Posts
The Alberta Gazette leaves the notation "more changes- new document to be produced shortly)"
This is really bad for Albertans. When will you see Conservative for what it is and vote otherwise?
Contract or self-insurance plan allowed under section 26 of Act
20(1) Pursuant to section 26 of the Act, an insurer shall not enter into or issue a contract or initiate a self‑insurance plan covering indemnification for the cost of basic health services or extended health services provided within Alberta except as otherwise provided in this section.
(2) An insurer may enter into or issue a contract or initiate a self‑insurance plan under which a resident is indemnified for
(a) the cost of chiropractic services provided to the resident by a chiropractor in excess of the amount that is payable in respect of each service under the Chiropractic Benefits Regulation,
(b) the cost of podiatric services provided to the resident by a podiatrist in excess of the amount that is payable in respect of each service under the Podiatric Benefits Regulation,
(c) the cost of optometric services provided to the resident by an optometrist in excess of the amount that is payable under the Optometric Benefits Regulation, or
(d) the cost of extended health services provided to the resident where those services are outside the limits prescribed in the Extended Health Services Benefits Regulation.
(3) Notwithstanding subsection (2)(a), an insurer may enter into or issue a contract or initiate a self‑insurance plan under which a resident is indemnified for the cost of chiropractic services provided to the person pursuant to the Diagnostic and Treatment Protocols Regulation (AR 122/2004).
(4) Notwithstanding subsection (2), nothing in this Regulation prevents an individual from receiving indemnity for the cost of extended health services where the individual was eligible to receive such indemnity through some other plan provided by a private insurance carrier before the individual or the individual’s dependants became eligible for extended benefits.
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
Monday, July 06, 2009
Alberta Heath Care prepared health coverage cuts!
Alberta is setting the stage to introduce health coverage cuts , Alberta has artificially increased the health care costs of Alberta Health by building multi million dollar hospitals that remain vacant and by flipping the name of the Capital Health Authority several times and paying the executives leaving the previous organization multi millions of dollars in severance packages while investing still more multi millions into new executives.
These are political expenses, not health care expenses.
The Capital Health authority produced a long list of services to delist from Alberta Health Care. To date, only the seniors portions have been somewhat introduced. The hammer will fall after the meeting captioned here.
Consider these guys have privatized all the hospitals and clinics while telling the world the electorate told them they didn't care if they were private or public only that they were public funded.
Well, now is the time to start turning off the public funding. You will be forced into Blue cross for coverage and, I would guess you will find new entries into that market. I don't think the broad list of dolts that make up this meeting are going to ask any questions, enough they got invited.
These are political expenses, not health care expenses.
The Capital Health authority produced a long list of services to delist from Alberta Health Care. To date, only the seniors portions have been somewhat introduced. The hammer will fall after the meeting captioned here.
Consider these guys have privatized all the hospitals and clinics while telling the world the electorate told them they didn't care if they were private or public only that they were public funded.
Well, now is the time to start turning off the public funding. You will be forced into Blue cross for coverage and, I would guess you will find new entries into that market. I don't think the broad list of dolts that make up this meeting are going to ask any questions, enough they got invited.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Alberta royalty plan trashed across US; Canada
Alberta's energy market raises questions Published: June 26, 2009 at 8:34 AM
The government in the southwestern Canadian province of Alberta changed its gas royalty laws to encourage productivity, but volatility may prove unattractive. Mel Knight, the energy minister in the provincial government, said Alberta would extend royalty rates in order to encourage gas productivity and maintain static employment levels.
Knight's decision is the fifth time the provincial government has modified its rules in less than two years in a move that some analysts say could push investors away from an uncertain energy sector, the National Post newspaper reports.
Alberta trails other Canadian provinces in terms of investment potential, and Knight said fluidity in the royalty structures for the oil and gas sector was a reactionary effort."We will monitor the programs that we have in place," he said. "We'll see what effect it has had on the industry (and) how it works for them."
But Laura Lau, who manages energy funds with Toronto's Sentry Select Capital Corp., said predictability, not fluidity, creates attractive investment climates."You need a stable regime, and we don't have a stable fiscal regime. No other regime has changed so often," she said. "Not even Libya has changed five times."© 2009 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
The government in the southwestern Canadian province of Alberta changed its gas royalty laws to encourage productivity, but volatility may prove unattractive. Mel Knight, the energy minister in the provincial government, said Alberta would extend royalty rates in order to encourage gas productivity and maintain static employment levels.
Knight's decision is the fifth time the provincial government has modified its rules in less than two years in a move that some analysts say could push investors away from an uncertain energy sector, the National Post newspaper reports.
Alberta trails other Canadian provinces in terms of investment potential, and Knight said fluidity in the royalty structures for the oil and gas sector was a reactionary effort."We will monitor the programs that we have in place," he said. "We'll see what effect it has had on the industry (and) how it works for them."
But Laura Lau, who manages energy funds with Toronto's Sentry Select Capital Corp., said predictability, not fluidity, creates attractive investment climates."You need a stable regime, and we don't have a stable fiscal regime. No other regime has changed so often," she said. "Not even Libya has changed five times."© 2009 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Alberta Gas Subsidizes Stock Market
Alberta today announces over a billion dollars is going to the troubled gas industry to increase drilling. There was over a billion dollars given to the oil industry to increase drilling and, nothing came of that. Likewise there will be nothing coming from the investment in gas.
Very recently bulk LNG has docked on the East coast of the US. LNG arriving by boats is a lot cheaper than gas shipped by pipelines. In the right circumstance it can render gas pipelines obsolete. This is a new trend that is expected to increase very rapidly.
Russia is looking for new customers as Europe looks elsewhere for a supplier.
In addition to this horizontal drilling coupled with carbon dioxide injection is freeing up huge amounts of natural gas here and in the other shale formations.
This is a market glut in gas that is not going to go away any time soon. Why then do they pour over a billion dollars into it? Every cent they put into Gas now will go directly into company profits and the stock market.
Still on Alberta Energy: Trans Canada has got the go ahead for the Texas pipeline for crude. This is a good deal for us all. What I find strange is Trans Canada have been able to sell 1.3 billion dollars in shares in a few days. This, at after the Alberta Government says it will have to borrow 8 billion.
I have to ask; Did AIMCo buy a huge slot of Trans-Canada share offerings on the pipeline?
Very recently bulk LNG has docked on the East coast of the US. LNG arriving by boats is a lot cheaper than gas shipped by pipelines. In the right circumstance it can render gas pipelines obsolete. This is a new trend that is expected to increase very rapidly.
Russia is looking for new customers as Europe looks elsewhere for a supplier.
In addition to this horizontal drilling coupled with carbon dioxide injection is freeing up huge amounts of natural gas here and in the other shale formations.
This is a market glut in gas that is not going to go away any time soon. Why then do they pour over a billion dollars into it? Every cent they put into Gas now will go directly into company profits and the stock market.
Still on Alberta Energy: Trans Canada has got the go ahead for the Texas pipeline for crude. This is a good deal for us all. What I find strange is Trans Canada have been able to sell 1.3 billion dollars in shares in a few days. This, at after the Alberta Government says it will have to borrow 8 billion.
I have to ask; Did AIMCo buy a huge slot of Trans-Canada share offerings on the pipeline?
Alberta's water is now privitized.
Alberta is celebrating the finish of the water privatization in Alberta. Whether or not it becomes a commodity they say. Like Health Care it is better in the hands of private enterprise than in the hands of Government. So says the Alberta Conservatives.
For over a generation, Conservatives have been after the Feds to change the NAFTA agreement to include water as a commodity. That change means water can be exported into the US. It also means that people in Alberta will be paying the same for water as is charged in California. If they get a majority in Ottawa, it will be a done deal.
Prices for water have increased in Alberta on all fronts. Check your utility bills. Towns and cities on the new program can charge what ever they want as it is now. Soon enough you will be paying rent on the pipelines. This will provide them the revenue increases which will probably go as everything else; to the insiders. Then you will be paying either still more rent on the pipelines or, you will be paying for the water. Either way, tough times or not, the Conservatives are going to rip coin for your pockets still again.
Every cent they pull from your pockets is used to further reduce oil royalty. That is what being a Conservative is all about.
Get a little smart and vote for another party to turn this province around! The Wildrose is not such a party; they are more extreme than the present Conservatives.
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Blue Cross cuts coverage for ill patient!
By Paul BegalaCNN Contributor
Editor's note: Paul Begala, a Democratic strategist and CNN political contributor, was a political consultant for Bill Clinton's presidential campaign in 1992 and was counselor to Clinton in the White House. He is an affiliated professor at Georgetown University's Public Policy Institute and an adviser to the Service Employees International Union, which supports President Obama's health care plan.
Paul Begala says health care isn't getting attention it deserves -- and Obama administration is partly to blame.
(CNN) -- You probably have never heard of Robin Beaton, and that's what's wrong with the debate over health care reform.
Beaton, a retired nurse from Waxahachie, Texas, had health insurance -- or so she thought. She paid her premiums faithfully every month, but when she was diagnosed with aggressive breast cancer, her health insurance company, Blue Cross, dumped her.
The insurance company said the fact that she had seen a dermatologist for acne, who mistakenly entered a notation on her chart that suggested her simple acne was a precancerous condition, allowed Blue Cross to leave her in the lurch.
Beaton testified before a House subcommittee this week. So did other Americans who thought they had insurance but got the shaft. As Karen Tumulty of Time magazine (who has been the journalistic conscience of health care coverage) wrote, other witnesses included:
"Peggy Raddatz, whose brother Otto Raddatz lost his insurance coverage right before he was scheduled to receive an expensive stem-cell transplant to treat his lymphoma. Why? Because Fortis Insurance Company discovered his doctor had found gall stones and an aneurysm on a CT scan -- conditions that had nothing to do with his cancer, that never bothered him and that he wasn't even aware of. And Jennifer Wittney Horton of Los Angeles, California, whose coverage was canceled because she had been taking a drug for irregular menstruation. Now, she can't get coverage anywhere else. 'Since my rescission, I have had to take jobs that I do not want, and put my career goals on hold to ensure that I can find health insurance,' she told the subcommittee."
The subcommittee's chairman, Democrat Bart Stupak of Michigan, called the hearing to highlight the obnoxious and unethical practice called rescission. His researchers produced performance reviews of insurance company bureaucrats who were praised and rewarded for kicking people off their coverage.
Then Stupak asked three health insurance executives the big question: Will your company pledge to end the practice of rescission except in cases of intentional fraud?
All three health insurance executives said no.
It was as dramatic as congressional testimony gets. Yet it got no airtime on the networks, nor, as far as I can tell, on cable news, although CNN.com did run a story. Time's Tumulty was all over it, as was Lisa Girion of The Lost Angeles Times. But the story did not make The New York Times.
Nor The Washington Post, which found space on the front page the morning after the hearing for a story on the cancellation of Fourth of July fireworks in Shippensburg, Pennsylvania, but not a story on the cancellation of health insurance for deathly ill Americans who've paid their premiums.
Stupak, and the Energy and Commerce Committee chairman, Henry Waxman, D-California, did their job. Why didn't the media do its? Why were the outrages uncovered by Stupak and Waxman un-covered by most of the media?
Maybe because the Obama White House drew the spotlight away from health care. They'd diverted the media to cover Obama's proposed reforms of the financial regulatory system.
On the last day of the 1992 Clinton-Gore campaign, we had the media A-Team traveling with us. So I made it my business to sit next to David Gergen, then with U.S. News & World Report but a former top aide to Presidents Nixon, Ford and Reagan (at that point -- little did I know he would soon be working for President Clinton). I had never seen a communications shop as effective as Reagan's, and I wasn't going to miss an opportunity to learn from a master. Gergen told me an anecdote I still remember vividly.
In the opening months of the Reagan presidency, it was the economy, stupid. America was mired in a recession, and President Reagan wanted to focus the nation's attention on his economic plan. But Secretary of State Al Haig had other ideas. The State Department had nothing to do with the economy, and Haig had ambitious plans. So, Gergen told me, Haig got a bunch of good press, advocating for intercepting Cuban gun runners (if memory serves).
You would think a staunch anti-Communist such as Reagan would have been happy. But, no. Reagan's chief of staff, James Baker, upbraided Haig for diverting media attention away from the primary goal: passing the president's economic plan.
I never forgot Gergen's story -- especially when the Clinton White House wandered off message as it tried to pursue fundamental reform of the health care system.
The economic plan eclipsed health care for much of Clinton's first year. As did NAFTA. And the crime bill, which included the Brady Bill and other gun control measures. And don't forget gays in the military. And a foreign policy crisis in Somalia -- and another in Haiti. And another in Russia.
Clinton gave his health care address to the Congress on September 23, 1993. October was supposed to be "Health Care Month" in the White House, but so many other issues got in the way that he had just one public event focused on health care in the entire month -- just one.
I understand that Obama's White House team has to juggle a lot of issues; I've been there. And I'm sure the Obama financial reforms have merit. But if the president wants to pass his ambitious health care reform, he's going to have to put other, worthy, ideas on the back burner and shine the media spotlight on the plight of people like Robin Beaton.
Editor's note: Paul Begala, a Democratic strategist and CNN political contributor, was a political consultant for Bill Clinton's presidential campaign in 1992 and was counselor to Clinton in the White House. He is an affiliated professor at Georgetown University's Public Policy Institute and an adviser to the Service Employees International Union, which supports President Obama's health care plan.
Paul Begala says health care isn't getting attention it deserves -- and Obama administration is partly to blame.
(CNN) -- You probably have never heard of Robin Beaton, and that's what's wrong with the debate over health care reform.
Beaton, a retired nurse from Waxahachie, Texas, had health insurance -- or so she thought. She paid her premiums faithfully every month, but when she was diagnosed with aggressive breast cancer, her health insurance company, Blue Cross, dumped her.
