly southward into the U.S. from Alberta.
I've previously mentioned that a similar "Pipelines-On-Rail" would also be looked at to BC's west coast.
Chevron's Burnaby refinery is now apparently receiving some of its product via rail from Alberta because Kinder Morgan's TransMountain Pipeline is massively over-subscribed.
And today we learn that Nexxen/CNOOC is actively looking at shipping Albertan bitumen to the west coast port of Prince Rupert via CN Rail.
No regulatory problems like Northern Gateway. Cenovus previously shipped toxic condensate from Kitimat to Alberta via CN Rail as well.
The Port of Prince Rupert has already selected a site for an oil tanker farm/terminal within its boundaries.
And, with the encouragement of the Port of Prince Rupert, Nexen/CNOOC is pursuing the rail-to-water concept.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/nexen-closer-to-moving-crude-oil-to-west-coast-by-train/article7981477/
Safer to move syncrude/bitumen via pipeline than rail but, alas, many people seem to fear pipelines.
mission impossible
16 weeks ago
Cool Hand is off-base, again..
First look at Prince Rupert's official position on Enbridge pipeline
___________
"The City of Prince Rupert has released a draft of its written submission to the government hearings on the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline, which are set top begin next month.
Boiled-down to its most basic message, the submission argues that Prince Rupert depends on a pristine marine environment too much to put it at risk – no matter how statistically small that risk is – by having oil tankers sailing out of Kitimat.
The submission itself is kept clean of any slights against Enbridge the company, nor does it point out any particular aspect or perceived flaws of the project that are cause for concern. Instead of arguing the moral responsibility of protecting the environment, they make their argument with the same tools that the energy company often makes theirs: economics.
The thrust of the City's argument is that many of the existing industries in Prince Rupert depend on a clean marine environment for survival. Prince Rupert's tourism for instance relies on it for everything from the nice views for drawing in tourists, to sports fishing and grizzly bear tours...
Needless to say a Prince William Sound-esque (Exxon Valdez) oil spill would put much of the economic activity in jeopardy not to mention the destruction of marine habitat,” reads the draft submission.
The City also worries what an accident would mean for those who make their living from harvesting resources from the ocean.
“The harvesting of salmon, halibut, herring, crabs and a host of other marine species generates tens of millions of dollars into the Prince Rupert and regional economy. Historically, a clean marine environment has allowed Prince Rupert to literally generate billions of dollars in economic activity."
http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/135614898.html
So Cool Drool, Prince Rupert is against Enbridge and the tankers, and you mr. Silly think Prince Rupert will allow tankers..
Too-much Mustel Poll for you!
Feverish
16 weeks ago
Elizbeth R
"When will we have a government with the balls to put a price on the environmental damage and insist that this too is a cost of doing business?"
When CDNS force their balls into a vice, not until.
"When will we begin to think long-term the way some First Nations people are urging us to do?"
Probably when our backs are up against a wall and we are forced to. Even then we made need someone to lead the flock to the light.
"One day we'll look back on this period and shake our heads that we misunderstood true value and were so very cavalier with the land, water and air."
'One day' was several years ago for many of us and each day brings another fit of the shakes. Our children and theirs will be shaking their heads while shedding tears of real sorrow and pain if we don't get the vice grips latched onto the gonads of current & future politicians, corporate leaders and bureaucrats.
Fiat lux
16 weeks ago
Canada could have a
Canada could have a prosperous and ecologically friendly economy,supplying citizens with the best living standards, as we had before, without having to sell the ground under our feet and poisoning the land and people.
All we have to do is get out of these destructive "free trade" rackets, stop the "free movement of capital" enslaving us, and rebuild our industries to produce goods for our own, local use, with exports and imports only for resources we don't have and products we can not make for some reason.
Imports from Asia are not "cheaper", but more expensive on the long run with our people and environment paying the full costs.
There's important university work going on on this subject in some universities, without this left and right wing idiocy we keep constantly hearing about.
Economics are not supposed to be tied to such silly religious faiths, as ideologies, but to simple physical, human rights and democratic realities.
Ed Deak.
Hakuin
16 weeks ago
Ayup
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2010/06/15/206151/the-exxon-valdez-spill-bp-escrow/?mobile=nc
wiley77
15 weeks ago
What me worry...
With Oil companies paying 1% of revenues to Alberta and all corporations paying in the neighbourhood of 15% federal tax it's hard to imagine them complaining regardless of the price of a barrel of oil. Perhaps we should offer our oil up to the highest bidder. Maybe then we might get somewhere close to the 78% of revenue that countries like Norway enjoy.
