Calgary & Alberta Economy

[Chowda7]

Carney signs major energy agreement with Alberta, laying out conditions for new oil pipeline

Prime Minister Mark Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith signed a major new energy co-operation agreement on Thursday, outlining the conditions that need to be met for a new oil pipeline to the Pacific to proceed.

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[Mountain Man]

Now all we need is someone to actually propose a pipeline to get this going!

 

[trtcttc]

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.

Canada-Alberta Memorandum of Understanding

PREFACE At this pivotal global moment, Canada and Alberta, working closely with Indigenous Peoples and industry, must work together cooperatively, and within their respective jurisdictions, to foster the conditions necessary for infrastructure, including pipelines, rail, power generation, a...

www.pm.gc.ca

 

[darwink]

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.

 

[Chowda7]

Carney's response when asked about Stephen Guilbeault tells me its just a matter of time before he gets politely booted

Carney signs major energy agreement with Alberta, laying out conditions for new oil pipeline

Prime Minister Mark Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith signed a major new energy co-operation agreement on Thursday, outlining the conditions that need to be met for a new oil pipeline to the Pacific to proceed.

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[Chowda7]

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.

Canada-Alberta Memorandum of Understanding

PREFACE At this pivotal global moment, Canada and Alberta, working closely with Indigenous Peoples and industry, must work together cooperatively, and within their respective jurisdictions, to foster the conditions necessary for infrastructure, including pipelines, rail, power generation, a...

www.pm.gc.ca

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

 

[UrbanWarrior]

The River Class Destroyers won't start production until the 2030s, this would be about the same timeline they were already unhappy about with their Constellation Class. And as mentioned, the River Class is a UK design, not ours to sell.

They’ve already started construction of the HMCS Fraser. Keel was laid down in April

 

[Mountain Man]

Maybe it enters service in the 2030s then...

 

[InfrastructureEnthusiast]

It really depends on what we want them to do. I don't see any need. ...
in what situation would a HDW ever need to launch an anti-ship missile.

Flexibility is nice to have, you never know what the future may bring.. The missiles cost a lot more than the launcher anyways, can't see adding the capability breaking the budget.

As for air defence. The power requirements of air defence beyond a 10 km bubble is enormous. This fairly low end frigate from Mexico has twice the installed power of a HDW, the ship displaces 1/3 the water, and doesn't break ice.

Guess the lav6000 isn't a good base for a flexible multipurpose/ export ship then.

Without getting lost in a bunch of spec weeds, the high level premise is USN wants more ships. Canada has idle shipyards in a region that could use an economic boost. This seems like an easy win to me..

Aluminum being volumetrically much smaller compared to its value (compared to wood, steel), doesn't have this problem. The market is liquid and the market will clear. The USA also needs to buy to meet its needs.

Yeah but this is where being 'resources-r-us' has gotten the region.

Canada can do better, right?

 

[Mountain Man]

Guilbeault just quit over the pipeline deal! Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!

 

[UrbanWarrior]

Maybe it enters service in the 2030s then...

Yeah early 2030s. Current projection is the first 9 ships all entering service by 2040, and the remaining 6 by 2050. Hopefully by then we’ll have a helicopter carrier program so that we can have a semblance of force projection and an effective means of coastal disaster relief.

 

[darwink]

Guilbeault just quit over the pipeline deal! Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!

 

[darwink]

Without getting lost in a bunch of spec weeds, the high level premise is USN wants more ships. Canada has idle shipyards in a region that could use an economic boost. This seems like an easy win to me..

The USA is totally capable of producing more ships in that class. It will have trouble with the mythical 'golden fleet' ship of 14,000 tonnes displacement with a substantial arsenal of 2500 km+ range missiles.

 

[trtcttc]

Guilbeault just quit over the pipeline deal! Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!

Only the cabinet, but staying in caucus. Seems inline with his career, symbolism vs action. Stay and have input in cabinet, or sit as a back bencher that can’t do anything.

 

[InfrastructureEnthusiast]

The USA is totally capable of producing more ships in that class. It will have trouble with the mythical 'golden fleet' ship of 14,000 tonnes displacement with a substantial arsenal of 2500 km+ range missiles.

Oh hi, remember me?

On second thought, maybe Canada should stay far away from USN work... The institutional dysfunction may be more trouble than its worth.