Alberta
The Chasm Between Pro and Anti Pipeline Debate in Two Opinions
 
																								
												
												
											In early January we published an opinion from a reader entitled:
Open letter to Canadians opposing Canadian Pipelines and Oilsands
It generated significant readership and response. You can click on the graphic to the left to read it now, or you can find it included later in this story. Reviewing it will give context to another opinion, this one from Neville Wells, a resident of British Columbia.
These two differing opinions illustrate the massive idealogical gap that exists in the debate around Canada’s energy industry. If you’d like to share your opinion we’d like to hear about it. Send us your thoughts at [email protected]
Open letter to Demian Newman, in response to his article appearing on “Todayville”.
Demian…
Thank you for putting out your thoughts and perspective on the pipeline issues that are on the top of everyone’s mind. I’d like to respond with a few thoughts of my own.
By way of background, I am someone who has, and is, opposing certain pipeline projects in western Canada. I am a native Calgarian who has over 25 years of professional environmental consulting experience and I have worked directly or indirectly for most of the majors on projects like Mackenzie Valley Pipeline, Trans Mountain Jasper National Park Looping, Georgia Straight Crossing, and many, many others. I know the oil and gas industry, its environmental practices, and effects. I have also worked for citizens, mostly farmers, First Nations and ENGOs who found themselves in conflict with the oil and gas industry. I have directly participated in dozens of regulatory hearings in front of the National Energy Board, the Alberta Energy Regulator, Joint Review Panels and other regulatory bodies. In the course of the last three decades I have taken both federal and provincial regulators to their respective courts of appeal on several occasions. Most recently, I challenged the TCPL Prince Rupert LNG pipeline and after being initially denied by the National Energy Board I was successful at the Federal Court of Appeal. As you may know that project did not proceed. I am currently challenging the TCPL Coastal GasLink pipeline in a National Energy Board regulatory proceeding that I initiated and I believe I’m solid legal grounds and that I will likely succeed in that challenge.
So I have a comprehensive understanding of most aspects of the oil and gas industry, in particular pipelines, and a good working knowledge of the rest. I have 25 years of professional environmental experience and am very familiar with the legislative, regulatory and public policy context in which the western Canadian oil and gas industry operates. In summary, I think I understand the industry, pipelines and more specifically its environmental consequences.
Please forgive my long winded preamble but I want to impress upon you that I am not your average tree hugger. My concerns about the oil and gas industry are hard earned over 30 years and are based on experience, facts, reason and good science. So with that said, I have the following to say about your open letter…
First, this is not a comprehensive review; instead I will focus on just a few highlights.
One of your major premises in your open letter is that Canada, and specifically the Oil and Gas industry, has world leading environmental standards and practices. This is simply not true.
For example we do not have an equivalent to the US Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act or the Endangered Species Act. Oh sure, we have the federal Species at Risk Act but the consensus is out – it doesn’t work. And why, because of intensive government lobbying by the powerful oil and gas industry to ensure any efforts to address endangered species do not have an adverse economic effect on industry.
I could go on at length about endangered caribou, sage grouse, westslope cutthroat trout and the list goes on and on., but I’ve made my point.
As for regulations, there are many problems with our current regulatory system, most notably that the government so-called “public interest” regulators, for example the National Energy Board, the Alberta Energy Regulator and the BC Oil and Gas Commission are literally and figuratively captive regulators whose credibility with the general public is near zero. We don’t believe anything they say and why should we.
Let’s not forget the weak environmental assessment legislation we have in this country and the efforts by government regulators and industry to block public participation in the environmental review process.
For example, in a recent Alberta Energy Regulator decision a SW Alberta land owner was denied a hearing on a Level 3 sour gas well where his land and residence was within the emergency response zone and where his only access and egress from his residence was by traveling over 7 km of low grade gravel road that was also in the emergency response zone. When the public lives in the emergency response zone of a Level 3 sour gas well and AER will not allow a public hearing, it’s hard to believe we have a world class environmental and regulatory system… I have many other examples as well.
Another point I want to make is this notion that some pro-pipeline advocates, yourself included, have that somehow it’s the industries God-given right to build pipelines regardless of other thoughtful citizens’ concerns. While that arrogance has worked very well for the oil and gas industry for the last 70 years, unfortunately Demian, to misquote Bob Dylan, “… the times they are a changing…”. And in my view it can’t happen quickly enough.
