Comments by "Neolithic Transit Revolution" (@neolithictransitrevolution427) on "" video.

This was a wonderful episode and deeply informative
16
Well the important point to consider is the small portion of Canadians who support Trump are highly concentrated in those very provinces. So to a considerable population what you're saying is a positive.
5
 @Sylvie_M be nice poor guy forget to switch accounts
4
The S curve also applies the SMRs, and in many ways conventional large nuclear reactors, and if we would put our mind to it I'd say SMRs can meet or beat solar. Almost certainly for large industrial heat applications, and probably for any very large power consumer.
3
So on one hand I think this may likely be the start of a permanent downturn. While I agree it is not structurally caused, if there isn't some greatly unexpected turn around from the US, this cyclical depression will lead into global structural changes, and while there will be an upswing it won't peak. I think the low price environment will disproportionately hit the first generation bitumen mining operations and upgraders around Fort McMurray and cause permanent closures of production. And that would disproportionately impact employment in the oil sands, since mines are far more labour intensive, and the old mines specific as the last two built are almost entirely automated. So there may be a structural change as a result. And secondarily, conventional producers will be able to keep selling at low prices, but new drilling, which is where the employment is. That will likely swing back in the future, although I'd be surprised if it reaches this level. Although, if we're clever, geothermal could reach this level by then, which would be a very good structural change. On the other hand, I do think Alberta could outcompete OPEC if sufficient capacity were available. And specifically in regard to an Energy east line carrying upgraded syncrude, I would suggest there are benefits to buying domestic for a declining but still critical element of our energy system. Particularly since that Syncrude locks in demand to those mines.
2
It depends on part where you want to ship it, a greater distance reduces capacity. There is also a differece between capacity to move oil by rail and capacity to Bitumen. My understanding is North America has around 300k bbl/d Rail but between oilsands and Vancouver, and about a million bbl/d in conventional oil. However, the US uses some of that, so it's a question of how many we can get.
1
@JaronSwickle No, it's really not, they're just approaching the first commercial facility. But I meant to communicate the US uses some of that rail car capacity
1
@TimBee100 The Americans can only move off our oil at such a speed. At worse, in 2-3 years, they could likely kick out ~2M bbl/d (excluding West Coast) by reversing KeyStone. Rail could not replace that. In the Shorter term, they could cut off Line 5 that connects Ontario and Alberta. Rail carrying upgraded oil could replace that. They could also kick out 300-500k bbl/d from the Midwest by retooling, we could replace that with railBit to Vancouver, maybe more rail oil domestically. But we need the cars in Canada. I wouldn't be surprised to see the US mandate oil carrying cars Don't leave the country since they also use them, and in fact are the main user of the oil carrying cars currently..
1
@TimBee100 ordering what? And I don't know I follow your point about US ownership of oil companies.
1
@BrianLacombe-f5l I didn't think Alberta had significant oil by rail capacity. I thought most of that came out of Bakken, and we mainly had Bitumen cars.
1
@TimBee100 well it's no Secret Imperial is Exon wearing a hat. And maybe you could argue it's interest is cheap exports to US Exon refineries. But otherwise, I do not think American ownership is against diversifying exports. If there is one thing I know about American investors, it's that they don't care about America. Who do you want to order these train Cars? The government of Canada? I think there is definitely good potential for rail cars in the medium term, both to boost Eastern manufacturing and move oil. But long term this is very expensive, dangerous, and will entirely crowd our relatively weak railway infrastructure.
1
There is a Pipeline from Montreal to Sarnia already. It would make much more sense to go to Cornwall for a new line.
1