The insurance company said the fact that she had seen a dermatologist for acne, who mistakenly entered a notation on her chart that suggested her simple acne was a precancerous condition, allowed Blue Cross to leave her in the lurch.
Beaton testified before a House subcommittee this week. So did other Americans who thought they had insurance but got the shaft. As Karen Tumulty of Time magazine (who has been the journalistic conscience of health care coverage) wrote, other witnesses included:
"Peggy Raddatz, whose brother Otto Raddatz lost his insurance coverage right before he was scheduled to receive an expensive stem-cell transplant to treat his lymphoma. Why? Because Fortis Insurance Company discovered his doctor had found gall stones and an aneurysm on a CT scan -- conditions that had nothing to do with his cancer, that never bothered him and that he wasn't even aware of. And Jennifer Wittney Horton of Los Angeles, California, whose coverage was canceled because she had been taking a drug for irregular menstruation. Now, she can't get coverage anywhere else. 'Since my rescission, I have had to take jobs that I do not want, and put my career goals on hold to ensure that I can find health insurance,' she told the subcommittee."
The subcommittee's chairman, Democrat Bart Stupak of Michigan, called the hearing to highlight the obnoxious and unethical practice called rescission. His researchers produced performance reviews of insurance company bureaucrats who were praised and rewarded for kicking people off their coverage.
Then Stupak asked three health insurance executives the big question: Will your company pledge to end the practice of rescission except in cases of intentional fraud?
All three health insurance executives said no.
It was as dramatic as congressional testimony gets. Yet it got no airtime on the networks, nor, as far as I can tell, on cable news, although CNN.com did run a story. Time's Tumulty was all over it, as was Lisa Girion of The Lost Angeles Times. But the story did not make The New York Times.
Nor The Washington Post, which found space on the front page the morning after the hearing for a story on the cancellation of Fourth of July fireworks in Shippensburg, Pennsylvania, but not a story on the cancellation of health insurance for deathly ill Americans who've paid their premiums.
Stupak, and the Energy and Commerce Committee chairman, Henry Waxman, D-California, did their job. Why didn't the media do its? Why were the outrages uncovered by Stupak and Waxman un-covered by most of the media?
Maybe because the Obama White House drew the spotlight away from health care. They'd diverted the media to cover Obama's proposed reforms of the financial regulatory system.
On the last day of the 1992 Clinton-Gore campaign, we had the media A-Team traveling with us. So I made it my business to sit next to David Gergen, then with U.S. News & World Report but a former top aide to Presidents Nixon, Ford and Reagan (at that point -- little did I know he would soon be working for President Clinton). I had never seen a communications shop as effective as Reagan's, and I wasn't going to miss an opportunity to learn from a master. Gergen told me an anecdote I still remember vividly.
In the opening months of the Reagan presidency, it was the economy, stupid. America was mired in a recession, and President Reagan wanted to focus the nation's attention on his economic plan. But Secretary of State Al Haig had other ideas. The State Department had nothing to do with the economy, and Haig had ambitious plans. So, Gergen told me, Haig got a bunch of good press, advocating for intercepting Cuban gun runners (if memory serves).
You would think a staunch anti-Communist such as Reagan would have been happy. But, no. Reagan's chief of staff, James Baker, upbraided Haig for diverting media attention away from the primary goal: passing the president's economic plan.
I never forgot Gergen's story -- especially when the Clinton White House wandered off message as it tried to pursue fundamental reform of the health care system.
The economic plan eclipsed health care for much of Clinton's first year. As did NAFTA. And the crime bill, which included the Brady Bill and other gun control measures. And don't forget gays in the military. And a foreign policy crisis in Somalia -- and another in Haiti. And another in Russia.
Clinton gave his health care address to the Congress on September 23, 1993. October was supposed to be "Health Care Month" in the White House, but so many other issues got in the way that he had just one public event focused on health care in the entire month -- just one.
I understand that Obama's White House team has to juggle a lot of issues; I've been there. And I'm sure the Obama financial reforms have merit. But if the president wants to pass his ambitious health care reform, he's going to have to put other, worthy, ideas on the back burner and shine the media spotlight on the plight of people like Robin Beaton.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Alberta Health Care-Taken into a US system.
Mr. Liepert tells us health care is a business when asked why he is cutting services to make room for private insurance coverage. Increases in the Blue Cross rates are still another step (in his words) to make the rates more reflective of private health coverage.
You can read out future by watching the US debate on health care. The US politic refers to the Canadian Health care system as being "the Soviet System". Mr. Obama struggling to put the ground work down for universal coverage in the US is defensive when he tells the US the Alberta Health care is dysfunctional producing long line ups of waiting.
He takes no effort in explaining to the population that this is brought about by budget manipulations. Basically; create a problem through short funding and present the cure as privatization.
What Mr. Obama didn't have to say is in the US people loose all their health care coverage when they loose their jobs. What he didn't say is in the US the hospitals are quick to have to sign and notarize a lien on your property before you get access to treatment.
Public hospitals in the US are for "Indigent People who have no insurance and no chattel (house to mortgage)."
Ron Liepert is not the author of these destructive Conservative policies. He is the point man delivering them for the Conservative organization of which Harper is a part of.
You can read out future by watching the US debate on health care. The US politic refers to the Canadian Health care system as being "the Soviet System". Mr. Obama struggling to put the ground work down for universal coverage in the US is defensive when he tells the US the Alberta Health care is dysfunctional producing long line ups of waiting.
He takes no effort in explaining to the population that this is brought about by budget manipulations. Basically; create a problem through short funding and present the cure as privatization.
What Mr. Obama didn't have to say is in the US people loose all their health care coverage when they loose their jobs. What he didn't say is in the US the hospitals are quick to have to sign and notarize a lien on your property before you get access to treatment.
Public hospitals in the US are for "Indigent People who have no insurance and no chattel (house to mortgage)."
Ron Liepert is not the author of these destructive Conservative policies. He is the point man delivering them for the Conservative organization of which Harper is a part of.
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Who pays for Alberta's 8 billion dollar transmission?
We all know that we, the consumers in Alberta will pay for the lines. But, I'm asking how many times over do we have to pay for them?
There are 2 million households in Alberta. AESO is telling us our power bills will go up 8 dollars per month to pay for the the new DC lines.
That is 16 million dollars per month going to the power companies and to the people who build and maintain the power lines. I would like to know how this 8.00 is split between the two.
192 million dollars per year out of our pockets. Over 10 years, 1.92 billion dollars.
According to these figures it will be over 40 years at 8.00 per month to pay this off but, by that time we will be paying forever!
Consider that last year TransAlta utilities had a bumper year with huge profits. They explained these profits as being the product of the high electric rates being paid in Western Canada.
This province cannot afford any more corporate welfare. We certainly cannot afford the Conservatives!
There are 2 million households in Alberta. AESO is telling us our power bills will go up 8 dollars per month to pay for the the new DC lines.
That is 16 million dollars per month going to the power companies and to the people who build and maintain the power lines. I would like to know how this 8.00 is split between the two.
192 million dollars per year out of our pockets. Over 10 years, 1.92 billion dollars.
According to these figures it will be over 40 years at 8.00 per month to pay this off but, by that time we will be paying forever!
Consider that last year TransAlta utilities had a bumper year with huge profits. They explained these profits as being the product of the high electric rates being paid in Western Canada.
This province cannot afford any more corporate welfare. We certainly cannot afford the Conservatives!
Alberta's new 8 billion dollar DC power line
Alberta is promoting their new 8 billion dollar DC power line. It is worth some discussion that is not coming out of Government.
First off, the cost of the power line is no where near 8 billion dollars! The towers are smaller, and not nearly so high as the AC towers. On the plus side DC does away with most of the "noise" and "radiation" assocated with high tension power lines which are mostly AC current. It would be my personal choice for transmission.
In order to put power onto a DC transmission line it first must be converted to DC. This, is expensive and wheter or not the cost is in the domain of the power companies and should be treated as an investment is for the public to decide.
When the DC power is taken off the line into a city grid as an example, it must be converd back to AC. Again, expensive and, who should pay?
The conversion is done by very large transducers; the larger version of that apparatus that tunes your television and a great numer of other applications.
Power will have to be converted to AC again to export it to the US; still another expence which appears will be carried by the Alberta consumers.
This Government has not told the truth about anything since they got elected the first time! Surly even the hard core Conservatives must be weary of being duped.
First off, the cost of the power line is no where near 8 billion dollars! The towers are smaller, and not nearly so high as the AC towers. On the plus side DC does away with most of the "noise" and "radiation" assocated with high tension power lines which are mostly AC current. It would be my personal choice for transmission.
In order to put power onto a DC transmission line it first must be converted to DC. This, is expensive and wheter or not the cost is in the domain of the power companies and should be treated as an investment is for the public to decide.
When the DC power is taken off the line into a city grid as an example, it must be converd back to AC. Again, expensive and, who should pay?
The conversion is done by very large transducers; the larger version of that apparatus that tunes your television and a great numer of other applications.
Power will have to be converted to AC again to export it to the US; still another expence which appears will be carried by the Alberta consumers.
This Government has not told the truth about anything since they got elected the first time! Surly even the hard core Conservatives must be weary of being duped.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Alberta Vote!
If you want to get rid of these guys you must vote. Yes! It is possible to get them out of Government.
The purpose of is to allow voters to register for the first time, or to change existing registration information.
You will need an Alberta Driver's Licence or an Alberta Identification Card for each individual aged 16 or over that you wish to register.
Your registration should take less than five minutes to complete.
If you would like additional information, please use the Contact Us link on the left to reach Elections Alberta staff.
The purpose of is to allow voters to register for the first time, or to change existing registration information.
You will need an Alberta Driver's Licence or an Alberta Identification Card for each individual aged 16 or over that you wish to register.
Your registration should take less than five minutes to complete.
If you would like additional information, please use the Contact Us link on the left to reach Elections Alberta staff.
Monday, May 04, 2009
Alberta on the verge of broke!
Yes, it is a sign of our economic health in this province.
First, we seen the trial balloon on Alberta Bonds. Governments issue bonds to raise money usually when they are broke. If this Government was in the least interested in putting money into Alberta pockets, they would increase the royalty to the same level that BC and Saskatchewan are. Instead we remain 35% below them. Over 20 Billion dollars of revenue that should have been in Alberta coffers has gone to the oil and gas companies!
Short of cash they hit on the poor and frail first. Cut rent assistance's.
The rents have not come down in Alberta. The only thing that has changed is a lot of people have gone home to other parts of Canada.
Short of cash they put in a new level of sin taxes.
Short of cash they increased the Blue Cross rates.
Short of cash the use the opportunity to activate some of the long sitting lists on what not to cover through Alberta Health care. Those of you out there that think this is a senior problem, think again. It is the first step into your pockets as well.
The list goes on. The bottom line is the Conservatives has driven the province into the ground through financial mismanagement. We make more on gambling than we do on resources.
Short on cash they bleed the Heritage Trust fund; the Sustainabilty fund and I think even the pensions will be used to finance opeations before this show is over.
Even the usually politically blind and deaf conservatives should be shaking their heads now.
Dig in! The worse is yet to come!
First, we seen the trial balloon on Alberta Bonds. Governments issue bonds to raise money usually when they are broke. If this Government was in the least interested in putting money into Alberta pockets, they would increase the royalty to the same level that BC and Saskatchewan are. Instead we remain 35% below them. Over 20 Billion dollars of revenue that should have been in Alberta coffers has gone to the oil and gas companies!
Short of cash they hit on the poor and frail first. Cut rent assistance's.
The rents have not come down in Alberta. The only thing that has changed is a lot of people have gone home to other parts of Canada.
Short of cash they put in a new level of sin taxes.
Short of cash they increased the Blue Cross rates.
Short of cash the use the opportunity to activate some of the long sitting lists on what not to cover through Alberta Health care. Those of you out there that think this is a senior problem, think again. It is the first step into your pockets as well.
The list goes on. The bottom line is the Conservatives has driven the province into the ground through financial mismanagement. We make more on gambling than we do on resources.
Short on cash they bleed the Heritage Trust fund; the Sustainabilty fund and I think even the pensions will be used to finance opeations before this show is over.
Even the usually politically blind and deaf conservatives should be shaking their heads now.
Dig in! The worse is yet to come!
Saturday, May 02, 2009
Alberta Bonds - Stay clear of the house of cards.
CCWhy would you put more money into the hands of a group of people who have lied their way into every election and have sold this province out from under you for only a few pennies on a dollar of value? Surly you can find a more honest group to invest your money with!
Alberta has the lowest royalty rates in the world, bar none! This means Albertans are getting less for their resource than any other country on earth!
In order to keep this province functioning they have to dig into gambling and habits for revenue. If there happens to be a plus balance at the end of the year, that is attributed to windfall profits. Such Crap!
Alberta Royalty is further reduced with "trade in kind" as buy bitumen from the tar sands at the going bitumen rates then, sell it to the up graders (probably an arm of the same company) at cut rates so the up graders can show quick profit.
The difference is what the taxpayer will again be shorted even more on royalty! Couple this with the new legislation in place that says the Alberta Government does not have to disclose the royalty charged mean they either have no idea what the bottom line will be or it is so shameful they want to keep it a secret.
Carbon sequestration starting out with 2 billion of taxpayer dollars. I have come to see capture and trade as being an ever larger scam for companies to move money between jurisdictions without paying taxes. I would think there is a lot of inventive book keeping when this is over!
Consider - carbon is put down a hole, any place. Then it is used as a solvent to extract crude from the same hole or is transported to another conventional site . It comes back up the hole with the oil.
Companies can take credits for sequestering and claim new production because of new technology and market it as green, conventional with a lower carbon footprint.
I don't think it is a good idea to invest in anything this crew comes up with they are simply lining their own pockets. I sure as hell don't think playing the carbon sequester game in stocks is a worth while endeavor. In Montana for instance, they plan on putting the carbon down into a natural dome, underground. Then they plan on building a pipe line to move the carbon from this dome to the oil shale project with a view of using it the same as Saskatchewan does.