And don’t get me started on global warming… that an entire conversation on its own… Do you really think that the momentum around reducing global carbon emissions can be stopped or reversed? Sure you can fight a rear-guard action, like the lead, asbestos, and Tobacco industries did, but like them, the oil and gas industry will ultimately lose. Tell you what… let’s make a wager around the issue… lets touch base in 12 years and see who was right. You in?
You indicated in your open letter that you “…I desperately want to have a conversation with…” people who oppose pipelines. Well here is your chance.
I would like to invite you to meet with me to have an open, frank and respectful discussion about the nature of the problems facing us all with a view to finding common ground so that we can identify and work towards a solution that will serve all Canadian’s interest. That will certainly be an entertaining and sometime difficult discussion, but I will make myself available to meet with you at your convenience to start towards finding a solution. Your call…
Best regards,
Mike Sawyer
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Todayville published the following story on January 5th, 2019, with permission from Demian Newman, President of Newman Sales an Marketing in Calgary.
January 5, 2019
Dear fellow Canadians,
I’m writing this as an open letter to every Canadian who has protested the Canadian oil and gas industry. I’m writing this to ask – what if you win? What if you succeed and completely shut down Canada’s oil and gas industry? What happens next?
Obviously, if you’ve ever marched, protested or argued against Canadian pipelines or Oilsands, you must believe that you are financially insulated from the hundreds of billions this industry puts into the Canadian economy. Or you are OK with the crushing blow to the Canadian economy, because your heartfelt belief is that the Canadian oil and gas industry is so environmentally bad for the planet.
These are the people I desperately want to have a conversation with.
I write this letter, not as a Calgarian, Albertan, or even as a Canadian. But I write this as a human being. A human being with two young children, and one who doesn’t go a day without being concerned about how we’re leaving this planet.
So, let’s say that all the anti-Canadian pipeline and oilsands campaigns finally crippled this industry, to a point it can’t rebound. Which feels like a real possibility these days. But what is not just a possibility, but a reality, is that Canadians without their own oil and gas industry would still consume the same amount of energy.
And as Canadians continue to consume 1.5 million barrels of oil per day, the amount we need to import from foreign countries would rise from the current 56%, to 100%. And as completely confused as I already am that we currently import 850,000+ barrels of oil per day, while having the 4th largest reserves in the world. I have absolutely no idea how anyone can think importing an additional 650,000 barrels a day is better for Canada or the environment?
Let’s start with where it’s coming from, with Canada importing 61% from the US, 12% from Saudi Arabia, 6% from Azerbaijan, 5% from Norway, and 4% from Nigeria. I’m going to skip past each of these countries environmental, safety, employee and human rights track records, as there’s no point defacing them when Canada’s oil and gas industry is the world leader in all of these. And I’ll expand on this later, but I thought for arguments sake, we can pretend all these countries have the same standards as Canada.
How could it possibly be more environmentally positive to drill oil in the Middle East, pipeline it to their ports, tanker it 10,000+kms across the ocean, and then deliver it to Canada? Remembering that we have it right here.
So, you’ve won, and there’s no more of what you believe is “dirty oil”. And now we’re importing an additional 650,000 barrels a day into Canada. Let’s not forget, that the 5% of the world’s oil production which Canada currently produces daily, would need to be replaced, or prices would inflate and everyone across the globe would have to pay more at the pumps. And more for the 1,000’s of items manufactured from oil.
But don’t worry about the extra cost, as no other country has an anti oil industry campaign against them, that has stopped or slowed them down like Canada has. And with technology getting better every day, Canada’s 5% worldwide production amounts will be easily replaced.
And let’s go full circle to the Canadian’s protesting new Canadian pipeline projects. If we eliminate our own industry, and we’re importing 650,000 extra barrels of oil daily, we’ll have no other choice but to build new pipelines and facilities to bring this additional oil from the US pipelines and foreign tankers.
So, wouldn’t that be an ironic punch in the face. Where Canadians protesting Canadian owned and operated pipelines, end up shutting down all the investment it takes to move Canadian resources through Canadian pipelines. Just so we are forced to build pipelines and facilities to move more foreign oil into Canada.
And I mentioned that we’d pretend all countries have the same environmental requirements and standards when exploring and developing their natural resources. But it isn’t even close.
You can Google articles with examples of Canada’s environmental standards in this industry, versus any other country. But instead, do yourself a favour and ask someone who’s worked in Canada’s oilpatch, and around the world. Every one of them has countless stories of horrendous environmental issues abroad, which haven’t been allowed in Canada in 30+years (or ever).
