Posts
Stelmach’s campaign an outright lie as is his royalty scheme.
Stelmach has been in politics as a Conservative boss for more than a dozen years. He knows the NAFTA agreement, inside and out.
His royalty scheme called for a large percentage of his BS oil program to be paid for “in like tender” as in tar sands oils, being turned over to the proposed up-graders at a discount price ranging from little to nothing.
Even as he was making the public announcements, he knew it would be impossible; would never get by NAFTA!
It was all lies a verbiage to kick off an election on.
As a kicker he reduced Alberta’s royalty from 25% to 19%.
When we were at 19% he made claims of increasing royalty under his new regime.
When the phony up-grader funding was exposed on the net, the oil companies and pipeline companies saw no reason to wait in instituting plans that have been in the making for at least 3 years. Pipelines were announced. Export the crude to the US and off the coast in ships.
There is no up-grader.
There is no increase in Royalty.
There is going to be a huge export of Alberta Crude to foreign soil.
The Conservatives have embarked on an unsustainable lie.
All these anouncements are straight out lies! What's left?
More and more you will be expected to dig deeper and deeper into your income for survival while all the resource coin is given to the oil and water companies, the ever popular conservative “trickle down” theory at work.
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
Friday, February 29, 2008
Stelmach twisting truths.
It would break a snakes back to follow Stelmach and crew!
Listen close to what he says. He says one thing and implies another.
Example: He says “1.4 billion dollars more in royalty next year” would have you believe he is increasing royalty rates. Not so! 1.4 billion dollars is made up of maturing production and new production all taken at 19% not 25% When he talks increase in revenues he is adding up increases in income tax no oil royalty!
His election is a sham! If you do not get out and vote this time you will be hit by a political bus! By not voting you will have put the most corrupt government in north America back into office.
John Clark
Listen close to what he says. He says one thing and implies another.
Example: He says “1.4 billion dollars more in royalty next year” would have you believe he is increasing royalty rates. Not so! 1.4 billion dollars is made up of maturing production and new production all taken at 19% not 25% When he talks increase in revenues he is adding up increases in income tax no oil royalty!
His election is a sham! If you do not get out and vote this time you will be hit by a political bus! By not voting you will have put the most corrupt government in north America back into office.
John Clark
Alberta Doctors against Conservatives
Doctors give Alberta Liberals top marks
The Canadian Press
February 28, 2008 at 11:46 AM EST
CALGARY — Alberta's doctors have given the Liberals the best grade of the political parties heading into Mondays election.
The Alberta Medical Association posed 10 health-care questions to the parties.
The Liberals garnered a B grade, the New Democrats a C-plus and the Conservatives a C.
The Green Party fared the worst with a D.
The answers were assessed by about 150 physicians.
The Wildrose Alliance was the only party that didn't respond to the survey.
The Canadian Press
February 28, 2008 at 11:46 AM EST
CALGARY — Alberta's doctors have given the Liberals the best grade of the political parties heading into Mondays election.
The Alberta Medical Association posed 10 health-care questions to the parties.
The Liberals garnered a B grade, the New Democrats a C-plus and the Conservatives a C.
The Green Party fared the worst with a D.
The answers were assessed by about 150 physicians.
The Wildrose Alliance was the only party that didn't respond to the survey.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Friday, February 22, 2008
Alberta 2008 Leadership Debate
2008 Leadership Debate
Opponents cream Stelmach
Compiled by Heath McCoy, Renata D'Aliesio and Tony Seskus, Calgary Herald., Calgary Herald
Published: Friday, February 22, 2008
Kevin Taft
Liberal
On Health Care
Taft: "I can't stand on the sidelines . . . . People are dying, Mr. Stelmach. People are stuck in emergency rooms for days on end. This is a life-and-death issue. . . . This government has to be held to account."
On Energy and Environment
Taft: "It feels to so many people like Alberta's economy, particularly the oilsands development, is a runaway train . . . But you don't build a garage without a plan. You can't . . . develop the biggest industrial development on the planet without a plan."
On Social Issues
Taft: "Too many people are getting left behind. . . . Long term, so much of this comes down to great education. The best low-income policy in the long term is to give people great education."
- - -
Brian Mason
NDP
On Health Care
Mason: "Albertans really want to have health care that's there when they need it. They don't want to be waiting in the hallways. We have 10 years of neglect. . . . We are short 1,000 doctors and 1,500 nurses. How did we get into this situation?"
On Energy and Environment
Mason: "The decision of the government to not touch the brake, as Mr. Stelmach said when he first became the Conservative leader, is a terrible mistake. We need to pace development in the tar sands."
On Social Issues
Mason: "This government has done more to create homelessness than any other government since the Second World War in this province. The simple failure to bring in rent controls to protect people has meant many more people are living out on the street."
