Comments by "Neolithic Transit Revolution" (@neolithictransitrevolution427) on "Energi Media" channel.

  1. The fact that the US clearly needs Canadian industry and is acting aggressively should not be seen as some confusing point but as clear evidence that he is serious about annex as a goal.
    29
  2. Firstly; obviously not. Secondly; this isn't what we have to worry about. We have to worry about Alberta being coaxed into a separation vote, and then joining as a state or territory; and Saskatchewan following. BC would be left entirely isolated, our population would be immediately dramatically older and our economy weaker.
    19
  3. I wouldn't support using the Emergencies Measures Act. But this is an Emergency. The US will crush Alberta's economy. And then offer statehood as a solution. There is already strong Anti-Canadian sentiment in Alberta. If we do not meet thier demands, no matter how economically unsound you believe them to be, we will lose Alberta.
    12
  4. I guess that depends on how democratic you feel the US is these days.
    11
  5. But heres the thing; she's right. She still polls well in Alberta. She is representative of her base. Yes, Quebec has tried to Seperate. The US wasn't actively trying to annex Quebec at the time. If we ignore this as just being those annoying Albertans, they are going to end up Seperating. Smith is a consequence of Albertan anger at Canada, not the source. We need to meet Albertan demands to avoid our nation being split in half.
    11
  6. Nova Scotia exports 2/3rds of the refined petroleum products it produces. To say it's exporting money is ignoring that it buys most of that oil to resell after adding value. But sure I'll happily agree it would be better getting domestic SynCrude. And you imply NS is dependent of foreign electricity which isn't true. Yes it imports some coal, but we could provide that; and it's only because of delays in connections to the rest of the country.
    8
  7. Toronto should be investing in "E-Highways" as we see in Germany to allow Diesel trucks to run electrically over high demand sections of road, and with that infrastructure, allow EV trucking with much smaller batteries because they are able to recharge while operating. Montreal and Ottawa should as well, and then with some electrification along the 401, you create a regional network.
    8
  8. If you can picture this 4X more valuable economy, with Alberta presumably producing a million barrels worth of Carbon fiber, to make a dent, WHY CAN YOU NOT IMAGINE IT BEING PRODUCED IN BC? Please explain, why can't we build a pipeline to the BC coast, and then build Carbon Fiber production there, with immediate coastal access for export? What part of being able to add value to bitumen prohibits it's movement by pipeline?
    7
  9. One area of significant methane leakage is the pump stations on pipelines. These should be widely electrified.
    7
  10.  @jhornett  counter point, LNG in Florida definitely came from the Permian, which means it was fracked with considerable Methane leakage.
    6
  11. In terms of Agriculture, and really it's aquaculture, we should be building a Kelp industry. That kelp could be carbon feed stock, animal feed, fertilizer, or chemical input. It would revitalize our coastal waters by adsorpting the nutrients we flush down the st. Lawrence, low acidity, raise oxygen, and increase fish breeding space.
    6
  12. There will be an energy criss when the Americans close line 5
    6
  13. Really hoping now that this hits you stop being so dogheadidly against pipelines Mark. It would be great to have an east coast line before the Americans shut down line 5 and a West coast pipeline for a few 10s of billions to salvage the 100s of billions in Oil sands investment accessing a trillion dollars worth of resources before the US uses the economic depression to boost Albertan Seperatism and cut our country in half..
    5
  14. The most crucial part of preventing it happening is keeping Alberta happily in Confederation. We need to build them pipelines. The cost really is not the point. We give Quebec nearly $20 billion a year to stay in the country, we can build a few pipelines.
    5
  15.  @expfcwintergreenv2.02  on what basis. Do you not see the US is trying to get it? What do you think Annex Canada means? You think Trump likes French people?
    5
  16. How can you cover America threatening to invade and then argue against a pipeline in the same video? CP rail was built at a loss, to keep BC. Sometimes we build infrastructure because Provinces are demanding it to be in the country. We have domestic Electricity - an entire red herring.
    5
  17.  @MisterDaryn  actually, here I disagree with you. A pipeline to the west coast is far better if the goal is market access. The reason we need an East coast pipeline is national security. Right now we rely on Pipelines flowing through the US, which Michigan has been trying to close for years. We need an entirely domestic connection. The only way that an east coast pipeline is a money making venture is if we can get Europe to pay for it or sign a long term purchase contract.
    4
  18. @gledatelj1979  1) Canada doesn't have rulers. 2) what on earth are you referring to
    4
  19. @billestew7535  it may not be that strong today. A year into a national depression where Alberta is hardest hit, with Trump welling them they would be rich on Fox News, it will be far wider. We need to get ahead of this.
    4
  20. That only further hurts the investment in EVs that we can't afford to lose. I'd do a 1 year removal for fleet purchase.