So, let’s look at what Canada’s environmental standards are for this industry. And by that, I mean you should go look it up. Don’t take my word for it, but find some reputable publications and factual documents, and not someone’s rambling blog.
Look it up, and please let me know if I’m wrong. Because as much as I needed to write this letter, to get a few things off my chest. I also wrote it, as I believe everyone needs to do better at having a conversation about climate change, the environment, and our responsibility to all do better.
So, I welcome the opposing opinion, as I don’t know why this topic has become a name calling divisive shouting match, where no one will listen to the other side.
But while I have you here, I did want to throw out a couple specific projects, and how protesting them doesn’t make any environmental sense to me. One is Energy East, and the other is BC LNG. The first one is dead, but my fingers are crossed that it can be revived. The second is still approved, for now.
If you look at a map of Canadian pipelines, there is no major pipeline going from Alberta to the east coast of Canada. This means that almost every drop of gas in every vehicle east of Winnipeg is from refined foreign oil. The amount of oil that would’ve travelled on the Energy East pipeline is almost the same amount of oil that we import from Saudi Arabia every day (roughly 100,000 barrels a day).
But what if we didn’t protest Energy East, and instead told the Premier of Quebec that he cannot block a national pipeline. Eastern Canadians would’ve paid (at a minimum) $10-$15 less per barrel than they are currently paying for Canadian oil versus foreign oil. But there was also the billions (not millions, but billions) in revenue that each province would receive from this pipeline running oil through their province.
And I know we’re focusing on the environment, and not the financial benefits of Canada’s oil and gas industry. But, the trick with clean energy and technology, is that it takes money to develop and get to market. So I could be wrong, but I’m almost certain that not one oil company would’ve been upset if Quebec hadn’t killed this pipeline, but instead, took their multi billions a year in revenue from it, and invested all of it into new clean energy technology.
Another thing I encourage you to Google, is the amount of new clean energy technology that has been developed by, and for, Canada’s oil and gas industry.
So, Energy East would’ve taken the amount of Canadian oil, which they are already buying from foreign countries, while generating a ton of money for Canada/Canadians. And then that money could’ve been invested into renewable green energy development. But, Climate Change is a world wide problem, not just a Canadian one. So, as crazy as this might sound, I do believe that BC building facilities to ship Canadian liquid natural gas (LNG) to the world, could have an incredibly positive carbon emissions net benefit.
Currently, China alone has over 700 super coal plants. Just one of them emitting almost as much CO2 as the entire Canadian Oilsands (this is easy to look up). So, what if we could help China get their energy from Natural Gas instead of Coal, as it’s WAY better for the environment. (Side note – also look up Natural Gas and its carbon footprint, as I find very few people realize that it has been unfairly lumped in as a dirty fossil fuel).
And very quickly, I would like to address how we got here in the first place. Why is the perception of Canada’s oil and gas industry so bad across the rest of Canada?
The industry really must start by looking inward, as it has done a very poor job of promoting itself and the strides it’s made over the years. And it can still improve. As can all of us individually.
Because who outside of the industry knows that the Oilsands greenhouse gas emissions have dropped 29% since 2000. Or that a barrel of oil sent from the Oilsands to a refinery on the US Golf Coast has a smaller carbon foot print than a barrel of oil traveling from an oil well in California (it’s small difference, but it’s still better).
And to understand why it’s tough for this industry to promote itself – it is Canadian after all, which explains a lot about its uncomfortable feelings towards self-promotion. And I’ve met a ton of extremely intelligent and thoughtful engineers, geologists, accountants, and tradespeople in this industry, but I’ve never met a Public Relations person – and if there is one, they are very underfunded.
Who is not underfunded, are the groups who make an extraordinary amount of money from Canada not being able to get its natural resources to other customers (the US is our biggest customer at 99%, which is a percentage no business can survive with). And you can’t blame these people for making money off Canada’s inability to build pipelines. But, how they’ve done it, by spending hundreds of millions on PR campaigns to smear Canada’s industry, and pitting us against each other, is beyond is infuriating.
If you only look up one item, please do some research on how openly organizations have been about making donations in the name of the environment, which only target one country’s oil industry. This has made a lot of headlines lately, but I’ve read national Canadian media articles investigating this as far back as 2010.
