Killing with kindness...?

[coppertop]

Geez,cowman, its fine and dandy for companies to get more for their raw product by shipping it out of Alberta, but what about the Alberta tax payers return on the products that they have subsidized by low royalties for years? We talk about packers ruling the beef industry and think that is horrible but the oil companies rule this province on Albertans dollar. We have the resources here so while being a province that welcomes the industry we need to get the best bang for our buck vs giving the stuff away to line the pockets of big business.

[ivbinconned]

"We,WE,WE!"

Where does this come from? This mind set that suggests that what the risk takers and investors find...belongs to us all!

Wilagrow and coppertop...I will trade you properties even up, acre for acre. Then you could live in a jurisdiction more in line with your socalist view of the world!

[coppertop]

the law of the land says that the resources belong to the people of Alberta, Sask. etc. I have never advocated a nanny state but I don't want to see the next generation saddled with huge debt in infrastructure, social issues etc. because we have frittered all our non-renewable resources away without adequate return.
Exploration for resources doesn't just cost the energy companies money, it costs millions of tax dollars a year to maintain infrastructure both provincial and municipal.

[wilagro]

Again I agree with coppertop. Sorry cowman, you are out-voted.

[spudchucker]

It doesn't cost money to explore for oil and gas? Where does that come from? Is Precision donating rigs for free these days? Are the rigs staffed by volunteers? Give your head a shake!

[coppertop]

spudchucker, if you read my post you will see I said exploration doesn't JUST cost energy companies money, it costs Albertans as well.

[cowman]

Spudchucker: Boy are you a refreshing voice on here...after all the old "we've got it, we aren't going to share it, Alberta BS!"
I was hoping someone other than the "establishment" might say it like it is!
Drivelling about "sustainability" and "progrssive growth"? Sounds like a bunch of old ladies dithering about what is appropriate and what is not?!
Let's rock and roll and enjoy the good times!!!

[spudchucker]

Hello Coppertop
You are right, I misread it, however I am all for economic growth in the oilfield. This is coming from someone who came out to the oilfield from the east with nothing but dept and is now comfortable. The oilfield is a great opportunity for anyone who wants to get ahead and doesn't mind working hard.

[coppertop]

no-one is denying that the oilfield is a great place to earn a living, both my sons and my grandson and his wife work at excellent, high paying jobs.
However, I am not the only one that is concerned about negative effect of the currrent boom. The Mayor of Wood Buffalo which encompasses all the Fort. Mac oilsands has begged the EUB not to approve anymore licences until the city of Fort Mac. can address the pressures on infrastructure, housing etc.

All construction projects are coming in way over budget, and this includes highway construction and remedial work. It means that the province is only doing 1/3 of the normal remedial work in highways this fiscal year. Each year that the highways deteriorate further, adds to the infrastructure debt that someone, sometime is going to be shouldered with.

My concerns are the lack of consistent land use policy within the province, which is allowing ad hoc growth, without due attention to the environment and water issues.

Water is going to be a huge issue in Alberta, and sooner than later. It is getting excedingly difficult to obtain a lic. to divert water from the North Saskatchewan River, so once industry has all their share, what will be left for human consumption ?????

[coppertop]

cowman, some of us 'old ladies' have spent many years paying attention to land use and environmental issues. I am no tree hugger but want to leave this old world a better place when my time here is through. If that means thinking like an old lady so be it, which sounds something like a pot calling the kettle black because from what I can gather you aren't far from being an old geezer yourself !!!!!!!!

[coppertop]

Monday, Oct 09, 2006
Alta., Sask. officials meet to discuss oilsands pollution


EDMONTON (CP) - Alberta and Saskatchewan have begun trying to figure out how to deal with increased pollution drifting over the boundary between them from rapidly expanding oilsands projects.
"We already know that the oilsands do have quite a bit of emissions associated with the projects," said Paul James of Saskatchewan's environment department.

"We are receiving some acidic deposition."