Steve Hetherington
15 weeks ago
Feverish/Fiat
Two great posts.How to get this wisdom to the masses?
Carol Pickup
15 weeks ago
Canadian Oil Producers' Crocodile Tears
Bravo to Robyn Allen for exposing the criminal minds that head up the major oil companies in Canada. Canada's oil resources should be managed for the common good, not for the wealthy ahareholders who don't even pay their fair share of taxes.
Bob Watts
15 weeks ago
Gas Price Up!
This morning gas is up 4 cents to 131.9 on Northern Vancouver Island.
To read we have the cheapest oil on earth and it then goes up, is such fun.
I see canadian Banks where just down graded, oh yes Harper is such a great manager.
Feverish
15 weeks ago
Steve H
IMO - By reducing our collective dependance on the 'system' as a starting point. We, each citizen, need to stop living the lie in order to see where truth lies. Living a simpler, more grounded life focuses the mind & one's priorities and can lead to more time for truly important pursuits that speak to justice and equality.
If we look to some individuals spending habits, can we really be surprised that there is this huge frenzy within our vile, illegitimate government to extract all Canada's resources ASAP? Life is moving full speed 24/ 7 and I think many people feel trapped. But we are only trapped by our own habits, our default behaviour that has been nurtured by various media, all our lives.
Ed has written here about making things with one's hands and finding people that appreciate a job well done to do trade with. There is something very rewarding about being able to support ones self within a network of people you genuinely like & respect. Despite what we are fed, making a living is not solely about money, accessories and vacations every winter.
I believe we need to set ourselves free before we can expect positive outcomes and critical mass from social justice movements. igbymac listed some great ideas in a post some time back and I really liked the simplest one... get out of your cars and walk more. Easy... and guaranteed to make a positive difference in your life.
I read a comment somewhere a while back that said something to the effect that not every important decision is going to result in what is best for your own family - sometimes the well-being of the greater community trumps personal needs & desires. Made me look at life from a broader perspective on that day because as a parent, my child's needs are often at the top of the list.
People are indeed waking to the 'new reality' and soon we may find ourselves walking together, en masse with a spirit that cannot be broken because we are in it for the long haul & for all the right reasons - a just future for our kids and that of our fellow citizens.
Cool Hand
15 weeks ago
Epilogue
Robyn Allan:
From my perspective, sooo many incorrect and inconsistent assumptions, facts, and analysis in this article.
From ignoring the massive output of the Bakken tight oil play in North Dakota, which now utilizes some of the same oil pipeline network previously utilized by Albertan syncrude/bitumen, to the logjam in Cushing, Oklahoma, etc.
But most importantly, Western Canada Select (which sells for ~$64/barrel) has a similar quality to Maya heavy oil from Mexico.
But Maya heavy oil from Mexico is even priced above WTI oil at ~$101/barrel at U.S. Gulf Coast refineries. That's a ~$40 dollar premium or a ~62% higher price than Western Canada Select for the same basic grade of oil.
Not good for taxation revenue for Alberta (which is facing a ~$6 billion budget shortfall this year as a result), not good for federal Canadian taxation revenue, and not good for Canada's balance of trade/trade deficit.
Economics 101.
RickW
15 weeks ago
According to Harper's Magazine......
....the US will be the world's largest producer of oil by 2017 (January 2013 edition).
Are the oil robber barons pooping their drawers at the prospect of having NO market where they can dictate proces and conditions?
Feverish
15 weeks ago
S H Pt. II
I feel like the only way to have an impact on the masses is to promote the spirit of justice and equality through our individual actions and by speaking up when opportunities present themselves. Protests, meetings of concerned citizens, all-candidate forums, letter writing and petition campaigns are great places to be assertive with the transformative messaging.
Eventually we connect with like-minded people and our circle of influence becomes larger through sheer numbers. People make connections and energy flows. Synergy occurs when those connections are deep and positive. The internet and social media are megaphones for promoting change and activating people.
I think it is important that any of us that are concerned with the downward spiraling state of affairs needs to get out of our comfort zone and start (or keep on) speaking out publicly whenever there is an opportunity. It will be much harder to find our voices when we are witnessing 'the heavy hand of the law' clenching the latest in urban combat & suppression tools. The future may not be as friendly as the corporations want us to think.
