And they span elections and governments which can change favourable but slow progress into cancellation to make an election promise a reality.
Trudeau Makes Good on Ethical Energy to Germany
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
Absolutely, and that's another part of the problem. And that can be both federal and provincial gov'ts, so with each having elections every 2 -4 years (lots of minority gov'ts these days) you may have to deal with a dozen different gov'ts (or more depending on how many provinces are affected by the project in the case of a pipeline) each of whom may have radically opposing ideas from the last gov't and each of whom may have the ability to throw a monkey wrench or delay into the project.
I was doing my usual melancholy read through the news of the day when I was startled out of the torpor it inevitably brings.
An online story from one of our broadcasters contained an incredible sentence. For — the sentence made sense. Hence, it was incredible.
Here it is: “One economist suggested Europe should drop its focus on climate change and instead prioritize keeping their countries warm and their lights on in the coming months.”
What! Drop the focus on climate change! Europe! Green Germany! This lone economist must be a new Luther at the doors of the Wittenberg Cathedral.
I remain in shock. Europe should drop its focus on climate change? What? And a Canadian news source is repeating this heresy?
Are butterflies transitioning back to caterpillars? Is yoga now a health risk? Is Heritage Canada funding “actual” anti-racists?
What else can explain this singular, unique dip into the blindingly obvious? Are there no “vetters” at Global News, for such was the source.
The second half of the sentence was even more provocative — that throwaway about Europe prioritizing “keeping their countries warm and their lights on in the coming (winter) months.” What’s this? States and nations are being advised that the warmth and comfort of their citizens in winter 2022 should take precedence over the neurotic spectre of global warming in 2100?
apple.news
Well, glue me to a Rembrandt! Tie me to the top of the CN Tower with organic rope. How thought has changed; a little reality leads to a great change of mind, at least to some. The trickle of common sense is not confined to Europe. It has been noted close to home.
A recent piece by Tristin Hopper in the National Post began with a masterfully crafted first paragraph carrying the same burden of the obvious: “It could well represent one of the biggest missed opportunities in Canadian history: An embattled Europe is clamouring for natural gas, and one of the world’s biggest producers (that would be us, Canada) of the stuff can’t sell it to them.”
The piece quoted the Chancellor of Germany, Olaf Scholz, on a state visit to Canada (he wore, it is helpful to note, traditional German dress — no beaver hat or lumberjack insignia to “fit” in) as saying, “Canada is our partner of choice” in transitioning away from Russian energy. “We hope that Canadian LNG will play a major role in this.”
Got that? His country really needs liquified natural gas, really needs our natural gas. Now this is a big thing.
The head of a huge European country, under the unforgiving thumb of Vladimir Putin, comes to Canada, and asks, “Canada, can you help? You have so much of the stuff that we need so badly. You can short-circuit that awful Putin’s hold over us if you help us.”
Nor was this his first overture to Canada. As a recent op-ed from Heather Exner-Pirot of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute made clear: “Scholz approached (Prime Minister Justin) Trudeau about LNG back in March … German officials planned this trip hoping that a deal could be announced by now. But those hopes were dashed as Germans came to understand what the oil and gas industry in Canada already knew: it is next to impossible to get pipelines and export terminals built in this country, and the federal government will suffocate any companies foolish enough to try with regulatory hurdles and delays.”
And what did Trudeau tell Scholz during the chancellor’s recent visit? That there’s “never been a strong business case” for liquified natural gas exports from Canada’s East Coast to Europe.
Two things: A) Justin Trudeau has less authority on the merits of a business case than I have on the workings of the Hadron supercollider or the esoteric mystic permutations of the Kabbalah. B) The current state of all Western Europe is the most massive “business case” for LNG there ever could be. When the chancellor of Germany asks for LNG, that is a “business case.”
Further, other nations have solicited Canada’s help on the energy crisis.
Recall that cruel maxim from Gospel writer Matthew, which I paraphrase: they ask for bread, and you give them a stone.
Here, 2,000 years later in Canada, it takes a turn: They ask for natural gas, which we have, and you promise them hydrogen, which we do not. We landlock what providence has given us while a tyrant threatens a continent, and offer fantasy relief 10 years down the road. I wonder what the chancellor really thinks about his trip to ally Canada?
Tristin Hopper’s piece had all the detail. Consider how much our failing health-care system, our national debt, all our social service systems could and should be reinforced by an un-ideological, perfectly common sense support of our natural resources, and the flow of revenues such support would bring.
