Does Western Alienation exist, and how can we fix it?

[headhorse]

that’s funny because there are some people who believe all the American money was pulled out of TMX because of fears of supplying China with Canadian oil and closer economic connections between the two countries

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Pinus

It's interesting how Misher is an Alberta Apologist. I guess he must be aware of some huge potential Chinese investment in the tarsands in the near future. Makes him all goosebumpy on the outside.

Can't wait to get his take on Kenney firing the guy investigating his illegal leadership race, who's already fined the campaign around $200k.

[headhorse]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Can't wait to get his take on Kenney firing the guy investigating his illegal leadership race, who's already fined the campaign around $200k.

yeah if people want to talk about “authoritarianism”, here’s a much better example than whatever is happening in HK

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by trueviking

For sure. Alberta has the most expensive oil in the world. Global prices are low and its biggest customer has suddenly become flush with cheaper oil and isn't as interested. Of course there is going to be a decline from the hey day. The province is still extremely wealthy. It still has a 20% higher average wage than the next wealthiest province. It still has by far the lowest poverty rates of any province. It still doesn’t even have a sales tax.

So, yeah. It’s not the upside of the curve anymore. The market is contracting to suit. Even so, unemployment is only barely a point over the national average and the economy is projected to grow above 3% this year.

The world is changing. It is time to look at transition, not lament that the past is likely never coming back. Even after the tidewater pipeline that Harper should have built finally opens.

I feel for those hurt. It’s just difficult to hear how hard done by Alberta is. Like nobody else has issues. I would trade provincial economies in a heartbeat.

Originally Posted by Rollerstud98

What do you mean “this”? They have no proof of anything they just posted, just pulled numbers out of the air and you’re agreeing with them?

Originally Posted by Rollerstud98

No, he should present the information where he got his numbers from. If he can’t, we should obviously disregard his post.

Most Expensive oil to extract: (actually 3rd highest, but highest of the large producers)
https://www.icis.com/blogs/chemicals...y/2015/04/oil/

GDP Growth:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...nomy-1.5035319

Poverty Rates:
(child)
https://www.thestar.com/calgary/2019...s-in-half.html

(overall)
https://www.cpj.ca/poverty-trends-2017

Unemployment Rates:
https://www.mymcmurray.com/2019/11/0...by-province-3/

Average Wages....ok, not 20%, but 12% higher than the next richest province.
https://www.mtlblog.com/news/canada/...east-in-canada

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by headhorse

if my posts make me come off as a liberal supporter I evidently need to step my posting up

Don't worry comrade....nobody in the Winnipeg forum thinks you are a Liberal!

[ssiguy]

Western alienation does not exist unless you don't consider BC or Manitoba as part of the West. It's strictly a Alberta & Sask concept and even that is not true alienation. The ROC has not alienated AB & SK but rather they have alienated themselves from the ROC. By completely ignoring environmental concerns, they have made calculated decisions to run against the overwhelmingly environmentally concerned est of the country.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by trueviking

Most Expensive oil to extract: (actually 3rd highest, but highest of the large producers)
https://www.icis.com/blogs/chemicals...y/2015/04/oil/

GDP Growth:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...nomy-1.5035319

Poverty Rates:
(child)
https://www.thestar.com/calgary/2019...s-in-half.html

(overall)
https://www.cpj.ca/poverty-trends-2017

Unemployment Rates:
https://www.mymcmurray.com/2019/11/0...by-province-3/

Average Wages....ok, not 20%, but 12% higher than the next richest province.
https://www.mtlblog.com/news/canada/...east-in-canada

Well... there's the data.

Uh... so what is the problem? Average wages not high enough above everybody else? Have to settle for the $70,000 pickup instead of the $90,000 one?

[misher]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Western alienation does not exist unless you don't consider BC or Manitoba as part of the West. It's strictly a Alberta & Sask concept and even that is not true alienation. The ROC has not alienated AB & SK but rather they have alienated themselves from the ROC. By completely ignoring environmental concerns, they have made calculated decisions to run against the overwhelmingly environmentally concerned est of the country.