- - -
Paul Hinman
Wildrose Alliance
On Health Care
Hinman: "We've had 36 years of these guys (the Tories) saying more money, more money. It will never be enough. . . . There's nothing bold about (Stelmach's) plan. There's nothing innovative about it."
On Energy and Environment
Hinman: "He's hurt our reputation by tearing up those contracts and saying, 'You know what, we're not going to listen to industry. We are going to listen to my heart,' and he's failing on the economic decision that he's making for this province."
On Social Issues
Hinman: "We need to reduce the taxes on the people of Alberta -- then they'll be able to have affordable housing because they (will) have money in their pocket to actually pay the rent or buy the house."
On Health Care
Ed Stelmach
Progressive Conservative
Ed Stelmach, Progressive Conservative
Jenelle Schneider, Calgary Herald
Stelmach: "I'm fully committed to supporting the public health-care system. . . . While others are identifying issues in health care, we have acted. We have brought world-class physicians to the province. We've added more nurses."
On Energy and Environment
Stelmach: "The plan we have in place is already showing that we have dealt with a lot of the environmental issues in Fort McMurray and Fort Saskatchewan -- an overall cumulative environmental plan. We've got an excellent plan for water strategy."
On Social Issues
Stelmach: "Rent controls do not build one affordable unit (of housing) in the province of Alberta. It's proven. We've looked at the history of other provinces and we're not going to go (down) that path. We're going to increase the supply."
An Exercise: How a re ordering of the story can change the facts!
Opponents cream Stelmach
Compiled by Heath McCoy, Renata D'Aliesio and Tony Seskus, Calgary Herald., Calgary Herald
Published: Friday, February 22, 2008
Kevin Taft
Liberal
On Health Care
Taft: "I can't stand on the sidelines . . . . People are dying, Mr. Stelmach. People are stuck in emergency rooms for days on end. This is a life-and-death issue. . . . This government has to be held to account."
On Energy and Environment
Taft: "It feels to so many people like Alberta's economy, particularly the oilsands development, is a runaway train . . . But you don't build a garage without a plan. You can't . . . develop the biggest industrial development on the planet without a plan."
On Social Issues
Taft: "Too many people are getting left behind. . . . Long term, so much of this comes down to great education. The best low-income policy in the long term is to give people great education."
- - -
Brian Mason
NDP
On Health Care
Mason: "Albertans really want to have health care that's there when they need it. They don't want to be waiting in the hallways. We have 10 years of neglect. . . . We are short 1,000 doctors and 1,500 nurses. How did we get into this situation?"
On Energy and Environment
Mason: "The decision of the government to not touch the brake, as Mr. Stelmach said when he first became the Conservative leader, is a terrible mistake. We need to pace development in the tar sands."
On Social Issues
Mason: "This government has done more to create homelessness than any other government since the Second World War in this province. The simple failure to bring in rent controls to protect people has meant many more people are living out on the street."
- - -
Paul Hinman
Wildrose Alliance
On Health Care
Hinman: "We've had 36 years of these guys (the Tories) saying more money, more money. It will never be enough. . . . There's nothing bold about (Stelmach's) plan. There's nothing innovative about it."
On Energy and Environment
Hinman: "He's hurt our reputation by tearing up those contracts and saying, 'You know what, we're not going to listen to industry. We are going to listen to my heart,' and he's failing on the economic decision that he's making for this province."
On Social Issues
Hinman: "We need to reduce the taxes on the people of Alberta -- then they'll be able to have affordable housing because they (will) have money in their pocket to actually pay the rent or buy the house."
On Health Care
Ed Stelmach
Progressive Conservative
Ed Stelmach, Progressive Conservative
Jenelle Schneider, Calgary Herald
Stelmach: "I'm fully committed to supporting the public health-care system. . . . While others are identifying issues in health care, we have acted. We have brought world-class physicians to the province. We've added more nurses."
On Energy and Environment
Stelmach: "The plan we have in place is already showing that we have dealt with a lot of the environmental issues in Fort McMurray and Fort Saskatchewan -- an overall cumulative environmental plan. We've got an excellent plan for water strategy."
On Social Issues
Stelmach: "Rent controls do not build one affordable unit (of housing) in the province of Alberta. It's proven. We've looked at the history of other provinces and we're not going to go (down) that path. We're going to increase the supply."
An Exercise: How a re ordering of the story can change the facts!
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Alberta to further reduce royalties!
The US dollar falling against the Canadian dollar was seen by the Conservative as an opportunity to upset what they had come to see as the status quo of the royalty regime.
Reducing our royality on the tar sands from 25% to 19% (current) is only the start of a long slide down!
It is their intention to further reduce royalties as new production comes on line. They will in effect benchmark what they think Alberta will need with the citizens charged to the brink for goods and services.
Alberta will not enjoy more royalties in the future under a Conservative Government!
Meanwhile, Oil companies in the US are doing budgets in anticipation of paying more money to the Government when the Democrats take office this election.
John Clark.
Reducing our royality on the tar sands from 25% to 19% (current) is only the start of a long slide down!