Consequently, bureaucrats from both provinces have blown the dust off a 2002 agreement on managing transboundary environmental effects, meeting several times this year after a long period of quiet.




"I think Alberta's announcements with respect to the oilsands kind of re- energized things," said James. "With the proposed expansions, we agreed it needed a more serious look."

Figures released last month showed that acid rain, once considered a problem only in the eastern provinces, has begun damaging soils and lakes in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

Already, two per cent of the land tested in Saskatchewan has absorbed acid precipitation exceeding its critical load, the maximum amount of acid a given area of land can tolerate before plant and animal life begins to suffer. Most of that land was in the northern forested section of the province, directly east and in the path of prevailing winds blowing from the oilsands region.




With $94 billion of oilsands expansion projects on the books, officials in both provinces are concerned about increasing emissions of acid rain- causing chemicals.

"The environment doesn't end at the border," said Randall Barrett of Alberta Environment.


Acid rain is formed primarily by emissions of suphur dioxide and various nitrogen oxides. Sulphur dioxide is increasingly being controlled through smokestack scrubbers.

But nitrogen oxides, which come from many smaller emitters such as trucks, are harder to clean up. They are also expected to increase faster because new projects use giant trucks in their mining process.

Oilsands mines emitted 50 tonnes of nitrogen oxides per day in 1990. That level had grown to 150 tonnes per day by 2003 and was expected to reach 398 tonnes per day by the end of this year.

If all planned projects are built, the oilsands could be spewing 538 tonnes of nitrogen oxides per day in the future.

About 70 per cent of such emissions eventually blow into Saskatchewan, says James.

"It has the potential to be quite serious in terms of acidifying lakes and ecosystems associated with lakes."

It could also affect the productivity of forests in Saskatchewan's logging industry, he said.

Companies are now being asked to consider Saskatchewan in their environmental assessments. As well, monitoring of acid deposition is expected to increase in Saskatchewan, with Alberta officials providing expertise.

Each province, however, will remain responsible for industrial activities in its own jurisdiction.

[cowman]

coppertop: The oil and gas industry doesn't set the standards for pollution? They do however comply with whatever the government requires...or they pack it in and move elsewhere?
Likewise the oil and gas industry doesn't set the standards about where and when they can drill...again government does?
When any company sees an opportunity, they are going to take it, just good business?
The responsibility of any government is to supply the infrastructure for the commercial activity they approve? These commercial ventures return to the people of Alberta billions and billions of dollars! I don't think it is unreasonable for the government to put back a small portion in infrastructure?
I would think with all this "pollution" you would be happy Mobile and Encana have decided to refine the heavy crude in the US? Let them have the pollution right? And let those Yankee packers kill all our fat cattle too...we don't want no stinking packing plants polluting our pristine air! In fact let them feed those cattle out too so we don't have any stinking feedlots!

[coppertop]

cowman, when a government encourages an industry to expand, they also must ensure that expansion is not to the detriment of the population.

As far as feedlots, hogbarns etc. go, they have regulations they must abide by, and you are very wrong about industry writing their own regulations. The livestock industry did NOT like the regulations passed in 2002, and of course some of the top guns in the livestock industry had the ear of a couple of cabinet ministers so when the regulations were to be amended, their 'experts' were at the table advising government on WHAT they wanted to see in the regs.

Do you think its any different in the energy sector ?

If other provinces are being affected by the negative side of exploration in Alberta, how long do you think before Rona and crew are going to crack down big time ? I am all for industries being allowed to extract our resources, raise our livestock etc. here in Alberta, but I also feel that the health and well being of the people of Alberta cannot be compromised in the quest for the big bucks.

[cowman]

Well just who is the government of Alberta? The government is the people? If the people didn't support the government then the policies would change? Obviously the people do support this government or they wouldn't keep returning them to power with massive majorities?
Does industry have input into what the government does? Of course they do! That just is common sense and good business? But bottom line...the government makes the decision... and the people support it?
If this government tries to slow down progress and prosperity, I believe they will get a lot of dissension? Just my opinion.