RickW
15 weeks ago
Another Reason for Tar Sands Big Oil to Poop It's Pants?
http://www.independent.ie/incoming/incoming_dailyfeed/oil-discovery-could-make-australia-the-new-saudi-3364251.html
"Some 233 billion potential barrels of oil worth trillions of dollars have been discovered in the Australian outback. The find could turn the region into a new Saudi Arabia."
Feverish
15 weeks ago
Treasures of black & gold in
Treasures of black & gold in the red earth. More aboriginals standing in the way of progress & wealth there too, still.
Bob Watts
15 weeks ago
Supply and Demand
So much for the prices dropping due to over supply...
It is all a game and we are the Pawns.
Steve Hetherington
15 weeks ago
Feverish
firstly,thankyou.All very good points and nothing there I can disagree with.Many of which I already practise.I drive less and would sooner make something before I would ever buy it.I also try,as hard as it may be,to buy Made in Canada.
The only problem with this kind of thinking is that it takes time.What Harper is doing to our country is happening at a very rapid rate and if he gets his way with China we are screwed.
We get FN protesting things such as c-45 and the majority of Canadians are bitching and whining about being put out by FN or about how they spend the money they are given.We can't even stand arm in arm with these folks for a worthy cause----to save this once great country from the evils of Harper and his gutless servants.
Again Feverish----your ideas are nobble,I just feel we need something along with them to speed things up.Harper needs ousted sooner than later.
Feverish
15 weeks ago
Steve H
I suppose we have to be louder (w/o being annoying to the point where the message goes unheard) and more committed to getting the message out there in an inspiring way. There is no greater motivator than inspiration and that can be accomplished via an effective, eloquent communicator, as we have seen in the past.
'Leaders' are becoming more unpalatable for many, but a person that can articulate the spirit of a social movement is so valuable. Some great songs & music to rouse our emotions would be very welcome also! A "Diesel and Dust" type collection of songs for instance (made in Canada tho' ;) That Midnight Oil album speaks to all the current issues and is still so relevant today.
http://grooveshark.com/#!/album/Diesel+And+Dust/2359499
I digress slightly. You are correct in respect to speed of change vs rate of destruction. I guess we must do more, more and more again. Eventually, soon, enough of us will be awake to attain critical mass, I believe.
I agree 100% that HARPO MUST GO. How do you see it coming to pass?
Steve Hetherington
15 weeks ago
Feverish
I think firstly we need to stand with FN and remind many it(INM) was initially about Harpers bills and his complete disregard for OUR environment.MSM loves to sidetrack to other FN issues and I feel we non FN need to be vocal in support of these non-democratic bills.FN has been the only notable opposition to adolf harper.lets not digress to other FN issues,they can be dealt with at a later date.Lets fully concentrate on dethroning the clown.
Another avenue I feel we should be using is to educate our youth.One of the reasons I am so disgusted by Harper is the very dire effects his actions will have on my children and grandchildren---We need to find ways to get them off their I-phones and pay attention to what the future holds for them as things stand now.I may not be around for the worst of Harper/oil consequenses,but my offspring will be.If we can't get off our collective buts and fight for our rights---let's fight for theirs.
Lets be vocal without being offensive(hard at times I know)Lets teach our children truths.
Remember many years ago the chinese student standing in front of the tank?We need to stand in front of the tank
MacKenna
15 weeks ago
If oil pipelines=wealth, how come Alberta is cash poor?
Alison Redford is about to jack up taxes and premiums in order to afford the basic services for Albertans, while the oil companies continue to profit handsomely and kick as little back to the province as possible.
The formula isn't working and they are not going to persuade anyone in BC that Alberta is some role model.
AlbertanAl
15 weeks ago
@Frank What's the solution
It is a matter of trade-offs, but basically if we're extracting resources we get full value. And we use that value to help us transition.
Bob Watts
15 weeks ago
Tax Rates
CBC was reporting that Harper has lowered the corparate tax rate from 28% to 15%
In the report it stated canadain companies now have cash reserves of over $600 Billion in what they are calling dead money!
The grad idea for Harper was that canadian companies would create vast amounts of jobs.
Wrong! Republicans in the USA have tried over and over again, always with a net lose in jobs and huge public debt.
Harper has not only given away tax revenue but I'm sure has doubled the national debt, JUST BECAUSE!
And now has given away the right of canadian citizens to even risk their lives making a living in underground mining.
NO Conservatives Have No Clue How To Make Money, Now Stealing Tax Dollars, Well That Has Become An Art Form!!!!
Frank
15 weeks ago
AlbertanAl
Well, we're not doing that, and I doubt the corporate sector is interested in changing the rules.
But I appreciate your post.