It is their intention to further reduce royalties as new production comes on line. They will in effect benchmark what they think Alberta will need with the citizens charged to the brink for goods and services.
Alberta will not enjoy more royalties in the future under a Conservative Government!
Meanwhile, Oil companies in the US are doing budgets in anticipation of paying more money to the Government when the Democrats take office this election.
John Clark.
Friday, February 15, 2008
Stelmach tough on crime? I don't think so.
Crime
Is he going to start to publish the results of Government bids and show all the bids along side the insiders he gives the contracts to? In Alberta now, they know who is getting the contract before they put it out! They won’t change.
Is he going to change the Freedom of Information program to allow a full and honest review of Government polices? I think not.
These guys are the biggest crooks! Is he going to take the seals off the court on the West Edmonton Mall fiasco? I think not.
Is he going to divulge the details on the Firestorm rip off? I think not.
Is he going to post the list of people who flipped the power purchase agreements and check for improprieties? I think not.
Perhaps this is the lynch pin for private prisons?
Eddie and the crew were a part of all of these debacles. No one is exempt. After 14 years to lies and deceit, nothing has changed.
John Clark
Is he going to start to publish the results of Government bids and show all the bids along side the insiders he gives the contracts to? In Alberta now, they know who is getting the contract before they put it out! They won’t change.
Is he going to change the Freedom of Information program to allow a full and honest review of Government polices? I think not.
These guys are the biggest crooks! Is he going to take the seals off the court on the West Edmonton Mall fiasco? I think not.
Is he going to divulge the details on the Firestorm rip off? I think not.
Is he going to post the list of people who flipped the power purchase agreements and check for improprieties? I think not.
Perhaps this is the lynch pin for private prisons?
Eddie and the crew were a part of all of these debacles. No one is exempt. After 14 years to lies and deceit, nothing has changed.
John Clark
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Oil Profits up 28 Billions - Alberta Royalities down 21 billion.
Oil companies to record record profits of 28 billions of dollars while Alberta looses 21billion a year proping up these profits!
Reasoning follows:
Alberta Oil Sands important details Oil sands deposits contain approximately 1.7 trillion barrels of bitumen.
Approximately 10 % or 174 billion barrels are proven reserves that can be recovered using current technology.
Current economic limit for oil sand surface mining is approximately 80 meters which makes up 20 % of the proven reserves.Current oil sand production is approximately 1 million barrels per day, 1/2 is from surface mining.
1 million barrels per day at $100.00 per bbl US is 100 million dollars per day US.
1% start up rate returns 1 million dollars per day into royalty funds.
25% agreed production returns 25 million dollars per day in royalties.
19% Stelmach adjusted rate brings in 19 million dollars per day royalties.
Stelmach has moved 6 million dollars per day from Alberta Taxpayers into the hands of the Oil Companies while he is telling us he has found the “middle road” turning even more revenue into oil company’s profits.
John Clark
Reasoning follows:
Alberta Oil Sands important details Oil sands deposits contain approximately 1.7 trillion barrels of bitumen.
Approximately 10 % or 174 billion barrels are proven reserves that can be recovered using current technology.
Current economic limit for oil sand surface mining is approximately 80 meters which makes up 20 % of the proven reserves.Current oil sand production is approximately 1 million barrels per day, 1/2 is from surface mining.
1 million barrels per day at $100.00 per bbl US is 100 million dollars per day US.
1% start up rate returns 1 million dollars per day into royalty funds.
25% agreed production returns 25 million dollars per day in royalties.
19% Stelmach adjusted rate brings in 19 million dollars per day royalties.
Stelmach has moved 6 million dollars per day from Alberta Taxpayers into the hands of the Oil Companies while he is telling us he has found the “middle road” turning even more revenue into oil company’s profits.
John Clark
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Liberals outline a solid, sustainable plan!
Kevan Taft has outlined a solid, sustainable plan for Alberta's future. This is in direct conflict with the Conservative doom and gloom scenarios that Albertan's must learn to pay more.
John Clark
John Clark
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Conservatives approve endless increases in insurance.
Ed Stelmach in a tit for tat statment gives insurance companies the okay to charge what ever they see fit in the wake of the court decision to get rid of the cap on soft tissue.
The Conservatives have been whoring with Insurance Companies since the onset. There is no one in this Government looking after the citizens of this province!
John Clark
The Conservatives have been whoring with Insurance Companies since the onset. There is no one in this Government looking after the citizens of this province!
John Clark
Friday, February 08, 2008
School Closures are a big thing in Alberta!
Conservative school closures are a deliberate means to push our education system into a privitized industry. There are people in our political arena who despise and resist this plan.
John Clark
John Clark
Thursday, February 07, 2008
The Conservative Plan to Fix Health Services
It takes 9 years to put a physician into private practice!
Alberta’s health care problem is short funding as it has always been. The plans have always been the same; destabilize then privatize.
