Is It Victory For Federal NDP If Trans Mountain Is Killed?

We could even take a poll right here. How many anti-pipeline babblers are thinking "But you know, if Alberta had just saved as much money as Norway has, I might have been okay with them building pipelines through my province"?

There already are pipelines through most of our provinces. 

The question is whether this export pipeline, and that terminus are a good idea.

http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/campaigns/Energy/tarsands/Pipelines-...

And this is also not a case of transition, though I am sure the industry wants to spin it that way. This project is an expansion from existing output for profit.

Pondering wrote:

voice of the damned wrote:

We could even take a poll right here. How many anti-pipeline babblers are thinking "But you know, if Alberta had just saved as much money as Norway has, I might have been okay with them building pipelines through my province"?

Probably none, but Alberta would have the money to transition. 

You make a very good point.

And when speaking about a winddown, if there is a process for transition and investment in it that this fund could have helped with then I think more people would endorse the process.

The other issue is tha this is too often termed as a resource issue when it isn't. There is no significant need for more oil than what already comes to market now. We are past the concept of peak oil crisis where runnignout would be a problem. Existing deposits are more than enough to destroy the planet so new supply chains are not a supply necessity.

This is about employment and economic activity. As such it should be measured against other potential employment and economic activity opportunities. This industry hires a lot of people but it is not labour intensive to the point it has no competition. The federal and provincial investments in this could be made in alternative areas. This is forgotten when the arguments about necessity are made so loudly.

To be blunt this is a regional competition for Alberta to get or keep its share of economic activity and jobs. Across all of Western Canada the oil and gas insdustry represents some 176,000 jobs which is about 50,000 more than Ontario's auto sector. However, divide this by the provinces, with a large volume to Alberta and then consider only the jobs dependent on the pipeline and the number falls sharply since raw bitchumen is not a labour intensive part of the industry (E. May has said that this would create a net reduction in jobs by exporting what could be processed in Canada).

So recognizing the importantce in jobs and in economic activity of the oil and gas industry, this is something a plan could mediate over time but a significant challenge. It is not impossible. When it comes to the pipeline, the number of jobs it offers or supports is debatable and it is clearly something Canada could do withoput -- and many claim even on economics should do without:

https://thetyee.ca/News/2017/05/31/Kinder-Morgan-Forget-Economic-Windfall/

Part of the problem is that in the minds of many people there is a simplistic connection between the entire value of economic output and jobs from the oil and gas sector and the value of this particular project. This project is only a political necessity. It is not needed for supply or resource issues and it is not a great enough economic value as many suggest. The Alberta NDP decided to rely on it for any hope of re-election and the Liberals want to use it as a carrot to keep Alberta with its growing number of seats in play, rather than letting it go back to a Conservative block.

Huge amounts of propaganda seem to attempt to persuade Canadians that without this Alberta and even Canada are on an economic cliff.

Good governance from the Liebrals could have lead to significant investments in Alberta to replace what economic value this project offered.

Let me just say one here: Water technology. Canada is in breach of promises to Indigenous people and the government has to invest in large scale projects across the coutnry but a technology hub for the protable engineering of this, equipment could have been brought to Alberta. I do not know how many jobs that could create but given that the pipeline is not employment intensive as they say, and nothing like the oil and gas industry as a whole, it might go a long way.

My point is that the politicians may have the purpose of the pipeline backwards when they say this is somethign Canada needs.

Quote:

But if oil is so awful that it should be kept in the ground(as in North Report's first paragraph), what's the point of criticizing one oil producer for being less economically prudent than another(as in North Report's second paragraph)?

Yes.

It reminds me of the old joke about two people complaining about a restaurant.

"The food here is horrible!!"

"Ya, and such small portions, too!!!"

If pumping dinosaur juice out of the ground is going to murder Gaia, Mother Earth then it really doesn't matter who financially benefits, does it?

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Gaia is in no danger at all. A lot of the existing biosphere, including our own species and many others, are facing extinction, but this is no threat to mommy Gaia. She has had litters of children go extinct numerous times in the past. In a few million years, she will have healed the wounds, and be ready to launch more litters of children, who may do better than we and our predecessors have.

Still, we humans have had a pretty good run. We came up with Quantum Field Theory, the Brandenburg Concertos, the Tao Te Ching, Angkor Wat, and many other quite impressive accomplishments. Not bad for a bunch of big, stinky apes.

I love this ^^^^. It's going into the Babble Hall of Fame, if I can find that thread...

Second poll in 2 days suggests pipeline support growing, even among NDP voters

A survey conducted for CTV News by Insights West showed 54 per cent of 1,000 people polled support the twinning of the pipeline used to transport diluted bitumen from Alberta to B.C. The latest numbers show 11-point jump in support compared to results of a poll conducted in the fall, and opposition has dropped 10 points to 36 per cent.

... Respondents to the Insights West poll were asked whether they strongly supported, somewhat supported, somewhat opposed or strongly opposed the pipeline. They were also given the option to say they weren't sure.

The percentage of people who strongly support the pipeline has increased in particular, Insights West said, jumping 15 points over the last seven months to 34 per cent. Strong opposition has decreased seven points.

"This is a political battle that's been going on in the court of public opinion," said Michael Prince, political science professor at the University of Victoria.

"And I think that these polls suggest that public opinion is shifting."

... Four-in-10 NDP voters supported the pipeline, while 53 per cent were against.

"They should be concerned. Forty per cent is not a small number," Mossop said.

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/second-poll-in-2-days-suggests-pipeline-support-gr...