[potatopizzafan]

I'm fundamentally pessimistic about the future of Alberta because the majority of the citizens here are.

that's a pretty wide sweeping generalization, and not an attitude i encounter often. Although not many of my friends and family are involved in oil and gas

you seriously think the majority of the population things Sask is better than here? hmm..

 

[Silence&Motion]

I'm torn in similar ways that others are. I think the fundamentals of Alberta are strong for all of the reasons mentioned. However, I do think that the attitudes represented by the UCP and many of the loudest segments of the population are a problem. Kenny's reaction to the question about a Green New Deal the other day is a perfect example of this. He could have given a bland, politic answer about how Alberta is investing in all types of energy, but instead his bluster made it seem like Alberta was going to be a hostile location for anyone interested in investing in new forms of energy.

Whether it's economic issues or cultural issues, people want to migrate to a place that has an inclusive, optimistic vision of the future. Albertans and their current government have instead embraced the opposite vision of a world in which everyone's out to get us, it's all a big conspiracy of globalists, and the solution is to circle the wagons, double-down on traditional ways of life, and accuse anyone who disagrees as being an anti-Alberta agent. If Alberta does go into permanent decline, it will be because this regressive, paranoid vision wins out, and anyone who wanted to fight for the progressive, optimistic vision eventually gave up and/or moved away.

 

[Chowda7]

Pretty ridiculous its come to this. But anything we can get at this point I guess.

Irving Oil finally gets approval to source Alberta oil — but through the Panama Canal

Irving's circuitous route is seen as a novel way to get around regulatory logjams in Canada that have stalled a number of pipelines

business.financialpost.com

 

[darwink]

Pretty ridiculous its come to this. But anything we can get at this point I guess.

Irving Oil finally gets approval to source Alberta oil — but through the Panama Canal

Irving's circuitous route is seen as a novel way to get around regulatory logjams in Canada that have stalled a number of pipelines

business.financialpost.com

Nah. Energy East sucked the day it was proposed, sucked even more over time. As long as there is enough take away capacity from Alberta (which there will be with everything under construction), this makes way more sense than building the longest most expensive oil pipeline in the entire world. It isn't a coincidence that once Trump cleared obstacles from Keystone XL that TC dunked Energy East.

 

[JonnyCanuck]

Nah. Energy East sucked the day it was proposed, sucked even more over time. As long as there is enough take away capacity from Alberta (which there will be with everything under construction), this makes way more sense than building the longest most expensive oil pipeline in the entire world. It isn't a coincidence that once Trump cleared obstacles from Keystone XL that TC dunked Energy East.

You have expressed that opinion before. I don't agree with it, nor does a previous exec from TransCanada Pipelines, Dennis McConaghy, who was behind the Keystone XL development. He was on the Danielle Smiths QR77 show yesterday. The Keystone XL project is far from a slam dunk and there is yet another injunction on it in the U.S. When asked about Energy East he stated that 'we had the opportunity to get this built and have now lost it'.

In my opinion, it should have been built years ago. Half the infrastructure is already in place from Western Canada and Ontario. The stumbling block was Quebec and the federal governments unwillingness to support the project, broker an agreement, and sell it to the country as a national infrastructure project. The tide had changed, it was no longer politically viable nationally to support pipeline construction across provinces (Keystone XL is from Albert to the U.S. and not across provinces) and TransCanada simply gave up. It is no wonder they changed their name to TC Energy as there is no such thing as 'transcanada' anymore, when it comes to pipelines.
Is there anyone now who is following the plight of our energy industry, not sorry that Energy East was built when we had the chance to do it? It is just another example of this country's economic suicide.

 

[darwink]

TransCanada can’t admit it willingly gave up the project, or else it would owe all the committed shippers equivalent of deposits which are used to pursue the project back.

Energy East would have been a great project for TC! No doubt. Big tolls, an easy long term project to sell off or run itself for a consistent Rate of return. The only losers would be the shippers and Alberta taxpayers.

 

[October]

Hello everyone, I'm working on a project for my university's summer macroeconomics class and I would like to hear some input on a couple questions, if some people here wouldn't mind answering that would be awesome. They are based on the future of Alberta's economy given 2 scenarios, 2 opinionated questions and one yes or no question.

Scenario 1: If Albertas oil & gas sector were to rebound to level seen before the Covid-19 outbreak, this means ~$45-$70 per barrel of oil, how do you think Albertas, and Canadas economy would fare during the next 5-10 years? this is in regards to employment, population growth and or decline, and citizen well being.

