We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.

Ricardo2000 • 1 year ago

The world is already over-supplied with crude. As Art Berman notes it was US and Canadian producers who flooded the market with oil and caused the crash in 2014, similar to the 1980-82 recession. US foreign policy has removed from the market significant fractions of Venezuelan, Iranian, Syrian, and Libyan crude without significantly affecting world crude prices. Even removal by missile attack of significant Saudi refining and shipping facilities didn't move prices much, or for long. Texas fracked shale oil producers can't make a profit in the unregulated home of the oil and gas industry. They can’t even cover capital expenditures required to drill and produce oil. Forget about paying existing debt or dividends, this requires more debt. In some cases, Permian fracked natural gas prices have fallen below zero, meaning they pay someone to buy their gas.

https://oilprice.com/Energy...

http://www.artberman.com/al...

https://9to5mac.com/2019/11...

https://ieefa.org/wp-conten...

http://ieefa.org/wp-content...

https://www.nakedcapitalism...

https://oilprice.com/Energy...

ingamarie • 1 year ago

Not bad for free marketeer capitalists don't you think? Ideologues rarely deal in ideas......fantasies of endless production, endlessly rising prices and money trees in their gated back yards being much more enticing.

RickW • 1 year ago

https://www.desmogblog.com/...
While Talking up Climate Action, Oil Majors Eye Argentina’s Shale Reserves

phodgson • 1 year ago

It's interesting to see CNRL on the list, wasn't it during the waning days of the Harper government we had minister Rona Ambrose vacationing on Murray Edward's yacht, the owner of CNRL
, what better for leadership of the Cons, she's already been bought.

Howard Gibb • 1 year ago

While not as fetching as Rona, Horgan has extracurricular friends too.

The NDP were the beneficiaries of millions in building trades union (dues) political contributions.
When does a union ever help with ensuring financial stewardship of public infrastructure projects?

phodgson • 1 year ago

They represent their workers, unless it's CLAC best union management can buy.

ingamarie • 1 year ago

Ahh yes ph, but workers are to remain powerless....individuals without support.......and at the mercy of the same goons that knowingly expand an industry that is destroying our children's chance for a future. Conservative war rooms run with our taxes...yes; unionized workers standing up for a living wage and decent working conditions???? Isn't that communism,lol?

Howard Gibb • 1 year ago

I don't doubt they do.
It's amusing to watch unions tear into each other.

ingamarie • 1 year ago

Howard....as too often, you are off topic, bashing trade unions, playing the neoliberal game of weakening the working people's right to act collectively....but the topic is the legal systems of the planet coming for your friends the tarsands expansionists....

Doesn't look good for them, and as more people take the time to understand the full implications of the climate emergency they have willingly and knowingly brought us..........its going to get worse.

Suck it up buttercuup...as to Rona, if she's smart she'll already know the conservatives only seriously consider a woman when they are in the toilet, and give this non opportunity a very wide berth....she appears to be a person of some integrity and doesn't deserve the headache or the knife attacks when party ideologues don't get what they feel entitled to.........a majority win for them.............and another decade of dithering for Canada.

Howard Gibb • 1 year ago

Oh Ing,
Next try, it was a contextual and factual counter punch to the standard charge of LibCons being in the sackeroo with corporations.
Unions have a different schtick, but are businesses themselves, hence the term "business agent".
Your screed needs freshening up.

Steve • 1 year ago

Yes, by all means hold the feet of the oil and gas industry to the fire (and all the financiers of it--especially central/private/shadow banks who continue to create 'money' from nothing and fund it--and the politicians who continue to support, sustain, and encourage it--particularly due to their obsession with perpetual growth). However, we are all guilty to a lesser or greater extent. The politicians. The banks. The corporations. The media. The consumers. The procreators. We are all guilty of being part of a complex system that we not only depend upon but sustain through our very existence and from which we cannot extricate ourselves. The idea that our current systems can survive in any recognizable form without fossil fuels is magical thinking as I have argued on this site before. Not that I am advocating continued use of fossil fuels or not attempting to mitigate the inevitable crises ahead but there are no 'clean' energy sources. Each and every one of us depends not only on processes that require fossil fuels but on environmentally-destructive processes and finite resources. If there is a 'solution', it lies in abandoning growth in most of its forms (but especially resource use, economics, and population) and embracing a degrowth culture. Since most people (particularly in so-called 'advanced' economies and especially those at the top of the economic/financial pyramid) will rail against such an approach, it would appear that the collapse that accompanies diminishing returns and ecological overshoot is all but guaranteed. I hope I'm wrong but our species pre/history suggests otherwise.