Hakuin
15 weeks ago
Well well, looks like pay back begins
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-21288214
Feverish
15 weeks ago
So Albertanal
Who is going to pay for reparations when the machines are done tearing up the land & fouling the water & poisoning people that have made homes in the region?
It is not even possible to 'calculate' the true cost in real terms? Is it??
So you keep all the money and try to remediate the damage you encounter, meanwhile making the transition.
"#2 Alberta is building a new refinery (Redwater). Did you know Alberta refines much of the fuel that BC consumes? Alberta takes on environmental risk for BC consumption right now."
For now the refined fuel flows... thanks, I guess, I drive a vehicle. But there is no way that dilbit or nat gas from fracking should be extracted at a higher rate (and eventually, soon, not at all) due to the sheer amount of toxins that are poured into the biosphere.
And so NOW we have multiple proposals for more pipelines full of dilbit - with imported condensate flowing back to the tar pits the other way! Why would *anyone* in BC want pipelines or tankers coursing with insane amounts of highly toxic, impossible-to-respond-to-in-the-case-of-a-rupture environmental poisons in the region we live?
We don't.
Hakuin
15 weeks ago
who owns the oil under the ground in Canada?
is it us? Can we chose to not make huge profits and just take out enough to meet our own needs? Who says multinational corporate profits are more important than what is good for us, the Canadian people?
Feverish
15 weeks ago
SH
Just deleted my longer response, but we are both in agreement on many aspects. Several good observations, particularly on FN, Kids and the ministry of propaganda clouding the main issues.
Kids need to know - we need to tell them whats taking root. We need to follow in the wake of the true elders of this land and trust in a more ancient paradigm.
"Canada's native winter" - this is very informative and inspiring to hear these voices respond to intelligent questions with articulate, wise responses.
http://stream.aljazeera.com/story/201301292348-0022511
Our 'tank' may well be a fleet of massive earth movers and dump trucks, a well-equipped pipeline security force run with mercenary workers, or simply the same mob of frothing 'Harper government' zombie wankers.
I'm hopeful that this current movement is on the correct course. Let's climb aboard and paddle together to align with the spirit of the first people and with a gentler way of navigating the waterways of life.
minewashed
15 weeks ago
Feverish/Steve H
Thanks for your posts. I agree with so much of what you said. We need to become vocal in a way that cannot be ignored - for the sake of our kids and the quality of life for all beings on this planet.
Many of us are listening and stepping out of our comfort zones to educate and engage.
Interesting times!
Feverish
15 weeks ago
Chris Hedges article
Mr. Hedges has written a great piece about a crucial aspect of resistance to oppression - imagination, 'sublime madness'
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/a_time_for_sublime_madness_20130120//
"The planet we have assaulted will convulse with fury. The senseless greed of limitless capitalist expansion will implode the global economy. The decimation of civil liberties, carried out in the name of fighting terror, will shackle us to an interconnected security and surveillance state that stretches from Moscow to Istanbul to New York. To endure what lies ahead we will have to harness the human imagination. It was the human imagination that permitted African-Americans during slavery and the Jim Crow era to transcend their physical condition. It was the human imagination that sustained Sitting Bull and Black Elk as their land was seized and their cultures were broken. And it was the human imagination that allowed the survivors in the Nazi death camps to retain the power of the sacred."
Steve Hetherington
15 weeks ago
Thanks feverish
for "Canadas native winter" very well done and as you said informative.Be great to have our high school students gather in the gym and watch such things.
I just listened to a CBC radio (only station I get in my remote location)discussion on INM---both pros and cons.Everything discussed,Spences weight,money mismanagement and so on---not one damn word on b-c45.
Speaks volumes eh?
BC Bill
15 weeks ago
$1200
Seems like a reasonable price to pay for environmental protection. Especially since it is money I have never had.
If this money ever trickles down to the common man it most certainly will not be to early or mid term baby boomers as you will all be in care homes or dead.
pwlg
15 weeks ago
alberta al
"Alberta taking on environmental risk for BC?"
Grasping at straws Al!
I would be more worried about the amount of environmental risk from your coal fired power plants than any refining.
Plus, Alberta gains the jobs and worker income taxes from refining in Alberta rather than BC so there are significant benefits!
Indeed, Alberta gains significant benefits from jobs and income taxes from natural gas extraction in NE BC where most of the workers and companies are from Alberta.
Your arguments up to the point of environmental risk were logical, however, with little regard by most Albertans for those living upstream in Alberta from Tar Sands development, your environment argument is just another example of crocodile tears.