Scenario 2: If we were to leave Alberta's oil & gas sector to their own devices, and let them fare as they would, with the eventual removal of them entirely? This would leave an economy open to diversification, how do you think Albertas, and Canadas economy would fare during the next 5-10 years. this is in regards to employment, population growth and or decline, and citizen well being.

Question 1: What do you think should be done in your own opinion to Albertas oil and Gas sector? What I mean by this is what do you think should be done with it, whether this be get rid of it, keep it as is, or grow it.

Question 2: If Alberta were to phase out Oil & Gas how do you think Alberta would diversify their economy? To avoid things such as high unemployment, population decline etc.

Finally, are you optimistic about Alberta's future? yes or no?

hope to get some responses from the general community via the forum considering I can't necessarily venture outside to find people in the general public right now, haha.

 

[darwink]

Hello everyone, I'm working on a project for my university's summer macroeconomics class and I would like to hear some input on a couple questions, if some people here wouldn't mind answering that would be awesome. They are based on the future of Alberta's economy given 2 scenarios, 2 opinionated questions and one yes or no question.

Scenario 1: If Albertas oil & gas sector were to rebound to level seen before the Covid-19 outbreak, this means ~$45-$70 per barrel of oil, how do you think Albertas, and Canadas economy would fare during the next 5-10 years? this is in regards to employment, population growth and or decline, and citizen well being.

It wasn't seen as that great before, but to be honest that is the best case scenario. Market access (pipelines that are approved and under construction today are finished), and mediocre prices. No large oil sands project that isn't replacing a depleted deposit will be proposed, and over time Alberta evolves.

Scenario 2: If we were to leave Alberta's oil & gas sector to their own devices, and let them fare as they would, with the eventual removal of them entirely? This would leave an economy open to diversification, how do you think Albertas, and Canadas economy would fare during the next 5-10 years. this is in regards to employment, population growth and or decline, and citizen well being.

I am not sure how this is any different from the above. I guess it is assuming that the industry would collapse without subsidy? I think this confuses industry with companies. A lot of the companies are going to collapse and be bought by others at low prices. The industry will survive.

Question 1: What do you think should be done in your own opinion to Albertas oil and Gas sector? What I mean by this is what do you think should be done with it, whether this be get rid of it, keep it as is, or grow it.

This shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what kind of industry oil and gas is. As a non renewable natural resource, what most outsiders would consider growth, is needed just to keep the industry in a stead state of production. New wells, new projects just to keep production the same. If a government was to make a policy decision to shut down production before deposits were depleted, the destruction of capital would be enormous. It would suck for Alberta sure, employment, royalties and all But the real losers would be Bay Street. Hundreds of billions of dollars of bonds owned by pension funds across the land just lit on fire.

Letting the industry naturally decline as a percentage of the economy by not having it grow much net new production seems very likely today. Then as time goes on, production declines, and the industry eventually enters a state to supply non-energy raw materials for ever imo.

Question 2: If Alberta were to phase out Oil & Gas how do you think Alberta would diversify their economy? To avoid things such as high unemployment, population decline etc.

Again, the phase out is all about timelines. 30, 40 years, sure, thats great. Over 5 years it would be utter devastation. That being said, Alberta's cities (Edmonton and Calgary) are large enough to stave off any decline over the long term, with the cities feeding on their own energy. Think about cities above a certain size as fires that create their own weather. They won't slowly decline like what has happened to New Brunswick and Cape Breton for example.

Finally, are you optimistic about Alberta's future? yes or no?

Yes. Educated population, big cities, tonnes of money even if it doesn't seem like it. We'll be fine.

 

[JonnyCanuck]

Alberta's Economy

darwink and I are probably the most active on this thread. Some things we agree on and some things we don't.

