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

[MacLac]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

Great post... not only does it show your admission that your equalization cheques are dependent on the "tar" sands that your province demonizes and despises it running through your province, but your post also implies that you do not even strive to become a "have" province, rather, remain a have-not and just expect less money.

I mean, if Quebec so despises the "tar" sands, and they really wouldn't care if they got shut down, and it would have minimal effect on your equalization cheques, why doesn't Quebec advocate to revise the equalization formula to omit "tar" sands revenue? I mean, not doing so would scream hypocrisy from Quebec

Awesome post!!!!!! Unfortunately though, QC's knee breakers already have the "key" to AB's Treasury.....Trudeau Sr. made sure of that.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by MacLac

Awesome post!!!!!! Unfortunately though, QC's knee breakers already have the "key" to AB's Treasury.....Trudeau Sr. made sure of that.

The formula that's causing heartburn was introduced by Mr. Harper, no?

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

The formula that's causing heartburn was introduced by Mr. Harper, no?

Doubt it. His name doesn't sound French enough. Doesn't build enough outrage.

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

It's happening. Alberta is whining.

Economics is killing the "tar" sands? Last I checked, what killed the Energy East pipeline project was significantly more red tape added to the regulatory process. This pipeline would supply the demand for “tar” sands out east and beyond, … Economics did not kill this project, the federal government killed this project.
Economics is killing the “tar” sands? Last I checked, what killed the Northern Gateway pipeline project, was the federal government quashed an already NEB approved project… Economics did not kill this project, the federal government killed this project.

Altogether, with Energy East (1.1 million barrels/day), Northern Gateway (500K barrels/day), Trans Mountain (300K barrels/day), Line 3 (800K barrels/day, Keystone XL (510K barrels/day), the amount of “tar” sands demanded by NA and the world equates to 3,210,000 additional barrels per day…Tough argument saying that economics is killing the “tar” sands when over 3 million additional barrels per day were proposed to hit the market.

[Airboy]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

The formula that's causing heartburn was introduced by Mr. Harper, no?

Yes Harper Shear and Kenney renegotiated the latest agreement.

At the rate the Kenny government is going in changes here there will not be much of a province left.

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

The formula that's causing heartburn was introduced by Mr. Harper, no?

It doesn't matter who introduced it... its actually a good thing, aside from Quebec not having to include its Hydro sector. The part of equalization that is dumbfounding these days in the hypocrisy of Quebec, happily accepting the cheques, while demonizing the industry which makes up a lot of those cheques. If there wasn't such hypocrisy coming from that province, equalization is fine.

[MacLac]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

It doesn't matter who introduced it... its actually a good thing, aside from Quebec not having to include its Hydro sector. The part of equalization that is dumbfounding these days in the hypocrisy of Quebec, happily accepting the cheques, while demonizing the industry which makes up a lot of those cheques. If there wasn't such hypocrisy coming from that province, equalization is fine.

Double the Hypocrisy when "that" province refines more oil than in AB! More pipelines running under the sewers in Montreal than any other city in the country.....and they won't take AB's Oil? Fear of a pipeline spill? BS! They wanna cash our cheques but won't let us make the money so the cheques don't bounce......insanity!

[travis3000]

Originally Posted by MacLac

Double the Hypocrisy when "that" province refines more oil than in AB! More pipelines running under the sewers in Montreal than any other city in the country.....and they won't take AB's Oil? Fear of a pipeline spill? BS! They wanna cash our cheques but won't let us make the money so the cheques don't bounce......insanity!

No. Quebec acknowledges they do indeed have pipelines already, they acknowledge they use and refine oil as we speak. Nobody is denying that. Quebec however has made it very clear that its their wishes to REDUCE their reliance on oil. They do not wish to further the production/use of it. The Quebec government has a long term plan to reduce reliance on oil use. Because of their big picture view on the environment, they don't want to continue down that road. This is why they are against more development/pipelines.