Stelmach opted to secretly cut our revenue from royalties by 84 million dollars a day. (Dropping royality to 19%) This was done to prop up oil companies profits when the US dollar fell; it had nothing to do with their operational securities! That is 84 million a day he doesn’t have to put into other programs. Health Care is only one example.
It is not a far reach to say they have cut money to Capital Health in order to prop up oil profits!
University seats go to foreign students because these students pay multi thousands of dollars more for a lecture hall slot at a university than does an Albert student. Universities need the cash!
These foreign graduates go back to their homes to practice, they seldom stay in Alberta.
Stelmach has put up a smoke and mirrors royalty proposal that returns nothing to the Alberta revenue base! He has found a way to subsidize the oil up grader plants through a fiscal “payment in kind of crude” which can be 90% of the royalty further shorting the revenue into Alberta.
A shallow numbers game! More lies and misconceptions!
These guys have lied their way into the past 3 elections. Hold them accountable now!
Remember they were elected to a Majority Government last time getting only 23% of the Alberta Vote!
John Clark
Alberta’s health care problem is short funding as it has always been. The plans have always been the same; destabilize then privatize.
Stelmach opted to secretly cut our revenue from royalties by 84 million dollars a day. (Dropping royality to 19%) This was done to prop up oil companies profits when the US dollar fell; it had nothing to do with their operational securities! That is 84 million a day he doesn’t have to put into other programs. Health Care is only one example.
It is not a far reach to say they have cut money to Capital Health in order to prop up oil profits!
University seats go to foreign students because these students pay multi thousands of dollars more for a lecture hall slot at a university than does an Albert student. Universities need the cash!
These foreign graduates go back to their homes to practice, they seldom stay in Alberta.
Stelmach has put up a smoke and mirrors royalty proposal that returns nothing to the Alberta revenue base! He has found a way to subsidize the oil up grader plants through a fiscal “payment in kind of crude” which can be 90% of the royalty further shorting the revenue into Alberta.
A shallow numbers game! More lies and misconceptions!
These guys have lied their way into the past 3 elections. Hold them accountable now!
Remember they were elected to a Majority Government last time getting only 23% of the Alberta Vote!
John Clark
The Conservative Plan to Save Alberta-Education
Increase funding to private schools while continuing to short public school funding.
Why?
The mentality of this crew is such that the privatization of schools allows them a place of fame with like minded people.
They feel the public system is too expensive and to walk away from regulation is a good thing because people will pay more to get their kids into better schools there by reducing “public” expenditures.
In all. a “feel good” thing for the Conservatives who claim private is always cheaper than Government but never ever do a follow up to see the huge cost increases.
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
Why?
The mentality of this crew is such that the privatization of schools allows them a place of fame with like minded people.
They feel the public system is too expensive and to walk away from regulation is a good thing because people will pay more to get their kids into better schools there by reducing “public” expenditures.
In all. a “feel good” thing for the Conservatives who claim private is always cheaper than Government but never ever do a follow up to see the huge cost increases.
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
Conservative Plan to Save Alberta - Water
Further privatize the water in Alberta.
Why?
The rivers are going dry, quickly as the glaciers recede at record speeds. This leaves the ground water; the aquifer as being our primary source of water. Much of the water rights for this aquifer have been given to Coca Cola, Calgary Malting and others in the Agra Food Industries.
The conservatives were unhappy with the hearings held by the Privy Council of Canada which ruled that bulk water exports were not covered under NAFTA and gave notice to the Privy Council the Conservatives were taking up a legal challenge to make it acceptable to export bulk water to the US.
Placing the water firmly in the hands of private companies makes it very easy to escalate the price of water to the residential consumers. Prices for water service will be levied by the pipeline companies. A bill for the water combined with a bill for the transmission of water if you like. The water analogy for electricity is applicable in more than one discipline.
Bottom line; your costs are going to go up by 10 times almost, overnight.
The kicker here is the oil up graders planned will use more water than all the residential housing but, will get it for nothing.
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
Why?
The rivers are going dry, quickly as the glaciers recede at record speeds. This leaves the ground water; the aquifer as being our primary source of water. Much of the water rights for this aquifer have been given to Coca Cola, Calgary Malting and others in the Agra Food Industries.
The conservatives were unhappy with the hearings held by the Privy Council of Canada which ruled that bulk water exports were not covered under NAFTA and gave notice to the Privy Council the Conservatives were taking up a legal challenge to make it acceptable to export bulk water to the US.
Placing the water firmly in the hands of private companies makes it very easy to escalate the price of water to the residential consumers. Prices for water service will be levied by the pipeline companies. A bill for the water combined with a bill for the transmission of water if you like. The water analogy for electricity is applicable in more than one discipline.
Bottom line; your costs are going to go up by 10 times almost, overnight.
The kicker here is the oil up graders planned will use more water than all the residential housing but, will get it for nothing.
