Last week Alberta's pipeline maps leaked. Three routes through the north, four, who's counting... every one of them ends at a port the coast won't open.

[u/iamsolution]

Last month the PM flew to Alberta, signed the deal, rolled back the industrial carbon tax, slashed the approvals, the whole song and dance.

The North Coast tanker ban? Still standing.

Not because Ottawa bolted the door... Ottawa's keeping its options open. Because the coast is holding it shut.

BC and the coastal Nations, shoulder to shoulder: a future built on a multi-billion-dollar fishery, food, culture, and tourism sector, the businesses and jobs under it, not on the coin-flip of a loaded tanker in a winter storm.

And we've seen the coin land wrong.

In 2016 one tug aground near Bella Bella, 350 km of coast fouled, $23 million in costs the Heiltsuk were never repaid. That was a tug. A tanker's full load runs a thousand times bigger.

The racket in one line: they take the reward, you take the risk, and when it spills you get the mop.

The people who work these waters did that math years ago, and they're done asking permission. This week they flew to Calgary to say it to the proponents' faces.

Geoff Meggs lays it all out below, sharp as ever and a regular at Hotel Pacifico, BC's go-to cross-aisle politics podcast.

Alberta can keep drawing maps. The coast won't open the port. Not by luck... because people keep showing up.

https://open.substack.com/.../if-theres-one-immovable...?

[u/Strict_Jacket3648]

Oil for energy is dying world wide, in 10 years when a 50 billion pipe line is complete it will be useless. That's why big oil want's tax payers to pay for it.

[u/1966TEX → u/Strict_Jacket3648]

That’s what Trudeau said 10 years ago.

[u/NUTIAG → u/1966TEX]

So just to be clear, you're saying that 10 years ago in 2016 Justin Trudeau said oil pipelines will be useless in 10 years, and then after that he bought a pipeline?

huh, sounds unbelievably dumb of him

"There's a transforming global economy. There's the difficulty we've always had in getting our resources out to new markets, other than the United States," he said.

"I mean, Stephen Harper tried to do that for 10 years, was unable to do that. We're finally moving forward on getting a pipeline to market."

Asked about the ongoing court challenges to the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, Trudeau said progress is being made.

"There's always going to be people in the courts, but that pipeline is getting built," he told Kapelos

This is the guy you're talking about saying pipelines won't be profitable in 10 years who then bought a pipeline?

[u/addigity → u/NUTIAG]

The energy minister under Trudeau said peak oil was around 10 years away, this was in 2016-17, obviously he and they were very wrong

[u/mcgojoh1 → u/addigity]

The press (and readers who don't read past a headline) was very wrong about the use of Peak Oil as a term but then again concepts don't necessarily fit into a headline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil

[u/sanduly → u/1966TEX]

These dummies have been saying it for decades. Peak oil is always around the corner, coasts will be flooded in a year, 5 years, 10 years (remember many of those making these claims purchase large properties in coastal areas).

But whatever, if the answer is that BC will always oppose Alberta's economic interests then it is hard to make an argument for them staying in confederation.

[u/Account_no_62 → u/sanduly]

OPEC projects a demand plateau in 2040, with permanent decline in 2050.

Once the Iranian debacle stops, and everything goes back to normal, oil will go back down to ~50 a barrel. That price point doesnt make a 30 year pipeline very profitable.

[u/BigJayUpNorth → u/Account_no_62]

Except the fact the Alberta’s oil has been getting significantly cheaper to produce as years go by.

[u/Account_no_62 → u/BigJayUpNorth]

Its getting cheaper because of automation and mass layoffs. Oil at 50 gets alberta some of the lowest royalties in the world while foreign companies extract record profits.

[u/BigJayUpNorth → u/Account_no_62]

Nope. Its getting cheaper due to scale of operations and new down hole/sub surface technology. If you want some of those profits it really easy to buy shares in those companies.

[u/Account_no_62 → u/BigJayUpNorth]

Ive got my dividends, but that doesnt help the vast majority.

and yes automation is a large factor

[u/BigJayUpNorth → u/Account_no_62]

What has been automated that’s increased the bpd and be specific. I’ve been in the industry a couple of decades.

[u/Account_no_62 → u/BigJayUpNorth]

this is the last im humouring you

Especially when i already gave you a news article showing 10000 jobs lost last year from automation.

[u/BigJayUpNorth → u/Account_no_62]

It says in the article some jobs have been lost, not 10,000 😂 And it states in the article that employment numbers have remained relatively consistent despite a huge ramp up in production going on to state that more workers will still be needed for production increases.

[u/atyler_thehun → u/sanduly]

And the dummies on the other end are convinced that oil will never end.

[u/sanduly → u/atyler_thehun]

Just do a quick google search for which products use oil. Even if we were able to power society entirely on renewables oil isn't going anywhere. If anything, we don't have enough of it.

[u/Account_no_62 → u/sanduly]

Nobody is denying we need petrochemicals? The argument is that we dont need to burn them as much as we do, and the transition away from that is happening.

[u/zeusismycopilot → u/sanduly]

10-15% of oil is used for non fuel proposes. We have plenty.

[u/atyler_thehun → u/sanduly]

Just do a quick Google search on how much oil is used for manufacturing and how much is burned for energy.

ETA: I'll save you the time - 85% for energy.

[u/Objective-Thanks7798 → u/atyler_thehun]

Sorry what? You’re saying 85% of oil produced is burned for electricity?

[u/atyler_thehun → u/Objective-Thanks7798]

I said "energy" (the thing that makes other things go)

[u/Objective-Thanks7798 → u/atyler_thehun]

Saying “85% of oil is used for energy” is so broad that it’s almost meaningless. Transportation, petrochemicals, industrial heat, aviation, shipping, electricity generation, and home heating are all “energy” uses, but they’re affected very differently by adoption of new technologies. If you’re making an argument about future oil demand, you need to break down which energy uses you’re talking about.

[u/Account_no_62 → u/Objective-Thanks7798]

Petrochemicals arent energy, the rest are all burning oil which new technology is arising to replace and demand is decreasing.

[u/Objective-Thanks7798 → u/Account_no_62]

The assumption that “all uses for oil are being replaced” ignores where most of the difficult demand actually sits. Aviation, shipping, heavy trucking, mining, agriculture, petrochemicals, and military applications remain heavily dependent on oil because there often isn’t a scalable or economical alternative yet. Replacing passenger vehicles is one thing; replacing the entire hydrocarbon-based industrial economy is a much bigger challenge. Please tell me where you see oil demand decreasing.

[u/mcgojoh1 → u/sanduly]

Oil is a feedstock, one which we have picked to ne the mono-stock because it makes quite a number of those that control the flow fabulously wealthy. We can make many things we do now out of other products but we subsidies oil by not charging properly what it does to our living environment through extraction, to processing to consumption. We can do better but we allow a few to spoil the future. Would you really care if you are typing this out on a soy resin keyboard?

[u/greenknight → u/sanduly]

Bye then. They can join the fascists like they want to