Stating The Obvious Redux

"the Iraq War is largely about oil." Allan Greenspan.

And all the U.S. media and pundits are all agog over this confession. Well duh, what did you think it was about? The funniest was to hear Chris Matthews on Hardball refer to Greenspan's analysis as Marxist. Hey I said that here.

Matthews: "So if you're in the European left and never liked Bush, to start with, now you got his Fed chairman say it's all about oil, you love it, right? This is the old Marxist analysis."

Yet some folks in the White House continue to live the lie, and remain in implausible denial.

In the book, "The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World," Greenspan writes, "the Iraq war is largely about oil." The comments, released before publication, put Defense Secretary Robert Gates on the defensive as he made the Sunday talk-show rounds following major recommendations on war policy last week.

"I know the same allegation was made about the Gulf War in 1991, and I just don't don't believe it's true," Gates said, appearing on ABC's "This Week."

But it was as much about oil then as it was being the first high tech war declaring the New World Order of the 21st Century. Just as this war was about oil and revenge.

Jill Zuckman, Chicago Tribune: "I think this is one of the reasons why what Greenspan says has so much resonance because this is the Texas oil crowd in the White House and so-"

Matthews: "The oil patch crowd."

Zuckman: "-people assume that a lot of what they do is motivated."

Matthews: "Okay let me ask you this. Exxon, Mobil, making tens of billions of dollars in profits this year. So the war worked out well for them right?"

Zuckman: "Yes and we can pay crazy amounts of money at the pump."

Matthews: "Should we put Exxon signs up over Arlington Cemetery and Mobil signs up there, like they have at baseball stadiums?"

And Halliburton, Bechtel and Blackwater too.



Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
China, US, Communism, Capitalism, State-Captialism, Monopoly, Trade, WTO,
Aid, development, CATO, China, P3, state-capitalism, capitalism, industrialization, housing bubble, Greenspan, Ayn Rand, banks, IMF, NGO, Fordism, India, Marx, trade, free-trade, Third-World,neo-liberalism,
Marx, Marxism,
Halliburton, US dollar, oil, Iraq, US, economy, petro-dollars, trade deficit, Imperialism, recession,

Danny Millions State Capitalist

Quick someone tell the Tired Old Tories in Alberta, Oil companies accept state capitalism. That whippersnapper Danny Williams is demanding a stake in oil development, on top of royalties. While in Alberta the same oil companies whine about any increase in their royalty windfall of paying 1% annually for 25 years.

The government of Newfoundland has agreed to buy a 5 percent stake in a planned expansion of Husky Energy Inc's White Rose offshore oil field, Canadian Press reported on Wednesday.

The Canadian province of Newfoundland plans to take a 10 pct stake in new oil and gas projects off its coastline, the province's government said.

The demand was contained in the provinces 35-year energy plan released yesterday by Premier Danny Williams.

The province will take a 10 pct stake in future offshore oilfields if they meet long-term strategic objectives and will pay its share of exploration and development costs, he said.

Newfoundland wants a bigger share in future energy projects, and oil companies say the demand is a reasonable point of negotiation for new projects.

Newfoundland described itself as an "energy warehouse," with natural resources unmatched by most other jurisdictions in North America. Given the possibility of Newfoundland being "a significant player on the international stage," Premier Danny Williams named "control" as one of three main energy goals, planning a provincially owned energy corporation to play a major role in future developments.

Paul Barnes, the St. John's-based spokesman for the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, said state equity stakes are common throughout the world beyond North America and Europe. He said his members are prepared to negotiate exact figures for specific deals. "It's not overly concerning to our members that equity participation is on the table here because we experience it on worldwide basis."

Except in Alberta where the the Republican Lite Tories bend over for the Oil industry.

They forget that State Capitalism is as Canadian as Saskatoon Berry Pie.


