REVscene Automotive Forum - Canadian politics thread

REVscene Automotive Forum (https://www.revscene.net/forums/)

- Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events (https://www.revscene.net/forums/vancouver-off-topic-current-events_50/)

- - Canadian politics thread (https://www.revscene.net/forums/715648-canadian-politics-thread.html)

Canadian politics thread

So can someone please explain to me why our oil is now worthless? It's like $12 a barrel with about a $50 gap between it and US' value.
I know, overabundance. But why? Nothing has changed with our physical capability to move it, AFAIK. So why is it piling up now and plummeting the value?

Shale oil's rise in America .
The quality is poor and much more expensive to refine.

how low could they go

Would be interesting to hear perspectives on this Canada Post strike. Every time these people strike, they lose more businesses to competitors. Seems counter-intuitive to me.

Also I'm sure they gather a lot of sympathy from regular people like me by blocking delivery trucks which are trying to deliver my mail and chant stuffs like "They don't like us, we don't care".

But then it's union. :lawl:

The simple answer is: Futures contacts and investment speculators.

What does the price of gas have to do with being a Canadian politics thread?

One could argue that the government bought a pipeline and 8% of Canadian GDP is attributed to oil and gas. Gas prices could have an affect on our economy. It could be up to government policy to relieve the stress on the sector.

Maybe this will help out with the prices. Without a pipeline, we can't get it to market quick enough. Protestors should've known this would happen.... no pipelines = more railcars and more railcars means more chances of derailment.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...isis-1.4926318

Quote:

Alberta needs to buy as many as 7,000 railcars if it wants to be able to meet its goal of shipping an additional 120,000 barrels of oil a day, says Premier Rachel Notley.

In a speech to the Toronto Board of Trade, Notley says her province is prepared to buy roughly 80 locomotives, with each train pulling 100 to 120 cars.

Notley says Alberta will buy rail cars to move oil, wants Ottawa to chip in
This extra capacity will allow the province to transport 30 per cent more crude-by-rail than current levels, and would help narrow the price gap by $4 a barrel and generate an additional $1 million a day for Ottawa.

She says the plunging price of oil has reached a "crisis" point for her province and her government is prepared to make the purchase on its own, with or without the federal government's help.

"Alberta will buy the rail cars ourselves to move this oil," she told the group of business leaders. "And we're not wasting any time."

Notley anticipates a deal will be announced in a few weeks, noting that the costs will be recouped through royalties and selling the new shipping capacity.

She did not give estimates on the cost of the cars but industry experts suggest that one rail car can cost between $120,000 and $150,000 to buy or about $1,200 per month to rent, putting Alberta's plan at upwards of $1.05 billion.

Notley says there is enough track capacity to accommodate the additional cars, noting that this is still a stop-gap solution to Alberta's depressed oil prices.

"Don't mistake me, this is not the long-term answer. New pipelines are the long-term answer. More upgrading and refining, as I said, is the long-term answer," she said.

"Additional rail is only a short and medium-term measure. But until pipelines are built, we need to move more oil by rail."

The price of Alberta crude is currently sitting around $10 a barrel, which Notley says is $40 less compared to the price of oil from other world producers.

A year ago, Notley said Alberta was losing about $40 million a day because of that difference. Today, that differential has grown to $80 million a day.

Following the speech, the premier was asked whether her government would consider mandated production cuts, an idea that Opposition United Conservative Leader Jason Kenney has proposed.

She wouldn't comment on whether she was for or against the idea, only to say that her government has been in talks with industry leaders for the past few weeks and will make an announcement soon.

"The nature of the industry is more complex than what it once was," she said. "The way different corporations are structured are more complex than they once were so the consequences are complex, but you will hear something from us in the near future."

Notley noted there was definitely no industry consensus on the idea of a production cut.

Quote:

Originally Posted by iwantaskyline (Post 8930551)

Shale oil's rise in America .
The quality is poor and much more expensive to refine.

so if our only customer is no longer as interested in our oil, how will moving more of it to them via rail car alleviate this?

usmca formally signed today.
i see trudeau is barking about metal tariffs as if he has any leverage right now.
oh well, we got our intersectionality, gender and race relations clause fulfilled.

Honestly, when the export prices for Alberta's oil is so low and they are bxtching so much, why are they not looking into building a refinery of their own to process the oil?

NIMBY hypocrites?

Quote:

Originally Posted by welfare (Post 8930605)

so if our only customer is no longer as interested in our oil, how will moving more of it to them via rail car alleviate this?

It won't.

When you essentially only have one customer (America), that one customer dictates the price.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Traum (Post 8930614)

Honestly, when the export prices for Alberta's oil is so low and they are bxtching so much, why are they not looking into building a refinery of their own to process the oil?

