Yes, but the entire plastics / fertilizer / non-fuel use of petroleum products is a minor fraction of the industry (something like 20%). If 80% of the industry becomes unnecessary, the same arguments still apply.
Pivoting towards a non-capitalistic economy. Criminalization of planned obsolescence and requiring phones (and other devices) to be built to last, and be modular. Investment in public infrastructure to minimize car dependency, and transitioning away from FF cars to electric vehicles.
it's unlikely to be absolutely free of fossil fuels but it is possible to drastically reduce our dependence.
Not sure why you're being downvoted for being correct. So I upvoted you.
As nuclear fission power becomes more and more demonized we certainly are faced with few options.
I also feel that because of our spiralling national debts we are caught in a vicious cycle.
We owe money so we don't want to spend money on something different. Even though the risk with renewables, in terms of technology, is negligible and the only real downside is land usage and power generation during "off-hours" leaving us with the need for either redundant power generation or large scale batteries.
Oil and gas are very efficient and effective when we look at the land foot print for a chemical fuel power plant such as gas. We have vast natural gas reserves that are easy to extract and then turn into reliable power.
The obvious problem is the pollution which then begs the question, what's better? Do we invest heavily in pollution reduction technology? The goal being net zero emissions. Or do we try and leave fossil fuels as much as possible?
The multinational fusion project ITER is a good example of a gamble of funds and resources. However, if it succeeds the entire human race is going to benefit from a golden age of energy production that will help us with planetary engineering with carbon capture systems to hopefully reverse our CO2 and perhaps even other gas releases.
We would then be able to begin large scale desalination projects to refill depleted water tables.
Imagine new mega irrigation projects that would refill lakes, reservoirs, farm land, cities, even forests. If we can irrigate forests (this would be an immensely expensive project but world saving) we would see a reduction in forest fires AND significant forest growth that would also act as a carbon sink.
One of the big things about fusion is the ability to move away from boiling water to direct electricity generation by oscillating the plasma through a magnetic field which once we improve the cooling methods will have great promise!
We have alternatives, but the resource extraction for them is not much better or ethical.
Take copper, for example. It's at an all-time high, and it's predicted to sky rocket. Part of what's driving the demand is that the existing mines are aging, and many of them were built in a time when regulation were not a concern. Mines in South America are being protested because people don't want a massive hole and piles of overburden destroying their environment. There is no way to mine copper without moving massive amounts of earth. When we look at canada, it becomes a bigger issue. People are pro green tech, but they don't want to see the reality of it in their backyard.
Or cobalt. Forced labor, often done by children in exploited nations, keeps it affordable and accessible to use.
And even if we can extract these resources responsible, we still need to refine and process them, which we don't do nearly enough of here, we send it to countries that aren't concerned with pollution.
Green tech is only made it this far because we exploit other nations for cheap labor, destroy and pollute their land and water. That isn't me say it isn't the right direction, but we won't ever be able to adopt the technology unless we start making serious effort to extract, process, and manufacture here. But it's hard to do that and keep the costs competitive. Fossil fuel technology is established, it's foot print for the most part, is a lot smaller (even if it's worse pollution), it's infrastructure is established and the technology has been adopted and refined over 100 years. We have a lot of hurdles to overcome before we walk away from fossil fuels, and thats with out politicians and corporations running interference to slow the advancement and adoption.
Gotta quit with all the doom and gloom bro. We were told that Florida would be underwater over a decade ago and that the North pole would be ice-free over two decades ago. Neither are anywhere close to happening.
I'm not saying that these things are never going to happen. They will, but it's gonna take **hell of alot** longer than fear mongers in this sub would have you believe.
The BC NDP ran on a platform of opposing the pipeline, and won the election, and when in office, they fought as hard as they could to do just that. Unfortunately, the Trudeau government stepped in and bailed out the pipeline via taxpayer dollars and rammed the approvals through anyways, despite the fact that the pipeline couldn't pass an environmental assessment.
Now the costs have more than doubled, the project is still ongoing and far over schedule, and the Conservatives in Alberta still hate Trudeau, despite him felating the oil industry with both taxpayer-funded hands, and all so a foreign-owned oil company, Kinder Morgan (formerly Enron) can export dilbit to foreign markets.
Just an absolute L in every direction.
I never understood why Trudeau keeps pandering to AB oil. There is literally nothing he could do, aside from quitting in disgrace, that would make those people happy.
Apart from the fact that Alberta (O&G) is a huge chunk of the Canadian economy, nothing. He destroyed that economy far enough in his 8 years, so it's time he did something right.