See:

Williams Out Deals Stelmach

Transparency Alberta Style

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Stelmach, Alberta, tarsands, oilsands, Canada, state capitalism, royalties, oil, profits,
Atlantic Accord, Newfoundland, Premier, Danny, Williams, Province,

Outing BP

A scandal occurred this spring when the British CEO of BP, British Petroleum, the British petrol giant which branded itself as green; Beyond Petroleum 'its a start', Lord Browne was outed for being gay, and supposedly lying about it in court.

The reality is that his resignation had less to do with covering up his homosexuality then covering for BP. Which had not gone Beyond Petroleum as a result of Lord Browne's corporate decisions but had become a Bad Player in the oil business.

British Petroleum used the cover of a post-Hurricane Katrina refinery bill in Congress for a sneak attack on legal protections against supertankers in Puget Sound. Reps. Jay Inslee and Dave Reichert thwarted it.

You will remember that BP had faced a number of oil field scandals prior to the outing of Lord Browne by his Canadian lover and rent boy; Jeff Chevalier.

A long list of misfortunes has battered this venerable company, including an explosion at its Texas City, Texas, refinery that killed 15 workers and injured scores more, and protracted outages at other refineries. There was also an Alaskan oil spill resulting from a corroded pipeline, along with 2005 hurricane damage to its big Gulf of Mexico Thunder Horse production platform, which delayed that facility's production start-up.

As if that weren't enough, the company's longtime CEO Lord John Brown stepped down abruptly this spring amid allegations about his private life. And more recently, BP was pressured by Russian authorities to sell much of its stake in a big natural gas field to state-run gas company OAO Gazprom.

Lord Browne the ultimate company man was still that despite his lovers outing of him. The reality was that his corporate maneuvering of BP in the oil business had been less an economic success than a failure in protecting the environment and workers.


As they say here is the rest of the story.

Blackmail, Sex & Corporate Secrets

While much has been written in Britain about the seedier side of the scandal, the critical role that BP and its executives played in it has been largely overlooked. Company officials, for instance, reportedly encouraged the C.E.O. to out himself on one of the BBC’s most popular radio shows, a plan that fizzled when Browne lost his nerve in the studio. Before that, BP leaders were secretly enlisted to serve on the board of Chevalier’s company, which was underwritten by Browne. And in the end, the disclosure of corporate secrets was as much a concern to Browne as the revelation of his homosexuality. The threat that internal BP matters might be leaked led Browne to lie in a court statement, which in turn led to his humiliating resignation and public shaming. Among the secrets Browne wanted to protect: He was considering relocating BP overseas—a potential economic ­disaster that would have been a huge blow to Britain’s corporate psyche—and he placed a dollar value on the heads of his workers in the event that they were injured or killed in an accident. In one memo, company executives gamed out different disaster scenarios for BP, comparing them to the outcomes in The Three Little Pigs.

Now the company is trying to right ­itself under a new C.E.O., Tony Hayward, who has taken over amid a growing outcry over BP’s shoddy environmental and safety record, which Browne managed to keep as secret as his private life.
Throughout the 1990s, he made a series of acquisitions that won him enormous praise in Britain and heralded the consolidation of the major oil companies. It seemed novel then that British ­Petroleum grew not by increasing its oil exploration and development but by taking over American oil companies such as Standard Oil of Ohio and Amoco. The BP-Amoco merger was the largest of its kind and launched the company into the big leagues overnight. When Exxon bought Mobil the next year, Browne quickly retaliated by purchasing Atlantic Richfield for $32 billion.

Browne was also, like any great C.E.O., a P.R. genius. In 1997, to the horror of many of his oil-industry peers, Browne admitted in a speech that he ­believed global warming was real. He then hired a San Francisco firm to ­rebrand British Petroleum and come up with a new corporate slogan. The old BP logo was replaced with a green-and-yellow sunburst, and ads suggested that BP now stood for . . . Beyond Petroleum. It was a masterstroke: BP had only $100 million invested in solar power at the time of the renaming, compared with at least $10 billion invested in conventional energy. But thanks to BP’s green logo and green C.E.O., its reputation as a green company flourished.