You mean the side of the nation currently expanding its oil & gas industry, refineries, and pipelines with plants to profit from export?

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Well... there's the data.

Uh... so what is the problem? Average wages not high enough above everybody else? Have to settle for the $70,000 pickup instead of the $90,000 one?

The drop in wages isn't the result of everyone taking a pay cut of $X though. A lot of that decrease in average is from people losing their jobs and small businesses failing. The unemployment rate has actually been going down since 2016 but anecdotally it seems like since a lot of people living in Alberta moved there for work in the first place many of them just leave rather than trying to find a new job in Alberta at this point.

I find it hard to feel sympathetic for those who still make "good enough for the ROC" wages or better but a lot of people have been getting screwed over pretty badly and it's understandable that they'd be upset.

[headhorse]

Originally Posted by trueviking

Don't worry comrade....nobody in the Winnipeg forum thinks you are a Liberal!

red salute

also, thanks for designing a building using natural materials, especially from the region - "moments of transcendence are often inspired by nature and we should seek to replicate those in our everyday lives."


from twitter.com/dhruggles

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Western alienation does not exist unless you don't consider BC or Manitoba as part of the West. It's strictly a Alberta & Sask concept and even that is not true alienation. The ROC has not alienated AB & SK but rather they have alienated themselves from the ROC. By completely ignoring environmental concerns, they have made calculated decisions to run against the overwhelmingly environmentally concerned est of the country.

Alberta is making huge strides, likely some of the biggest in the country, in order to reduce carbon footprint. To name just a few examples:

- converting all coal fired power plants to natural gas
- private $200 million investment to develop another wind farm
- CNRL spending $1.5 billion to upgrade its co-gen unit, that will equate to taking 1,000,000 cars of the road every year.
- Edmonton deploying electric fleet of buses
- Calgary deploying fleet of CNG busses
- since 1990, oil sands industry has reduced greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions per barrel by 28%
- Alberta investment of $745 million carbon capture and storage – one of its kind in the world, reducing emmissions equivalent to 175,000 cars every year.
- Canadian requirement for ongoing environmental reporting, closure plans, reclamation and remediation and costs associated with regulatory application is the most stringent in the world

With just 2 initiatives and implementation of technologies stated above, equivalent emissions of 1,175,000 cars will be removed from the atmosphere every year.

So to say AB has ignored environmental concerns is a complete fabrication.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by Denscity

Ah k this helps a bit cheers.

Dumb question. Are you able to ship it overseas out of Texas?

Hilariously yes. There is enough demand for Alberta heavy oil in Asia that a fair amount is shipped through the round-about route of Alberta->Gulf Coast->Asia.

Following U.S. sanctions on Venezuela in late January, Asian refiners have sought new heavy oil supplies in a hunt that has benefited Canadian oil exporters since this summer.

Thirty-two cargoes with a combined 16 million barrels of Canadian crude loaded in the U.S. Gulf Coast from May until mid-September have been shipped mainly to buyers to China, India, South Korea and Europe, according to market intelligence firm ClipperData. Last year, such shipments totaled 7.7 million barrels.

https://boereport.com/2019/09/27/can...-data-traders/

[misher]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

Alberta is making huge strides, likely some of the biggest in the country, in order to reduce carbon footprint. To name just a few examples:

- converting all coal fired power plants to natural gas
- private $200 million investment to develop another wind farm
- CNRL spending $1.5 billion to upgrade its co-gen unit, that will equate to taking 1,000,000 cars of the road every year.
- Edmonton deploying electric fleet of buses
- Calgary deploying fleet of CNG busses
- since 1990, oil sands industry has reduced greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions per barrel by 28%
- Alberta investment of $745 million carbon capture and storage – one of its kind in the world, reducing emmissions equivalent to 175,000 cars every year.
- Canadian requirement for ongoing environmental reporting, closure plans, reclamation and remediation and costs associated with regulatory application is the most stringent in the world

With just 2 initiatives and implementation of technologies stated above, equivalent emissions of 1,175,000 cars will be removed from the atmosphere every year.