But no — the startling quote from that one economist at the beginning is, despite how welcome it was, nothing but false, fugitive, forlorn hope. Give up “global warming” for guaranteed “heat and light?” How unprogressive. It will never happen.
Let us be cold and in the dark, let Europe remain on Putin’s cat’s paw — it is good for the planet.
Glue me to another Rembrandt. (I’d go for the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel but I’m afraid of heights and allergic, therefore, to high art.)
An online story from one of our broadcasters contained an incredible sentence. For — the sentence made sense. Hence, it was incredible.
Here it is: “One economist suggested Europe should drop its focus on climate change and instead prioritize keeping their countries warm and their lights on in the coming months.”
What! Drop the focus on climate change! Europe! Green Germany! This lone economist must be a new Luther at the doors of the Wittenberg Cathedral.
I remain in shock. Europe should drop its focus on climate change? What? And a Canadian news source is repeating this heresy?
Are butterflies transitioning back to caterpillars? Is yoga now a health risk? Is Heritage Canada funding “actual” anti-racists?
What else can explain this singular, unique dip into the blindingly obvious? Are there no “vetters” at Global News, for such was the source.
The second half of the sentence was even more provocative — that throwaway about Europe prioritizing “keeping their countries warm and their lights on in the coming (winter) months.” What’s this? States and nations are being advised that the warmth and comfort of their citizens in winter 2022 should take precedence over the neurotic spectre of global warming in 2100?
Rex Murphy: Yes, Trudeau, there is a case for exporting LNG to Europe — National Post
Our PM has less authority on the merits of a business case than I have on the workings of the Hadron supercollider
Well, glue me to a Rembrandt! Tie me to the top of the CN Tower with organic rope. How thought has changed; a little reality leads to a great change of mind, at least to some. The trickle of common sense is not confined to Europe. It has been noted close to home.
A recent piece by Tristin Hopper in the National Post began with a masterfully crafted first paragraph carrying the same burden of the obvious: “It could well represent one of the biggest missed opportunities in Canadian history: An embattled Europe is clamouring for natural gas, and one of the world’s biggest producers (that would be us, Canada) of the stuff can’t sell it to them.”
The piece quoted the Chancellor of Germany, Olaf Scholz, on a state visit to Canada (he wore, it is helpful to note, traditional German dress — no beaver hat or lumberjack insignia to “fit” in) as saying, “Canada is our partner of choice” in transitioning away from Russian energy. “We hope that Canadian LNG will play a major role in this.”
Got that? His country really needs liquified natural gas, really needs our natural gas. Now this is a big thing.
The head of a huge European country, under the unforgiving thumb of Vladimir Putin, comes to Canada, and asks, “Canada, can you help? You have so much of the stuff that we need so badly. You can short-circuit that awful Putin’s hold over us if you help us.”
Nor was this his first overture to Canada. As a recent op-ed from Heather Exner-Pirot of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute made clear: “Scholz approached (Prime Minister Justin) Trudeau about LNG back in March … German officials planned this trip hoping that a deal could be announced by now. But those hopes were dashed as Germans came to understand what the oil and gas industry in Canada already knew: it is next to impossible to get pipelines and export terminals built in this country, and the federal government will suffocate any companies foolish enough to try with regulatory hurdles and delays.”
And what did Trudeau tell Scholz during the chancellor’s recent visit? That there’s “never been a strong business case” for liquified natural gas exports from Canada’s East Coast to Europe.
Two things: A) Justin Trudeau has less authority on the merits of a business case than I have on the workings of the Hadron supercollider or the esoteric mystic permutations of the Kabbalah. B) The current state of all Western Europe is the most massive “business case” for LNG there ever could be. When the chancellor of Germany asks for LNG, that is a “business case.”
Further, other nations have solicited Canada’s help on the energy crisis.
Recall that cruel maxim from Gospel writer Matthew, which I paraphrase: they ask for bread, and you give them a stone.
Here, 2,000 years later in Canada, it takes a turn: They ask for natural gas, which we have, and you promise them hydrogen, which we do not. We landlock what providence has given us while a tyrant threatens a continent, and offer fantasy relief 10 years down the road. I wonder what the chancellor really thinks about his trip to ally Canada?