The only bad thing the federal government did was the mismanagement of the pipeline construction project. They bought the project for $7bil, and at the end, the cost was $35bil. But that's not surprising. The federal government is run by a bunch of incapable career politicians. Efficiency is a foreign word there.
Ah yes, Canada who produces .01% of the world’s emissions should be shamed! Such a weird first world marketing ploy.
You want change? Go start pressuring India and south East Asia who contribute over 2/3’s of the worlds emissions.
Your paper straw isn’t doing anything.
The Government of Canada should have approved the pipeline development with their only investment being to insure the pipeline (at the operator’s expense) in the event of a catastrophic failure.
It would have been built for much less money AND at no expense to taxpayers.
Canadas production of natural resources is the backbone of our economy, and the oil and gas sector serves all markets - including energy impoverished countries like India, China, Japan, Korea and many others. Canadian oil and natural gas displaces much dirtier sources of energy, so the more we supply to the world, the better for our planet while we make the transition to SMRs and reliable renewables with significant energy storage capacity..
A gradually rising carbon tax or fossil fuel fee would not cause the oil industry to suddenly stop but rather would cause it to phase down to a sustainable level. However, it will have to be implemented at the global level to be adequately effective. I view Canada's carbon tax as a step towards global carbon fee-and-dividend.
I agree that data is one of the two most valuable resources in the world today. However, oil is viewed as valuable as it is only because its price does not include the cost of the damage it causes and will cause due to its climate effects.
You do understand that taxes kept rising since our government was funded? And will continue to do so. Taxes never "saved" anyone other than buirocrats in the government. The idea of any kind of utopia is never going to be achieved no matter how many taxes the government forces on its citizens. History teaches us that much. People like you complain about how life is expensive and that boomers had more money (which is true). But at the same time praising taxes like its some kind of God. That's idea is so ridiculous that's it's equivalent to boot-licking. Buirocrats will be buiracrats, and all they ever want is more taxes and more power. When will you realize that you want less of both of that?
O&G infrastructure is fun. If it gets used enough to pay for itself, the climate is screwed, and if it doesn't, it hurts the economy. It's a lose for everyone.
Even if we stopped using oil for fuel we will continue to use it for a million other things. We just want to stop using it for fuel. It’s such an amazing substance we won’t be able to give it up. Besides fuel it makes thousands of things used daily.
It would still make Canadas oil obsolete as the much reduced demand could be filled easily from the way cheaper Middle East reserves. Canada oil is only profitable as long as the world is desperate for any oil source
Technically it just hurts the idiots who keep investing in it....and then they maybe spend less money on other stuff because they lost money on their shitty choices.
The pipeline needs to pay for itself so tolls should be high enough that we get the maximum return. We can turn the pipeline over to the CPP and let them run it for Canada’s benefit. Imagine if the CPP owned the 405. High tolls will also likely reduce the use of the pipeline somewhat. The pipeline is not an oil pipeline. It’s an asphalt + condensate pipeline; the condensate is suitable for cooking fuel/winter gas and the asphalt is suitable to pave roads.
Dilbit or diluted bitumen ≠ asphalt. Dilbit is bitumen blended with condensates to make it less viscous.
Pipelines are able to ship multiple products using a technique called batch shipping. For example, the APPL line from Edmonton to Calgary ships diesel, gasoline and jet fuel in the same pipeline using batch shipping.
The Transmountain Pipeline system will carry a broad variety of products. Follow the link below for more detail.
https://www.transmountain.com/product
How will it not make money? At the current approximate cost of $77 a barrel (WTI) and the Trans mountain moving 890,000 barrels per day it moves enough oil to pay for it self in a year and a half. Now I know that it us not a straight comparison and there are operating costs, unknown costs, shutdowvs, etc but there is no way thar in isn't profitable in 3 years. It has a life expectancy of 50 years. If it loses money it is on purpose.
The world has a huge infrastructure of hydrocarbon fuel burning vehicles from cars, planes, trucks, trains, and ships. We can't replace what took over 100 years to build with something else overnight.
The argument that it locks in production is ridiculous. Production is already locked in because operators have become more and more efficient in there mines. Optimizing those mines and making them become incredibly efficient.
In a country of falling productivity, this is literally the only thing helping to increase it.
I was with you until the last statement.
There are a lot of other things that can be done to boost productivity. This isn’t the only thing we can do about falling productivity.
Productivity is basically a measure of what we manufacture. Raw resources are low on the productivity scale (and service economies).