So to say AB has ignored environmental concerns is a complete fabrication.

Yep, Alberta has done a lot to reduce its footprint. Compared to many operations in the world they are more sustainable with a smaller impact. I don't know why people want Venezula, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Syria, Iran, America, and various other nations with poor human rights records to get stronger instead of Canada. Oil companies in Alberta invest huge money in carbon capture technologies, likely if we keep them profitable they will eventually solve global warming as carbon capture technology advances. They want to be able to counter pollution so they can keep selling oil, the free market at work. Just like big tobacco would love to cure cancer.

Honestly I don't understand why most Canadians seem to ignore or have a distaste for carbon capture technology and instead push for reducing pollution. I think carbon capture is an amazing technology because not only can it counter our own emissions, but it can counter the worlds emissions. We need to be investing a lot more federal funding into it and a lot less into reducing emissions. We can remove harmful carbon dioxide from our atmosphere, we just need to further develop the technology and invest in a power source and facilities. Imagine if we could counter the world's pollution with a 10-100 billion dollar investment? We could crowdsource funding from around the world and give Canada's economy a massive boost. Of course there are other gases and molecules other than CO2 that pollute but once we solve CO2 we can focus on the others.

Carbon Engineering, which boasts Bill Gates as an investor, has a plant in western Canada that can capture one million tons of CO2 a year. It projects that at large scale, it could remove CO2 for $100 to $150 per ton. Its goal is to use the CO2 to make carbon-neutral synthetic hydrocarbon fuels, which would further lower its cost. The company maintains that a facility using this “Air to Fuels” process, once scaled up, could produce fuel at less than $1 dollar a liter.

Global Thermostat, which is building its first plant in Huntsville, AL, is aiming to get its price down to $50 a ton by selling the captured CO2 to a soda company. The company would build small on-site “capture plants” at the soda maker’s facilities, thus reducing costs for energy and transportation.

https://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2018/1...limate-change/

To do the math the earth emits 33 billion tons of CO2 a year so at $100 a ton that means the total cost to counter our annual CO2 emissions is 3.3 trillion basically the total revenue of America or 1/8th of the world's total revenue. Canada is 2% which works out to 660 million tons making it $66 billion. So Canada at $100/ton can cancel out our emissions with just our public debt payments and elderly benefits alone ($72 billion). Rather than say we have a climate crisis, I would say we have to cut back on our spending and pay off our debt so we can afford to pay to counter climate change in the future.

If we can get the technology down to $10 a ton by 2050 (likely using better technology and cheap fusion power), we can ask each nation to pay 2% of their revenues to counter climate change. This technology is the future.

[WarrenC12]

Call me when this shows Alberta doing anything other than massively increasing carbon emissions:

https://www.canada.ca/en/environment...emissions.html

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Call me when this shows Alberta doing anything other than massively increasing carbon emissions:

https://www.canada.ca/en/environment...emissions.html

I’d advise to you to not wait by the phone unless the Transportation, Electricity, Agriculture and Heavy Industry with a combined GHG emissions of 393 megatonnes of CO2 equivalent wasn’t entirely dependant on the O&G industry but seeing as those industries continue to grow, and continue to increase emissions, it only makes sense that O&G emmissinns will continue to rise... no?.

Call me when the demand of O&G decreases yet the emissions still continue to increase, then you have a justified argument.

[misher]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

I’d advise to you to not wait by the phone unless the Transportation, Electricity, Agriculture and Heavy Industry with a combined GHG emissions of 393 megatonnes of CO2 equivalent wasn’t entirely dependant on the O&G industry but seeing as those industries continue to grow, and continue to increase emissions, it only makes sense that O&G emmissinns will continue to rise... no?.

Call me when the demand of O&G decreases yet the emissions still continue to increase, then you have a justified argument.

Pollution from extraction may be done in the Praries but other provinces both use it and benefit from exports. Pollution is a Canadian stat not a provincial stat. Its not a competition between provinces.

Today, natural gas meets about 12% of Quebec's energy needs and 34% of Ontario's.