Browne was not quite so popular in the U.S., where experience on the ground is more important than a taste for fine art. “They pounded their chests a lot, but they didn’t know how to run refineries,” a former Amoco employee says of the BP executives. Because refineries are among the most intricate and dangerous workplaces on the planet, the old-timers feared that the BP ­executives’ ignorance would compromise safety, especially as BP cut jobs and budgets to reduce redundancy and raise profits for shareholders. (Similar allegations would later take center stage in the Texas refinery explosion lawsuits.) Other executives were skeptical of the hierarchical management structure at BP; they particularly complained about the handpicked “turtles” (named after the mutant ninja variety), who served as interns to Browne and were supposedly fast-tracked to replace other executives. There was also something known internally as the promise: a written business plan that could be used against employees who didn’t meet their projected goals. “They would use it to cut your throat if you failed,” a former engineer explains. Gradually, the company’s culture became less about innovation than intimidation. Fearful of losing their jobs, few spoke up about deteriorating conditions at some of the refineries. Behind Browne’s back, employees nicknamed him the “elf,” an acronym for “evil little fucker.”

Browne had his critics outside the oil industry too. The company was accused of committing human rights violations while building a pipeline in Colombia, and concerns were expressed about North Sea pollution. Greenpeace selected Browne for its Best Impression of an Environmentalist award. Matt Simmons, whose Houston-based Simmons & Co. is one of the largest investment-banking businesses serving the energy sector, was deeply skeptical of Browne’s 1999 prediction that, because of a worldwide market glut, oil prices would never reach $40 a barrel. “There was a vision of unreality in John Browne’s business plan,” Simmons says. “That generally works until you slip up.”

No one would dispute that Texas City, Texas, is a very long way from St. James’s Square. It is a rough-and-tumble blue-collar town on the Gulf Coast, where people know all too well that refinery work is often life threatening but just as often the only work available. On March 23, 2005, something went very wrong at BP’s Texas City refinery, the third largest in the U.S. An aging tank used to separate gas and fluid overflowed, filling the air with flammable vapor. A driver unwittingly left his truck running, igniting a fireball that by the end of the day had killed 15 people and injured more than 200. Not surprisingly, the blast led to the launch of hundreds of multimillion-dollar lawsuits and several investigations, including one by a commission that former secretary of state James Baker headed. A probe by the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board specifically blamed BP’s closed culture for the explosion. In 2006, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration fined the company $21.3 million, the largest penalty of its kind ever issued.

That wasn’t all that would befall BP. The next several months brought a cascade of problems, almost all blamed on lax oversight and poor management. In March, 200,000 gallons of crude leaked out of a BP pipeline at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, forcing the company to partially shut down a major field. The pipe, it turned out, hadn’t been cleaned in years. In April, the U.S. Department of Labor fined BP for unsafe operations in an Ohio refinery. Also during this time, the company was unable to capitalize on its Thunder Horse offshore oil platform—the world’s largest—which was damaged during Hurricane Dennis in 2005. And in June, the government charged some of BP’s traders in Houston with trying to manipulate the price of propane in the Midwest and Northeast.

All these incidents inevitably prompted this question: How could a company that was supposed to be a model of corporate citizenship have gone so wrong? The answer that emerged was simple, and the weakness of Browne’s highly praised policy of acquiring big companies and instituting massive cost cuts was suddenly, fatally exposed. Instead of putting excess cash into maintenance and safety, the executives in London had ordered the company to “bank the savings.” But as plaintiffs’ attorneys have alleged, a rubber band can be stretched only so far before it breaks. BP led the industry in refinery deaths from 1995 to 2005. For 10 years, there was a fire a week at the Texas City plant, and many were afraid to work there, fearing that disaster was imminent. As an employee explained in a survey, “No one here in management cares. . . . We have been very lucky so far with this.” At the same time, the arrogance of BP executives was easily recognizable. One memo, prepared for a meeting held before the Texas City explosion, insisted on cost cuts, a familiar refrain at the plant: “Which bit of 25 percent don’t you understand??? We are going to be wasting our time on Monday unless you come prepared to commit to a 25 percent cut.”