Question 1: What do you think should be done in your own opinion to Albertas oil and Gas sector? What I mean by this is what do you think should be done with it, whether this be get rid of it, keep it as is, or grow it.
I don't understand why there is even any discussion in Canada about 'getting rid of the oil & gas sector' in our lifetime. With the world forecasting to consume vast quantities of fossil fuels for decades to come. Why would you eliminate a resource that there is demand for? Do you think government and industry in Saudi Arabia, Russia and the U.S. are asking the same question? Of course NOT.... it is a significant percentage of their economies. Why do we want to commit economic suicide in Canada?
So, to answer the question ... we should maximize our exports of oil and gas to increase our share of the global market while there is still demand. There is no export market for green energy, so what resource, products or services can Alberta or Canada come up with that would replace O&G in terms of revenue, profits and tax contribution; in the short to medium term. The answer is .... there is nothing and Canadians need to realize this, because we have some huge debt now that is going to take decades to pay for.
Question 2: If Alberta were to phase out Oil & Gas how do you think Alberta would diversify their economy? To avoid things such as high unemployment, population decline etc.
Without an industry like O&G that employs highly educated and skilled people but also paid well, we will most certainly lose those people to other provinces or countries. The standard of living we enjoy in Alberta was, and still is afforded by the contributions of oil and gas. No other industry in the province can come close. As we are land locked, it is difficult to imagine what a replacement industry could be. Toronto is the financial hub. Ottawa, Montreal and now Vancouver is becoming the tech hub. Ontario and Quebec have most of the manufacturing. I doubt whether there is room for Calgary to expand in any of those sectors, in a meaningful way.
Finally, are you optimistic about Alberta's future? yes or no?
Until the rest of Canada realizes and appreciates the contribution of oil & gas to the Canadian economy and stops demonizing it; I am not optimistic at all. We have a resource that the world wants and until they don't want it, we should not stop developing it. We still have to pay for stuff in this country and renewable energy is not going to cut it, unless we can figure out a way of exporting it in mass quantities. Good luck with that!

hope to get some responses from the general community via the forum considering I can't necessarily venture outside to find people in the general public right now, haha.

 

[Disraeli]

50 million USD funding round is a pretty impressive deal

With $73 million CAD, Symend closes one of the largest Series B rounds in recent Alberta history | BetaKit

Symend has raised $73 million CAD in Series B funding for its customer engagement platform designed for financially at-risk customers.

betakit.com

 

[CBBarnett]

Yes. Educated population, big cities, tonnes of money even if it doesn't seem like it. We'll be fine.

Me too, I am optimistic. There are many much older, less educated, less wealthy places that continue to evolve, grown and offer great quality of life with far less of the excess resources we have available. Stable and slow growth places are the normal remember.

With our advantages and big growing cities, we will do fine even if our crony-capitalist business and political class can't get it together and squanders opportunity after opportunity. The province and the economy are far greater than a single industry despite what they continue to try and present.

 

[JonnyCanuck]

Biden says he will tear up approval of Keystone XL pipeline if elected. And Trudeau's response to this when asked ... 'I have always supported the Keystone XL project in an effort to get our energy products to different markets. We will work with whatever government is elected in November'. He did not offer any details of what action he would take ... probably because he does not know or hasn't thought about it.

None of this is the least bit encouraging. After the Alberta government announced a $7 billion investment in this project a few short weeks ago, construction stateside was halted by another injunction. Circuit courts will probably block this until the election is over. This is just another 'kick in the nuts' to Canada''s energy industry.

 

[darwink]

The American process makes duty to consult / Indigenous Title obligations look positively easy to follow and implement in comparison now that most of the law is pretty near settled (if the Supreme Court doesn't overturn the TMX approval).

 

[CBBarnett]

None of this is the least bit encouraging. After the Alberta government announced a $7 billion investment in this project a few short weeks ago, construction stateside was halted by another injunction. Circuit courts will probably block this until the election is over. This is just another 'kick in the nuts' to Canada''s energy industry.

Everyone involved in setting Canadian and Albertan economic policy should be fully aware of the political risks of working with the Americans after a few centuries of dealing with them. The only blame would be on those that fail to acknowledge this reality and make single-minded policy decisions based on a toxic mix of reality, blind ideological dogma, crony-capitalism, and political showmanship for the base.

It's one thing to intervene to de-risk a project in your own jurisdiction with your own bureaucratic hurdles that we have control over to improve (e.g. TMX with the Federal investment) it's quite another to try to do the same in a different country's political climate - particular one as complex and polarized as the Americans. You may be able to intervene in the market to de-risk the financing side, but we have zero control over the political and regulatory sides. It's not like American elections are black swan events, they happen every 4 years for the past few hundred. Alberta could adapt to just have a sensible economic policy that acknowledges this and works within the world it can control while slowly de-riskingit's economic portfolio from it's reliance on a single project, industry or market.

But when you put all your economic and political eggs in one proverbial egg basket with a single ideological-driven recipe on your hands as the provincial government has done, and then pass that recipe off to your neighbour who is mostly indifferent to your existence at the best of times - hostile in the worst - you shouldn't be surprised if you end up with a shitty omelette.

 

[darwink]

^ The shift in Alberta when oil and gas began to be seen as not a strategic necessity, was the adoption of the ethical oil argument, which is quite a bad argument. About as convincing as doctors endorsing a favoured brand of cigarettes.

Unfortunately as the purveyors of oil, the ethical argument seemed to really convince Calgary's oil patch -- so much so that they reject using arguments that actually work on other Canadians and Americans to convince people to change their mind.