It is only a matter of time until we hear of workers being overcome by carbon dioxide while drilling for oil.
Alberta has the lowest royalty rates in the world, bar none! This means Albertans are getting less for their resource than any other country on earth!
In order to keep this province functioning they have to dig into gambling and habits for revenue. If there happens to be a plus balance at the end of the year, that is attributed to windfall profits. Such Crap!
Alberta Royalty is further reduced with "trade in kind" as buy bitumen from the tar sands at the going bitumen rates then, sell it to the up graders (probably an arm of the same company) at cut rates so the up graders can show quick profit.
The difference is what the taxpayer will again be shorted even more on royalty! Couple this with the new legislation in place that says the Alberta Government does not have to disclose the royalty charged mean they either have no idea what the bottom line will be or it is so shameful they want to keep it a secret.
Carbon sequestration starting out with 2 billion of taxpayer dollars. I have come to see capture and trade as being an ever larger scam for companies to move money between jurisdictions without paying taxes. I would think there is a lot of inventive book keeping when this is over!
Consider - carbon is put down a hole, any place. Then it is used as a solvent to extract crude from the same hole or is transported to another conventional site . It comes back up the hole with the oil.
Companies can take credits for sequestering and claim new production because of new technology and market it as green, conventional with a lower carbon footprint.
I don't think it is a good idea to invest in anything this crew comes up with they are simply lining their own pockets. I sure as hell don't think playing the carbon sequester game in stocks is a worth while endeavor. In Montana for instance, they plan on putting the carbon down into a natural dome, underground. Then they plan on building a pipe line to move the carbon from this dome to the oil shale project with a view of using it the same as Saskatchewan does.
It is only a matter of time until we hear of workers being overcome by carbon dioxide while drilling for oil.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Alberta using the same standard as Sask for determining CCS
Mr. Knight answers the letter explaining Alberta using carbon Dioxide to recover oil from mature fields is the same as done in Weyburn Saskatchewan. Weyburn being run by Encana and they are developing the technology at depths of 1500 meters which is above the minimum requirements to keep the carbon dioxide critical (liquid).
Weyburn crude is actually thinned by the Carbon Dioxide making it easier to recover and process. The thinning is carbon dioxide absorbed into the oil, being returned to the surface.
It will be interesting to see if Mr. Knight is as forth coming when the testing is done as in how much of the carbon dioxide that is put down the hole is returned to the atmosphere dissolved in the oil.
Alberta's carbon cap and trade system is going to be for Alberta only, not trade outside the province. That means this Government can balance any number of books and ledgers with carbon credits. Along with payments in kind taken on royalty, it is turning into a system where Alberta will receive whatever the oil companies and the Conservatives feel is necessary to keep this province above destitution.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Alberta -- The Details - For Sale!
After a rash of rude suggestions I am prompted to tender this site for sale and with it comes the necessary agreements on my part.
Sales price is stricly cost recovery at Canadian $ 142,623.56
Sales price is stricly cost recovery at Canadian $ 142,623.56
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Albertans Entitled to lower Natural Gas Prices-Will they get it?
The Conservatives claim they want market pressure to rule the prices when they stand to make a profit. When it goes the other way, they tend to shy away under an umbrella of excuses in order to keep their profits. What will they do this time?
In Alberta, with the Conservatives in power it is always the Alberta Consumer who ends up paying the losses.
Exerts from the full article in Financial Post:
“ When Peter Tertzakian stands on a soapbox at the Calgary Petroleum Club -- as he did last week -- and warns senior Canadian oil executives to stop being in denial about natural-gas prices ever recovering to the levels they think they need to get back to work in Alberta, they tend to listen.
His message in the presentation: Low natural-gas prices are here to stay. Either you change or you will be out of business.”
Further, Mr. Tertzakian points out the Natural Gas Prices will not go above 5 or 6 dollars and never again reach the double digits that today’s residential prices are charged at.
Albertans have every right to expect a 50% reduction in their home and business heating bills!
If the reduction is not forthcoming, it is time to replace your elected officials both provincial and municipal!
In Alberta, with the Conservatives in power it is always the Alberta Consumer who ends up paying the losses.
Exerts from the full article in Financial Post:
“ When Peter Tertzakian stands on a soapbox at the Calgary Petroleum Club -- as he did last week -- and warns senior Canadian oil executives to stop being in denial about natural-gas prices ever recovering to the levels they think they need to get back to work in Alberta, they tend to listen.
His message in the presentation: Low natural-gas prices are here to stay. Either you change or you will be out of business.”
Further, Mr. Tertzakian points out the Natural Gas Prices will not go above 5 or 6 dollars and never again reach the double digits that today’s residential prices are charged at.
Albertans have every right to expect a 50% reduction in their home and business heating bills!
If the reduction is not forthcoming, it is time to replace your elected officials both provincial and municipal!
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Alberta Conservatives throw in the towel!
The Alberta Conservatives have been on something that can only be called a rampage over the past several years. Worshiping at the shrine of Conservative Doctrine they have reached out to privatize everything they can lay hands to.
With so much fresh information out there on their rip and burn programs they are thinking they cannot possibly be elected again so, get the job done now!
Our health system is pretty much privatized now, hospitals being owned by individuals and companies other than Government. Now, they are pushing Albertans into Insurance Heaven! Mazankowski must be rubbing his hands!
The Capital Health Authority at the request of the Government drew up a long list of services to be delisted from coverage under Alberta Health Care. Now, that list is being put in two or three items at a time putting pressure onto Albertans to reach for Blue Cross Coverage.
This was the desired response of the Government. Now, they are raising the Blue Cross premiums to better reflect what is being paid for in the private sector. This is blatant! There is no "private sector" health insurance in Alberta at this time and only US owned companies are in that business.
The billions poured into the Mazankowski heart centre to date to build and keep an empty building will come to fruit in the Conservative world. Makes sense now to turn it all over to still another insider for 1/100 th of the cost in the name of "private is a better way"
The Conservatives tell us the Canada Health Act is simply a Liberal tool to continue to beat up and control provinces indicating that Harper's crew will not pay any attention to it.
For you out there who did not think it was worth while to vote or that your vote would not make any difference; look now at the ugly face of conservatism.
Enter now the US dominated private health care insurance companies
There does not seem to be any laws in place to stop the pillage. The Auditor General has been told to butt out of their business and they take glee in standing in front of the cameras lying.
Time to take up arms my friends! Go get them!
With so much fresh information out there on their rip and burn programs they are thinking they cannot possibly be elected again so, get the job done now!
Our health system is pretty much privatized now, hospitals being owned by individuals and companies other than Government. Now, they are pushing Albertans into Insurance Heaven! Mazankowski must be rubbing his hands!
The Capital Health Authority at the request of the Government drew up a long list of services to be delisted from coverage under Alberta Health Care. Now, that list is being put in two or three items at a time putting pressure onto Albertans to reach for Blue Cross Coverage.
This was the desired response of the Government. Now, they are raising the Blue Cross premiums to better reflect what is being paid for in the private sector. This is blatant! There is no "private sector" health insurance in Alberta at this time and only US owned companies are in that business.
The billions poured into the Mazankowski heart centre to date to build and keep an empty building will come to fruit in the Conservative world. Makes sense now to turn it all over to still another insider for 1/100 th of the cost in the name of "private is a better way"
The Conservatives tell us the Canada Health Act is simply a Liberal tool to continue to beat up and control provinces indicating that Harper's crew will not pay any attention to it.
For you out there who did not think it was worth while to vote or that your vote would not make any difference; look now at the ugly face of conservatism.
Enter now the US dominated private health care insurance companies
There does not seem to be any laws in place to stop the pillage. The Auditor General has been told to butt out of their business and they take glee in standing in front of the cameras lying.
Time to take up arms my friends! Go get them!
Thursday, April 09, 2009
Alberta Budget- Where the real losses are!
Using the Government surplus figures as a basis and, taking the exchange rates 2006-07 as nominal 10% and 2008-2009 as nominal 25%, I have developed the following alternate table.
I am using the BC Saskatchewan royalty rates of 30% for a low comparison.
These figures then represent the inside lowest possible royalty figures.
Past surpluses -Royalty % - Sask and BC royalty
2000-01 — $6.57 billion- at 25% US - 30% - Should have been 8.54 Loss 1.97 Billion
2001-02 — $1.08 billion - at 25% US - 30% - Should have been 1.40 Loss .32 Billion
2002-03 — $2.13 billion at 25% US - 30% - Should have been 2.56 Loss .43 Billion
2003-04 — $4.14 billion at 25% US - 30% - Should have been 4.97 Loss .83
2004-05 — $5.18 billion at 19% US - 30% - Should have been 8.18 Loss 3.0 Billion
2005-06 — $8.55 billion at 19% US - 30% - Should have been 13.5 Loss 4.95 Billion (10% Exchange)
2006-07 — $8.51 billion at 19% Canadian 30% - Should have been 14.29 Loss 5.78 Billion
2007-08 — $4.58 billion at 19% Canadian 30% - Should have been 8.15 Loss 3.57
Projected deficits
2009-10 — $4.7 billion at 19% Canadian dollar - Should be surplus of 3.9 Billion
2010-11 — $2.4 billion at 19% Canadian dollar - Should be surplus of 5.89
2011-12 — $1.8 billion - Should be surplus of 11.44
That is a total Loss of 20.02 billion dollars swept away on a Conservative platform. One that says there can be no extra cash in Government, it must go to the companies.
They call it being Great Conservatives. I call it gross fiscal mismanagement.
Albertans will have no change until they get this crew out of office!
I am using the BC Saskatchewan royalty rates of 30% for a low comparison.
These figures then represent the inside lowest possible royalty figures.
Past surpluses -Royalty % - Sask and BC royalty
2000-01 — $6.57 billion- at 25% US - 30% - Should have been 8.54 Loss 1.97 Billion
2001-02 — $1.08 billion - at 25% US - 30% - Should have been 1.40 Loss .32 Billion
2002-03 — $2.13 billion at 25% US - 30% - Should have been 2.56 Loss .43 Billion
2003-04 — $4.14 billion at 25% US - 30% - Should have been 4.97 Loss .83
2004-05 — $5.18 billion at 19% US - 30% - Should have been 8.18 Loss 3.0 Billion
2005-06 — $8.55 billion at 19% US - 30% - Should have been 13.5 Loss 4.95 Billion (10% Exchange)
2006-07 — $8.51 billion at 19% Canadian 30% - Should have been 14.29 Loss 5.78 Billion
2007-08 — $4.58 billion at 19% Canadian 30% - Should have been 8.15 Loss 3.57
Projected deficits
2009-10 — $4.7 billion at 19% Canadian dollar - Should be surplus of 3.9 Billion
2010-11 — $2.4 billion at 19% Canadian dollar - Should be surplus of 5.89
2011-12 — $1.8 billion - Should be surplus of 11.44
That is a total Loss of 20.02 billion dollars swept away on a Conservative platform. One that says there can be no extra cash in Government, it must go to the companies.
They call it being Great Conservatives. I call it gross fiscal mismanagement.
Albertans will have no change until they get this crew out of office!
Friday, April 03, 2009
Carbon Capture - What we are looking for.
A static source is essential for carbon capture. There presently is no such source available in the processes at the tar sands. In coal, cement and the other industries where a single source and high volume is available it is possible to create a burning platform that can be controlled.
How it works, generally:
The fuel is put into a special container to burn. The nitrogen is pulled off the air mix. The remainder in the container is heated to a high temperature and oxygen is injected. A burst flash is created. Because the "air " is off, nearly pure carbon dioxide is produced.
This is pumped off and stored to be put down pipelines etc. The heat generated in the process is used to make the steam to run the turbines etc. Consider; the priorities are actually reversed. Instead of making steam your process is making carbon dioxide and the steam is incidental to it.
Plants will have to be completely re built or new plants built. This isn't about picking stuff out of a smokestack and it is very expensive! And, we will pay.
How it works, generally:
The fuel is put into a special container to burn. The nitrogen is pulled off the air mix. The remainder in the container is heated to a high temperature and oxygen is injected. A burst flash is created. Because the "air " is off, nearly pure carbon dioxide is produced.
This is pumped off and stored to be put down pipelines etc. The heat generated in the process is used to make the steam to run the turbines etc. Consider; the priorities are actually reversed. Instead of making steam your process is making carbon dioxide and the steam is incidental to it.
Plants will have to be completely re built or new plants built. This isn't about picking stuff out of a smokestack and it is very expensive! And, we will pay.
Thursday, April 02, 2009
Carbon Capture (CCS) Funding by Feds
Projects receiving federal funding:
Heartland Area Redwater Project — The Alberta Research Council and ARC Energy Trust, leading this Edmonton-area project, will try to demonstrate carbon capture and storage on a commercial scale of several million tonnes per year. (Good!)
Integrated Carbon Capture and Enhanced Oil Recovery (A subsidy-Oil Recovery from marginal depths)— Lead by Enhance Energy, the project northeast of Edmonton, involves the capture of CO2 emissions from industrial sites.
Fort Nelson Exploratory Project — (
Good - Deep enough) Spectra Energy Transmission hopes its existing gas processing plant in Fort Nelson, B.C. will be able to inject large volumes of sour gas more than two kilometres underground. (Deep enough; Good. 2 km=6500 feet; 2600 feet is the minimum)
Pioneer Project — Proposed for the Keephills thermal electric power generation plant, TransAlta hopes the plant will perform several functions including capture of chilled ammonia, which could then be used in enhanced oil recovery and stored in saline aquifers.
Belle Plaine Integrated Polygeneration CCS Project — TransCanada's plan involves building a $5-billion electricity power plant in Belle Plaine, Sask. (Excellent! This is where it is at!) At the time of this edit, Trans Canada has withdrawn their plan to build the plant leaving only the projects in place to scarf oil and return the CO2 to the surface.