In conclusion, I would like to point out that I tried my best to use as few statistics as possible, as I’ve seen arguments get derailed with debates on stats. As if the $80 million that Canada losses every day due to no pipeline capacity, is any different if its $40 million or $100 million. It’s a lot of millions, that have turned into billions. And it’s costing hundreds of thousands of good hardworking Canadians financial hardship.
And if it saves the environment, and the planet, then there certainly is an argument for it. But if it’s not helping at all, and potentially harming the planet. Then everyone needs to get educated on all the facts and start to talk to each other about a real solution. And get our industries, politicians, and every Canadian on board with a solution that works.
And please, please, please, don’t take your information from this subject off some rogue website, that’s for or against my stance. Take the time to get your facts from vetted and fact checked publications.
No one should get their facts from a nameless person shouting on the internet. So, my name is Demian Newman, and the two kids I’m leaving this planet to are Olivia and Liam. And both of them need to grow up in a country which is thriving as a world leader, both economically and environmentally – as anything less would be un-Canadian.
Sincerely,
Demian Newman
p.s. If you don’t have time to look up information on everything I’ve mentioned above. Here are a few links:
This first one is on personal energy use and personal accountability. Fun fact: If each of us does a better job to minimize our individual carbon footprint, the industries selling it won’t need to produce as much. Scary fact: literally every economist has said we will use more energy each and every year. This article does a good job expanding on that.
https://www.c2cjournal.ca/2018/12/03/we-have-met-the-carbon-enemy-and-he-is-us/
https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy/oil-sands/18091
https://ipolitics.ca/2014/07/18/how-clean-is-our-dirty-oil-youd-be-surprised/
Newman Sales and Marketing Inc is a full service sales and marketing firm representing independently owned and operated oilfield service companies.
If you enjoyed this story, you might also like this story from Sheldon Gron. Click the image below:
Alberta
Nobel Prize nods to Alberta innovation in carbon capture
 
														From the Canadian Energy Centre
‘We are excited to bring this made-in-Canada innovation to the world’
To the naked eye, it looks about as exciting as baking soda or table salt.
But to the scientists in the University of Calgary chemistry lab who have spent more than a decade working on it, this white powder is nothing short of amazing.
That’s because the material they invented is garnering global attention as a new solution to help address climate change.
Known as Calgary Framework-20 (CALF-20 for short), it has “an exceptional capacity to absorb carbon dioxide” and was recognized in connection with the 2025 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.
“It’s basically a molecular sponge that can adsorb CO2 very efficiently,” said Dr. George Shimizu, a UCalgary chemistry professor who leads the research group that first developed CALF-20 in 2013.
The team has been refining its effectiveness ever since.
“CALF-20 is a very exciting compound to work on because it has been a great example of translating basic science into something that works to solve a problem in the real world,” Shimizu said.
Advancing CCS
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is not a new science in Alberta. Since 2015, operating projects in the province have removed 15 million tonnes of CO2 that would have otherwise been emitted to the atmosphere.
Alberta has nearly 60 proposed facilities for new CCS networks including the Pathways oil sands project, according to the Regina-based International CCS Knowledge Centre.
This year’s Nobel Prize in Chemistry went to three of Shimizu’s colleagues in Japan, Australia and the United States, for developing the earliest versions of materials like CALF-20 between 1989 and 2003.
Custom-built molecules
CALF-20 is in a class called metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) — custom-built molecules that are particularly good at capturing and storing specific substances.
MOFs are leading to new technologies for harvesting water from air in the desert, storing toxic gases, and capturing CO2 from industrial exhaust or directly from the atmosphere.
CALF-20 is one of the few MOF compounds that has advanced to commercial use.
“There has been so much discussion about all the possible uses of MOFs, but there has been a lot of hype versus reality, and CALF-20 is the first to be proven stable and effective enough to be used at an industrial scale,” Shimizu said.
It has been licensed to companies capturing carbon across a range of industries, with the raw material now being produced by the tonne by chemical giant BASF.
Carbon capture filter gigafactory
Svante Inc. has demonstrated its CALF-20-based carbon capture system at a cement plant in British Columbia.
The company recently opened a “gigafactory” in Burnaby equipped to manufacture enough carbon capture and removal filters for up to 10 million tonnes of CO2 annually, equivalent to the emissions of more than 2.3 million cars.
The filters are designed to trap CO2 directly from industrial emissions and the atmosphere, the company says.
Svante chief operating officer Richard Laliberté called the Nobel committee’s recognition “a profound validation” for the entire field of carbon capture and removal.
