|
Tantrika
Miss Ann Thrope




Registered: 03/26/12
Posts: 17,138
Loc: Lashed to the pyre
|
Re: good rare pics from Alberta oil sands [Re: Hobozen]
#16251372 - 05/18/12 07:03 PM (11 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Insightful pictures.
My father works around areas like this. Very good money and connections; however, do not really embrace the idea of following in his footsteps.
|
spoonbomb
Registered: 10/16/10
Posts: 2,058
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
|
Quote:
aNeway2sayHooray said: Ive heard it takes more oil to produce anything from the oil sands than what comes back out.
Is there any truth to this or is it just anti-fossil fuel propaganda?
I've read that it takes half a barrel of oil in energy to extract one barrel of oil from the sands, this was one of the reasons that it's only recently become viable.
-------------------- .
|
SlashOZ
:D



Registered: 10/20/06
Posts: 3,557
Loc: Following the water cycle
|
Re: good rare pics from Alberta oil sands [Re: realfuzzhead]
#16251490 - 05/18/12 07:32 PM (11 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
realfuzzhead said: California government would not let them come in and destroy Yosemite, I have said this before, as a backpacker my biggest concern with RP is his environmental policy BUT the president isn't a one man wrecking machine and I believe the overspending in the military and on social welfare are much more important and much bigger issues than my environmental concerns that most states would override
yeah, i figured when you mentioned backpacking in your original post in this thread. just giving you a little shit . its my big hangup on RP too. didn't stop me from writing him in for '08 and didn't stop me from caucusing for him this year. i have to imagine that his personal history of being from a rather developed part of texas, houstonish area, and not really being an outdoors kind of guy really hurts his perspective on just how much good and economic value that our natural and wild places have because of things like the national park and forest system. i also recognize that the president can't get all they want. i know my conservative senators from Idaho would NEVER let them deconstruct the wilderness system here.
-------------------- "Life sucks but in this really beautiful way" - Axl Rose "Life's a bitch and then you die that's why we get high cuz you never know when you're gonna go." - NAS "When people don't know what you're about they put you down and shut you out" - Black Sabbath "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" - Gandhi "Look up at me I am God, look down on me and I am evil, look at me I am you." - Charles Manson. "Don't question my reality." - Me (as far as I know)
|
Aftermath
Stranger
Registered: 05/14/12
Posts: 124
Last seen: 11 years, 9 months
|
Re: good rare pics from Alberta oil sands [Re: SlashOZ]
#16251531 - 05/18/12 07:42 PM (11 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Aftermath said: Harpers willing to burn through Canadas natural gas reserves and destroy a 3rd of alberta just to line the pockets of his oilexec buddies pockets. Virtually none of the money this stockpile produces goes back to Canada, less then 1% of it, our largest natural resource is being liquidated as fast as possible to other countries that have no other intrest in our country. Harper is a scumbag, I wanna see him drawn and quartered.
oil companis produce less profit than you may think, with the average pay of those workers being $190k, I think a great deal more money goes back to canada than you're willing to recognize
Its a drop in the bucket compared to what it could bring to Canada, thats what Im getting at, the resource is being pumped out at our long term expense, the royalties there collecting on them are rock bottom rates. Canada is getting less then 15% of the profits the tarsands bring, and in some instances large amounts of these royalties are completely withheld.
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/alberta-sues-oil-sands-firms-over-royalties/article2422361/?service=mobile
Not only that but then the actual citizens of Alberta, the ones that run the fishing industry donwstream have to deal with the loss of a longterm business , they gotta deal with the loss of tourism too, and sustainable agriculture, there ripping up some of the most fertile fields in alberta to get to this sloppy shit they pass off as oil. Then theres all the pollution the people of alberta are gonna have to deal with. Its a ecological cataclysm. All for some extremely short term gains. That does a lot to counter-act what little money from the tar-sands stays in Canada.
Edited by Aftermath (05/18/12 07:50 PM)
|
realfuzzhead



Registered: 03/03/10
Posts: 10,783
Loc: above the smog layer
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
|
Re: good rare pics from Alberta oil sands [Re: SlashOZ]
#16251677 - 05/18/12 08:16 PM (11 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SlashOZ said:
Quote:
realfuzzhead said: California government would not let them come in and destroy Yosemite, I have said this before, as a backpacker my biggest concern with RP is his environmental policy BUT the president isn't a one man wrecking machine and I believe the overspending in the military and on social welfare are much more important and much bigger issues than my environmental concerns that most states would override
yeah, i figured when you mentioned backpacking in your original post in this thread. just giving you a little shit . its my big hangup on RP too. didn't stop me from writing him in for '08 and didn't stop me from caucusing for him this year. i have to imagine that his personal history of being from a rather developed part of texas, houstonish area, and not really being an outdoors kind of guy really hurts his perspective on just how much good and economic value that our natural and wild places have because of things like the national park and forest system. i also recognize that the president can't get all they want. i know my conservative senators from Idaho would NEVER let them deconstruct the wilderness system here.