Tristin Hopper’s piece had all the detail. Consider how much our failing health-care system, our national debt, all our social service systems could and should be reinforced by an un-ideological, perfectly common sense support of our natural resources, and the flow of revenues such support would bring.
But no — the startling quote from that one economist at the beginning is, despite how welcome it was, nothing but false, fugitive, forlorn hope. Give up “global warming” for guaranteed “heat and light?” How unprogressive. It will never happen.
Let us be cold and in the dark, let Europe remain on Putin’s cat’s paw — it is good for the planet.
Glue me to another Rembrandt. (I’d go for the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel but I’m afraid of heights and allergic, therefore, to high art.)
Stick with CanCon, and pretty soon you'll be comfortably ensconced in knee-jerk hatred of True Dope and the Liberals, to the point where you'd blame a rainy day on them and accept without question or scepticism any claim about their nefarious evil, no matter how swivel-eyed.
Now, just think about how close we could be to actually sending LNG and coal to Germany if turdOWE had not put up road blocks to development every step of the way since the day he seized power.Naturally, I expect Ezra Levant to be his #1 cheerleader.
Trudeau is set to sign an energy development agreement largely focused on hydrogen with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz during Scholz's visit to Canada next week.
Europe, and Germany in particular, are heavily reliant on Russian oil and gas and are desperately seeking both short and long-term alternatives.
Trudeau says Canada has increased its oil and gas outputs but cannot realistically do much to change the energy crunch in the short term.
But longer-term, he says Canada's hydrogen and critical minerals strategies are aimed at making the country one of the world's biggest net-zero energy suppliers.
Canada-German energy agreement to focus on long-term energy planning: Trudeau
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is hinting that an energy pact planned between Canada and Germany will focus more on Canada's aim to be a long-term clean energy supplier to the world.beta.ctvnews.ca
Is this the only place you do stupid troll posts, or are you allowed to post BS on other forums too. The turdOWE fanboi club doesn't count.
I'm not too sure about some of this. the LNG plant currently under construction in Kitamat is around 500k from the closest gas well. It seems compressing just before ship loading is the preferred method. I think it has to do with the cost of constructing pipelines to handle a much higher pressure to move LNG.
And they intend to be shipping alberta NG in the future - it's being talked of as the second Alberta oil boom. So that must be more like 1500 clicks or more from the source.
It's actually a selling point to leave it gaseous till the last minute. If there's a pipeline breech the ecological damage is severely minimized and next to nothing compared to oil.
Yeah, I mean we could also trade maple syrup and one-on-one autograph signings with Gretzky.
We could and we do. But - none of those things fund the russian war machine. LNG absolutely does. We are literally enabling a bully to kill people by not providing that stuff ourselves. You never see Gretzky invading other countries.
Yeah fucktard, because that'll help solve Europe's energy crisis at the hands of a tyrant. But then again your clear support of petty tyrants is pretty clear.
Kind'a like the MSM and Trump? I'll take 4 years of Russian collusion lies and attempting to depose a duly elected president for $1000, Alex.
Yeah but he didn't shell them first, so it's different
Also he didn't annex anehiem last year or anything. I maintain that while both are tragedies the ukraine invasion is the more important of the two.
From the U.S. ?
Can we secede Alberta and Saskatchewan to you instead? You can live the dream of living in a country that looks like someone giving the finger.
China is already the world’s biggest carbon emitter, well ahead of the U.S., India and the European Union. Its plan to build dozens of new coal plants is forecast to add 1.5 per cent to its total. Many Canadians, not all of them cranks, have wondered what practical purpose there is in twisting the country’s industry into an unproductive pretzel in search of a slightly lower carbon output when we’re responsible for just 1.5 per cent of the global output while China — with 400 times our population —pumps out 26 per cent and has increased its total by 75 per cent since 2005.
After decades of virtue-signalling, the need to put more effort into adaptation is starting to impose itself. Uber-progressive Governor Gavin Newsom is now engaged in a desperate attempt to halt the closure of California’s last remaining nuclear plant, which produces nine per cent of the power in a state whose rickety electrical network, when it’s not fighting bankruptcy, is better known for starting forest fires than providing reliable power.
California and other nearby states are finally facing serious consequences for favouring righteous verbiage over practical preparations during years of drought. Federal authorities recently implemented mandatory cuts to the amount of water Arizona, Nevada and Mexico can take from the Colorado River, with California down the road amid doubts the cuts will be enough to offset the crisis. Still, the urge to posture continues to compete with fear of upsetting voters: a big water-supply strategy recently unveiled by Newsom was quickly derided for failing to seriously address agricultural water usage, which is about 40 per cent of the total.