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
Conservative Plans to Savel Alberta-Heating
Immediately eliminate the subsidy to home owners on heating costs. When the price of heating goes up there will be no rebates!
Why?
The price of gas is down. Because of this now is a good time to eliminate the program.
The price of coal is moving up on the world markets. It is higher now than it has ever been and it will get much higher they will push for world prices on coal more especially since the Ontario Teachers Pension fund owns most of it.
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
Why?
The price of gas is down. Because of this now is a good time to eliminate the program.
The price of coal is moving up on the world markets. It is higher now than it has ever been and it will get much higher they will push for world prices on coal more especially since the Ontario Teachers Pension fund owns most of it.
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Alberta electricity an empire built on lies and misdirection
The deregulation of Alberta’s power grid and the subsequent mess was not an accident. It was in fact the plan from the start.
Paying friends hundreds of thousand of dollars to “fix” an electrical system that is going precisely the way they had hoped is nothing but another act of misdirection and still another lie.
They find it more convenient and easier to sell an error in judgment than to admit they embarked on what amounts to a royal rip off.
As a plus it puts more coin into the pocket of friends.
John Clark
Cyberclark@shaw.ca
Paying friends hundreds of thousand of dollars to “fix” an electrical system that is going precisely the way they had hoped is nothing but another act of misdirection and still another lie.
They find it more convenient and easier to sell an error in judgment than to admit they embarked on what amounts to a royal rip off.
As a plus it puts more coin into the pocket of friends.
John Clark
Cyberclark@shaw.ca
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Alberta electricty pressures.
Following my lead-in there is an excellent evaluation of Alberta's electrical power situation. The web link to the journal article has been taken down so I have copied here.
Not covered in the Article by Joseph Doucetis is the Fording Coal dilemma which is huge and should get some air.
1. Fording was purchased by Sherritt (Ontario teachers assn pension)
2. Fording kept title to the Anthracite (tool) coal.
3. Sherritt took the title to all the lower quality heating coal.
4. Fording is presently completing or has completed the environmental studies for the Genesee like generating unit at Brooks AB. (4000 mv, half of the present generation capacity of Alberta)
5. Fording will buy coal from Sherritt for the generation at prices that Sherrit set as a seperate entity.
Depending on the price the Ontario Teachers assn charges Fording for the coal, the prices of electricity should come down!
The Government has allowed the prices to escalate by constricting growth forcing gas generation on line in the meantime.
When Fording comes on they will peg their prices at the "market" which will allow them huge, unprecedented profits.
The environmental studies should be complete. That means an announcement will be made shortly after an election.
Consider: When Fording owned all the coal they tried to build the plant and got shut down by what appears to be government sponsored environmental complaints allowed by a Government who had every interest in killing the project. Fording was prepared to build the power lines to Calgary and South to Southern Alberta. Trans Alta fought this. (who would have guessed?)
On a different line the City of Edmonton fought the Province for permission to build the expansion of Genesse and were like Fording, denied permission until the scalping PPA agreements were in place.
In short the Conservatives again have autored a rip off situation for Albertans.
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
Wednesday » January 16 » 2008
Alberta's power play difficult to assess
Government's electricity restructuring results can't be measured simply by comparing prices
Joseph Doucet
Freelance
Saturday, January 12, 2008 - Edmonton Journal
In a letter to the Journal, "6 years later, deregulation hasn't lived up to the promises" (Jan. 10), a former provincial electricity planner suggested that the restructuring of Alberta's electricity industry and markets has not delivered on its "promises." Of particular interest to consumers is Keith Provost's statement that "Albertans have paid more than $16 billion more for their electricity needs than if the system had not been deregulated."
Despite his contention that "the cost can be easily calculated by anyone with a cursory knowledge of the economics of electricity generation," I would suggest that calculating the costs and benefits of restructuring is anything but an easy exercise.
One of the all-too-common mistakes made in this type of discussion is to simply compare prices today with prices in previous years. Electricity prices in Alberta, as in almost every other jurisdiction, are higher today than they were in 1995, the year in which Alberta's first piece of restructuring legislation, the Electric Utilities Act, was passed.
Why can't we simply compare 2008 with 1995? Well, the makeup of the industry is actually quite different today. For instance, in the mid-1990s about 75 per cent of Alberta electricity was generated with coal. Today the figure is a little under 50 per cent. Natural gas, on the other hand, makes up about 40 per cent of today's generation capacity; in 1995 it accounted for less than 15 per cent. Thus we can't expect underlying costs, and the resulting prices, to be directly comparable.
Informed readers will point out, quite correctly, that coal prices are both lower and less volatile than natural gas prices. Thus, the greater reliance on natural gas is bound to have had an impact on electricity prices. This is certainly true. But is the increased use of natural gas in Alberta attributable to restructuring? I'm not so sure. In the 1990s North American electricity planners believed that natural gas was going to remain cheap for a long time. We were wrong.