exactly man, Couldn't of said it better myself. And my original post was actually talking about Idaho, I have some family up in McCall and we would go up there and go on day drives and hikes up in the mountains. We would always come across 50 year old dredge sites that were such eyesores.. but the vast majority of Idaho is just breathtakingly beautiful
Edited by realfuzzhead (05/18/12 08:42 PM)
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: good rare pics from Alberta oil sands [Re: Aftermath]
#16251861 - 05/18/12 08:58 PM (11 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Aftermath said: Its a drop in the bucket compared to what it could bring to Canada, thats what Im getting at, the resource is being pumped out at our long term expense, the royalties there collecting on them are rock bottom rates. Canada is getting less then 15% of the profits the tarsands bring, and in some instances large amounts of these royalties are completely withheld.
a drop in the bucket? the profit margin for the oil companies is the lowest of the majority of industries, a mere 6%, if canada is getting 15% of that then that cuts the profit to 5%, but what else is canada getting, dont they have income tax on these workers? well canada has pretty high income tax to cover things such as health care and other services but then let's look at the other stuff, where do these workers live, dont they pay rent or mortgages? arent they buying their various needs and goods such as food, clothing and home furnishings, doesnt that money benefit other canadians such as the local business owners?
they're trying to put on an additional 100,000 workers over the next 10 years, they already have 65,000 temporary foreign oil workers, more than 150,000 permanent domestic labor and if we base them all at a single rate of $50/hr, it's more than $40mil/week that can be pumped back into the local economy. this doesnt include the people providing support such as housing construction or other services... you really arent looking at the economics of a project such as this
by the way, your link on the lawsuit, it's a precautionary lawsuit, maybe you should have read it or learned a little about the suit because it only allows an extension on the statute of limitations, it's not about alberta not getting paid
your link http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/camp-oil-sands-albertas-new-economic-boom/article2332939/page2/
Quote:
Alberta is suing the partners of Canada’s second-largest oil sands project for $100-million over a dispute tied to royalty payments.
The provincial government filed a lawsuit against Syncrude Canada Ltd. and its six joint venture partners Monday. The battle is tied to the government’s decision to change the royalty framework effective January, 2009. However, the new rules are not in dispute. Instead, the two sides disagree on how much Syncrude must pay for the oil processed as it transitioned to the new payment structure.
While government has turned to the courts, it says negotiations have not turned sour.
“Negotiations have been going on and they continue to go on and we don’t plan to pursue legal action any further than this at this time,” said Bart Johnson, a spokesman for Alberta Energy. Had the government not filed the lawsuit, its legal window for doing so would have closed, he said. By filing, it keeps its options open if negotiations break down.
“We just needed to file the statement in order to beat the possible two-year limitation period to ensure we can take legal action in the future if that’s what it comes to,” he said.
Syncrude and Suncor Energy Inc. are Canada’s two oldest oil sands projects. In their infancy, the government supported the mines in order to spur the multibillion-dollar industry. As a result, parts of Syncrude and Suncor’s operations paid royalties under a framework different from the companies that followed them into the bitumen-rich slice of northern Alberta.
When Ed Stelmach’s Progressive Conservatives phased out the old royalty framework, Syncrude opted to pay royalties based on the bitumen it produces, rather than the synthetic crude it spits out of its upgrader. Suncor’s royalty structure also changed.
Syncrude and its owners “have been unjustly enriched by retention of the royalty proceeds owed” to the government, Alberta says in its legal filing. The province “has been correspondingly deprived of the value of its royalty share.”
None of the allegations have been proven in court.
Alberta leans heavily on bitumen royalties to fund its coffers. Bitumen is the most important, and fastest-growing, resource in Alberta. The province raked in more than $3.7-billion in royalties from the oil sands in 2010-2011.
|
Aftermath
Stranger
Registered: 05/14/12
Posts: 124
Last seen: 11 years, 9 months
|
Re: good rare pics from Alberta oil sands [Re: Prisoner#1]
#16251903 - 05/18/12 09:13 PM (11 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Aftermath said: Its a drop in the bucket compared to what it could bring to Canada, thats what Im getting at, the resource is being pumped out at our long term expense, the royalties there collecting on them are rock bottom rates. Canada is getting less then 15% of the profits the tarsands bring, and in some instances large amounts of these royalties are completely withheld.
a drop in the bucket? the profit margin for the oil companies is the lowest of the majority of industries, a mere 6%, if canada is getting 15% of that then that cuts the profit to 5%, but what else is canada getting, dont they have income tax on these workers? well canada has pretty high income tax to cover things such as health care and other services but then let's look at the other stuff, where do these workers live, dont they pay rent or mortgages? arent they buying their various needs and goods such as food, clothing and home furnishings, doesnt that money benefit other canadians such as the local business owners?
they're trying to put on an additional 100,000 workers over the next 10 years, they already have 65,000 temporary foreign oil workers, more than 150,000 permanent domestic labor and if we base them all at a single rate of $50/hr, it's more than $40mil/week that can be pumped back into the local economy. this doesnt include the people providing support such as housing construction or other services... you really arent looking at the economics of a project such as this
by the way, your link on the lawsuit, it's a precautionary lawsuit, maybe you should have read it or learned a little about the suit because it only allows an extension on the statute of limitations, it's not about alberta not getting paid
your link http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/camp-oil-sands-albertas-new-economic-boom/article2332939/page2/
Quote:
Alberta is suing the partners of Canada’s second-largest oil sands project for $100-million over a dispute tied to royalty payments.