It's really not rocket science. I understand where they are coming from. Quebec's future is green, that's the direction they wish to go.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by travis3000

No. Quebec acknowledges they do indeed have pipelines already, they acknowledge they use and refine oil as we speak. Nobody is denying that. Quebec however has made it very clear that its their wishes to REDUCE their reliance on oil. They do not wish to further the production/use of it. The Quebec government has a long term plan to reduce reliance on oil use. Because of their big picture view on the environment, they don't want to continue down that road. This is why they are against more development/pipelines.

It's really not rocket science. I understand where they are coming from. Quebec's future is green, that's the direction they wish to go.

BC is in exactly the same boat.

[Acajack]

A relative of mine has gone "full native" and preaches western alienation in a fire and brimstone kind of way on social media. He's originally from Central Canada with very recent roots in Ontario, Quebec and the Maritimes, and AFAIK everyone in his immediate family except for him (and his wife and kids) lives east of Manitoba. I gather he's lived in the West for about 10 years or so.

His latest posting references this Maclean's study. Now I am not a big fan of StatsCan's crime severity index but it's still noteworthy that 20 out of 20 of the country's (allegedly) most dangerous places are in the West.
https://www.macleans.ca/society/canadas-20-most-dangerous-places-2020/

My relative says this is evidence that things are really, really bad in the West right now.

Of course, the West taken as a region has usually had higher violent crime than most of central-eastern Canada in the three decades or so I've been paying attention to this. It's nothing new.

Crime is also very low in the West's biggest metro, Vancouver, and is also pretty low (comparable to Ontario and Quebec cities) in Calgary which is ground zero for the oil bust.

But my relative (the guy who has 95% of his loved ones east of Winnipeg) still spouts off about this being another example of the "East" being ungrateful leeches, when the "West" pays for "everything" in Canada.

Looking forward to Christmas in that family I am sure!

[TorontoDrew]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

BC is in exactly the same boat.

The majority of Ontario as well. Remember DoFo only got around 40% support last election.

[ssiguy]

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.

With these stats you exemplify how Alberta is doing little to reduce it's GHG emissions.

Converting coal hydro to natural gas or changing over some buses to it, is NOT, in any way shape or form, going to lead Canada to a zero carbon economy. Natural gas is not clean at all. NG is a dirty and polluting fossil fuel. Full stop. If Alberta was to produce all it's electricity from zero emission sources like nearly every other province, it's emissions would plunge 17% overnight.

As far as overall emissions, it is Alberta and Sask that are hurting our chances of reaching our Paris goals. Most provinces have seen substantial reductions but those positive changes have been completely wiped out by increasing emissions in Ab & SK.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

The majority of Ontario as well. Remember DoFo only got around 40% support last election.

I didn't want to speak for Ontario, and I realize that quickly getting off coal was a bit painful in the short term.

[swimmer_spe]

Lets face it over 60% of Canada, including in Alberta voted for a party that has a plan to lower our carbon footprint. The oil sands are a major contributor to our carbon footprint. That would mean that most Canadians, including some in Alberta would want to see that lowered. By saying Quebec doesn't want it is a lie, because most of Canada does not want it. You are just picking on a Province you don't like. Why not build a pipeline to Churchill MB? Have a terminal there that can hold 8-10 month of production. Have the ships come there as much as possible? Now you have a deep water ocean port.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Hali87

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.

Thanks for that. I hadn't considered that aspect of it. Sounds like this is a case where the data doesn't always tell the entire story.

[misher]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Lets face it over 60% of Canada, including in Alberta voted for a party that has a plan to lower our carbon footprint. The oil sands are a major contributor to our carbon footprint. That would mean that most Canadians, including some in Alberta would want to see that lowered. By saying Quebec doesn't want it is a lie, because most of Canada does not want it. You are just picking on a Province you don't like. Why not build a pipeline to Churchill MB? Have a terminal there that can hold 8-10 month of production. Have the ships come there as much as possible? Now you have a deep water ocean port.

Last I checked the difference between the Conservative and Liberal plan was not huge, one just focuses on industry emitters while the other hits everyone. They both won’t meet our targets. Trudeau is breaking both our military and environmental promises to the world.

Climate change isn't an exam its either a pass or fail. Both plans fail.