But I don't believe that a regulated generation sector in Alberta would have seen things any differently.
The real question to ask in order to begin to understand the price impact of restructuring is this: What would our electricity industry look like today had the Government of Alberta NOT embarked on the restructuring exercise? What fuels and technologies would have been chosen in a regulated system? What types of plants would have been built, and where? What research and development would have been undertaken? Which risks would have been allocated to electricity consumers and which to the regulated firms?
There are no straightforward answers to these questions, despite the best intentions of Monday morning quarterbacks. In truth it is impossible to know exactly what our electricity industry would look like today had the government not introduced restructuring. As a result it is very difficult to say what price we would be paying under the "old" system.
That being said, the retail price is just one measure of the efficiency of the electricity industry. It is certainly an important one and understandably the main focus of attention of residential consumers. But retail prices can be deceiving, such as in Ontario where retail prices have been regulated to artificially low levels well below the wholesale prices. This hides the true costs of electricity and shifts the burden to taxpayers. This doesn't happen here.
To suggest that prices in some non-restructured jurisdictions have risen less than in restructured jurisdictions misses the important point that the underlying costs and technologies differ a great deal between different provinces and states and that, for the most part, low-cost North American jurisdictions did not embark on restructuring.
Many very-low-cost jurisdictions, notably those with large hydroelectric capacity, continue to benefit from their low-cost technologies despite the fact that they have not changed the structure of their industry. Relatively low prices in these areas for the most part reflect the low costs of generation, not the benefits of the regulated system.
On the other hand, many high-cost jurisdictions saw costs rising, principally because of the need to build more generation, and moved to restructuring in part because of the desire to introduce competition in the generation investment and operation decisions.
In the last 10 years close to 4,500 megawatts of new generation capacity has been built in Alberta. This is one reason that there is less danger of the lights going out in Alberta than in Ontario - proportionally more capacity has been built here than in Ontario. Has more capacity been built than would have been the case without restructuring? This again is hard to say, because we simply don't have the crystal ball that answers the "what if" questions about the past.
More significantly than the amount of generation, though, is the fact that the new electricity generation plants in Alberta have been built without any price or profit guarantee from the government or the regulator as was the case in the "good old days." This is a comparison that we can make. Alberta ratepayers no longer carry the risk of construction-cost overruns, plant operation or fuel prices via a regulated system. This is a very real benefit to Albertans. Of course, Alberta electricity consumers do bear some risk with respect to fuel price increases. There is no way around this.
Was the government's plan perfect? Of course it wasn't, as I have often written. There were errors in planning and in implementation. The lessons of history cannot be ignored. But let's move on and make our electricity sector as productive, efficient and environmentally responsible as possible.
Is Alberta's electricity model today a panacea? Of course it isn't. I would like to see more competition in the retail sector, but fear that won't happen because of our small market size, and because electricity prices really are, relatively speaking, low. However, lack of competition on the retail side should not be mistaken for, or confused with, lack of competition in the wholesale and investment market.
It is also true that we have major challenges ahead in co-ordinating the development of regulated transmission in sync with our competitive generation market. This challenge is not unique to Alberta and will take a lot of effort and smart people to solve. It isn't an easy problem.
And clearly the newly created Alberta Utilities Commission has to regain public trust in its regulation of the electricity industry.
This exercise will take time, commitment and leadership.
So are there challenges ahead? Most definitely. But this is not a simple industry and the questions to be asked are complex. Suggesting otherwise does a disservice to the debate.
Joseph Doucet is professor of energy policy and director of the Centre for Applied Business Research in Energy and the Environment at the U of A's School of Business.
http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/ideas/story.html?id=7587c57a-4aa0-419c-b5c8-65244dd6d51f
Not covered in the Article by Joseph Doucetis is the Fording Coal dilemma which is huge and should get some air.
1. Fording was purchased by Sherritt (Ontario teachers assn pension)
2. Fording kept title to the Anthracite (tool) coal.
3. Sherritt took the title to all the lower quality heating coal.
4. Fording is presently completing or has completed the environmental studies for the Genesee like generating unit at Brooks AB. (4000 mv, half of the present generation capacity of Alberta)
5. Fording will buy coal from Sherritt for the generation at prices that Sherrit set as a seperate entity.
Depending on the price the Ontario Teachers assn charges Fording for the coal, the prices of electricity should come down!
The Government has allowed the prices to escalate by constricting growth forcing gas generation on line in the meantime.
When Fording comes on they will peg their prices at the "market" which will allow them huge, unprecedented profits.
The environmental studies should be complete. That means an announcement will be made shortly after an election.
Consider: When Fording owned all the coal they tried to build the plant and got shut down by what appears to be government sponsored environmental complaints allowed by a Government who had every interest in killing the project. Fording was prepared to build the power lines to Calgary and South to Southern Alberta. Trans Alta fought this. (who would have guessed?)