CO2 Injection in Heavy Oil Reservoirs (All are subsidies-Heavy Oil Recovery is not Carbon Sequestration! What they put down hole will come back up.) — Husky Energy Inc., at its oil upgrader and ethanol plant in Lloydminster, Sask., wants to develop new methods for enhanced heavy oil recovery.
Alberta Saline Aquifer Project/Genesee Post-(Excellent - This is what they should all look like!) Combustion Demonstration Plant — EPCOR's Genesee project involves a demonstration facility that would capture CO2 from a coal-fired power plant in Alberta, and transport it to the Saline Aquifer Project for storage.
Heartland Area Redwater Project — The Alberta Research Council and ARC Energy Trust, leading this Edmonton-area project, will try to demonstrate carbon capture and storage on a commercial scale of several million tonnes per year. (Good!)
Integrated Carbon Capture and Enhanced Oil Recovery (A subsidy-Oil Recovery from marginal depths)— Lead by Enhance Energy, the project northeast of Edmonton, involves the capture of CO2 emissions from industrial sites.
Fort Nelson Exploratory Project — (
Good - Deep enough) Spectra Energy Transmission hopes its existing gas processing plant in Fort Nelson, B.C. will be able to inject large volumes of sour gas more than two kilometres underground. (Deep enough; Good. 2 km=6500 feet; 2600 feet is the minimum)
Pioneer Project — Proposed for the Keephills thermal electric power generation plant, TransAlta hopes the plant will perform several functions including capture of chilled ammonia, which could then be used in enhanced oil recovery and stored in saline aquifers.
Belle Plaine Integrated Polygeneration CCS Project — TransCanada's plan involves building a $5-billion electricity power plant in Belle Plaine, Sask. (Excellent! This is where it is at!) At the time of this edit, Trans Canada has withdrawn their plan to build the plant leaving only the projects in place to scarf oil and return the CO2 to the surface.
CO2 Injection in Heavy Oil Reservoirs (All are subsidies-Heavy Oil Recovery is not Carbon Sequestration! What they put down hole will come back up.) — Husky Energy Inc., at its oil upgrader and ethanol plant in Lloydminster, Sask., wants to develop new methods for enhanced heavy oil recovery.
Alberta Saline Aquifer Project/Genesee Post-(Excellent - This is what they should all look like!) Combustion Demonstration Plant — EPCOR's Genesee project involves a demonstration facility that would capture CO2 from a coal-fired power plant in Alberta, and transport it to the Saline Aquifer Project for storage.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Alberta and Canada cheat on Carbon Sequester
All the carbon dioxide that goes down hole is not sequestered! The original plan was to put the carbon into the deep saline water aquifer which is housed between and upper and lower level of bedrock.
Now, they are using the bulk of the planned carbon dioxide as an effective solvent most of which will come gushing out of the well ahead of the first recovered oil and the remainder for the better part will be absorbed into the oil to be released later. Effervescent oil easy to pump.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Alberta schools P3
In the world of Alberta Finance, there is no firm price contracts. All projects are let "cost plus" and cost over runs are never challanged, just coverd with more money. True costs of the programs are never made public. A really good investment for these companies.
Quote:
Lenders including Sun Life Assurance Company, The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company, Canada Life, Bank of Ireland, Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, National Australia Bank, The Toronto-Dominion Bank and The Bank of Montreal.
On September 10, 2008, the Government of Alberta signed an agreement with BBPP Alberta Schools Limited to design, build, finance and maintain 18 state-of-the-art schools in the province through a Design-Build-Finance-Maintain public-private partnership. The schools are scheduled to open in September 2010 and provide space for more than 12,000 students, and will cost the Province $643 million. According to the Government of Alberta, this public-private partnership resulted in a savings of $118 million to the Province compared to the cost of providing the same work through traditional delivery methods. This agreement represents the largest ever Canadian schools P3 transaction and Alberta's largest social infrastructure P3.
Total debt aggregated approximately $460 million, including approximately $335 million in long-term lending, and a $125 million short-term tranche to remain in place until completion of construction. The financing, which was arranged by CIT Financial Ltd. (as agent) included both banks and institutional lenders, including Sun Life Assurance Company, The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company, Canada Life, Bank of Ireland, Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, National Australia Bank, The Toronto-Dominion Bank and The Bank of Montreal.
Babcock & Brown's London listed infrastructure fund, Babcock & Brown Public Partnerships is investing 75% of the project's equity, with GVest, an affiliate of Graham Construction, providing the remaining 25%. The construction contractor for the project is a joint venture of Graham Construction and Bird Construction, and the renewal and maintenance contractor is Honeywell.
The lenders were advised by a team from Fasken Martineau that included Brian Kelsall, Ella Plotkin, Jon Holmstrom, Tom Barlow and Marc Lefler in the Toronto office, and Richard Peters and Sheldon Good in Calgary.
Quote:
Lenders including Sun Life Assurance Company, The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company, Canada Life, Bank of Ireland, Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, National Australia Bank, The Toronto-Dominion Bank and The Bank of Montreal.
On September 10, 2008, the Government of Alberta signed an agreement with BBPP Alberta Schools Limited to design, build, finance and maintain 18 state-of-the-art schools in the province through a Design-Build-Finance-Maintain public-private partnership. The schools are scheduled to open in September 2010 and provide space for more than 12,000 students, and will cost the Province $643 million. According to the Government of Alberta, this public-private partnership resulted in a savings of $118 million to the Province compared to the cost of providing the same work through traditional delivery methods. This agreement represents the largest ever Canadian schools P3 transaction and Alberta's largest social infrastructure P3.
Total debt aggregated approximately $460 million, including approximately $335 million in long-term lending, and a $125 million short-term tranche to remain in place until completion of construction. The financing, which was arranged by CIT Financial Ltd. (as agent) included both banks and institutional lenders, including Sun Life Assurance Company, The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company, Canada Life, Bank of Ireland, Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, National Australia Bank, The Toronto-Dominion Bank and The Bank of Montreal.
Babcock & Brown's London listed infrastructure fund, Babcock & Brown Public Partnerships is investing 75% of the project's equity, with GVest, an affiliate of Graham Construction, providing the remaining 25%. The construction contractor for the project is a joint venture of Graham Construction and Bird Construction, and the renewal and maintenance contractor is Honeywell.
The lenders were advised by a team from Fasken Martineau that included Brian Kelsall, Ella Plotkin, Jon Holmstrom, Tom Barlow and Marc Lefler in the Toronto office, and Richard Peters and Sheldon Good in Calgary.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Alberta or Iranian Oil in the future?
What a joke! What an absolute waste of money by our disaster called Premier Stelmach. Last week US President Obama made a video for Iranians to see and mull over. In his video Obama spoke of renewed peace and co-operation between Iran and the United States.
Think: Uncle Sam wants Iranian oil and NOT Alberta's dirty oil.
I'm selling all my tar sands related stock and buying into those companies that will likely get contracts (soon!) in Iran. It's too bad that Klein and Stelmach gave away for dirt cheap all the natural gas in Alberta, because that's all we'll have left of what Obama wants.
Alberta's Conservative governments have totally ruined the future of our province. Big mouth Tories bragged to the world how much "oil" will have and how stinking rich we are, but guess what happened? People took a second look at what's happening here and they didn't like what they saw.
Thanks Klein for shooting your mouth off... and now because of all the stupid decisions made by Conservatives the future of our province is nowhere near as bright as people think it is.
Am I being negative? No, I'm being honest. Thanks Conservatives for the massive bust that is now following a useless mini-boom. In reality, Albertans only have themselves to blame for voting Conservative. We never learn do we???
Good insight; shared from a friend.
Think: Uncle Sam wants Iranian oil and NOT Alberta's dirty oil.
I'm selling all my tar sands related stock and buying into those companies that will likely get contracts (soon!) in Iran. It's too bad that Klein and Stelmach gave away for dirt cheap all the natural gas in Alberta, because that's all we'll have left of what Obama wants.
Alberta's Conservative governments have totally ruined the future of our province. Big mouth Tories bragged to the world how much "oil" will have and how stinking rich we are, but guess what happened? People took a second look at what's happening here and they didn't like what they saw.
Thanks Klein for shooting your mouth off... and now because of all the stupid decisions made by Conservatives the future of our province is nowhere near as bright as people think it is.
Am I being negative? No, I'm being honest. Thanks Conservatives for the massive bust that is now following a useless mini-boom. In reality, Albertans only have themselves to blame for voting Conservative. We never learn do we???
Good insight; shared from a friend.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Alberta Bitumen going south in pipelines.
Bitumen is first foamed, mixed with naphtha to make a slurry in order to pump it down to Texas. The press in the US would have people in Nevada believe the product in the tank is the polished crude from the tar sands.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Alberta still spinning royalty
The Calgary Herald remains the Conservative Ink Barrel. No posts allowed if they pertain to the truth about the royalties. One has to wonder why you even subscribe! The comments are more interesting than the stories as in how far misinformation goes.
On point:
Comparison of Alberta royalty to that of Saskatchewan and BC.
Alberta takes 19% in Canadian dollars now. The others take 30% Plus in US dollars
We are short 22% at this point on exchange alone plus another 11% on the actual exchange rate.
On start up royalty our neighbors collect 2% and we only collect 1% and that, only when oil reaches 45.00 per barrel.
It is Albertans who carry the brunt of the punishment in this downturn, not the oil companies. However, there is enough of that to go around.
On point:
Comparison of Alberta royalty to that of Saskatchewan and BC.
Alberta takes 19% in Canadian dollars now. The others take 30% Plus in US dollars
We are short 22% at this point on exchange alone plus another 11% on the actual exchange rate.
On start up royalty our neighbors collect 2% and we only collect 1% and that, only when oil reaches 45.00 per barrel.
It is Albertans who carry the brunt of the punishment in this downturn, not the oil companies. However, there is enough of that to go around.
Monday, March 16, 2009
Trans Canada Pipelines- Implications.
The output of the tar sands is currently about 1.3 to 1.5 million barrels of polished crude per day and is being moved in pipelines to the US.
Where is the new crude going to come from? Expansion in the tar sands or from up-graders around Hardisty?
Trans Canada are currently building the Keystone Pipeline into the Texas gulf
This first pipeline will have a capacity of 435,000 barrels per day late this year and that capacity will expand to 590,000 barrels per day next year.
Trans Canada are making an application for a long planned second pipeline capable of 900,000 barrels per day. All apparently directed to the movement of McMurray crude. The pipeline will swing through Oklahoma and Nebraska which many refineries of their own.
The capabilities of these pipelines is 1.5 million barrels per day which means the output of the tar sands is expected to be doubled by the end of 2010.
We can guess what the next election is going to be about.
Where is the openness this Government talks about?
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Alberta Economy shows most shrinkage!
Alberta has been grossly mismanaged. Rather than invest windfall royalty back into this province this Government has elected to plough the profits back into reduced royalty rates.
At 19% Canadian, the rates are the lowest in the world but because of the nature of stock, very little is returned to the province.
Alberta's conventional oil is now a "mature" resource. Deep wells and directional drilling are expensive. Using captured carbon to access deep well reserves is a good plan but will take years to get on line.
Now in recession or worse with a Government that has only experience in mega surplus non budget performance, we see the fruits of our labours.
I personally don't think this crew could manage a lemonade stand!
At 19% Canadian, the rates are the lowest in the world but because of the nature of stock, very little is returned to the province.
Alberta's conventional oil is now a "mature" resource. Deep wells and directional drilling are expensive. Using captured carbon to access deep well reserves is a good plan but will take years to get on line.
Now in recession or worse with a Government that has only experience in mega surplus non budget performance, we see the fruits of our labours.
I personally don't think this crew could manage a lemonade stand!
Saturday, March 07, 2009
Alberta Finance - turning the corner?
This article on the reduction of cost on the Henday drive is a historical document!
This is the first time in Alberta Conservative history they have released the results of the bidding on a project. Here, we have the players names and the relative placement of their bids.
Can we expect more of the same as this Government burns through the cash?
I think, probably not.
This is the first time in Alberta Conservative history they have released the results of the bidding on a project. Here, we have the players names and the relative placement of their bids.
Can we expect more of the same as this Government burns through the cash?
I think, probably not.
Friday, March 06, 2009
Alberta finance: Inexperience and recklessness
Alberta puts 40 million into well reclamation reads the headline.
Also the article tells us the receivers of the money, the Orphan Well Association, did not ask for funds and did not need the funds as the Orphan Wells have been paid for by the oil companies to the extent of about 12 million dollars a year.
The Mr. Stelmach in a separate article said he was giving this money to them to use in addition to what ever they are spending and he hopes they will spend it.
The point of all this?
This project like the other 2.5 billion in projects that have been put up by the Conservatives have gone out with no plans, no details, no instruction on how or what to spend it on.
Their construction projects when they were more than flush with cash were all cost plus. Bids were given to whoever they wanted after a bid was asked for regardless of what the winning bid was. Lists of bids are never let to the public. Awash with cash they threw money at what ever tweaked their interest.
Now, the worm has turned and it should be apparent to every one that after all these years we are dealing with amateurs who do not no how to Govern. They don't have a whole pile of experience. They have the same very few experiences, over and over again.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Alberta's oil fiscal deficiencies laid out
Short now of what amounts to 3 years of revenue from our resources they find us in trouble and are using it as an excuse of pushing the Conservative agenda of absolute and total privatization. Now, they can uses the lower revenues which they caused as an excuse to cut funding for programs.
It must be a warp in the conservative physic! Today we see articles the world is awash with oil due to inactivity caused by the recession. We read of whole fleets of tankers being bought to store oil afloat awaiting a port to dump their cargo into. Cheaper than pipelines. Cheaper than tanks ashore for storage.
We read where BP is cancelling its pipeline work designed to move natural gas from Alaska to Alberta and a day later Stelmach is telling the NWT industry wants the gas from the North Shore, put the pipeline through.
Every where we look and everything we see points to the hard fact that oil along with a number of other commodities has tanked!