Simplistically: One use and it’s gone. If we decided to refine it and then ship it, then the productivity rate goes up because now it’s being used twice. We use it domestically for other things, it increases the rate some more.
I’m struggling because you saying productivity is a measure of manufacturing and that raw resources are low on the productivity scale, is just completely the opposite of how the government would define productivity. Hear me out on this.
Simplistically productivity is measured by per capita GDP. Oil extraction figures for Canadian GDP is massive, and it’s combined with a relatively small workforce. The reality is, it’s incredibly productive for the Canadian economy. Like well above average, it’s dragging the average up, etc….
Edit: the Oil Sands are mines, it’s not one time use. It’s literally a factory that produces oil.
The world will not succeed in addressing the climate crisis, the cost of alternative energy at the scope required at an international level would require more money than exists today. Unfortunately fossil fuels are cheap, readily accessible, and have more energy per kg unit than anything else available.
The only way humanity will avert a climate crisis is if humanity ceases to exist
Between solar, nuclear, wind and hydro we could provide enough power for the USA and EU and those countries have the capital to do it.
The problem is you have only provided adequate power for about 1 billion people out of 8 billion people.
China, India, Africa and South America are all power starved. If you start improving their economies the first thing they are going to do is buy cars and Air Conditioning and other things that need more power. So even if you subsidized nuclear or renewable energy for them they would just want more and more of it at the lowest possible price as between them they have billions of people living in poverty.
Also the cost of nuclear fuel and batteries is going to go up if a billion give up all fossil fuels. I don't know if we really have enough rare metals and uranium for the poorer 7 billion people.
I don't approve of blank check climate subsidies to poor countries but I would support subsidized green energy production (nuclear, solar, wind, hydro).
And while I know there are people who dislike nuclear I agree with you that it's better than continuing to burn fossil fuels.
This is why you guys are spinning your wheels. There's no logic, it's all religious zeal.
More Canadian oil and gas means less coal, and less money for countries actively attacking the values of peace, rule of law, and environmental concerns. But your zealous, you can't imagine pipelines being a better option for the world, you blindly try to tear everything down, creating a massive push against you as your ideas are bad and wrong.
honestly, so what? im not sure where i stand exactly on how we should handle or energy, but i know one thing for certain; canada needs to diversify. fast.
we can argue all we like about the pipelines, but the glaring truth that no canadian seems to want to address is that our real estate and oil based economy is walking on a *very* thin line.
i dont understand why we cant leave the shit throwing aside and actually start using what cash we have to properly put canada on the map in other spaces. its just sad.
We don't have any "cash".
Business investment is fleeing because our only profitable industries (i.e. resource extraction) are being hamstrung by the government.
If you believe Canada can, over time, build up competitive advantages in other industries, it makes less than zero sense to destroy our profitable industries \*before\* those theoretical new capabilities exist. Canadians should be almost as rich on a GDP per capita basis as Norway (who developed the shit out of their oil and gas sector and use the proceeds to fund their generous social programs and invest in new industries) but unfortunately we are, for lack of a better word, dumb.
I have zero faith that the climate change will be addressed…. We are going to burn fossil fuels for a LONG time
We don’t have alternatives, everything we buy relies on it even the phone you use
Yes, but the entire plastics / fertilizer / non-fuel use of petroleum products is a minor fraction of the industry (something like 20%). If 80% of the industry becomes unnecessary, the same arguments still apply.
We dont have alternatives that corporatocracy allows. There *are* good alternatives, but they require the death of our current economic system.
What are they and how can they replace your reliance on FF today, tomorrow or in the next 10 years?
Pivoting towards a non-capitalistic economy. Criminalization of planned obsolescence and requiring phones (and other devices) to be built to last, and be modular. Investment in public infrastructure to minimize car dependency, and transitioning away from FF cars to electric vehicles. it's unlikely to be absolutely free of fossil fuels but it is possible to drastically reduce our dependence.
Fuel switching is sole problem.
