News   Apr 03, 2020
 6.6K     1 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 8.2K     5 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 4.8K     0 

Calgary & Alberta Economy

The language is much stronger than I thought.
  • Clean electricity regs and O&G emissions cap, gone
  • Commitment to export the oil that reach the port, with no caveat for indigenous or BC agreement
  • Only consultation and financial ownership/benefit with BC/FN, no mention of agreement or anything resembling a veto
  • Commitment to use C-5 (not the same as Major Projects office, no project currently under C5), which actually has legal authority to override regulations.
  • Any new pipeline is IN ADDITION to the Transmountain Expansion, which the BC government was trying to trade off for a new pipeline, but the MOU is both.
  • Dependence clause such that Pathways Plus will not happen without the pipeline, and vice versa. The Feds emissions plan falls significantly on Pathways Plus, so they have a very strong interest to see this pipeline built.
The part that isn't clear is the beginning talks about private ownership, but in the second portion says "Alberta will act as proponent for the development", which isn't clear how far down the road of development will Alberta remain the proponent.

 
The part that isn't clear is the beginning talks about private ownership, but in the second portion says "Alberta will act as proponent for the development", which isn't clear how far down the road of development will Alberta remain the proponent.
Alberta contracted for Bitumen Royalty In Kind Barrels on Energy East to underpin the contract as a take or pay customer. Same on various versions of KXL. Energy East wouldn't have been launched if Alberta hadn't contracted.
Energy East

Keystone XL

I'd expect a combination of that, plus an equity stake to reduce front end risk (lets say $100 million up front to capitalize the project) with an ownership stake that the province would then mostly flip to first nations via loan products, basically a 'free' ownership system.
 
The language is much stronger than I thought.
  • Clean electricity regs and O&G emissions cap, gone
  • Commitment to export the oil that reach the port, with no caveat for indigenous or BC agreement
  • Only consultation and financial ownership/benefit with BC/FN, no mention of agreement or anything resembling a veto
  • Commitment to use C-5 (not the same as Major Projects office, no project currently under C5), which actually has legal authority to override regulations.
  • Any new pipeline is IN ADDITION to the Transmountain Expansion, which the BC government was trying to trade off for a new pipeline, but the MOU is both.
  • Dependence clause such that Pathways Plus will not happen without the pipeline, and vice versa. The Feds emissions plan falls significantly on Pathways Plus, so they have a very strong interest to see this pipeline built.
The part that isn't clear is the beginning talks about private ownership, but in the second portion says "Alberta will act as proponent for the development", which isn't clear how far down the road of development will Alberta remain the proponent.

The part about expanding power generation and transmission to support the data centre infrastructure caught my eye too. Its a very comprehensive plan
 

Back
Top