Today the Conservative announce they are going to kick yet another billion into the oil patch "to keep people working" and a second Billion and a half going to subsidize oil drilling. The Billion is to clean up oil wells according to Mr. Knight. This government has spent years telling us there is nothing such as a dirty site. If you got ill because of the wells, now is the time to lawyer up.
On royalty we are taking a 20% + loss in revenue on exchange alone. I estimated this at 16 billions of dollars but the Liberals have pulled the oil books and pointed out to the Government that their energy regime considering Syncrude alone has cost this province 18 billion dollars.
This runs the estimate up to close to 30 billions of because the deals are passed onto other sectors of the petroleum and gas industry. Pumped into the oil industry coffers that that has all gone to fat stock portfolios. Its gone and the Government is now going to throw another 3 billion on the table to encourage drilling?
We are already taking less money than is Saskatchewan and BC. If someone was going to drill they would be drilling now! This is a blatant slice to move more of Alberta cash into the oil industry.
When the math is done, we are paying the oil and gas companies to take the non renewable resource from the province. At the end of the day we won't even have the jobs.
It is time to elect a Government in Alberta who works for the province rather than the oil industry. They are not one of the same!
It must be a warp in the conservative physic! Today we see articles the world is awash with oil due to inactivity caused by the recession. We read of whole fleets of tankers being bought to store oil afloat awaiting a port to dump their cargo into. Cheaper than pipelines. Cheaper than tanks ashore for storage.
We read where BP is cancelling its pipeline work designed to move natural gas from Alaska to Alberta and a day later Stelmach is telling the NWT industry wants the gas from the North Shore, put the pipeline through.
Every where we look and everything we see points to the hard fact that oil along with a number of other commodities has tanked!
Today the Conservative announce they are going to kick yet another billion into the oil patch "to keep people working" and a second Billion and a half going to subsidize oil drilling. The Billion is to clean up oil wells according to Mr. Knight. This government has spent years telling us there is nothing such as a dirty site. If you got ill because of the wells, now is the time to lawyer up.
On royalty we are taking a 20% + loss in revenue on exchange alone. I estimated this at 16 billions of dollars but the Liberals have pulled the oil books and pointed out to the Government that their energy regime considering Syncrude alone has cost this province 18 billion dollars.
This runs the estimate up to close to 30 billions of because the deals are passed onto other sectors of the petroleum and gas industry. Pumped into the oil industry coffers that that has all gone to fat stock portfolios. Its gone and the Government is now going to throw another 3 billion on the table to encourage drilling?
We are already taking less money than is Saskatchewan and BC. If someone was going to drill they would be drilling now! This is a blatant slice to move more of Alberta cash into the oil industry.
When the math is done, we are paying the oil and gas companies to take the non renewable resource from the province. At the end of the day we won't even have the jobs.
It is time to elect a Government in Alberta who works for the province rather than the oil industry. They are not one of the same!
Thursday, February 26, 2009
The Calgary Herald - The Conservative Ink Pot
Calgary Herald - The Conservative Ink Barrel
The Calgary Herald recently decided to take an excursion into allowing comment on their articles to appear on their web site. This came about when the Government was accused of not posting news items in media which allowed comments. It lasted no more than a month.
Now, if you criticize the Government by citing oil royalty, spending or mismanagement in general (there is lots of that)the comment stays up at best for an hour or so but more often does not make it past the moderator. Never to see publication.
Likewise the Edmonton Journal regular addition. The digital publication seems to be more forgiving. The CBC on the other hand is wide open and spirited.
The Calgary Herald recently decided to take an excursion into allowing comment on their articles to appear on their web site. This came about when the Government was accused of not posting news items in media which allowed comments. It lasted no more than a month.
Now, if you criticize the Government by citing oil royalty, spending or mismanagement in general (there is lots of that)the comment stays up at best for an hour or so but more often does not make it past the moderator. Never to see publication.
Likewise the Edmonton Journal regular addition. The digital publication seems to be more forgiving. The CBC on the other hand is wide open and spirited.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Carbon Sequester- Who pays and how?
Alberta Carbon Sequester program has been taking a lot of flack in the media these days, for all the wrong reasons. It has the potential to be the power line "who pays" issue all over again.
On the plus side carbon dioxide treated in this manner can be measured unlike the cap and trade thing that is so popular in shifting cash around the world.
Carbon must first be collected! This means coal burning generation plants will have to be re built or, significantly revamped! This is going to cost over a billion dollars and one has to ask who is going to pay and how much are we going to be asked to pay.
The act of collection requires a large containment. Nitrogen and air is pumped out of the container. Coal is heated in the containment, giving off methane and hydrogen. Oxygen is introduced into the container and a flash fire is created. Because it is an oxygen burn, nearly pure carbon dioxide is given off. There are variations in the mechanics of the process.
The heat generated is used to heat steam to power the generators. The carbon dioxide is collected and put into temporary storage awaiting shipment down line which brings us to the pipelines needed.
Pipelines are going to be needed to move the collected carbon dioxide from the coal burning plants to where it is to be used or disposed of. Yes, there is a difference. There is probably more than a billion dollars needed for pipelines when it is over. Who pays? How do we pay?
Much carbon dioxide will be pumped down hole into existing older oil strata where it will be used as a solvent to free up oil moving it to the surface. The carbon dioxide will not stay down hole in most cases but will come up to the surface again either with the oil or separately. This is what is happening at Weyburn, Saskatchewan. Putting carbon dioxide down hole is not the same as sequestering!
Deep below the Viking formation (where the old oil is to be found) is a saline water aquifer. It is unpotable, never to be used for human or animal consumption. It is loaded with mineral salts and generally very toxic substance. This aquifer is encased both top and bottom with bedrock. The oil companies have rejected the use of this aquifer for their drilling water citing it as being too expensive.
This saline aquifer (and others similar) is where the anticipated sequestering is to take place. At this depth carbon dioxide is super critical. It is a liquid which will blend with the underground saline water and will stay there presumably until it is absorbed into the bedrock again.
On the plus side carbon dioxide treated in this manner can be measured unlike the cap and trade thing that is so popular in shifting cash around the world.
Carbon must first be collected! This means coal burning generation plants will have to be re built or, significantly revamped! This is going to cost over a billion dollars and one has to ask who is going to pay and how much are we going to be asked to pay.
The act of collection requires a large containment. Nitrogen and air is pumped out of the container. Coal is heated in the containment, giving off methane and hydrogen. Oxygen is introduced into the container and a flash fire is created. Because it is an oxygen burn, nearly pure carbon dioxide is given off. There are variations in the mechanics of the process.
The heat generated is used to heat steam to power the generators. The carbon dioxide is collected and put into temporary storage awaiting shipment down line which brings us to the pipelines needed.
Pipelines are going to be needed to move the collected carbon dioxide from the coal burning plants to where it is to be used or disposed of. Yes, there is a difference. There is probably more than a billion dollars needed for pipelines when it is over. Who pays? How do we pay?
Much carbon dioxide will be pumped down hole into existing older oil strata where it will be used as a solvent to free up oil moving it to the surface. The carbon dioxide will not stay down hole in most cases but will come up to the surface again either with the oil or separately. This is what is happening at Weyburn, Saskatchewan. Putting carbon dioxide down hole is not the same as sequestering!
Deep below the Viking formation (where the old oil is to be found) is a saline water aquifer. It is unpotable, never to be used for human or animal consumption. It is loaded with mineral salts and generally very toxic substance. This aquifer is encased both top and bottom with bedrock. The oil companies have rejected the use of this aquifer for their drilling water citing it as being too expensive.
This saline aquifer (and others similar) is where the anticipated sequestering is to take place. At this depth carbon dioxide is super critical. It is a liquid which will blend with the underground saline water and will stay there presumably until it is absorbed into the bedrock again.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Crown Assets to go at fire sale prices
This financial disaster we are working through is a Godsend to the ruling Conservatives. No bad days for these boys! Sell off crown assets below bargain basement prices all in the name of creating financial diversity. Sell them to insiders who are looking for safe haven for their money in these troubled times.
In the conservative mind any building or chattel owned by the government is a direct rip off from private industry. It ‘s the Conservative sworn duty to set this abolition right.
In the Conservative plan "selling an asset to a private-sector entity may generate more economic activity and deliver greater value to taxpayers." Is all they need to cut and slash this country to nothing.
As the game unfolds it could lead to the sale or privatization of several well-known Crown corporations, including Canada Post, Via Rail, the Royal Canadian Mint and the agency that oversees security at Canada's airports Finance, Indian and Northern Affairs, Natural Resources and Transport and Infrastructure. Not to mention the Canada Pension Fund.
Some of the Crown corporations that fall under the authority of those departments have been known to be on the block for some time, such as Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd more because the Conservatives find them troublesome than any intrinsic value they may hold.
UNDER REVIEW
Crown corporations under the authority of departments under review:
Finance
- Bank of Canada
- Canada Deposit Insurance Corp.
- Canada Development Investment Corp.
- Canada Pension Plan Investment Board
- PPP Canada Inc.*
Indian and Northern Affairs
- First Nations Statistical Institute**
Natural Resources
- Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.
- Cape Breton Development Corp.
Transport
- Atlantic Pilotage Authority
- Blue Water Bridge Authority
- Canada Lands Company Ltd.
- Canada Post Corp.
- Canadian Air Transport Security Authority
- The Federal Bridge Corporation Ltd.
- Great Lakes Pilotage Authority
- Laurentian Pilotage Authority
- Marine Atlantic Inc.
- National Capital Commission
- Old Port of Montreal Corporation Inc.*
- Pacific Pilotage Authority
- Parc Downsview Park Inc.*
- Ridley Terminals Inc.
- Royal Canadian Mint
- Via Rail Canada Inc.
Source: Annual report to Parliament on Crown corporations.
*Wholly owned subsidiaries of Canada Lands.
** Non-operational as of July 31, 2008.
In the conservative mind any building or chattel owned by the government is a direct rip off from private industry. It ‘s the Conservative sworn duty to set this abolition right.
In the Conservative plan "selling an asset to a private-sector entity may generate more economic activity and deliver greater value to taxpayers." Is all they need to cut and slash this country to nothing.
As the game unfolds it could lead to the sale or privatization of several well-known Crown corporations, including Canada Post, Via Rail, the Royal Canadian Mint and the agency that oversees security at Canada's airports Finance, Indian and Northern Affairs, Natural Resources and Transport and Infrastructure. Not to mention the Canada Pension Fund.
Some of the Crown corporations that fall under the authority of those departments have been known to be on the block for some time, such as Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd more because the Conservatives find them troublesome than any intrinsic value they may hold.
UNDER REVIEW
Crown corporations under the authority of departments under review:
Finance
- Bank of Canada
- Canada Deposit Insurance Corp.
- Canada Development Investment Corp.
- Canada Pension Plan Investment Board
- PPP Canada Inc.*
Indian and Northern Affairs
- First Nations Statistical Institute**
Natural Resources
- Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.
- Cape Breton Development Corp.
Transport
- Atlantic Pilotage Authority
- Blue Water Bridge Authority
- Canada Lands Company Ltd.
- Canada Post Corp.
- Canadian Air Transport Security Authority
- The Federal Bridge Corporation Ltd.
- Great Lakes Pilotage Authority
- Laurentian Pilotage Authority
- Marine Atlantic Inc.
- National Capital Commission
- Old Port of Montreal Corporation Inc.*
- Pacific Pilotage Authority
- Parc Downsview Park Inc.*
- Ridley Terminals Inc.
- Royal Canadian Mint
- Via Rail Canada Inc.
Source: Annual report to Parliament on Crown corporations.
*Wholly owned subsidiaries of Canada Lands.
** Non-operational as of July 31, 2008.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Alberta still holds option of payments in kind!
The last paragraph is very interesting. A play on words rather than a fact.
Alberta’s original deal on royalty was that it would be taken in US dollars based on NY prices for sweet crude. Collected in US dollars the royalty would be deposited with the exchange on the US dollars into income in the Alberta coffers.
Mel Knight would have us believe the original deal was in Canadian dollars and, it was not! He has changed it so our royalty is taken in Canadian dollars and the oil companies keep the exchange.
I would call that still another lie.
Alberta is looking at the option of “payment in kind” that is, taking crude oil in lieu of cash. The idea is that the crude oil is either going to be “given free and clear” to the upgraders when and if they come on line or “sold at a very reduced price” to the same upgraders.
No matter which way it is done, it means less and less money into Alberta Treasury coffers while this Government remains in power.
Considering the Canadian Dollar take on resources was put in for all our petro chemical products, the Conservatives have shifted upwards from20 billions of dollars into the petroleum pockets away from Alberta’s taxpayers in the past 2 years.
With that kind of slash and burn to the provinces revenues things are not going to be okay it is a shame however they choose to tax the unfortunate and seniors for their shortcomings in business management.
Alberta’s original deal on royalty was that it would be taken in US dollars based on NY prices for sweet crude. Collected in US dollars the royalty would be deposited with the exchange on the US dollars into income in the Alberta coffers.
Mel Knight would have us believe the original deal was in Canadian dollars and, it was not! He has changed it so our royalty is taken in Canadian dollars and the oil companies keep the exchange.
I would call that still another lie.
Alberta is looking at the option of “payment in kind” that is, taking crude oil in lieu of cash. The idea is that the crude oil is either going to be “given free and clear” to the upgraders when and if they come on line or “sold at a very reduced price” to the same upgraders.
No matter which way it is done, it means less and less money into Alberta Treasury coffers while this Government remains in power.
Considering the Canadian Dollar take on resources was put in for all our petro chemical products, the Conservatives have shifted upwards from20 billions of dollars into the petroleum pockets away from Alberta’s taxpayers in the past 2 years.