    4
  21. I think everyone agrees the Emergency Act should not be used for this. But i Think almost everyone agrees we should be building new pipelines so Alberta is at least as dependent on Canada as it is the US. And the people who don't are probably being convinced by your oneside arguments. Ei; still quoting a pipeline built over covid as a relevant price, ignoring that Ontario's entire oil supply is reliant on the US not closing a pipeline, the economic cost of a collapse in oil prices, etc
    4
  22. Smith's competence isn't a measure of how well she achieves what you think she should do, its a measure of how well she achieves what she wants done. Its very dangerous to assume a lack of competence from someone doing a very good job at supporting her industry and pushing anti Canadian sentiment
    4
  23. You can see in that first graph where Line 9 was reversed in 2014, allowong Quebec to access upgrader Alberta Syncrude and Bakkan shale oil, pushing down overseas imports, overall imports, and pushing up US imports. Unfortunately for the same reason, today Ontario is 100% reliant on oil coming from pipelines that run through the US. So until this is reversed again, ending Eastern Canada's access to Western Canadian crude, and cutting back Alberta's market, and significantly the market for the Upgraders, any talk of holding back oil from the US is impossible. While Quebec could still access seaborne crude, and supply Ottawa as it already does, the remainder of Ontario, significantly the Golden Horseshoe, could find itself entirely cut off from any oil not provided by rail. At least unless/until we have an east west pipeline..
    4
  24. The east coast pipeline doesn't make direct, economic sense. But then again, neither does the TransCanada highway. The East Coast pipeline does make more sense viewed more holistically, as a matter of national security, as a way to increase the trade surplus, amd as a vector to encourage investment in Alberta, not into producing oil, but into upgrading it or flat out refining in and shipping RPPs east as they are shipped through Transmountain to Vancouver..
    4
  25. Trump first started talking about running for president in 1988 and ran for president under the Reform part in 2000. You voted wrong in 1988, dependence on the US was always dangerous. And you are wrong today to repeatedly ignore the very strong potential for Alberta to Seperate and join the US. We need to build pipelines, which will serve economic and national priorities, but most off all because we must appease Alberta before our country is cut in half.
    4
  26. It's just a bad economic layout. It is a seasonal route. It's a long shipping distance. It has absolutely no infrastructure in place. There are really no markets; Europe has no demand for bitumen, Eastern Canadian refineries have no use for it, basically this is a really complex way to ship to the US Gulf. An east coast pipeline works because it connects to eastern refineries and let's existing SynCrude production stop flowing through US pipelines freeing up capacity and increasing security..
    3
  27. There are roughly 3 million tractor trailers in registered in the US. If everything goes well, in 2026 telsa will displace something like 1.6% of that. Assuming no overall growth. I would call it progress but its certainly not revolution.
    3
  28. On the last episode you were mocking the Western Standard for calling the Emergency Measures Act the War Measures Act. That was whiplash.
    3
  29.  @ramastarchild6804  it is maddening that Canadians cannot see the obvious reality that the President talking about the 51st state is not about wanting a bunch of French Democrats
    3
  30.  @noIDwhatsoever  idk, I'm from Ontario, I have watched Markham for years, but over the last month I have been increasingly frustrated with his stance. It is becoming hard to believe he has any interest beyond closing the oil sands at all cost.
    3
  31. We own an oil pipeline company that actually just finished building an oil pipeline. With a staff of management and engineering, equipment operators, and contractors and suppliers..
    3
  32. Consider the Sturgeon Falls refinery; we can use a barrel of Bitumen to produce a barrel of Diesel or Jet fuel. OPEC can't do that, OPEC has to take a barrel of oil to make half a barrel of Gasoline, and the maybe a quarter barrel of Diesel and a tenth a barrel of Jet fuel. So what actually has the higher emissions intensity? The 10% higher production intensity in the oil sands, or the subsidizing of half a barrel of gasoline to keep it cheap enough to out compete EVs. But I also want lower emissions in the Oil sands. We should be using nuclear reactors at the major SAGD sites and the Upgraders. We should be using Green Hydrogen. The solutions to these things are to invest in the solutions, not try and shut down the industry so that OPEC can flood the market with cheap gas paid for by expensive diesel.
    3
  33.  @bobsacamano1274  do you think Alberta will stay in Canada on the hope the federal government will pay for capping wells? Do you believe that that is a line of thought the people who elect Smith will follow even loosely?
    3
  34. Are you on the con side of this hypothetical debate? Or do you agree that it is a crisis? Because if the later, maybe you should be making a reasonable argument for pipelines so that your followers/views can understand what we should be developing. Because your current approach is a receipt for division and polarization, instead of moderate compromise.
    3
  35. You don't come off as a critic, Markham, because you don't provide constructive criticism. I have never heard you say "I think a pipeline should be built to X, and bitumen at X should be used for Y". The closest you get is a Carbon fiber industry which best case scenario will have 100k bbl/d in demand in a decade. When the only usage you support is a decade away from using 2% of current output, you are arguing again an industry.
    3
  36. Why is an expansion of production a thing I should be against? But regardless, we would probably need 2M bbl/d in coastal pipelines before new production was even in discussion.