NL Quebec is a megaproject comprising a 782 km pipeline (the Gazoduq Project), a liquefied natural gas plant (the Énergie Saguenay Project) and a marine terminal where supertankers would be loaded with liquefied natural gas (LNG) to transport it to foreign markets via the Saguenay Fjord and the St. Lawrence River. Those supporting this project assert it would contribute to the fight against global warming because hydropower would be used to liquefy the gas and because the exported gas would replace coal and oil "in Europe, Asia and elsewhere."

In fact, this project would not help fight climate change. It would facilitate the daily extraction, in the Canadian Prairies, of 44 million cubic meters of natural gas, which amounts to 2.6 times the total daily consumption of Quebec. Canada, which is already the world's fifth largest natural gas exporter, would see its net natural gas exports jump by 27 per cent if this project went forward.

According to an industry-commissioned life cycle assessment of this gas, from its extraction to the exit point of the liquefaction plant, it would produce more than 7.8 million tonnes of greenhouse gas (GHG) per year. This means that the total emissions associated with this project within Canada would be comparable to the sum total of GHG emission reductions in Quebec since 1990. A key uncertainty in these calculations is the amount of fugitive gas emissions (leaks) occurring during its extraction, throughout the whole transport chain and after wells are abandoned. Considering that natural gas is mainly methane, a greenhouse gas 84 times more potent than CO2 over a 20-year period, the global warming effect of these leaks is enormous, and there is therefore potential for total GHG emissions associated with this project to be considerably higher than the best available estimate. Moreover, GNL Quebec carefully avoids highlighting the large amounts of downstream CO2 emissions resulting from the combustion of the gas. According to our calculations, these emissions would add roughly 30 million tonnes of CO2 per year, assuming no fugitive gas emissions. That number spikes dramatically when applying average fugitive emissions under normal operating conditions.


Moreover, GNL Quebec would have no control over the end use of this gas, and there is no evidence that its use would replace coal or oil fuel. It is just as likely that this gas could replace renewable energy sources, which would only increase the world’s continued reliance on fossil fuels, and slow the desperately needed development of alternative energy technologies.


Let us remember that in order to limit global warming to 1.5 C, we must reduce GHG emissions by about 45 per cent by 2030, as compared to 2010, and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. To achieve this, it is essential that we wind down the number of fossil fuel infrastructures, not build more of them.



The GNL Quebec project also poses a serious threat to biodiversity. By cutting right across the natural environment of Northern Quebec, from Abitibi- Témiscamingue to the Saguenay Fjord, the Gazoduq pipeline would fragment the habitat of 17 vulnerable, threatened or endangered species. It would go through the catchment areas of the Harricana, Nottaway, Moose, Outaouais, Saint-Maurice and Saguenay rivers. Finally, exporting this liquefied gas would require six to eight mega-tanker transits per week in the fjord. The deafening underwater noise from these giant ships would jeopardize the survival of the St. Lawrence beluga in the only acoustic refuge it still has.

Taken as a whole, this project would thus further alter the terrestrial and marine ecosystems on which life on Earth depends, even as UN-mandated experts have recently confirmed an "unprecedented" and accelerating rate of extinction of species, thus eroding "the very foundations of our economies, our livelihoods, food security, health and quality of life around the world."

https://www.nationalobserver.com/201...ec-lng-project

Monte Solberg: Quebec is as much an oil state as Alberta — they just let others produce it
Quebec is a major importer, refiner and consumer of oil; Quebec is riddled with pipelines; Quebec drivers love gas-guzzling trucks

Much of that oil comes from countries where you’ll be severely punished for saying the wrong thing, kind of like on Sportsnet. Much of it comes up the St. Lawrence in tankers, the same kind of tankers that are banned from taking Alberta oil off the north coast of British Columbia. Quebec’s biggest source of oil is the Alberta oilsands. It travels to refineries in Montreal via a long tube known as a pipeline.

