Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Energy

Federal election campaign a “slap in the face” for this Central Alberta Oilfield Company

Published

6 years ago

6 minute read

Post from Garett Chandler of Red Deer County 

Today is my daughter Sophie’s eighth birthday and it’s caused me to reflect so here goes…

I was raised to never ask someone who they voted for and I’d certainly never tell someone how to vote, but I do think it’s important we tell our story at GT Chandler Contracting as #regularpeople who live and work in the oilfield.

At times it’s been frustrating listening and watching the rhetoric about the oil industry during this campaign. Too often the entire industry has been carelessly batted around, used as a wedge issue designed to elicit emotional responses from voters on both ends of the political spectrum. It saddens me when the industry is characterized as a set of numbers – be it GHGs or the tremendous wealth it’s contributed to our country – instead of its people.

What’s missing are the thousands upon thousands of #regularpeople’s stories who rely on the industry to get by. We’re proud to be a locally-owned and family-run business operating in central Alberta. From pulling slips to running a brake handle, I’m proud to have worked my way up from the bottom of the patch. When I first moved from Manitoba in search of “Alberta riches” almost 20 years ago I honestly wasn’t even sure what that meant.

Today, I know exactly what it means. It’s a roof over my three children’s heads. It’s a business I look forward to going to work in every day with the support of my wife. It’s the men and women who rely on us for a paycheque. It’s dance lessons, hockey practices and holidays. It’s late nights and early mornings. It’s the look my daughter gave me in this photo when I told her we wouldn’t be going home until the boiler was completely clean! The oilfield didn’t give me a job, it gave me so much more and I’m grateful for that.

And that’s why it’s been tough to see so many people line up to take shots at the industry. It’s important to remember we produce some of the most socially responsible oil and gas in the world and in my time in the patch I’ve seen systems change and regulations evolve to ensure the environment is protected. We’re blessed to live in a country with tremendous wealth which has allowed us to expand social programs and ensure everyone has the same opportunity to succeed. Oil has played a large role in that as have the #regularpeople who have gone to work, putting in long hours and honest days.

We aren’t delusional either, even if we’re misrepresented that way in the media a lot of the time. We understand that oil won’t be our primary source of fuel forever. We also understand that we aren’t ready to abandon it yet. Canadian oil and Canadian oil workers should continue to responsibly meet global needs for oil. The wealth generated doesn’t just help our country, it also helps our entrepreneurs who will lead the next wave of energy tech.

To see leaders stand on the national stage and tell us they would shut down the oilfield feels like a slap in the face. To have provinces refuse to have oil transported by pipeline through their territory, stopping it from reaching the global market where it would be bought at a fair price doesn’t just seem unfair, it’s unneighbourly.

It’s also no secret that Alberta workers have been hurt by the economic downturn. We’ve seen it firsthand. We’ve seen friends lose their jobs. Companies close their doors. And hardest of all we’ve seen the impact, the emotional toll, it’s had on people. It’s been devastating to say the least. These are #realpeople not numbers to be used to score political points. No matter what happens on Monday, our country is stronger when we come together to find solutions. When we have compassion for our neighbours. And when we focus on #realpeople.

Our company, GT Chandler Contracting, is full of #realpeople and we hope you think of them and the thousands of others who work in the patch when you cast your ballot.

Feel free to share if you agree and let me hear your story about being #realpeople working in the oilfield.

And if you’re fortunate enough to run into sweet Sophie today do wish her the happiest of birthdays!!

Before Post

Related Topics:

After 15 years as a TV reporter with Global and CBC and as news director of RDTV in Red Deer, Duane set out on his own 2008 as a visual storyteller. During this period, he became fascinated with a burgeoning online world and how it could better serve local communities. This fascination led to Todayville, launched in 2016.

Follow Author

More from this author
Alberta / 2 weeks ago

The Technical Pitfalls and Political Perils of “Decarbonized” Oil

International / 3 weeks ago

Hamas agrees to release hostages; demands further negotiations

Business / 4 weeks ago

Gun Buyback Boondoggle will create criminals out of law abiding citizens while taking taxpayer dollars and directing policing away from actual criminals

Economy

Top Scientists Deliberately Misrepresented Sea Level Rise For Years

Published on October 25, 2025

By

From Michael Shellenberger

Image

Accelerated sea level is one of the main justifications for predicting very high costs for adapting to climate change. And while good scientists have debunked acceleration claims in the past, they did not clearly show how IPCC scientists engaged in their manipulations.