    3
  37. We agree with value added use of bitumen. But you can produce Carbon Fiber and activated Carbon and Asphalt Binder in BC. That argument has nothing to do with pipelines. Pipelines move feedstock, they don't determine what happens to it. We should also look at Sturgeon falls. We can turn a barrel of Bitumen into a barrel of diesel. That has a huge value when EVs are cutting out gasoline demand, and half a barrel of conventional oil ends up gasoline.
    3
  38. If you teach Seperation of powers in the Canadian context, I hope you focus is on how our system is designed and not thiers, and the focus is on Federal vs Provincial Jurisdiction not branches of Government
    3
  39.  @jhornett  I mean, a quick look at a 2024 S&P article says about 2% of methane produced is lost in the Permian/155 BCF. But you can find a wide range of estimates, some significantly higher. It's very hard to specifically state how much methane leaks from an area which is intentional fracked to allow gas to flow through the rock.
    2
  40. @jhornett  yes exactly. But we can confidently say LNG in Florida is among the highest emission electrical sources.
    2
  41.  @jhornett  no. My point was we can't say confidentially either way. Whereas you are normally right, an EV in the average grid will be lower emissions, a grid running on Permian LNG is arguably dirtier than coal.
    2
  42. I've emailed you in disagreement. You didn't reply with evidence Inwas wrong.
    2
  43. @michaelenman9498  you need to understand this really isn't true. I am very frustrated at Canadians for not understanding we can in fact be hurt by these policies and Americans largely won't be.
    2
  44. Let's look at oil. We have seen during Covid and 2018 what happens when we do not have sufficient take away capacity. All oil is priced out of Hardisty, AB. 600k bbl/d goes south through Keystone to the Gulf Coast refineries. If a selective tariff is placed on Canada, then for our oil to sell in the Gulf where international crude is available, the purchase price, aka the price in Hardisty + the fee for the tariff, cannot be higher than the global price. We will see a discount on oil to accommodate the additional cost purchasers pay in tariff, or else we will lose the 600k bbl/d to international competition, which would be worse for prices. A discount that will be available to all purchases, including the Midwest. We literally saw price movements the day of the tariff taking off an immediate 4% relative to US WTI.
    2
  45. Let's look at Aluminum or Iron. What is the alternative market? We will have to ship by rail to the Pacific, and then oversea. That is significant transportation cost. So long as a Tariff does not drive down prices to the point producers are losing revenue, we will adsorb most of the cost in the form of lower profits and capital write downs.
    2
  46. Manufacturing and the complex supply chain will be reflected in substantially higher prices. But a new car is not an essential or regular purchase. Auto manufacturers will move production to the US over the next few years, even without a tariff, if this uncertainty continues. Do you think Trump, backed by Musk, cares if Ford goes under? If they destroy a massive private sector union? Tariffs here will increase prices in the medium term, but that will only make Tesla more competitive in the US and take manufacturing away from Canada.
    2
  47. And all of this is going to weaken the CAD. A weaker CAD will suppress our export prices across the board. There may be some level of higher prices on certain goods. But they did the same thing to China in 2018, and the renminbi fell to adsorb almost the entire price difference. And Canada is far more reliant on US trade, and in particular export purchases.
    2
  48. @michaelenman9498  Potash is one of the very few hands we could play. However, the US will retaliate to such an obvious aggressive action. They could go so far as to cut us out of SWIFT or even sanction us which will make any goal of trade diversion impossible. And Frankly, I wouldn't put it past them to buy it from Russia. The 25% flat tariff they are applying is almost ambivalent toward us, if they choose to be actively harmful they have the ability. If we cut off Electricity, we also have regional markets that rely on the US. And, 3/4s of Ontario's NG comes from the US, which could be cut off or taxed leaving Southern Ontario with no Alternative for peak power generation. We could Toll the highway, but a lot of our trucking moves through the US as well. If we want international trade, we need to have commodities that can be exported internationally, and realistically that means we need to have coastal pipelines as a part of the solution. The alternative is an enormous drop in exports that took decade to develop. I'm happy to list the areas of manufacturing I would like to see policy toward. But ultimately, I have no way to say definitively what our new export strategy will look like, because it will be determined by government policy choice. I can only say what I think should be done..
    2
  49. There is no contradiction in expanding the O&G sector and developing green electricity and manufacturering like heat pumps and batteries. In fact green energy being cheap for green hydrogen to upgrade bitumen is not just diversitying it's complementary.
    2
  50.  @ChrisR-xs9wp  to be fair Alberta has put a lot into several that have been cancelled. I care less about who pays for the pipeline, particularly TransCanada should be subsidized by the Federal government. What I want to see is Alberta agreeing to save all royalties generated by oil going through the pipeline and invest it into eastern Canada, or at least non-energy infrastructure. Also a new upgrader in Alberta, and ideally to see large oil sands SAGD operations changed to using SMRs or otherwise nuclear steam, and green hydrogen used in upgrading. But it's rather a strategic necessity when we can't trust pipelines running through the US to bring our oil to Ontario..
    2