The provincial government filed a lawsuit against Syncrude Canada Ltd. and its six joint venture partners Monday. The battle is tied to the government’s decision to change the royalty framework effective January, 2009. However, the new rules are not in dispute. Instead, the two sides disagree on how much Syncrude must pay for the oil processed as it transitioned to the new payment structure.
While government has turned to the courts, it says negotiations have not turned sour.
“Negotiations have been going on and they continue to go on and we don’t plan to pursue legal action any further than this at this time,” said Bart Johnson, a spokesman for Alberta Energy. Had the government not filed the lawsuit, its legal window for doing so would have closed, he said. By filing, it keeps its options open if negotiations break down.
“We just needed to file the statement in order to beat the possible two-year limitation period to ensure we can take legal action in the future if that’s what it comes to,” he said.
Syncrude and Suncor Energy Inc. are Canada’s two oldest oil sands projects. In their infancy, the government supported the mines in order to spur the multibillion-dollar industry. As a result, parts of Syncrude and Suncor’s operations paid royalties under a framework different from the companies that followed them into the bitumen-rich slice of northern Alberta.
When Ed Stelmach’s Progressive Conservatives phased out the old royalty framework, Syncrude opted to pay royalties based on the bitumen it produces, rather than the synthetic crude it spits out of its upgrader. Suncor’s royalty structure also changed.
Syncrude and its owners “have been unjustly enriched by retention of the royalty proceeds owed” to the government, Alberta says in its legal filing. The province “has been correspondingly deprived of the value of its royalty share.”
None of the allegations have been proven in court.
Alberta leans heavily on bitumen royalties to fund its coffers. Bitumen is the most important, and fastest-growing, resource in Alberta. The province raked in more than $3.7-billion in royalties from the oil sands in 2010-2011.
Its our resource, 3% of that profit margin should be staying here, not a mere 1% and those mortages, income taxs dont balance out the loss of natural, sustainable industry because of these tarsands. Those are one time payouts that will dissipate quickly, whats being destroyed to extract this sludge pretty much negates what alberta gains, along with the workers wages. Those sustainable industries would have helped power alberta's economy for centuries if properly managed. Not only that but Canadas natural gas reserves will be exhausted years before all the tar is even extracted, reserves that were meant to heat our homes for a century and a half. Forcing us to import the shit at a higher cost, draining more money out of our economy and threatening our energy security.
TL;DR When you just look at the short term gains, yea a fair amount of money from the project pours into Canada, but the long term consequences outstrip those gains.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: good rare pics from Alberta oil sands [Re: Aftermath]
#16251993 - 05/18/12 09:39 PM (11 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Aftermath said: Its our resource, 3% of that profit margin should be staying here, not a mere 1%
you said it was 15% of their profits hat you were getting, now you want 50%, what's to stop them from shutting down, packing up and hitting the badlands in the dakotas, then where's alberta sitting
it's not your resource, it's your government's resource and they negotiated the deal
Quote:
and those mortages, income taxs dont balance out the loss of natural, sustainable industry because of these tarsands.
I've been looking, havent been finding what you're claiming, found illegal fish trafficking, found the commercial fishing was a $5mil/yr industry and tourist fishing was $350mil, havent found anything bout destruction of lands being farmed and did in fact find that they were extracting oil from hundreds of feet below farms and no one's been complaining
maybe you can show us all the collateral damage
Quote:
Those are one time payouts that will dissipate quickly, whats being destroyed to extract this sludge pretty much negates what alberta gains, along with the workers wages. Those sustainable industries would have helped power alberta's economy for centuries if properly managed. Not only that but Canadas natural gas reserves will be exhausted years before all the tar is even extracted, reserves that were meant to heat our homes for a century and a half. Forcing us to import the shit at a higher cost, draining more money out of our economy and threatening our energy security.
100 years of oil sands left, $20bn/yr from the employees of the oil companies, the sport and commercial fishing, $355mil/yr and the entire agricultural industry is equal to what alberta is recieving in royalties, around $4bn... maybe you should do the math because your numbers dont add up, the oil industry is currently driving alberta, just the employee pay is more than all of alberta's food industry. all those one time payment are monthly payments on houses, they're monthly payments on cars, they're daily payments on food and other goods. right now and for the next 100 years, alberta is oil, if the oil leaves then alberta will collapse, they'll see 50% unemployment rates because many of those oil workers decided to stay
http://www.sportfishcanada.ca/pages/page_prov_alberta.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Alberta#Agricutlure
Quote:
TL;DR When you just look at the short term gains, yea a fair amount of money from the project pours into Canada, but the long term consequences outstrip those gains.
once more, you need to show all this harm, I'm simply not finding it
|
|