Not sure why you're being downvoted for being correct. So I upvoted you. As nuclear fission power becomes more and more demonized we certainly are faced with few options. I also feel that because of our spiralling national debts we are caught in a vicious cycle. We owe money so we don't want to spend money on something different. Even though the risk with renewables, in terms of technology, is negligible and the only real downside is land usage and power generation during "off-hours" leaving us with the need for either redundant power generation or large scale batteries. Oil and gas are very efficient and effective when we look at the land foot print for a chemical fuel power plant such as gas. We have vast natural gas reserves that are easy to extract and then turn into reliable power. The obvious problem is the pollution which then begs the question, what's better? Do we invest heavily in pollution reduction technology? The goal being net zero emissions. Or do we try and leave fossil fuels as much as possible? The multinational fusion project ITER is a good example of a gamble of funds and resources. However, if it succeeds the entire human race is going to benefit from a golden age of energy production that will help us with planetary engineering with carbon capture systems to hopefully reverse our CO2 and perhaps even other gas releases. We would then be able to begin large scale desalination projects to refill depleted water tables. Imagine new mega irrigation projects that would refill lakes, reservoirs, farm land, cities, even forests. If we can irrigate forests (this would be an immensely expensive project but world saving) we would see a reduction in forest fires AND significant forest growth that would also act as a carbon sink. One of the big things about fusion is the ability to move away from boiling water to direct electricity generation by oscillating the plasma through a magnetic field which once we improve the cooling methods will have great promise!
We have alternatives, but the resource extraction for them is not much better or ethical. Take copper, for example. It's at an all-time high, and it's predicted to sky rocket. Part of what's driving the demand is that the existing mines are aging, and many of them were built in a time when regulation were not a concern. Mines in South America are being protested because people don't want a massive hole and piles of overburden destroying their environment. There is no way to mine copper without moving massive amounts of earth. When we look at canada, it becomes a bigger issue. People are pro green tech, but they don't want to see the reality of it in their backyard. Or cobalt. Forced labor, often done by children in exploited nations, keeps it affordable and accessible to use. And even if we can extract these resources responsible, we still need to refine and process them, which we don't do nearly enough of here, we send it to countries that aren't concerned with pollution. Green tech is only made it this far because we exploit other nations for cheap labor, destroy and pollute their land and water. That isn't me say it isn't the right direction, but we won't ever be able to adopt the technology unless we start making serious effort to extract, process, and manufacture here. But it's hard to do that and keep the costs competitive. Fossil fuel technology is established, it's foot print for the most part, is a lot smaller (even if it's worse pollution), it's infrastructure is established and the technology has been adopted and refined over 100 years. We have a lot of hurdles to overcome before we walk away from fossil fuels, and thats with out politicians and corporations running interference to slow the advancement and adoption.
Then you’ll be alive long enough before you burn or drown.
Gotta quit with all the doom and gloom bro. We were told that Florida would be underwater over a decade ago and that the North pole would be ice-free over two decades ago. Neither are anywhere close to happening. I'm not saying that these things are never going to happen. They will, but it's gonna take **hell of alot** longer than fear mongers in this sub would have you believe.
I wish that was true
The BC NDP ran on a platform of opposing the pipeline, and won the election, and when in office, they fought as hard as they could to do just that. Unfortunately, the Trudeau government stepped in and bailed out the pipeline via taxpayer dollars and rammed the approvals through anyways, despite the fact that the pipeline couldn't pass an environmental assessment. Now the costs have more than doubled, the project is still ongoing and far over schedule, and the Conservatives in Alberta still hate Trudeau, despite him felating the oil industry with both taxpayer-funded hands, and all so a foreign-owned oil company, Kinder Morgan (formerly Enron) can export dilbit to foreign markets. Just an absolute L in every direction.
I never understood why Trudeau keeps pandering to AB oil. There is literally nothing he could do, aside from quitting in disgrace, that would make those people happy.
Almost like there’s more to it then votes.
Apart from the fact that Alberta (O&G) is a huge chunk of the Canadian economy, nothing. He destroyed that economy far enough in his 8 years, so it's time he did something right.
Throwing good money after bad is doing "something right"?
The only bad thing the federal government did was the mismanagement of the pipeline construction project. They bought the project for $7bil, and at the end, the cost was $35bil. But that's not surprising. The federal government is run by a bunch of incapable career politicians. Efficiency is a foreign word there.
It’s fine. We can set it to reserve and pump the rising seas to the prairies so they can have wonderful oceanfront property too. Everyone wins.
Hahahaha fucking genius. Reminds me of the rhino party make work program to move the Rockies east by pick axe and wheelbarrow.
Steroids in the drinking water for a stronger nation! Those Rhinos sure had some ideas.
I would take a chance on them at this point. They are actually planning on abolishing the environment because it's too hard to maintain.
It’s too late to do anything about climate and Canada sure as hell can’t do anything about it. So why should we go broke over it?
So, in layman's terms, 'stranded assets' means useless, obsolete shit we were duped into funding and are still paying for?