On a different line the City of Edmonton fought the Province for permission to build the expansion of Genesse and were like Fording, denied permission until the scalping PPA agreements were in place.
In short the Conservatives again have autored a rip off situation for Albertans.
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
Wednesday » January 16 » 2008
Alberta's power play difficult to assess
Government's electricity restructuring results can't be measured simply by comparing prices
Joseph Doucet
Freelance
Saturday, January 12, 2008 - Edmonton Journal
In a letter to the Journal, "6 years later, deregulation hasn't lived up to the promises" (Jan. 10), a former provincial electricity planner suggested that the restructuring of Alberta's electricity industry and markets has not delivered on its "promises." Of particular interest to consumers is Keith Provost's statement that "Albertans have paid more than $16 billion more for their electricity needs than if the system had not been deregulated."
Despite his contention that "the cost can be easily calculated by anyone with a cursory knowledge of the economics of electricity generation," I would suggest that calculating the costs and benefits of restructuring is anything but an easy exercise.
One of the all-too-common mistakes made in this type of discussion is to simply compare prices today with prices in previous years. Electricity prices in Alberta, as in almost every other jurisdiction, are higher today than they were in 1995, the year in which Alberta's first piece of restructuring legislation, the Electric Utilities Act, was passed.
Why can't we simply compare 2008 with 1995? Well, the makeup of the industry is actually quite different today. For instance, in the mid-1990s about 75 per cent of Alberta electricity was generated with coal. Today the figure is a little under 50 per cent. Natural gas, on the other hand, makes up about 40 per cent of today's generation capacity; in 1995 it accounted for less than 15 per cent. Thus we can't expect underlying costs, and the resulting prices, to be directly comparable.
Informed readers will point out, quite correctly, that coal prices are both lower and less volatile than natural gas prices. Thus, the greater reliance on natural gas is bound to have had an impact on electricity prices. This is certainly true. But is the increased use of natural gas in Alberta attributable to restructuring? I'm not so sure. In the 1990s North American electricity planners believed that natural gas was going to remain cheap for a long time. We were wrong.
But I don't believe that a regulated generation sector in Alberta would have seen things any differently.
The real question to ask in order to begin to understand the price impact of restructuring is this: What would our electricity industry look like today had the Government of Alberta NOT embarked on the restructuring exercise? What fuels and technologies would have been chosen in a regulated system? What types of plants would have been built, and where? What research and development would have been undertaken? Which risks would have been allocated to electricity consumers and which to the regulated firms?
There are no straightforward answers to these questions, despite the best intentions of Monday morning quarterbacks. In truth it is impossible to know exactly what our electricity industry would look like today had the government not introduced restructuring. As a result it is very difficult to say what price we would be paying under the "old" system.
That being said, the retail price is just one measure of the efficiency of the electricity industry. It is certainly an important one and understandably the main focus of attention of residential consumers. But retail prices can be deceiving, such as in Ontario where retail prices have been regulated to artificially low levels well below the wholesale prices. This hides the true costs of electricity and shifts the burden to taxpayers. This doesn't happen here.
To suggest that prices in some non-restructured jurisdictions have risen less than in restructured jurisdictions misses the important point that the underlying costs and technologies differ a great deal between different provinces and states and that, for the most part, low-cost North American jurisdictions did not embark on restructuring.
Many very-low-cost jurisdictions, notably those with large hydroelectric capacity, continue to benefit from their low-cost technologies despite the fact that they have not changed the structure of their industry. Relatively low prices in these areas for the most part reflect the low costs of generation, not the benefits of the regulated system.
On the other hand, many high-cost jurisdictions saw costs rising, principally because of the need to build more generation, and moved to restructuring in part because of the desire to introduce competition in the generation investment and operation decisions.
In the last 10 years close to 4,500 megawatts of new generation capacity has been built in Alberta. This is one reason that there is less danger of the lights going out in Alberta than in Ontario - proportionally more capacity has been built here than in Ontario. Has more capacity been built than would have been the case without restructuring? This again is hard to say, because we simply don't have the crystal ball that answers the "what if" questions about the past.
More significantly than the amount of generation, though, is the fact that the new electricity generation plants in Alberta have been built without any price or profit guarantee from the government or the regulator as was the case in the "good old days." This is a comparison that we can make. Alberta ratepayers no longer carry the risk of construction-cost overruns, plant operation or fuel prices via a regulated system. This is a very real benefit to Albertans. Of course, Alberta electricity consumers do bear some risk with respect to fuel price increases. There is no way around this.
Was the government's plan perfect? Of course it wasn't, as I have often written. There were errors in planning and in implementation. The lessons of history cannot be ignored. But let's move on and make our electricity sector as productive, efficient and environmentally responsible as possible.
Is Alberta's electricity model today a panacea? Of course it isn't. I would like to see more competition in the retail sector, but fear that won't happen because of our small market size, and because electricity prices really are, relatively speaking, low. However, lack of competition on the retail side should not be mistaken for, or confused with, lack of competition in the wholesale and investment market.