Mikey • 1 year ago

Good thinking that points towards the best of the faux solutions - remove
energy market control from dirty energy proponents and create a truly transitioning economy that unequivocally demonstrates we are reducing fossil fuel combustion every year; we are renovating resource extraction, transportation and agriculture to reduce damage & destruction; state financing will reflect the highest priority of our nation without contradiction; we are removing power from industry weaponized rhetoric and placing control under an accountable and transparent democracy that has never been tried.
A wing and a prayer . . . .

John Merriman • 1 year ago

What all this adds up to, what few people want to acknowledge, is the total ending of what is essentially unrestricted capitalism. Unless and until that happens, there is no saving humanity.

ingamarie • 1 year ago

We could do it. The main obstacles as I see it, will be all the scam artists who jump on board as soon as the people demonstrate the will to have the transition happen at the speed necessary. We have so many know it alls out there.......so few walking the talk and doing the work now. It's hard work......and contested work...........and governments have had over 40 years of being bamboozled by the private sector into schemes that turn out to be scams. Just think Phoenix pay system...has that been fixed yet? Or those big ferrys in B.C. a couple of decades ago...who forgot about the science of water displacement and how big the docks had to be to accomodate those massive ships....and who was fined or went to jail for the oversight?

Governments are captive to big marketeers right now. How to free them should be part of our discussion. How to only hire the qualified, the credible, and the genuine experts is another topic for discussion. Yes...we need to move....and fast.

We also need to minimize big mistakes and corporate spin.

RickW • 1 year ago

Seemed to work for a while in the 50's & 60's.....
https://harpers.org/archive...

Steve • 1 year ago

A wing and a prayer mixed in with a lot of magical thinking to reduce cognitive dissonance...

Mikey • 1 year ago

No cognitive dissonance in an accountable transparent democracy. Lots in the status quo based on the magical thinking of contradiction as truth.

Steve • 1 year ago

"...accountable transparent democracy.."
LOL. Not only has one never existed in the pre/history of complex societies, but the rich and powerful would never let that happen.

Mikey • 1 year ago

Thank you - you finally got the point.

salal • 1 year ago

Justin's reply? "Congratulations Premier Horgan on your 40 billion dollar LNG/Fracking industry.

Steve • 1 year ago

Part of our dilemma, I'm afraid, is that our financial/economic systems have become little more than a fraudulent Ponzi scheme that can only be kept from imploding by the pursuit of growth, and this necessitates that the 'front men' of the scheme (our politicians and bankers) keep the engine of our economic growth (cheap energy, especially fossil fuels) growing, even though they are well aware (but deny it) that it is detrimental to our long-term survival. I mean, really, what could possibly go wrong with infinite growth on a finite planet?

Chevy • 1 year ago

good observation.

watched a news report on this travesty of justice to peoples on APTN and before that on the Amazon Jungle and what the rich (even some hollywood actors?) intend to do with the lungs of the earth deforested. Another get rich sick plan that will fail for sure. Like it is a rain forest and hell have no wrath like mother nature.

dda • 1 year ago

Watch "Ecuador's Oil: The Curse of Abundance".
There isn't an ounce of integrity in these companies, despite the PR campaigns they wage...
The only 'difference' between how they 'operate' in 1st world countries vs. 3rd world countries is that in 3rd world countries they use the poorest equipment/pipes, no oversight, rampant pollution, and they will kill objecters. And now, very savvy Chinese corps. (the same ones operating in Canada) have made "loans" to the Ecuadorians that must be repaid in o/g, not cash. Of course, while the market price of o/g drops, the loans don't. As the price of o/g drops - they simply 'owe' them More o/g to 'repay' the debt.
I have one word for the industry and those who support their 'modus operandi' - Disgusting!!!

Mike • 1 year ago

The oilsands annual contribution to the global carbon footpint is 0.15%. Canada, as a nation, contributes approximately 1.5% to the total global carbon footpint.
Everyone agrees on the science. But pointing fingers without providing a viable solution really doesn't accomplish much.

Steve • 1 year ago

Do keep in mind, however, that that 1.5% number is from a country with about 0.467% of the world's population. Canadians are, unfortunately, one of the world's most negatively-impactful players on a per capita basis.

Mike • 1 year ago

I agree. But Canada, with is 0.467% of the world's populaiton is the 4th largest producer and the 4th largest exported of oil in the world.
But look where we live. How are we supposed to feed ourselves and heat our homes.
And Steve, what specifically are you doing to solve the problem? Alternatively, do you any reasonable suggestions for the rest of us that will sustainably meet our energy needs?