CALF-20 expansion
Meanwhile, one of Shimizu’s former PhD students helped launch a spinoff company, Existent Sorbents, to further expand the applications of CALF-20.
Existent is working with oil sands producers, a major steel factory and a U.S.-based firm capturing emissions from other point sources, said CEO Adrien Côté.
“The first users of CALF-20 are leaders who took the risk of introducing new technology to industries that are shrewd about their top and bottom lines,” Côté said.
“It has been a long journey, but we are at the point where CALF-20 has proven to be resilient and able to survive in harsh real-world conditions, and we are excited to bring this made-in-Canada innovation to the world.”
Alberta
Thousands of Albertans march to demand independence from Canada
 
														From LifeSiteNews
Thousands of Albertans marched upon the province’s capital of Edmonton this past Saturday in the “I Am Alberta Rally,” calling for the province to immediately secede from Canada in light of increasing frustration with the Liberal federal government.
The rally saw an estimated 20,000 to 30,000 people march on the steps of the Alberta legislative building, demanding that a referendum be held at once to allow Alberta to leave Canada.
“We can’t delay. We can’t slow down,” well-known freedom lawyer Keith Wilson said at the rally as he spoke to the crowd.
“This is our moment. This is our future. For our families, for our children, for Alberta. Alberta will be free.”
The group behind the rally, the Alberta Prosperity Project (APP), bills itself as a sovereignty advocacy group. As reported by LifeSiteNews earlier this year, the APP wants to put Alberta independence to a question to the people via a referendum.
The rally also comes after certain members affiliated with the APP such as Jeffrey Rath and Dr. Dennis Modry earlier the month met in Washington, D.C. with cabinet-level U.S. politicians to discuss Alberta’s potential independence from Canada.
U.S. President Donald Trump has routinely suggested that Canada become an American state in recent months, often making such statements while talking about or implementing trade tariffs on Canadian goods.
The APP on July 4 applied for a citizen-led petition presented to Elections Alberta that asks, “Do you agree that the Province of Alberta shall become a sovereign country and cease to be a province in Canada?”
The group is hoping to have the referendum on the ballot as early as next year and has accused the Liberal federal government of encroaching on Alberta’s ability to manage its own affairs.”
The group says an independent Alberta would allow it to “keep our resources, grow our economy, and reinvest in Alberta families, businesses and infrastructure.”
As it stands now, the referendum question has been referred to the courts to see whether or not it can proceed.
Alberta Conservative Premier Danielle Smith does not support a fully independent Alberta. However, she does advocate for the province to have more autonomy from Ottawa.
As reported by LifeSiteNews, Smith said her conservative government will allow but not support a citizen-led referendum on independence.
Despite not advocating for an outright separate Alberta, Smith’s government has not stood still when it comes to increasing provincial autonomy.
Smith’s United Conservative government earlier this year passed Bill 54, which sets the groundwork for possible independence referendums by making such votes easier to trigger. The bill lowers the signature threshold from 600,000 to 177,000.
As reported by LifeSiteNews last week, Smith’s government introduced a new law to protect “constitutional rights” that would allow it to essentially ignore International Agreements, including those by the World Health Organization (WHO), signed by the federal Liberal government.
The calls for independence have grown since Liberal leader Mark Carney defeated Conservative rival Pierre Poilievre.
Carney, like former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau before him, said he is opposed to new pipeline projects that would allow Alberta oil and gas to be unleashed. Also, his green agenda, like Trudeau’s, is at odds with Alberta’s main economic driver, its oil and gas industry.
- 
																	   Internet2 days ago Internet2 days agoMusk launches Grokipedia to break Wikipedia’s information monopoly 
- 
																	   Business1 day ago Business1 day agoCanada heading into economic turbulence: The USMCA is finished and Canadian elbows may have started the real fight 
- 
																	   Business2 days ago Business2 days agoBill Gates walks away from the climate cult 
- 
																	   Opinion2 days ago Opinion2 days agoBritish Columbians protest Trump while Eby brings their province to its knees 
- 
																	   National1 day ago National1 day agoCanada’s NDP is now calling women ‘non-males’ 
- 
																	   International2 days ago International2 days agoStrongest hurricane in 174 years makes landfall in Jamaica 
- 
																	   National1 day ago National1 day agoCanadian MPs order ethics investigation into Mark Carney’s corporate interests 
- 
																	   Business1 day ago Business1 day agoFord’s Liquor War Trades Economic Freedom For Political Theatre 





 
														




 
											 
											 
											