Germany is similarly caught beneath the baggage of 20 years of climate policy designed to placate the Green party and an army of activists. Former chancellor Gerhard Schroeder thought it was a brilliant idea to tie the country’s power supply to gas shipments from Russia. His successor, Angela Merkel thought it was an even better idea to shut all the country’s nuclear plants while also pledging to end the use of coal, thereby cranking up the degree to which the country could be held hostage to Russian deliveries.
Which is exactly what’s happening now, as one pipeline from Putin has been shut and a second cut back to a relative dribble. Heating costs are going through the roof and there’s a real fear of a winter of vast discontent as Germans shiver through their anger. But old habits die hard, and German Economy Minister Robert Habeck dismissed suggestions the last three nuclear plants might be kept operating just a bit longer, maintaining it wouldn’t save enough gas to make it worthwhile.
Habeck, a Green party member, also warned the country’s biggest gas supplier could go bust if not for a new levy introduced by the government to prop it up. His warning came as Chancellor Olaf Scholz was in Canada seeking any new energy supplies he could get his hands on. Canada has plenty of the stuff he needs, which we do our best to avoid taking advantage of by blocking pipelines and dissuading investment, a fact Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made clear by questioning the “business case” for exports of liquefied natural gas.
It might be an idea to let actual businesspeople assess the business case, rather than a politician with no background in such things. Instead Trudeau and Scholz agreed to a non-binding pact to try and create an industry able to ship hydrogen to Europe by 2025, even though Canada’s current production of suitable hydrogen is about zero, and it wouldn’t do much to solve Germany’s immediate problems in any case.
apple.news
After decades of virtue-signalling, the need to put more effort into adaptation is starting to impose itself. Uber-progressive Governor Gavin Newsom is now engaged in a desperate attempt to halt the closure of California’s last remaining nuclear plant, which produces nine per cent of the power in a state whose rickety electrical network, when it’s not fighting bankruptcy, is better known for starting forest fires than providing reliable power.
California and other nearby states are finally facing serious consequences for favouring righteous verbiage over practical preparations during years of drought. Federal authorities recently implemented mandatory cuts to the amount of water Arizona, Nevada and Mexico can take from the Colorado River, with California down the road amid doubts the cuts will be enough to offset the crisis. Still, the urge to posture continues to compete with fear of upsetting voters: a big water-supply strategy recently unveiled by Newsom was quickly derided for failing to seriously address agricultural water usage, which is about 40 per cent of the total.
Germany is similarly caught beneath the baggage of 20 years of climate policy designed to placate the Green party and an army of activists. Former chancellor Gerhard Schroeder thought it was a brilliant idea to tie the country’s power supply to gas shipments from Russia. His successor, Angela Merkel thought it was an even better idea to shut all the country’s nuclear plants while also pledging to end the use of coal, thereby cranking up the degree to which the country could be held hostage to Russian deliveries.
Which is exactly what’s happening now, as one pipeline from Putin has been shut and a second cut back to a relative dribble. Heating costs are going through the roof and there’s a real fear of a winter of vast discontent as Germans shiver through their anger. But old habits die hard, and German Economy Minister Robert Habeck dismissed suggestions the last three nuclear plants might be kept operating just a bit longer, maintaining it wouldn’t save enough gas to make it worthwhile.
Habeck, a Green party member, also warned the country’s biggest gas supplier could go bust if not for a new levy introduced by the government to prop it up. His warning came as Chancellor Olaf Scholz was in Canada seeking any new energy supplies he could get his hands on. Canada has plenty of the stuff he needs, which we do our best to avoid taking advantage of by blocking pipelines and dissuading investment, a fact Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made clear by questioning the “business case” for exports of liquefied natural gas.
It might be an idea to let actual businesspeople assess the business case, rather than a politician with no background in such things. Instead Trudeau and Scholz agreed to a non-binding pact to try and create an industry able to ship hydrogen to Europe by 2025, even though Canada’s current production of suitable hydrogen is about zero, and it wouldn’t do much to solve Germany’s immediate problems in any case.
Kelly McParland: Is there a 'business case' for defending Canada? — National Post
Ottawa’s promise to pay its fair share would mean an extra $15 billion or so a year, which the government has made clear it is unwilling to spend