For years, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, has claimed that human-caused climate change has accelerated sea level rise. But that claim is false. There is no scientific evidence of accelerated sea level rise since the mid-19th Century, and thus none showing human-created emissions caused an acceleration in recent decades.
This does not mean that climate change isn’t happening. It is. It simply means that it has not caused the sea level to rise at a rate any higher than one would expect without human-caused climate change.
Not only that, but the top scientists know this fact and have deliberately misrepresented it for years, deceiving the public.
In September, I reported on one of the first global studies of sea level rise that used tide-gauge data, which is the only real-world data that goes back long enough, to the mid-19th Century, that would allow one to detect whether sea level rise had accelerated, decelerated, or remained steady. Since then, I exchanged over 50 emails with one of the world’s leading sea level rise scientists, Robert Kopp from Rutgers University, and heard back from IPCC, NASA, and NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. What I learned shocked me.
For years, the world’s top scientists have known that they cannot prove there has been an acceleration of sea level rise, and yet they have told the public that they can. Not only that, in the process of this exchange, I gained a glimpse into how the scientists have been able to mislead journalists, policymakers, and the wider public for so long.
You might think this is either old news or unimportant. Some climate scientists in years past have pointed out that the real-world data do not support claims of acceleration. And in recent years, a supposed increase in natural disasters from climate change has eclipsed sea level rise in terms of attention-grabbing headlines. But sea level rise has, since the 1990s, been the main justification for apocalyptic climate claims, and past efforts to debunk sea level rise have failed to show that scientists were deliberately misleading.
The media and others have published terrifying maps of the future showing cities underwater. Accelerated sea level is one of the main justifications for predicting very high costs for adapting to climate change. And while good scientists have debunked acceleration claims in the past, they did not clearly show how IPCC scientists engaged in their manipulations.
Not only can I prove that the real-world data do not support the claims that there has been an acceleration, I can show that the scientists deliberately misrepresented their research, and how they did it, thanks to my on-the-record email conversation with Kopp of Rutgers….
Please subscribe now to support Public’s award-winning investigative reporting, to read the whole article, and watch the full video!
Full version: x.com/shellenberger/

Continue Reading

Alberta

B.C. would benefit from new pipeline but bad policy stands in the way

Published on October 25, 2025

By

From the Fraser Institute

By Julio Mejía and Elmira Aliakbari

Bill C-69 (a.k.a. the “no pipelines act”) has added massive uncertainty to the project approval process, requiring proponents to meet vague criteria that go far beyond any sensible environmental concerns—for example, assessing any project’s impact on the “intersection of sex and gender with other identity factors.”

In case you haven’t heard, the Alberta government plans to submit a proposal to the federal government to build an oil pipeline from Alberta to British Columbia’s north coast.

But B.C. Premier Eby dismissed the idea, calling it a project imported from U.S. politics and pursued “at the expense of British Columbia and Canada’s economy.” He’s simply wrong. A new pipeline wouldn’t come at the expense of B.C. or Canada’s economy—it would strengthen both. In fact, particularly during the age of Trump, provinces should seek greater cooperation and avoid erecting policy barriers that discourage private investment and restrict trade and market access.

The United States remains the main destination for Canada’s leading exports, oil and natural gas. In 2024, nearly 96 per cent of oil exports and virtually all natural gas exports went to our southern neighbour. In light of President Trump’s tariffs on Canadian energy and other goods, it’s long past time to diversify our trade and find new export markets.

Given that most of Canada’s oil and gas is landlocked in the Prairies, pipelines to coastal terminals are the only realistic way to reach overseas markets. After the completion of the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion (TMX) project in May 2024, which transports crude oil from Alberta to B.C. and opened access to Asian markets, exports to non-U.S. destinations increased by almost 60 per cent. This new global reach strengthens Canada’s leverage in trade negotiations with Washington, as it enables Canada to sell its energy to markets beyond the U.S.

Yet trade is just one piece of the broader economic impact. In its first year of operation, the TMX expansion generated $13.6 billion in additional revenue for the economy, including $2.0 billion in extra tax revenues for the federal government. By 2043, TMX operations will contribute a projected $9.2 billion to Canada’s economic output, $3.7 billion in wages, and support the equivalent of more than 36,000 fulltime jobs. And B.C. stands to gain the most, with $4.3 billion added to its economic output, nearly $1 billion in wages, and close to 9,000 new jobs. With all due respect to Premier Eby, this is good news for B.C. workers and the provincial economy.

In contrast, cancelling pipelines has come at a real cost to B.C. and Canada’s economy. When the Trudeau government scrapped the already-approved Northern Gateway project, Canada lost an opportunity to increase the volume of oil transported from Alberta to B.C. and diversify its trading partners. Meanwhile, according to the Canadian Energy Centre, B.C. lost out on nearly 8,000 jobs a year (or 224,344 jobs in 29 years) and more than $11 billion in provincial revenues from 2019 to 2048 (inflation-adjusted).

Now, with the TMX set to reach full capacity by 2027/28, and Premier Eby opposing Alberta’s pipeline proposal, Canada may miss its chance to export more to global markets amid rising oil demand. And Canadians recognize this opportunity—a recent poll shows that a majority of Canadians (including 56 per cent of British Columbians) support a new oil pipeline from Alberta to B.C.

But, as others have asked, if the economic case is so strong, why has no private company stepped up to build or finance a new pipeline?

Two words—bad policy.

At the federal level, Bill C-48 effectively bans large oil tankers from loading or unloading at ports along B.C.’s northern coast, undermining the case for any new private-sector pipeline. Meanwhile, Bill C-69 (a.k.a. the “no pipelines act”) has added massive uncertainty to the project approval process, requiring proponents to meet vague criteria that go far beyond any sensible environmental concerns—for example, assessing any project’s impact on the “intersection of sex and gender with other identity factors.” And the federal cap on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions exclusively for the oil and gas sector will inevitably force a reduction in oil and gas production, again making energy projects including pipelines less attractive to investors.

Clearly, policymakers in Canada should help diversify trade, boost economic growth and promote widespread prosperity in B.C., Alberta and beyond. To achieve this goal, they should put politics aside, focus of the benefits to their constituents, and craft regulations that more thoughtfully balance environmental concerns with the need for investment and economic growth.

Continue Reading

Trending

X