Quebec’s gasoline consumption is second only to Ontario’s and is growing

That oil is then turned into gasoline and it’s a good thing, too. Quebec’s gasoline consumption is second only to Ontario’s and is growing. In 2013 Quebec drivers consumed 25,000 cubic meters of gasoline every single day. By 2018 that was up to 26,300. Remember, 70 to 80 per cent of GHGs in the fossil fuel transportation value chain are created by vehicle combustion. The remainder you can pin on producing and transporting the oil. It turns out that in this world of hard facts, in almost every respect, Quebec is itself an oil state, even if Quebecers let other jurisdictions produce the oil that they then burn in their trucks and SUVs.

https://business.financialpost.com/o...ers-produce-it

Quebec slags Alberta's oil bounty, while gorging itself on it at the same time

Quebec, Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois wants everyone to know, doesn't want Alberta oil within its borders. The MNA from Québec solidaire upbraided Alberta Premier Jason Kenney for the latter's contention, delivered en français, that an oil pipeline through Quebec would be beneficial to all Canadians.

"Quebec's not into tar sands oil and Albertan pipelines," Nadeau-Dubois informed Kenney via Twitter.

The self-righteousness of his comment, perhaps forgivable for the 28-year-old former student leader, is nonetheless outdone by its gobsmacking hypocrisy. Quebec, as even a cursory bit of Googling reveals, is actually really, really into Alberta oil and Alberta pipelines. Some 44 per cent of the province's oil comes from Western Canada, the vast majority of it harvested from the very oilsands Nadeau-Dubois frequently derides.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/quebec-oil-1.5118791

I count 9 oil refineries East of Manitoba while Canada has 17 total. The two biggest are in NB and Quebec. When it comes to guns do you criticize those who mine the metal or those who refine it and turn it into a gun? Maybe we should shutdown our refineries in Eastern Canada before we reduce attack our oil production? Why do people tell Alberta to shutdown and diversify yet continue to voraciously import oil from the West.
https://www.oilsandsmagazine.com/pro...ian-refineries

As you may have noticed the East is doing its best to cover up the environmental impacts of its business. One great example is the Irving refinery:

(Reuters) - Irving Oil’s refinery in the Canadian province of New Brunswick spewed an excessive amount of ash-like catalyst into the surrounding city of Saint John at least a dozen times since 2010 as regulators launched and later abandoned a study of its health impacts, according to filings reviewed by Reuters.

The problems at the refinery, Canada’s largest, underscore concerns over catalyst releases at refineries around North America. Incidents in Texas, Wyoming, and California, for example, have heightened calls for a better understanding of how the concoction of sand and metal compounds, used in the production of gasoline, affects human health.

Between August 2010 and December 2015, privately held Irving’s refinery had repeated operational problems that triggered the releases of the substance, according to monthly reports submitted by Irving to provincial regulators.

The incidents sometimes left surrounding homes, vehicles and backyards coated by the gritty dust, prolonged exposure to which has been linked by the company and health experts to potential lung damage.

Irving Oil spokesman Andrew Carson said the catalyst releases were “unplanned and infrequent” and noted the refinery had not exceeded its annual overall particulate emissions limit during the more than five years examined by Reuters.

“An event like a catalyst release is responded to quickly with very minimal environmental impact,” Carson said.

But during the period, large particulate emissions from the refinery exceeded the two-month rolling average threshold established in Irving’s operating permit at least a dozen times, according to the documents. The company told regulators it fielded as many as 183 complaint calls from neighbors.

The New Brunswick Department of Health had launched an effort to study the substance after a particularly large release in 2013, but the work was delayed and finally canceled two years later because of a lack of time and data, according to agency emails included in the documents.

https://ca.reuters.com/article/domes.../idCAKCN0YW0BK

Valero Energy Inc.–Jean Gaulin Refinery must pay fine of $500,000 for environmental offences
Non-compliance with a directive issued following an oil discharge into the stream on the Chapais farm

Québec city, Quebec - March 1, 2017 - Environment and Climate Change Canada

Effective enforcement of Canada’s environmental- and wildlife-protection laws is one of the ways that Environment and Climate Change Canada fulfills its commitment to clear air, clean water and the conservation of wildlife species and their habitat.