I'd have a lot more respect for the Liberals if they went for real improvement instead of feel-good taxes. BC's low carbon gas standard should be across the nation. As we've seen in Vancouver a tax does little to solve a problem, you cannot tax your way out of climate change. Rather than have a tax to raise prices we should have just required refiners to refine gas more to reduce its carbon intensity which would raise prices anyway.

Part 3 of the Act establishes low carbon fuel requirements for fuels sold in British Columbia:

Fuel suppliers must progressively decrease the average carbon intensity of their fuels to achieve a 10% reduction in 2020 relative to 2010
Under the Regulation, fuel suppliers choose their own approach for compliance with Part 3 requirements. Fuel suppliers may choose to:

Supply more low carbon fuels
Acquire credits through a Part 3 Agreement
Trade credits with other suppliers

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/indus...tion-energies/renewable-low-carbon-fuels

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by misher

Last I checked the only difference between the Conservative and Liberal plan was one letter grade. They both won’t meet our targets. Trudeau is breaking both our military and environmental promises to the world.

Scheer's plan was a complete joke. Trudeau's was not enough, but doing the right thing and could be amped up (carbon tax) with relative ease.

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by travis3000

No. Quebec acknowledges they do indeed have pipelines already, they acknowledge they use and refine oil as we speak. Nobody is denying that. Quebec however has made it very clear that its their wishes to REDUCE their reliance on oil. They do not wish to further the production/use of it. The Quebec government has a long term plan to reduce reliance on oil use. Because of their big picture view on the environment, they don't want to continue down that road. This is why they are against more development/pipelines.

It's really not rocket science. I understand where they are coming from. Quebec's future is green, that's the direction they wish to go.

Originally Posted by ssiguy

With these stats you exemplify how Alberta is doing little to reduce it's GHG emissions.

Converting coal hydro to natural gas or changing over some buses to it, is NOT, in any way shape or form, going to lead Canada to a zero carbon economy. Natural gas is not clean at all. NG is a dirty and polluting fossil fuel. Full stop. If Alberta was to produce all it's electricity from zero emission sources like nearly every other province, it's emissions would plunge 17% overnight.

As far as overall emissions, it is Alberta and Sask that are hurting our chances of reaching our Paris goals. Most provinces have seen substantial reductions but those positive changes have been completely wiped out by increasing emissions in Ab & SK.

Huh?! AB is making its primary industry greener, with the equivalent of removing 1.2 million cars off the road, every year. Canada produces ~2 million cars per year. If Ontario were to say “We are producing only 800K ICE vehicles this year and 1.2 million EV’s”, people would be raving how amazing Ontario is and how amazing the climate change plan… but for AB to make a similar statement, that they are upgrading facilities to the tune of removing 1.2 million cars’ worth of emissions every year, we get responses like yours… So yes ssiguy, Alberta is actually making significant strides in reducing its carbon footprint.

So with respect to converting coal to NG, its time you call out Quebec and BC then for how much of a damaging impact their LNG export facilities will be to the environment. Fortunately for them though, to make it seem like they are environmental angels, those emissions from the NG they export will not be accounted for for them… Much like BC’s coal export, 100 million tonnes of C02 equivalent per year of thermal coal is exported, that does not get calculated into BC’s emissions footprint.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

Huh?! AB is making its primary industry greener, with the equivalent of removing 1.2 million cars off the road, every year.

"Huh?!" is definitely the right response here:



You can spout a lot of initiatives they are doing, but it's clear Alberta has been massively increasing carbon emissions, while complaining the rest of Canada is holding them back from even more dramatic increases.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

Much like BC’s coal export, 100 million tonnes of C02 equivalent per year of thermal coal is exported, that does not get calculated into BC’s emissions footprint.

That's a lie.

In 2018, Canada exported 34 million tonnes of coal around the world. and imported 7.6 million tonnes of coal mostly from the United States. Exports to the United States accounted for 3% of Canadian coal exports, and represented 13% of total United States coal imports.

Canada's exports are primarily metallurgical coal (97% in 2018).

https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/science-data/dat...a-analysis/energy-facts/coal-facts/20071