It is also true that we have major challenges ahead in co-ordinating the development of regulated transmission in sync with our competitive generation market. This challenge is not unique to Alberta and will take a lot of effort and smart people to solve. It isn't an easy problem.
And clearly the newly created Alberta Utilities Commission has to regain public trust in its regulation of the electricity industry.
This exercise will take time, commitment and leadership.
So are there challenges ahead? Most definitely. But this is not a simple industry and the questions to be asked are complex. Suggesting otherwise does a disservice to the debate.
Joseph Doucet is professor of energy policy and director of the Centre for Applied Business Research in Energy and the Environment at the U of A's School of Business.
http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/ideas/story.html?id=7587c57a-4aa0-419c-b5c8-65244dd6d51f
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Alberta Heritage Trust Funding is a farce!
The Conservatives have raped the Heritage Trust fund as with every other resource we have!
The Conservatives claim they are being more open but in doing so they have to change history and misrepresent figures and the truth.
The short truth being that the Heritage Trust Fund should have been 40 billions of dollars by this time is only sitting at a very small 1.6 billion.
The balance whisked away unaccounted for by this Government. It would still be going on if the Liberals had not busted them.
After finally admitting they were fleecing the Heritage Trust fund they come up with a one liner they hope to cover their pillage as in “The net income earned from the Fund’s investments, less the amount retained for inflation-proofing, is transferred to the Province’s main operating fund, the General Revenue Fund (the GRF), to help pay for government programs.” This was written by spin doctors!
Outright lies, and misdirection are the hallmark of this Government! They are trying very hard to spin this misappropriation of funds off with the repeated lines “Of the total realized net income during the past six months, $662 million is transferred to the GRF and $248 million is retained in the Fund for inflation-proofing.”
In this bit of chicanery they have invented a term that never existed prior to their web page “inflation-proofing the Heritage Trust” Such crap!
When the Heritage Trust Fund was set up the moneys made by the Heritage trust fund were to be reinvested in that Fund. This Government robbed the Heritage Trust fund of all its dividend earnings preventing the compounding of investment. The purpose of this was to debilitate the Heritage Trust Fund in order to privatize it. And that is a very bad move.
As to adding to community projects from the billions they have taken from the Heritage Trust Fund is simply another aspect of a large and thinly veiled misrepresentation by spin doctors!
When the money goes into the General Operating Revenues it is more than likely spent on paying for Government Aircraft, paying the Elected Members expense accounts and quick flights to the Orient or Washington and possibly the cafeteria bills. It is after all, General Revenue.
The citizens of this province have suffered through 14 years of outright lies and misdirection watching the money and resources go to a very short list of Tory friends. This line of Heritage Trust stuff is no exception.
PS:
It was a year ago now when they first announced the privatization of the Heritage
Trust Fund saying it had to be privatized because "it was preforming very poorly"
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
The Conservatives claim they are being more open but in doing so they have to change history and misrepresent figures and the truth.
The short truth being that the Heritage Trust Fund should have been 40 billions of dollars by this time is only sitting at a very small 1.6 billion.
The balance whisked away unaccounted for by this Government. It would still be going on if the Liberals had not busted them.
After finally admitting they were fleecing the Heritage Trust fund they come up with a one liner they hope to cover their pillage as in “The net income earned from the Fund’s investments, less the amount retained for inflation-proofing, is transferred to the Province’s main operating fund, the General Revenue Fund (the GRF), to help pay for government programs.” This was written by spin doctors!
Outright lies, and misdirection are the hallmark of this Government! They are trying very hard to spin this misappropriation of funds off with the repeated lines “Of the total realized net income during the past six months, $662 million is transferred to the GRF and $248 million is retained in the Fund for inflation-proofing.”
In this bit of chicanery they have invented a term that never existed prior to their web page “inflation-proofing the Heritage Trust” Such crap!
When the Heritage Trust Fund was set up the moneys made by the Heritage trust fund were to be reinvested in that Fund. This Government robbed the Heritage Trust fund of all its dividend earnings preventing the compounding of investment. The purpose of this was to debilitate the Heritage Trust Fund in order to privatize it. And that is a very bad move.
As to adding to community projects from the billions they have taken from the Heritage Trust Fund is simply another aspect of a large and thinly veiled misrepresentation by spin doctors!
When the money goes into the General Operating Revenues it is more than likely spent on paying for Government Aircraft, paying the Elected Members expense accounts and quick flights to the Orient or Washington and possibly the cafeteria bills. It is after all, General Revenue.
The citizens of this province have suffered through 14 years of outright lies and misdirection watching the money and resources go to a very short list of Tory friends. This line of Heritage Trust stuff is no exception.
PS:
It was a year ago now when they first announced the privatization of the Heritage
Trust Fund saying it had to be privatized because "it was preforming very poorly"
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