On February 24, 2017, Valero Energy Inc.-Jean Gaulin Refinery (formerly Ultramar Ltd.) in Lévis, Quebec, pleaded guilty to six counts, and it was sentenced to pay the sum of $500,000. The company was order to pay a $120,000 fine for failing to comply with an order issued by an officer, thereby committing an offence under paragraph 40(3)(g) of the Fisheries Act. The court also ordered the company to pay the sum of $380,000, pursuant to paragraph 79.2(f), for the financial benefits it obtained through these violations.

The investigation conducted by Environment and Climate Change Canada found that Valero Energy Inc.-Jean Gaulin Refinery had committed the following violation six times:

Failure to comply with a directive requiring rehabilitation and environmental monitoring work issued following the deposit of a deleterious substance in water frequented by fish.
The total amount will be deposited in the Environmental Damages Fund, which is administered by Environment and Climate Change Canada.

Environment and Climate Change Canada has set up a free subscription service to help Canadians stay current with what the Government of Canada is doing to protect our natural environment

https://www.canada.ca/en/environment...-offences.html

Ecology Action Centre has compiled research into the environmental records of these refineries.
Incidents of environmental contamination from the refineries are listed for the period January 1st, 2012 to December 31st 2014. Where possible, details about the impacts of the incident and events surrounding the reporting are provided.
Over a two-year period, 19 incidents were reported at the Irving refinery in New Brunswick, a record that is significantly worse than the other two refineries. The largest incidents occurred in 2014; a spill of 10,000 litres of vacuum gas oil and a spill of 40,000 litres of diesel. Both were due to tanks being
overfilled.
Meanwhile Suncor in Montreal had three reported incidents and Valero in Levis had 14 during the same time frame, the largest involving a spill at the Valero refinery of 15,000 litres of crude oil.

https://www.ecologyaction.ca/files/i...Refineries.pdf

Eastern Canada's environmental record seems very poor and careless. I think we in the West should be criticizing them for polluting our air, lands, and oceans.

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by misher

Pollution from extraction may be done in the Praries but other provinces both use it and benefit from exports. Pollution is a Canadian stat not a provincial stat. Its not a competition between provinces.





https://www.nationalobserver.com/201...ec-lng-project



https://business.financialpost.com/o...ers-produce-it



https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/quebec-oil-1.5118791

I count 9 oil refineries East of Manitoba while Canada has 17 total. The two biggest are in NB and Quebec. When it comes to guns do you criticize those who mine the metal or those who refine it and turn it into a gun? Maybe we should shutdown our refineries in Eastern Canada before we reduce attack our oil production? Why do people tell Alberta to shutdown and diversify yet continue to voraciously import oil from the West.
https://www.oilsandsmagazine.com/pro...ian-refineries

I would guess that most people who tell Alberta to shutdown and diversify are completely blind to the fact their first world way of life is entirely dependent on O&G.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by misher

Quebec, as even a cursory bit of Googling reveals, is actually really, really into Alberta oil and Alberta pipelines. Some 44 per cent of the province's oil comes from Western Canada, the vast majority of it harvested from the very oilsands Nadeau-Dubois frequently derides.

LOL! You can "turn off the taps"... if you have the cojones to do it. We'll just get our oil from somewhere else while progressively getting off it. No big deal.

We're doing AB a favor by using its dirty oil, not the other way around.

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by lio45

LOL! You can "turn off the taps"... if you have the cojones to. We'll just get our oil from somewhere else while progressively getting off it. No big deal.

We're doing AB a favor by using its dirty oil, not the other way around.

Riiiiiiigghhhhhhtttt... we’ll just “get our oil from somewhere else”, like, it’s that easy to source nearly 50% of your oil consumption from somewhere else... I’d love to see the mass influx of oil tankers up the St. Lawerence. God save us if one subsides!! Whatever helps push the perpetual have-not Quebec out of this federation I am all for it! I’m sure shutting off the taps to Quebec will help expedite that cause.