With that kind of slash and burn to the provinces revenues things are not going to be okay it is a shame however they choose to tax the unfortunate and seniors for their shortcomings in business management.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
The Economy-why did we crash?
by: Tyler Durden February 10, 2009
Tyler Durden
Add to Your WatchlistAbout this author:
Profile & More Articles
Visit: ZeroHedge
Become a Contributor Submit an Article
TweetThis
LiveLeak has caught a scary moment of previously undisclosed insight by Paul Kanjorski where he reveals some facts that have not been captured by the media previously.
At 2 minutes and 20 seconds in the video below, Democratic Representative Kanjorski explains how the Federal Reserve told Congress members about a "tremendous draw-down of money market accounts in the United States, to the tune of $550 billion dollars." According to Kanjorski, this electronic transfer occurred over the period of an hour or two. And it gets worse.
Kanjorski paraphrases the following disclosure by Bernanke and Paulson (emphasis added):
On Thursday (Sept 18), at 11 in the morning the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous draw-down of money market accounts in the U.S., to the tune of $550 billion was being drawn out in the matter of an hour or two.
The Treasury opened up its window to help and pumped a $105 billion in the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide.
We were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn't be further panic out there.If they had not done that, their estimation was that by 2pm that afternoon, $5.5 trillion would have been drawn out of the money market system of the U.S., would have collapsed the entire economy of the U.S., and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed... It would have been the end of our economic system and our political system as we know it...
We are no better off today than we were 3 months ago because we have a decrease in the equity positions of banks because other assets are going sour by the moment.
Interestingly, Kanjorski, and likely more and more Democrats, are starting to shift to the camp that more time is needed to make a correct decision this time (which may explain Geithner's decision to postpone the "bank-rescue" announcement by one day, to Tuesday), instead of rushing into another half-baked plan.
Very scary stuff.
Tyler Durden
Add to Your WatchlistAbout this author:
Profile & More Articles
Visit: ZeroHedge
Become a Contributor Submit an Article
TweetThis
LiveLeak has caught a scary moment of previously undisclosed insight by Paul Kanjorski where he reveals some facts that have not been captured by the media previously.
At 2 minutes and 20 seconds in the video below, Democratic Representative Kanjorski explains how the Federal Reserve told Congress members about a "tremendous draw-down of money market accounts in the United States, to the tune of $550 billion dollars." According to Kanjorski, this electronic transfer occurred over the period of an hour or two. And it gets worse.
Kanjorski paraphrases the following disclosure by Bernanke and Paulson (emphasis added):
On Thursday (Sept 18), at 11 in the morning the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous draw-down of money market accounts in the U.S., to the tune of $550 billion was being drawn out in the matter of an hour or two.
The Treasury opened up its window to help and pumped a $105 billion in the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide.
We were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn't be further panic out there.If they had not done that, their estimation was that by 2pm that afternoon, $5.5 trillion would have been drawn out of the money market system of the U.S., would have collapsed the entire economy of the U.S., and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed... It would have been the end of our economic system and our political system as we know it...
We are no better off today than we were 3 months ago because we have a decrease in the equity positions of banks because other assets are going sour by the moment.
Interestingly, Kanjorski, and likely more and more Democrats, are starting to shift to the camp that more time is needed to make a correct decision this time (which may explain Geithner's decision to postpone the "bank-rescue" announcement by one day, to Tuesday), instead of rushing into another half-baked plan.
Very scary stuff.
Friday, February 06, 2009
Alberta to fund oil company mess cleanups
All of a sudden the messes left behind by oil drilling become an infrastructure problem?
Alberta to fund oil company mess cleanups.
On Thursday nights local CTV news, Mel Knight said: we will pay oil-rig workers to switch-out their duties and focus on cleaning-up (the thousands of) toxic well sites.
THERE IT IS... After years of denying there were toxic well sites, This government is paying for the clean-up costs.
John Clark
Alberta to fund oil company mess cleanups.
On Thursday nights local CTV news, Mel Knight said: we will pay oil-rig workers to switch-out their duties and focus on cleaning-up (the thousands of) toxic well sites.
THERE IT IS... After years of denying there were toxic well sites, This government is paying for the clean-up costs.
John Clark
Monday, February 02, 2009
Friday, January 16, 2009
Alberta Shock Doctrine is under way!
“As in the Klein days we have to come to terms with the 38.00 barrel of oil” says Stelmach.
In Klein’s days, Alberta would have collected 25% US $ in royalty.
Thanks to Stelmach we collect only 19% in Canadian Funds.
This is a full 50% reduction in our take on royalty, thanks to Stelmach and Knight!
The figures; today’s exchange at .80 cents.
Under Stelmach:
38.00 US oil pays Alberta at 19% or 5.78 Canadian.
Under Klein:
38.00 US oil pays Alberta at 25% or 9.50 US which is 11.88 Canadian.
And as I said earlier, you as citizens of this province are going to be asked to make up the difference.
In Klein’s days, Alberta would have collected 25% US $ in royalty.
Thanks to Stelmach we collect only 19% in Canadian Funds.
This is a full 50% reduction in our take on royalty, thanks to Stelmach and Knight!
The figures; today’s exchange at .80 cents.
Under Stelmach:
38.00 US oil pays Alberta at 19% or 5.78 Canadian.
Under Klein:
38.00 US oil pays Alberta at 25% or 9.50 US which is 11.88 Canadian.
And as I said earlier, you as citizens of this province are going to be asked to make up the difference.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Alberta-The lowest royalty for oil in the world!
Multi Billions more given up to the oil companies!
In the latest rush of resource give away, the Conservatives have hit a new low!
They revamped the royalty system on December 16 as follows:
Oil companies will not have to pay their pre-payout of 1% as was the original deal. Instead they pay the 1% on the payout portion until after oil reaches 55.00 per barrel!
And:
The original deal was for 25% to be paid as oil royalty from the time the project was paid for. Under the new deal the 25% will not come in effect until oil again reaches 55.00 per barrel.
This means the royalty being collected now is at 19% and all the royalty posturing is nothing more than lies.
To put the icing on the cake, the tar sands refined crude oil is selling at a discount of near 30% when it is being sold at the price of regular crude.
The bottom lines is this Government has now cut itself off cash flow and will try to make that up off the residences in this province.
There is only 1 cure for this, get rid of this bunch of crooks!
In the latest rush of resource give away, the Conservatives have hit a new low!
They revamped the royalty system on December 16 as follows:
Oil companies will not have to pay their pre-payout of 1% as was the original deal. Instead they pay the 1% on the payout portion until after oil reaches 55.00 per barrel!
And:
The original deal was for 25% to be paid as oil royalty from the time the project was paid for. Under the new deal the 25% will not come in effect until oil again reaches 55.00 per barrel.
This means the royalty being collected now is at 19% and all the royalty posturing is nothing more than lies.
To put the icing on the cake, the tar sands refined crude oil is selling at a discount of near 30% when it is being sold at the price of regular crude.
The bottom lines is this Government has now cut itself off cash flow and will try to make that up off the residences in this province.
There is only 1 cure for this, get rid of this bunch of crooks!
Alberta provides the cheapest oil there is to the US.
“At the same time, the development of these things (tar sands) is pretty important, in our judgment, to North American energy security." Says Obama.
It is time to take a closer look at the tar sands crude output.
Tar sands output is a crude oil that has been heavily refined before going to market as crude. There is none of the sulfur or other impurities in the crude. These have been taken out.
Essentially it is clean, ready to be used. This means the refineries in the US who are intent on doing the final cracking in the US are going to be able to collect big bucks back on Carbon reductions.
Very little needs to be done to the Alberta Crude so, they can claim operational improvements in reducing their carbon foot print. Estimates from industry have put a value of the Alberta Tar Sands oil as being underpriced by as much as 30% because of the state of distillation of the product.
If you add the underpriced base oil to the short shift we got when the Conservatives put the oil to Canadian dollars for figuring out royalty you can see where we are paying the oil companies to take the resource away from Alberta.
It is time to take a closer look at the tar sands crude output.
Tar sands output is a crude oil that has been heavily refined before going to market as crude. There is none of the sulfur or other impurities in the crude. These have been taken out.
Essentially it is clean, ready to be used. This means the refineries in the US who are intent on doing the final cracking in the US are going to be able to collect big bucks back on Carbon reductions.
Very little needs to be done to the Alberta Crude so, they can claim operational improvements in reducing their carbon foot print. Estimates from industry have put a value of the Alberta Tar Sands oil as being underpriced by as much as 30% because of the state of distillation of the product.
If you add the underpriced base oil to the short shift we got when the Conservatives put the oil to Canadian dollars for figuring out royalty you can see where we are paying the oil companies to take the resource away from Alberta.
Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Alberta Oil News is no news at all!
The Calgary Harold is the most biased, most useless rag in the province if you are looking for information.
Two Examples today:
One misleading quote: “That might work in normal times, but industry leaders are deeply pessimistic these breaks will encourage much new activity in today's bleak conditions.”
They make no effort to explain exploration is down to zero around the world right now. Instead, they would have you believe it has something to do with the new Energy plan. Also note that the Alberta Government doesn’t release these BS enlightenments in papers that allow public opinion.
And another one:
“Knight, however, argued Alberta isn't in "any danger"of collecting less royalties under the new system as opposed to the old one.”
The controversial royalty plan, which took effect Jan. 1, was announced in the fall of 2007 after a government-appointed expert committee said Albertans weren't receiving "their fair share" of energy development.
In this article they pan the Canadian Dollar royalty like it has been in there forever! Such crap!
The royalty was switched from US to Canadian last September away from the public eye when exchange between the US and Canadian dollars was at par.
How in Knights wildest dreams can he expect a point for point change in royalty percentage to make up for the direct 20% loss in exchange? He can’t! It is still another lie.
They have mismanaged this economy drastically. That exchange slight of hands costs Albertans 8 to 12 billions of dollars per year! Think of that when they start laying off and cutting programs.
Two Examples today:
One misleading quote: “That might work in normal times, but industry leaders are deeply pessimistic these breaks will encourage much new activity in today's bleak conditions.”
They make no effort to explain exploration is down to zero around the world right now. Instead, they would have you believe it has something to do with the new Energy plan. Also note that the Alberta Government doesn’t release these BS enlightenments in papers that allow public opinion.
And another one:
“Knight, however, argued Alberta isn't in "any danger"of collecting less royalties under the new system as opposed to the old one.”
The controversial royalty plan, which took effect Jan. 1, was announced in the fall of 2007 after a government-appointed expert committee said Albertans weren't receiving "their fair share" of energy development.
In this article they pan the Canadian Dollar royalty like it has been in there forever! Such crap!
The royalty was switched from US to Canadian last September away from the public eye when exchange between the US and Canadian dollars was at par.
How in Knights wildest dreams can he expect a point for point change in royalty percentage to make up for the direct 20% loss in exchange? He can’t! It is still another lie.
They have mismanaged this economy drastically. That exchange slight of hands costs Albertans 8 to 12 billions of dollars per year! Think of that when they start laying off and cutting programs.
Saturday, January 03, 2009
Alberta to release the SHOCK DOCTRINE!
This is the perfect financial climate for the Conservatives who want to push their right wing privatization agenda more than they want anything else. Cut Services, Destabilize, under fund. This has been the legacy of this Government. When the programs are ruined the answer is clear; privatize it!
Changing the royalty regime on all of Alberta’s petrochemical resource to Canadian Dollars from US dollars, the standards all other in the petroleum trade business follow has ensured them this province will be short 6 to 8 billion dollars a year in revenue and, they have no intention of pulling that money back.
Taking hugely deficient royalty percentages ensured another shortage of revenue. For years now we have only been collecting 19% royalty on the tar sands. The “new deal, good for everyone” moves that percentage back to 25%, where it was to start with. The 1% taken on product until the plant is paid for by Albertans is an icon in itself!
For comparison the US, BC and Saskatchewan all take funds in US dollars This is an immediate loss of 20% Their start up percentage is 2%, not 1 as is Alberta. Another 1% loss.
BC and Saskatchewan both take 34% royalty on Tier 3 oil (producing). This is a long way from the 19% and 25% Alberta is taking. A further loss of 9%
Changing the royalty regime on all of Alberta’s petrochemical resource to Canadian Dollars from US dollars, the standards all other in the petroleum trade business follow has ensured them this province will be short 6 to 8 billion dollars a year in revenue and, they have no intention of pulling that money back.
Taking hugely deficient royalty percentages ensured another shortage of revenue. For years now we have only been collecting 19% royalty on the tar sands. The “new deal, good for everyone” moves that percentage back to 25%, where it was to start with. The 1% taken on product until the plant is paid for by Albertans is an icon in itself!
For comparison the US, BC and Saskatchewan all take funds in US dollars This is an immediate loss of 20% Their start up percentage is 2%, not 1 as is Alberta. Another 1% loss.
BC and Saskatchewan both take 34% royalty on Tier 3 oil (producing). This is a long way from the 19% and 25% Alberta is taking. A further loss of 9%
In total we are loosing a minimum of 30% of the revenue that rightly belongs to this province!
There is no guarantee the new rates will come into effect. Mel Knights ongoing lies are tantamount in considering his recent comments that “nothing is written in stone” and “we may put off the increases”
So, the stage is set!
Enter now, THE SHOCK DOCTRINE.
In a few short months (perhaps, weeks) Stelmach-Liepert-Knight-Evans-Snelgrove will begin the process of telling (think – warning and leaky press releases) Albertans the following:
Dear Albertans, because of lower than expected revenues...
Less of X
Less of Y
Less of Z
Then:
Pay as you go A
Pay as you go B
Pay as you go C
And, we're holding off on the previously announced initiatives... long list but, a peek did come in Stelmach’s New Year’s speech on CFRN. When asked about the pharmacare package for seniors he said “that will take place probably in 2010 (think here after the next election) and we will be telling you who pays and, who doesn’t.
EVERYTHING will be blamed on the GLOBAL ECONOMIC CRISIS.
The attitude and direction of Stelmach will be, I / we have no choice.
Behind the veil of the GLOBAL ECONOMIC CRISIS, the Stelmach government will take the opportunity to implement M-O-R-E privatization, including the sell-off of more public works and the rural hospitals.