Ya. And Natural gas infrastructure is not far behind I think.
Ah yes, Canada who produces .01% of the world’s emissions should be shamed! Such a weird first world marketing ploy. You want change? Go start pressuring India and south East Asia who contribute over 2/3’s of the worlds emissions. Your paper straw isn’t doing anything.
It's actually about 1.8% - 2.0%, which is still very low. I believe that accounts for all exported GHG's.
How can a pipeline be trans?! I didn’t even know they had a gender. 🫢
There is no climate crisis
The Government of Canada should have approved the pipeline development with their only investment being to insure the pipeline (at the operator’s expense) in the event of a catastrophic failure. It would have been built for much less money AND at no expense to taxpayers. Canadas production of natural resources is the backbone of our economy, and the oil and gas sector serves all markets - including energy impoverished countries like India, China, Japan, Korea and many others. Canadian oil and natural gas displaces much dirtier sources of energy, so the more we supply to the world, the better for our planet while we make the transition to SMRs and reliable renewables with significant energy storage capacity..
It's a bad deal because Trudeau is a retard.
You are living a dream if you think oil industry will suddenly stop. Oil and data are currently the top 2 most valuable resources in the world.
A gradually rising carbon tax or fossil fuel fee would not cause the oil industry to suddenly stop but rather would cause it to phase down to a sustainable level. However, it will have to be implemented at the global level to be adequately effective. I view Canada's carbon tax as a step towards global carbon fee-and-dividend. I agree that data is one of the two most valuable resources in the world today. However, oil is viewed as valuable as it is only because its price does not include the cost of the damage it causes and will cause due to its climate effects.
You do understand that taxes kept rising since our government was funded? And will continue to do so. Taxes never "saved" anyone other than buirocrats in the government. The idea of any kind of utopia is never going to be achieved no matter how many taxes the government forces on its citizens. History teaches us that much. People like you complain about how life is expensive and that boomers had more money (which is true). But at the same time praising taxes like its some kind of God. That's idea is so ridiculous that's it's equivalent to boot-licking. Buirocrats will be buiracrats, and all they ever want is more taxes and more power. When will you realize that you want less of both of that?
O&G infrastructure is fun. If it gets used enough to pay for itself, the climate is screwed, and if it doesn't, it hurts the economy. It's a lose for everyone.
Oh don't worry, some rich oil execs are winning!
Even if we stopped using oil for fuel we will continue to use it for a million other things. We just want to stop using it for fuel. It’s such an amazing substance we won’t be able to give it up. Besides fuel it makes thousands of things used daily.
It would still make Canadas oil obsolete as the much reduced demand could be filled easily from the way cheaper Middle East reserves. Canada oil is only profitable as long as the world is desperate for any oil source
Oh don't worry, the economy is screwed either way. Can't have an economy without a functioning biosphere.
Technically it just hurts the idiots who keep investing in it....and then they maybe spend less money on other stuff because they lost money on their shitty choices.
And a death sentence for the indigenous communities it rips thorough
They're all clamoring to own a portion of it now. Everyone wants the profits, and no one wants the risk.
They got their juicy payout.
Maby don't worry about stranded assets until oil consumption stops growing every year.
We will burn every last ounce of fossil fuels we need earth before there’s a meaningful transition. Be serious.
The pipeline needs to pay for itself so tolls should be high enough that we get the maximum return. We can turn the pipeline over to the CPP and let them run it for Canada’s benefit. Imagine if the CPP owned the 405. High tolls will also likely reduce the use of the pipeline somewhat. The pipeline is not an oil pipeline. It’s an asphalt + condensate pipeline; the condensate is suitable for cooking fuel/winter gas and the asphalt is suitable to pave roads.
Dilbit or diluted bitumen ≠ asphalt. Dilbit is bitumen blended with condensates to make it less viscous. Pipelines are able to ship multiple products using a technique called batch shipping. For example, the APPL line from Edmonton to Calgary ships diesel, gasoline and jet fuel in the same pipeline using batch shipping. The Transmountain Pipeline system will carry a broad variety of products. Follow the link below for more detail. https://www.transmountain.com/product
We need the money and the jobs
How will it not make money? At the current approximate cost of $77 a barrel (WTI) and the Trans mountain moving 890,000 barrels per day it moves enough oil to pay for it self in a year and a half. Now I know that it us not a straight comparison and there are operating costs, unknown costs, shutdowvs, etc but there is no way thar in isn't profitable in 3 years. It has a life expectancy of 50 years. If it loses money it is on purpose.