[misher]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

Riiiiiiigghhhhhhtttt... we’ll just “get our oil from somewhere else”, like, it’s that easy to source nearly 50% of your oil consumption from somewhere else... I’d love to see the mass influx of oil tankers up the St. Lawerence. God save us if one subsides!! Whatever helps push the perpetual have-not Quebec out of this federation I am all for it! I’m sure shutting off the taps to Quebec will help expedite that cause.

Quebec has a very good relationship with the world's dictators, after all they are quite happy to bring their kids over to wine dine and sex them. I'm not surprised they'll be able to source oil easily. Back in 2012 41% of its oil came from Algeria and in 2017 11% came from Algeria.

SNC-Lavalin paid $22M to secret offshore company to get Algeria contracts: Panama Papers
Social Sharing Montreal-based SNC landed at least $4 billion in contracts in Algeria during a prosperous decade for the company in North Africa. The Panama Papers reveal a number of those deals were obtained through the services of a shadowy firm called Cadber Investments SA registered in the British Virgin Islands.

The revelations, from a joint investigation by CBC's French-language service Radio-Canada and the Toronto Star, call into question SNC insiders' dealings in yet another country, contributing to a mounting toll of evidence that some staff at Canada's premier engineering firm repeatedly engaged in suspicious commercial practices.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/pan...eria-1.3586953

SNC-Lavalin's Board of Directors became aware of financial irregularities concerning the company's activities in Libya by early 2009. The board raised concerns about the cost of a trip that Al-Saadi Gaddafi took to Canada in 2008—totalling $1.9 million—which SNC-Lavalin paid for. The board issued Stéphane Roy, the company's financial controller, a "serious warning" for the size of the Gaddafi bill. The board had also expressed concerns about the amounts of cash kept by SNC's Libyan office—at that time approximately $10 million—according to the company's chief financial officer. In May 2009, the board ordered that no more than $1 million in cash should be kept in the company's safe in Libya.[2]

On 19 February 2015, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and the Public Prosecution Service of Canada (PPSC) laid charges against SNC-Lavalin Group Inc. and two of its subsidiaries: SNC-Lavalin International Inc. and SNC-Lavalin Construction Inc. Each firm was charged with one count of fraud under section 380 of the Criminal Code, and one count of corruption under Section 3(1)(b) of the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act. The charges allege that between 2001 and 2011, SNC-Lavalin paid CA$48 million in bribes in Libya to officials in the government of Muammar Gaddafi. They also allege that at the same time, the company defrauded Libyan organizations of CA$130 million. On the same day, SNC-Lavalin announced that they were contesting the charges and planned to enter a non-guilty plea.[3][4]

On recommendation from the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Kathleen Roussel, former SNC-Lavalin Executive Vice President Normand Morin[11] was charged in the Court of Quebec in May 2018 with making illegal donations to Canadian federal political parties. The charges, which were unrelated to the federal charges against the company, alleging that from 2004 to 2011, Morin orchestrated and solicited political donations from employees or their spouses to Canadian federal political parties anonymously on behalf of SNC-Lavalin, to be reimbursed afterwards. The amounts paid included about CA$110,000 to the Liberal Party and CA$8,000 to other Canadian political parties.[12][13] In November 2018, Morin pleaded guilty to two of the five charges, and was fined $2,000. The remaining three charges were dropped by the prosecution.[14]

Quebec obviously prefers oil that comes from child labour and human rights abuses

The analysis found that last year, Canadian companies spent $3.54 billion importing 6.4 million cubic metres of Saudi oil. That's up from $2.5 billion in 2017—before the diplomatic dispute between Canada and Saudi Arabia erupted last summer. Saudi Arabia is the second-largest source of foreign oil for Canada, after the United States.

Foreign oil imports are a bit of a paradox for Canada, given that Canada possesses the third-largest oil reserves in the world and is a major net exporter of oil, with oil revenues providing an important source of economic benefit for the nation. Canadian energy industry officials point out that new pipelines are needed to increase access to new markets for Western Canadian crude, including markets in Eastern Canada.