John Merriman • 1 year ago

I am sorrry you feel so helpless. It must be a comfort to you to know that you bear no personal responsibility for our collective predicament. I guess you will carry on consuming as usual until everything just fizzles.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/apr/26/were-doomed-mayer-hillman-on-the-climate-reality-no-one-else-will-dare-mention

Mike • 1 year ago

Wow John, I'd like to thank you for your sympathy.

My point has always been that what we're dealing with is a demand issue, not a supply issue. We somehow have to figure out how to feed the planet and find the energy to do that without destroying ourselves in the process.

What I've observed is that everyone wants something done until that proposed something causes a slight personal inconvenience, and then the cognitive dissonance kicks in.

If we're going to solve the problem, we have to solve it together and stop pointing fingers.

John Merriman • 1 year ago

Hi Max, I fully endorse your sentiments on this issue, but I don't see it as all represented in black and white.

It is partly a supply issue because our choices have been purposely restricted. We can only choose among what is made available to us to meet the needs of the level of lifestyle that we choose. In that regard, I can't entirely agree with another statement of yours that "[you] too are as much a part of the problem as any oil company". There are big differences in our levels of responsibility. As an example of the principle, if my electrical power were supplied by a utility using fossil fuels to generate it, I would not have any realistic choice about whether to use it. Even if we had solar (not feasible in our location), it would only be supplementary, we would still need hydro.

"Slight personal inconvenience" is fine, I readily accept many of them to reduce my footprint, but major lifestyle adjustments are not only more than most would agree to but are probably not workable in isolation in a society that is not making the same adjustments. We don't tolerate the homeless forming "tent cities" as a non-conforming lifestyle.

Frank_inBC • 1 year ago

Those of us in the developed world that produce the most emissions per capita can all make a difference by doing what we can. Better insulation, buying an ev, living closer to work or working at home, not flying to sunny destinations every vacation etc etc.

However, the big movement requires government and industry. Globalization for example is bad for the environment, is it required? Do we need Chilean fruit and New Zealand meat on our store shelves in February? Do we need to buy manufactured goods from China? Global supply chains have not been with us forever and perhaps we can go back to living without them. Meaning, let's demand less.

People in the sunbelt will still need electricity, they aren't going to stop using it altogether so its incumbent on those with the power to change how that electricity is generated from gas to solar or whatever.

There is no magic pill that will fix everything, it requires billions of individual decisions that will add up.

As for Canadians having to use more energy because of where we live, there's no rule that there has to be a Canada, we choose to live here, no one is forcing us.

If a billion people moved to Antartica and started producing 100x the emissions per capita of someone in France would we say well that's necessary?

Frank_Reminder • 1 year ago

Max is pretty clear about where responsibility lies, you're the one who will shoulder no blame.

John Merriman • 1 year ago

I understand why you made that response, but I was replying to an earlier comment by Max ("I agree. But Canada..."), not the one that fell later immediately above mine. I took the earlier one to suggest that he was asking for answers because he was at a loss to supply his own.

phodgson • 1 year ago

Insulate, we heat our house with 2 1500 watt heaters at -25.

Steve • 1 year ago

The first thing we need to do is stop pursuing growth (both population and economic) and pursue degrowth strategies, as I have repeatedly argued on this site.

As far as what I've done to 'solve' the problem: first, I don't believe there is a 'solution' primarily because of the complexity, the momentum of the various systems, and how late in the 'game' we are--to say little about the fact that almost all of us in so-called 'advanced' economies are virtually entirely dependent on our fossil fuel-dependent systems, as you say "... look where we live. How are we supposed to feed ourselves and heat our homes." Second, I personally have reduced my consumption, travel, leisure/entertainment activities, etc. significantly. Third, I have explored and put into practice organic food production on our small property in an attempt to provide as much of our own food as possible and this past growing season participated in and supported a local, organic farmshare program that kept us well-fed in greens and veggies up until last week's finally pickup that will provide us with locally-grown food for this and next week's dinners). There are numerous other things as well...you?

Mike • 1 year ago

Good on you. I think you're one of the few on here trying. Not that my opinion really matters, but I do agree with what you're saying....we have to reduce the demand for energy and our seemingly eternal need for more. Personally, my wife and I live in a tiny little house. We walk or bike to work. Produce our own food where we can and buy local whenever we can. There is very good book called "The End of Energy Obesity" by Peter Tertzakian which talks about all this. You should check it out.