NIMBY hypocrites?

https://www.oilsandsmagazine.com/pro...ian-refineries
http://www.canadianfuels.ca/Blog/Dec...of-refineries/

Note: These sources are from oil associations, so there might be a bias to what they are saying and they might be leaving out inconvenient details.

From what I remember, refining is pretty bad for the environment. Another factor is that the Canadian market is tiny compared to the rest of the world. There is way more demand for any oil products outside Canada, regardless if it is refined or not.

Quote:

Refiners produce not only enough to meet Canadian demand, but ensure we are a modest net exporter

I call this bullshxt. If we are producing enough to meet Canadian demand, there'd be far more places selling gas at below $1/L right now.

There is no doubt refining is bad for the environment. But let's not forget that oil extraction from the Alberta tar sands aren't exactly a squeaky clean operation either. It isn't that I don't care about the environment, but if they want the oil money, there is gonna be some damage to the environment.

Carbon tax. Moreover, refineries are there to make money, they're not going to give away their product.

I'm in the position of getting it out of the ground before it's worthless. On the other hand, there were promises made by oil producers that there would be a clean up after they were done with their various sites. Now that the money has dried up, that cleanup is in question. If it's in a densely populated area, the most likely outcome is that it will be cleaned up with tax dollars.

I thought the purpose of the pipeline and now the rail cars is to get the oil to the Pacific so they can export to other markets in Asia?

I remember Pierre Idiot Trudeau as our Prime Minister. Not sure if you can call him, Flamboyant or not, but his honey was :megusta:. At least I thought so.

Slept with celebrities, went commando, shit like that.

He, on the other hand, stood up to the Amuricans and took no shit from 'em. I liked that about him. C'mon, dude likes to canoe and spend quiet times out in the wilderness. Gotta respect him for that.

Anyway.............. Canadian Politics, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MG1 (Post 8930637)

Do you think his pretty face son (or was that Fidel's son :D ) can make it for a second term?

- Canada already exports more refined oil than it imports.

- there is no demand for Canadian refined products abroad

- demand for refined products is increasing in emerging markets where it would be much cheaper to refine there.

- no private investors have any desire to build a refinery in Canada. So who is going to build this refinery?

There are probably a lot more reasons why it makes absolutely no sense to build a refinery in Canada. It's such a red herring that people keep bringing up

Quote:

Originally Posted by !LittleDragon (Post 8930636)

I thought the purpose of the pipeline and now the rail cars is to get the oil to the Pacific so they can export to other markets in Asia?

That is the purpose.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Traum (Post 8930639)

Do you think his pretty face son (or was that Fidel's son :D ) can make it for a second term?

Yes. Conservatives can't find their own ass. Also, when the NDP is weak, the Libs benefit. Libs will lose some seats next election, but I foresee another Liberal majority.

Given all the blunders and flak that Pretty Face JT has taken, I'd personally expect to see either a minority Liberal or minority Conservative gov in the next election. But recently, all 3 major parties are seeing bad news in different forms. It's almost like they are all actively trying to outdo the others in terms of showing how incompetent and disorganized they are.
FailFish

So without a new pipeline more and more oil will be transported via rail cars. What’s going happen when one of those damn things derails and destroys half of the kootneys? Seems like transporting oil by rail is far riskier than pipeline. Oh well pick your poison.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DragonChi (Post 8930643)

That is the purpose.

So the oil will be going to the Pacific? All I've seen is "international markets".

Rail cars will take over a year and cost just over $1b and only close the gap by $4/barrel. Estimated.
By that time the pipeline will probably be in swing or just about.

Sounds like an expensive symbolic gesture to gain favorability for an upcoming election.
I really don't think Albertans will vote her back in. Hope not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by belka (Post 8930672)

I don't doubt that some environmentalist nut jobs would do it themselves

So the liberal government has announced a $600m bailout for the media in their fall budget.
They've appointed an impartial (LOL!!!) Committee to determine which media organizations will receive funding.
https://www.nationalobserver.com/201...n-tax-measures

Quote:

The federal government is stepping in to help the struggling Canadian media industry with new tax credits and incentives valued at nearly $600 million over the next five years.

"To protect the vital role that independent news media play in our democracy and in our communities, we will be introducing measures to help support journalism in Canada," Finance Minister Bill Morneau said in his speech to the House of Commons.

The full details of the program won't be available until the next federal budget, after the government receives advice from an independent panel from the news industry.

The goal is for the program to be funded by the government but have no role for politicians to decide what constitutes a media outlet or who would be eligible. That way, the government hopes to avoid the appearance of conflict between a free press and government influence.

I wonder if Jerry Dias, the unifor union leader will be at the table. His union represents some 13,000 Canadian journalists.
He tweeted last week that he was leading the "resistance" and was Andrew Scheers "worst nightmare".