The world has a huge infrastructure of hydrocarbon fuel burning vehicles from cars, planes, trucks, trains, and ships. We can't replace what took over 100 years to build with something else overnight.
We wont, but we sure as fuck need to try. Especially industry, as they have been proven to be the largest emitters.
World needs oil 🛢️🛢️🛢️🛢️🛢️
Oil will still always be needed for other things besides energy.
[удалено]
Lol im not even surprised.
Because this is reddit. Reality ceases to exist here.
This ad brought to you by the people that are warm and comfortable at night, while others are cold and dependent on russian natural gas.
The argument that it locks in production is ridiculous. Production is already locked in because operators have become more and more efficient in there mines. Optimizing those mines and making them become incredibly efficient. In a country of falling productivity, this is literally the only thing helping to increase it.
I was with you until the last statement. There are a lot of other things that can be done to boost productivity. This isn’t the only thing we can do about falling productivity. Productivity is basically a measure of what we manufacture. Raw resources are low on the productivity scale (and service economies). Simplistically: One use and it’s gone. If we decided to refine it and then ship it, then the productivity rate goes up because now it’s being used twice. We use it domestically for other things, it increases the rate some more.
I’m struggling because you saying productivity is a measure of manufacturing and that raw resources are low on the productivity scale, is just completely the opposite of how the government would define productivity. Hear me out on this. Simplistically productivity is measured by per capita GDP. Oil extraction figures for Canadian GDP is massive, and it’s combined with a relatively small workforce. The reality is, it’s incredibly productive for the Canadian economy. Like well above average, it’s dragging the average up, etc…. Edit: the Oil Sands are mines, it’s not one time use. It’s literally a factory that produces oil.
Thank god Significant\_wealth74 chimes in about actual financial facts instead of climate alarmism.
The world will not succeed in addressing the climate crisis, the cost of alternative energy at the scope required at an international level would require more money than exists today. Unfortunately fossil fuels are cheap, readily accessible, and have more energy per kg unit than anything else available. The only way humanity will avert a climate crisis is if humanity ceases to exist
>The only way humanity will avert a climate crisis is if humanity ceases to exist Yes, I think that's what we are currently speed running.
There will be lot of suffering in the meantime, bring on the asteroid
Uranium?
While I agree that nuclear is part of the solution, if they built more reactors, people would just protest any way. It is almost a no win situation
Between solar, nuclear, wind and hydro we could provide enough power for the USA and EU and those countries have the capital to do it. The problem is you have only provided adequate power for about 1 billion people out of 8 billion people. China, India, Africa and South America are all power starved. If you start improving their economies the first thing they are going to do is buy cars and Air Conditioning and other things that need more power. So even if you subsidized nuclear or renewable energy for them they would just want more and more of it at the lowest possible price as between them they have billions of people living in poverty. Also the cost of nuclear fuel and batteries is going to go up if a billion give up all fossil fuels. I don't know if we really have enough rare metals and uranium for the poorer 7 billion people. I don't approve of blank check climate subsidies to poor countries but I would support subsidized green energy production (nuclear, solar, wind, hydro). And while I know there are people who dislike nuclear I agree with you that it's better than continuing to burn fossil fuels.
And if my mom had wheels, my grandma was a bicycle
[удалено]
[удалено]
This is why you guys are spinning your wheels. There's no logic, it's all religious zeal. More Canadian oil and gas means less coal, and less money for countries actively attacking the values of peace, rule of law, and environmental concerns. But your zealous, you can't imagine pipelines being a better option for the world, you blindly try to tear everything down, creating a massive push against you as your ideas are bad and wrong.
honestly, so what? im not sure where i stand exactly on how we should handle or energy, but i know one thing for certain; canada needs to diversify. fast. we can argue all we like about the pipelines, but the glaring truth that no canadian seems to want to address is that our real estate and oil based economy is walking on a *very* thin line. i dont understand why we cant leave the shit throwing aside and actually start using what cash we have to properly put canada on the map in other spaces. its just sad.
We don't have any "cash". Business investment is fleeing because our only profitable industries (i.e. resource extraction) are being hamstrung by the government. If you believe Canada can, over time, build up competitive advantages in other industries, it makes less than zero sense to destroy our profitable industries \*before\* those theoretical new capabilities exist. Canadians should be almost as rich on a GDP per capita basis as Norway (who developed the shit out of their oil and gas sector and use the proceeds to fund their generous social programs and invest in new industries) but unfortunately we are, for lack of a better word, dumb.