Andrew Mitchell • 1 year ago

Yes, but the overall global impact, which this article is about, should be more transparent. What about China and their activities, what about the USA and their continuing expansion of their oil production? What about population growth where in the last 70 years the human population has tripled to 7.5B and all of the consumption requirements that these people demand and require....all of which rely on the petroleum industry. Laying climate change at the feet of corporation who are doing the bidding of the global population by providing the inputs they require is cutting out your heart when it's faulty but the rest of your body is fine. you will die anyway. We need to talk about sustainability and finding other ways to transport products and power our economies but that will be a slow process not one that can be solved in 5 years

John Merriman • 1 year ago

Ah, yes! Whatabout.....and whatabout...?

"Don't look here -- look over there!"

We have no control over what happens in other countries, and we have no valid claim to demand that they address their own climate and consumption issues until we make a credible start on putting our own house in order.

John Merriman • 1 year ago

In carbon emissions per capita, Canada is the 3rd worst in the world, close behind USA and Australia. China is 7th.

"We're Number 3!"
"We're Number 3!"

Don't worry folks, Trudeau are his dedicated band of oleophiles will soon have up to Number 1.

Steve • 1 year ago

No industrial or growing nation is innocent, that's for sure. I would not agree with attempts to transport products long distances or power our economies (especially anything like they are currently organized) as 'sustainable'; and it doesn't matter how 'green' the power might be. Everything needs to be small and as local as possible. And if the local environment can't sustain the population, then the population shouldn't be there. I think of my home province of Ontario that with its millions of inhabitants (and growing) long ago overshoot the region's natural carrying capacity, relying on 90+% of its food to be imported...and with climate changing, perhaps very quickly, one's continuing reliance on long-distant supply chains to keep one fed is the ultimate in cargo-cult like, magical thinking.

disqus_Wf91wKMTsJ • 1 year ago

There are no viable solutions. At this point climate change is locked in. Our logging, fishing, mining and agricultural activities have destroyed much of the earth’s capacity to take care of the fossil-fuel carbon currently in the system.

Mitigation can’t deal with what is already in place. Disruptive and uncontrollable levels of climate change, bringing more starvation, destruction, migration, disease and even war will lead to societal collapse.

David Kimball • 1 year ago

"Never notice another slice off a cut loaf."--the favourite 'excuse' of a petty thief or a serial gang-banger.

Mike • 1 year ago

If you've ever filled up your car, flown in an airplane or heated your home then you too are as much a part of the problem as any oil company.

David Kimball • 1 year ago

I don't have a car and havn't flown since I discovered that the oil companies were lying to us that they wern't destabilizing the climate.

Mike • 1 year ago

All right. Kudos. Seriously.

conductor274 • 1 year ago

That's true but that changes nothing. That logic only proves that you understand that we're all causing climate change to get worse but it allows you an excuse to not participate in any solution.

Chevy • 1 year ago

people think the viable solution is to go with new products that don't involve digging into the earth.

people need to slow down, stop having so many babies (adopt right), look back at the way our ancestors did things without much technology and use our advanced technology to improve our gifted ways and help the entire world be a better place to live, work and promote peace and harmony. Imagine!

Like if everybody made that their new years resolution it would be the start of something better!

Mike • 1 year ago

And our ancesters were typically considered lucky to make to the age of 35 and they started having children at age of 13. There's plenty of crown land in Canada you can wander off to so you can carve out a better place and promote peace and harmony. Imagine!

conductor274 • 1 year ago

There's a big change from even 10 years ago whenever climate change is discussed now compared to then. Our excessive use of fossil fuels is now widely recognized as the main cause of climate change as more scientific information gets published and understood and we see the actual damage in news reports from around the globe. The conversations about climate change are getting more reasonable and intelligent as climate change denial becomes akin to believing the earth is flat. The fact that climate change is not an "us vs them"scenario is better understood better now than ever before so there's a glimmer of hope that we might do the things that are necessary to slow climate change down and leave behind a reasonable place for our kids and grandkids.

Hawkman100 • 1 year ago

Any notion that the fossil fuel industry should be held accountable for anything to do with climate change is completely ludicrous. Everybody in this world depends on fossil fuels in one way or another to put food on the table through employment or other economic activities. If the fossil fuel industry is to be held accountable, then every one of us should be held accountable as complicit in its activities.

Only Greenpeace and other environmentalists could think up an idea as stupid as this.

puppyg • 1 year ago

By your logic then, we push on to the cliff edge and jump. Is that it?