By definition the basis for the Shock Doctrine is to take Full Private Sector Advantage of public disaster (s) be they mother nature (Tsunami - Hurricane) OR mismanaged economic as is about to happen.
Nobody in Alberta can tell me that should oil slip to $25 a drum (until April) the government won't fire-sale everything to their buddies!
38 years of Tory rule, including billions and billions of non-renewable dollars passing through this province and we have NOTHING MORE THAN ANY OTHER CANADIAN PROVINCE TO SHOW FOR IT.
The Tories have run our province into the ground. Unfortunately, too many idiots got their rocks off because a handful of guys got rich in the process. Yes, a handful of folks did get rich, but that didn't translate into a flourishing prosperous society.
Friday, December 26, 2008
CHORUS OF VOICES CALLING ROYALTIES REGIME A RIP-OFF GROW LOUDERN
Vue Magazine out of Edmonton
CHORUS OF VOICES CALLING ROYALTIES REGIME A RIP-OFF GROW LOUDER
Shannon Phillips / shannon@vueweekly.com
Eighty-four per cent of Albertans think the province isn’t collecting enough royalties from our non-renewable resources, according to a May 2006 poll. But the government says their review of the system—which they won’t release to the public—concluded that we’re getting “our fair share” from multinational corporations reaping unprecedented profits.
Alberta energy minister Greg Melchin says his department finished a review of the province’s oil royalties last week, but controversy erupted when Conservative leadership candidates Ted Morton and Ed Stelmach told reporters the review was discussed at neither caucus nor cabinet. Morton told the Canadian Press that the exercise had not even begun, saying his understanding was that the review had been shelved pending the expected election.
The energy ministry did not return repeated requests from Vue for information on the review.
NDP leader Brian Mason has since written to the energy minister requesting the parameters of the review, its timeline and its participants.
“Basically, the government is saying that their dog ate the royalty review,” quipped Mason.
“During the last election, the NDP was out on its own, asking for changes to the royalty system. None of the other parties would touch it, as both the Liberals and the Tories depend so heavily on money from the oil and gas sector.
“But now, there seems to be a growing awareness that we’re not getting a fair return on our resources—that’s why the province agreed to this phantom review. Given all the fog around it, we’re simply renewing our call for a public, transparent process.”
Alberta’s last royalty review was in 1992, but no significant changes were made. 1997 saw some changes for oil sands producers, but conventional oil and natural gas calculations were designed in the mid-1980s, when oil prices dipped to $10/barrel and the undiversified Alberta economy suffered, with thousands of job losses and a mini-recession.Oil and gas royalties are not just another form of corporate tax—they’re less like tax deductions on a paycheque and more like the cash paid to a landlord. Policy wonks call the concept economic rent: by law, non-renewable resources belong to Albertans, not to the companies that exploit them. Economic rent is the difference between the value of the resource and the cost of producing the resource, including an allowance for a normal rate of return on investment (profit).
Royalties are calculated in many different ways, so comparisons between different countries, states and provinces are difficult. But the Pembina Institute, an Alberta-based environmental economics think-tank, has demonstrated that Albertans are being grossly shortchanged compared to other jurisdictions.
In 2004, Pembina found that Alaska charged $11.60 per barrel oil royalty, and Norway charged $14.10 per barrel. Alberta charged $4.30 per barrel.
Between 1995 and 2002, Alaska captured almost 100 per cent of the economic rent of the resource, and Norway captured almost 90 per cent. Alberta captured just 50 per cent.Calgary-based EnCana—one of Canada’s most prolific natural gas producers—is one of the few companies that disclose their average royalty rates. In 2003, EnCana paid an average of 12.9 per cent on the Canadian (mostly Alberta) natural gas they produced. They paid 20 per cent on their US-produced gas.Low royalties means that Alberta collects the same amount of money from gambling as we do from conventional crude oil ($1.4 billion). Liquor and tobacco taxes significantly outpace oil sands royalty revenue ($1.3 billion on booze and smokes last year compared to $950 million from the tar sands). Add low royalties to the lowest corporate taxes in Canada (reduced this year by another $365 million) and Alberta is by far the most lucrative place in the hemisphere for American oil and gas companies to do business.
The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers says increasing royalties discourages investment. But that’s not what has happened in countries that have made recent changes to their royalties. Venezuela’s leftist President Hugo Chavez boosted royalties from one per cent to a whopping 30 per cent over the past two years, even charging back-royalties to make up for years of uncollected rent.
Foreign investments from Asia—particularly China—have increased. Only Texas-based Exxon-Mobil has refused to play ball.
Mason says a thorough public review of royalties would take the oil and gas industry’s disinvestment claims into careful consideration.“If the oil and gas industry is saying we’re not going to invest if you raise royalties, and if you look back and see that they were making investments with a third of the profits they are making now, then we need to scrutinize those claims very closely and decide what’s in the public interest,” says Mason.
Tar sands royalties are an entirely different Pandora’s box of complicated calculations. But the basic concept is simple: oil sands developers pay only one per cent royalty until they recover their capital costs—a scheme developed in the early 1980s and reworked in 1997. The one per cent rule was meant to give oil sands producers a helping hand with big-ticket technology and equipment required to strip mine and refine viscous, sandy tar into a usable final product.As production costs have declined and profits gone skyward, many observers are saying it’s time for a change—including former Premier Peter Lougheed. The man who first negotiated what the Pembina Institute calls a “sweet deal for companies” called for a moratorium on tar sands development and a renegotiation of royalty rates in early July. “[Albertans got] $2.85 from a barrel of oil from the oil sands in 1997. They got $1.74 in 2005,” says Amy Taylor, director of ecological fiscal reform at the Pembina Institute.“Keeping the decade-old royalty regime, designed to jumpstart oil sands production, when [the economy] is overheated, is irresponsible,” says Taylor.“At the end of the day,” concludes Mason, “the most important thing to remember is that Albertans own these resources, not the oil and gas companies. The smartest thing to do would be to capture an appropriate return on our non-renewable resources so that we can build an economy based on renewables.
CHORUS OF VOICES CALLING ROYALTIES REGIME A RIP-OFF GROW LOUDER
Shannon Phillips / shannon@vueweekly.com
Eighty-four per cent of Albertans think the province isn’t collecting enough royalties from our non-renewable resources, according to a May 2006 poll. But the government says their review of the system—which they won’t release to the public—concluded that we’re getting “our fair share” from multinational corporations reaping unprecedented profits.
Alberta energy minister Greg Melchin says his department finished a review of the province’s oil royalties last week, but controversy erupted when Conservative leadership candidates Ted Morton and Ed Stelmach told reporters the review was discussed at neither caucus nor cabinet. Morton told the Canadian Press that the exercise had not even begun, saying his understanding was that the review had been shelved pending the expected election.
The energy ministry did not return repeated requests from Vue for information on the review.
NDP leader Brian Mason has since written to the energy minister requesting the parameters of the review, its timeline and its participants.
“Basically, the government is saying that their dog ate the royalty review,” quipped Mason.
“During the last election, the NDP was out on its own, asking for changes to the royalty system. None of the other parties would touch it, as both the Liberals and the Tories depend so heavily on money from the oil and gas sector.
“But now, there seems to be a growing awareness that we’re not getting a fair return on our resources—that’s why the province agreed to this phantom review. Given all the fog around it, we’re simply renewing our call for a public, transparent process.”
Alberta’s last royalty review was in 1992, but no significant changes were made. 1997 saw some changes for oil sands producers, but conventional oil and natural gas calculations were designed in the mid-1980s, when oil prices dipped to $10/barrel and the undiversified Alberta economy suffered, with thousands of job losses and a mini-recession.Oil and gas royalties are not just another form of corporate tax—they’re less like tax deductions on a paycheque and more like the cash paid to a landlord. Policy wonks call the concept economic rent: by law, non-renewable resources belong to Albertans, not to the companies that exploit them. Economic rent is the difference between the value of the resource and the cost of producing the resource, including an allowance for a normal rate of return on investment (profit).
Royalties are calculated in many different ways, so comparisons between different countries, states and provinces are difficult. But the Pembina Institute, an Alberta-based environmental economics think-tank, has demonstrated that Albertans are being grossly shortchanged compared to other jurisdictions.
In 2004, Pembina found that Alaska charged $11.60 per barrel oil royalty, and Norway charged $14.10 per barrel. Alberta charged $4.30 per barrel.
Between 1995 and 2002, Alaska captured almost 100 per cent of the economic rent of the resource, and Norway captured almost 90 per cent. Alberta captured just 50 per cent.Calgary-based EnCana—one of Canada’s most prolific natural gas producers—is one of the few companies that disclose their average royalty rates. In 2003, EnCana paid an average of 12.9 per cent on the Canadian (mostly Alberta) natural gas they produced. They paid 20 per cent on their US-produced gas.Low royalties means that Alberta collects the same amount of money from gambling as we do from conventional crude oil ($1.4 billion). Liquor and tobacco taxes significantly outpace oil sands royalty revenue ($1.3 billion on booze and smokes last year compared to $950 million from the tar sands). Add low royalties to the lowest corporate taxes in Canada (reduced this year by another $365 million) and Alberta is by far the most lucrative place in the hemisphere for American oil and gas companies to do business.
The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers says increasing royalties discourages investment. But that’s not what has happened in countries that have made recent changes to their royalties. Venezuela’s leftist President Hugo Chavez boosted royalties from one per cent to a whopping 30 per cent over the past two years, even charging back-royalties to make up for years of uncollected rent.
Foreign investments from Asia—particularly China—have increased. Only Texas-based Exxon-Mobil has refused to play ball.
Mason says a thorough public review of royalties would take the oil and gas industry’s disinvestment claims into careful consideration.“If the oil and gas industry is saying we’re not going to invest if you raise royalties, and if you look back and see that they were making investments with a third of the profits they are making now, then we need to scrutinize those claims very closely and decide what’s in the public interest,” says Mason.
Tar sands royalties are an entirely different Pandora’s box of complicated calculations. But the basic concept is simple: oil sands developers pay only one per cent royalty until they recover their capital costs—a scheme developed in the early 1980s and reworked in 1997. The one per cent rule was meant to give oil sands producers a helping hand with big-ticket technology and equipment required to strip mine and refine viscous, sandy tar into a usable final product.As production costs have declined and profits gone skyward, many observers are saying it’s time for a change—including former Premier Peter Lougheed. The man who first negotiated what the Pembina Institute calls a “sweet deal for companies” called for a moratorium on tar sands development and a renegotiation of royalty rates in early July. “[Albertans got] $2.85 from a barrel of oil from the oil sands in 1997. They got $1.74 in 2005,” says Amy Taylor, director of ecological fiscal reform at the Pembina Institute.“Keeping the decade-old royalty regime, designed to jumpstart oil sands production, when [the economy] is overheated, is irresponsible,” says Taylor.“At the end of the day,” concludes Mason, “the most important thing to remember is that Albertans own these resources, not the oil and gas companies. The smartest thing to do would be to capture an appropriate return on our non-renewable resources so that we can build an economy based on renewables.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Gas Prices hit 4 year low!
With the price of oil at 37.67 US Alberta presently keeps 19% Canadian which is 4.87 cents US and the oil companies take 32.80 US.
Based on 2 million barrels per day (tar sands and conventional) means that Alberta will get 9.7 million dollars per day in royalty.
Under our contract before the "new deal fair for all" came in Alberta would have received 7.77 per barrel US dollars.
Mel knight and company have given away nearly 50% of our revenue to the oil companies!
Using present day figures we would have received under our orignal deal 18,835,000 US dollars per day. At these rates that is 4.5 billion dollars per year that should have been in Alberta Treasury that is in the OIl coffers!
The worse is yet to come.
The "new deal" comes in January 1/2009 The new deal puts the royalty back up to our origianl 25% but the exchange remains Canadian dollars. I'm pretty sure we won't see it!
Mel Knight is making noises in the media about further assistance to the oil companies. In the new year.
At the same time they have legislation in place for the new year to make all dealings on royalty and literally any other business with the oil companies "secret".
This means we will not know of changes until we loose our services or are taxed to oblivian.
Having watched this pack of outright lies unfold, how could you possibly beleive anything that comes from the mouth of this Government? Keep in mind the recent helath care dribble.
To the PC rank and file I ask, "What in hell is the matter with your heads? They have lied to you constantly for 15 years and you just keep on taking the beating!"
Based on 2 million barrels per day (tar sands and conventional) means that Alberta will get 9.7 million dollars per day in royalty.
Under our contract before the "new deal fair for all" came in Alberta would have received 7.77 per barrel US dollars.
Mel knight and company have given away nearly 50% of our revenue to the oil companies!
Using present day figures we would have received under our orignal deal 18,835,000 US dollars per day. At these rates that is 4.5 billion dollars per year that should have been in Alberta Treasury that is in the OIl coffers!
The worse is yet to come.
The "new deal" comes in January 1/2009 The new deal puts the royalty back up to our origianl 25% but the exchange remains Canadian dollars. I'm pretty sure we won't see it!
Mel Knight is making noises in the media about further assistance to the oil companies. In the new year.
At the same time they have legislation in place for the new year to make all dealings on royalty and literally any other business with the oil companies "secret".
This means we will not know of changes until we loose our services or are taxed to oblivian.
Having watched this pack of outright lies unfold, how could you possibly beleive anything that comes from the mouth of this Government? Keep in mind the recent helath care dribble.
To the PC rank and file I ask, "What in hell is the matter with your heads? They have lied to you constantly for 15 years and you just keep on taking the beating!"
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Ron Liepert-A rush to the US health care system.
When Mr. Liepert cut the universal drug coverage for seniors he said “Money is not the object”.
It is true; Alberta’s money has never been the object of concern for this Government! They are driven wholly and totally by a narrow view of developing the perfect conservative state. That is, a total user pays system in which there is little or nothing left anywhere as far as Government support. That would be the US system.
The only moral guide they have is how low or not the royalty and the taxes are.
After the major lies in the “new oil regime” how can we possibly believe on word that comes out of their mouths!
Ron Liepert – One man’s view of health care being installed in Alberta. He is putting us on a fast track to the US system whether he says so or not! People with a different view he calls “negative whiners” on the opposition benches.
There is no consideration given to the fact the US system is hugely more expensive than the Canadian public system.
In Mr. Liepert’s view, the only people that are concerned about what he is doing are the media and the opposition. Paying 8000.00 a year for a subscription to the Calgary physicians clinic "is one of the shelf". If you want to pay that, go ahead he says but does not entertain conversations about cue jumping or not.
Mr. Liepert outlines his experience in Los Angeles as a trade representative, described as a standard perk. He explains his son was assessed quickly for a broken arm but no treatment would be forth coming until the hospital was paid 5000.00 (cash?).
Sounds drastic don’t it. The fact overlooked is the Alberta Government would have covered him with premium (some would say unheard of) health care coverage while in the US. All he had to do was show his card.
The article also tells of his enterprise in setting up a day care centre in Calgary and his on going association with Jim Dinning who is involved in private hospitals and senior’s care centre. Between them they will certainly know how to rip taxpayer money out of the system to their own enterprises! Perhaps they are in line to pickup up some of the prototypical hospitals?
The article also dwells on Mr. Liepert’s success in building 18 new 3P schools. The article doesn't say the title of these 3P schools can be transferred to an individual or a company in less time than it takes to write this article. And, with the tax dollar (some of it) travelling with the kids now, you can say comfortably you are looking at the end of the public school system in Alberta.
It is true; Alberta’s money has never been the object of concern for this Government! They are driven wholly and totally by a narrow view of developing the perfect conservative state. That is, a total user pays system in which there is little or nothing left anywhere as far as Government support. That would be the US system.
The only moral guide they have is how low or not the royalty and the taxes are.
After the major lies in the “new oil regime” how can we possibly believe on word that comes out of their mouths!
Ron Liepert – One man’s view of health care being installed in Alberta. He is putting us on a fast track to the US system whether he says so or not! People with a different view he calls “negative whiners” on the opposition benches.
There is no consideration given to the fact the US system is hugely more expensive than the Canadian public system.
In Mr. Liepert’s view, the only people that are concerned about what he is doing are the media and the opposition. Paying 8000.00 a year for a subscription to the Calgary physicians clinic "is one of the shelf". If you want to pay that, go ahead he says but does not entertain conversations about cue jumping or not.
Mr. Liepert outlines his experience in Los Angeles as a trade representative, described as a standard perk. He explains his son was assessed quickly for a broken arm but no treatment would be forth coming until the hospital was paid 5000.00 (cash?).
Sounds drastic don’t it. The fact overlooked is the Alberta Government would have covered him with premium (some would say unheard of) health care coverage while in the US. All he had to do was show his card.
The article also tells of his enterprise in setting up a day care centre in Calgary and his on going association with Jim Dinning who is involved in private hospitals and senior’s care centre. Between them they will certainly know how to rip taxpayer money out of the system to their own enterprises! Perhaps they are in line to pickup up some of the prototypical hospitals?
The article also dwells on Mr. Liepert’s success in building 18 new 3P schools. The article doesn't say the title of these 3P schools can be transferred to an individual or a company in less time than it takes to write this article. And, with the tax dollar (some of it) travelling with the kids now, you can say comfortably you are looking at the end of the public school system in Alberta.
Alberta Oil Royalty-Lies burried within lies
With lies like this how can any person in their right mind believe Liepert on his measured privatization of Health Care?
How can this crew be believed on any thing they say?
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Government outright lies are going to cost you!
With our dollar at 80 cents we are loosing 20% of our royalty in exchange. That is over 6 billion dollars of Albertans monies have gone into oil pockets as a bonus.
Today, Albertans are given a choice of a deficit or, do you want to pay more for gas at the pumps. Some choice!
On another front this same bunch of bandits is saying they will close rural hospitals and turn them into homes for the aging. This, forcing rural people into city hospitals for treatment.
In almost the same breath they say they are going to increase the costs of accommodation in these same buildings as a means to attract investment.
Soon enough you will hear the announcement that the hospitals have been sold to Conservative insiders for a dollar (After you have finished paying for conversations as required). This is still another big leap forward in privatization.
When Mel Knight made his lie public at the last election he put out reams of paper showing there would be increased revenue attributed to his "new deal". The figures put forward to the public includedlies about anticipated revenues from new production from new tar sands installations.
When the crunch came, the new projects were cancelled and his numbers became impossible. So much for the most expensive lie in the Conservative history!
The minster went public saying "errors had been made" In any civilized Government there would be resignations of both Stelmach and Knight but not in Alberta; they own it you know.
Today, Albertans are given a choice of a deficit or, do you want to pay more for gas at the pumps. Some choice!
On another front this same bunch of bandits is saying they will close rural hospitals and turn them into homes for the aging. This, forcing rural people into city hospitals for treatment.
In almost the same breath they say they are going to increase the costs of accommodation in these same buildings as a means to attract investment.
Soon enough you will hear the announcement that the hospitals have been sold to Conservative insiders for a dollar (After you have finished paying for conversations as required). This is still another big leap forward in privatization.
When Mel Knight made his lie public at the last election he put out reams of paper showing there would be increased revenue attributed to his "new deal". The figures put forward to the public includedlies about anticipated revenues from new production from new tar sands installations.
When the crunch came, the new projects were cancelled and his numbers became impossible. So much for the most expensive lie in the Conservative history!
The minster went public saying "errors had been made" In any civilized Government there would be resignations of both Stelmach and Knight but not in Alberta; they own it you know.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Alberta trashes seniors - Again!
Summary: Long term care facilities in Alberta are for the very rich. If you do not quality, find a ditch to retire in!
EDMONTON – Health Minister Ron Liepert today announced a new strategy for continuing care called “Aging in the Right Place.” The success of that strategy will hinge on the government acknowledging the reality of the seniors population in every community across Alberta.
Unfortunately, the strategy fails to plan for the construction of any new continuing care beds, despite projecting a need for approximately 750 beds per year over the next 20 years. The new strategy suggests this need can be met by increasing home care services and moving some seniors out of long-term care and back into the community.
It is important to provide these options to seniors who are healthy enough to take advantage of them. However, as the 2005 MLA Task Force on Continuing Care noted, the health needs of Alberta’s seniors in continuing care are increasing and becoming more complex. It is unlikely that these needs can be met without the level of professional staff and services available in a continuing care facility.
"Albertans need to ask themselves whether they want such a big leap into private, for-profit senior's care delivery. Senior's will pay more, and long-term services will be in short supply."
While increasing "options" seniors might have in regards to service and accommodation, the strategy is to increase fee structures for senior's accommodation, and to freeze long-term care services at 2008 levels for an unspecified number of years.
Also, the change in fee structure for long-term care and senior's care facilities in the province is unacceptable. "Three years ago the fees for long-term care increased by 40% and this year there was an additional 6% increase. Now the government wants to adjust fees again 'to encourage more investment.' Merry Christmas for private health care providers," said Eggen.
Information provided by:
David Eggen
Executive Director
Friends of Medicare
780 423 4581
EDMONTON – Health Minister Ron Liepert today announced a new strategy for continuing care called “Aging in the Right Place.” The success of that strategy will hinge on the government acknowledging the reality of the seniors population in every community across Alberta.
Unfortunately, the strategy fails to plan for the construction of any new continuing care beds, despite projecting a need for approximately 750 beds per year over the next 20 years. The new strategy suggests this need can be met by increasing home care services and moving some seniors out of long-term care and back into the community.
It is important to provide these options to seniors who are healthy enough to take advantage of them. However, as the 2005 MLA Task Force on Continuing Care noted, the health needs of Alberta’s seniors in continuing care are increasing and becoming more complex. It is unlikely that these needs can be met without the level of professional staff and services available in a continuing care facility.
"Albertans need to ask themselves whether they want such a big leap into private, for-profit senior's care delivery. Senior's will pay more, and long-term services will be in short supply."
While increasing "options" seniors might have in regards to service and accommodation, the strategy is to increase fee structures for senior's accommodation, and to freeze long-term care services at 2008 levels for an unspecified number of years.
Also, the change in fee structure for long-term care and senior's care facilities in the province is unacceptable. "Three years ago the fees for long-term care increased by 40% and this year there was an additional 6% increase. Now the government wants to adjust fees again 'to encourage more investment.' Merry Christmas for private health care providers," said Eggen.
Information provided by:
David Eggen
Executive Director
Friends of Medicare
780 423 4581
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Alberta's new energy vision.
Alberta’s new energy booklet “energy vision” released today is like the other new fair for all deals they have come out with. Iris Evans made an announcement on funding the other day. The funding was not nearly has important as the by-line as in “another project paid for out of windfall profits”
After giving away 16% of our revenue to the oil companies in their currency flip it is all they can do to keep this province afloat! And, with personal bankruptcies climbing one has to wonder if it is afloat or not!
No more windfall profits Evans! Try for once to take care of the provinces business. Perhaps the oil guys will give you a week off.
To the subject of the new booklet:
“Changing energy consumption behavior of industry and ordinary Albertans.” It says. And
Strengthening the electrical transmission system by "identifying requirements, technical solutions, timing, and updating of the approval process."
The Conservatives sponsored an Environmental speakeasy in Lethbridge about two years ago and filled the forum with their own people notably one “famous” scientist from the US who said Alberta was on the right track increasing the cost of water and electricity. “It is really the most effective way to change things”
The announcement above is telling us the price of electricity is going to sky rocket in Alberta to a point you cannot afford to use it. And, with the encouragement of the Government. So much for Alberta’s Advantage!
Both Epcor and Enmax are owned by the cities of Calgary and Edmonton. You can't deal with the Government on anything or can you deal the power companies but you can deal with the city councils. Vote them out if need be!
This would suit Alberta’s scheme of things allowing more electricity to be available for export.
This, is a segway into the Bruce Power bid for Nuclear power in Saskatchewan. While the power is a good thing in my mind the plans are not.
Alberta announced a new power line from the connection of the Saskatchewan grid to the Montana border. Because it is on the Alberta side of the line, Alberta taxpayers will be paying for the power line of which Saskatchewan will be the major user.
By this time we all know what huge disdain the Conservatives hold the electorate in this province. You and I simply do not matter!
Perhaps some of you die hard Conservatives that are perhaps a little tired of 14 years of lying by these guys will rethink your ideals as you shiver in the dark.
After giving away 16% of our revenue to the oil companies in their currency flip it is all they can do to keep this province afloat! And, with personal bankruptcies climbing one has to wonder if it is afloat or not!
No more windfall profits Evans! Try for once to take care of the provinces business. Perhaps the oil guys will give you a week off.
To the subject of the new booklet:
“Changing energy consumption behavior of industry and ordinary Albertans.” It says. And
Strengthening the electrical transmission system by "identifying requirements, technical solutions, timing, and updating of the approval process."
The Conservatives sponsored an Environmental speakeasy in Lethbridge about two years ago and filled the forum with their own people notably one “famous” scientist from the US who said Alberta was on the right track increasing the cost of water and electricity. “It is really the most effective way to change things”
The announcement above is telling us the price of electricity is going to sky rocket in Alberta to a point you cannot afford to use it. And, with the encouragement of the Government. So much for Alberta’s Advantage!
Both Epcor and Enmax are owned by the cities of Calgary and Edmonton. You can't deal with the Government on anything or can you deal the power companies but you can deal with the city councils. Vote them out if need be!
This would suit Alberta’s scheme of things allowing more electricity to be available for export.
This, is a segway into the Bruce Power bid for Nuclear power in Saskatchewan. While the power is a good thing in my mind the plans are not.
Alberta announced a new power line from the connection of the Saskatchewan grid to the Montana border. Because it is on the Alberta side of the line, Alberta taxpayers will be paying for the power line of which Saskatchewan will be the major user.
By this time we all know what huge disdain the Conservatives hold the electorate in this province. You and I simply do not matter!
Perhaps some of you die hard Conservatives that are perhaps a little tired of 14 years of lying by these guys will rethink your ideals as you shiver in the dark.
Thursday, December 04, 2008
Alberta looses 6 billion of royalty by mismanagement
I don't think it is a coincidence that Alberta is going to be short 6 billion dollars in oil royalty.
When these turkeys reduced the oil royalty taken by changing the funds from US dollars to Canadian dollars we lost 16% right off the top.
With today's low prices, Oil is 46.79 US per barrel Exchange is at 80 cents.
The oil companies get paid in US dollars. Alberta converts that figure to Canadian dollars to calculate the royalty, currently at 19%
Considering only the cut we took in exchange at these figures Albertans will loose
$6,489,773,000 this year. The same number Iris Evans tells us we are going to be short.
They gave it to the oil companies what in hell do they expect? We will be told projects are cut, funding is cut and layoff is they key word for control.
This is nothing short of gross mismanagement by this Government!
When these turkeys reduced the oil royalty taken by changing the funds from US dollars to Canadian dollars we lost 16% right off the top.
With today's low prices, Oil is 46.79 US per barrel Exchange is at 80 cents.
The oil companies get paid in US dollars. Alberta converts that figure to Canadian dollars to calculate the royalty, currently at 19%
Considering only the cut we took in exchange at these figures Albertans will loose
$6,489,773,000 this year. The same number Iris Evans tells us we are going to be short.
They gave it to the oil companies what in hell do they expect? We will be told projects are cut, funding is cut and layoff is they key word for control.
This is nothing short of gross mismanagement by this Government!
Monday, December 01, 2008
Alberta's WCB said to be in good shape
Alberta's Minister of Employment and Immigration is telling us the WCB premiums will not go up next year, in fact, whatever the WCB is short in funding now will be fully made up by the end of the year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