In the end, Browne lied less to save his image than to save the image of his company. It’s notable, for instance, that there was no talk of resignation when word first emerged that the press had its hands on Chevalier’s story. Only after Browne learned that the corporate secrets could leak did he finally decide to step down.

Browne’s early departure will not prevent continued legal battles for BP, but it is perhaps as close to a sacrificial act of love as Browne is capable of, and it has allowed the company to start fresh. Though Browne also resigned from the board of Goldman Sachs, he still works for Apax Partners, a global private equity firm, and goes to his office when it suits him.

And as usual in the corporate world despite his fall from grace Lord Browne has landed on his feet.

FORMER BP boss Lord Browne has walked away with a pension worth just over £1million a year.The disgraced peer tops the list of 100 leading execs who look forward to pensions of £200,000 a year or more.

The former chief executive of BP PLC Lord Browne of Madingley has resigned as non-executive chairman of the advisory board of private equity firm Apax Partners to join energy and power private equity specialists Riverstone Holdings LLC.

His appointment at Riverstone Holdings, which specialises in the energy sector, comes almost four months after he quit oil giant BP when it emerged he lied to the High Court during a battle to block stories about his private life.

Lord Browne takes on the post of managing director and managing partner of Riverstone’s European business and will be based in London, where the group is soon to open an office.

Tags:

BP, Kyoto, environmentalism, homosexual, scandal, Lord Browne, John Browne,

Beyond Petroleum, British Petroleum, oil, Jeff Chevalier,

Williams Out Deals Stelmach

Newfoundland's Danny Boy brings home the bacon while Albertans suffer from a-give-away-a-day by Eddie Stelmach. And both of 'em are Conservative Premiers.

For months, Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams has stared down the country's largest oil companies. Wednesday, "Big Oil" -- as the bombastic Williams likes to call the multinationals -- blinked.

At a St. John's news conference, the premier announced a "memorandum of understanding" outlining a deal that will develop the $5-billion Hebron offshore oil project located 350 kilometres southeast of the provincial capital. In a rare public-private arrangement, the province will invest $110 million in return for a 4.9-per-cent equity stake in the venture. Williams said that will amount to about 35 million barrels of oil out of a possible overall haul of 700 million barrels.

On the royalty side, the province received an improved rate structure that would deliver a new royalty of 6.5 per cent of net revenues when oil prices exceed $50 a barrel.

William's victory of State Capitalism for the Public Good is a lesson for Stelmach as Erin Weir points out;

Williams’ victory clearly contradicts the view that oil is a “globally competitive” business in which governments need to give away substantial resource rents to get investment. In fact, Canadian governments have a very strong bargaining position because our country hosts more than half of global reserves open to private investment. Even the Premier of a small, poor province successfully stood up to the multinational oil companies. This outcome begs the broader question of why larger, richer provinces collect such unimpressive royalties on the depletion of their finite oil and gas reserves.

The irony is that Eddie wants to adopt some practices from Newfoundland, unfortunately not those dealing with oil/resource ownership and royalties. As they used to say about Red Rose Tea; 'Pity'.

Stelmach wants to find out how the Newfoundland and Labrador cellphone driving ban, implemented in 2003, has affected vehicle accident rates in that province.

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Stelmach, Alberta, tarsands, oilsands, Canada, equalization, royalties, oil, profits,
Stephen Harper, Harper, NCC, Reform Party, Conservatives, Conservative Party, politics, Government, PM, Ottawa, Canada,
equalization, royalties, Atlantic Accord, Peter Mackay,
Flaherty, Calvert, Harper, Government, Conservatives, Saskatchewan, Atlantic Accord, Newfoundland, Premier, Danny, Williams, Province,

Whose Arctic

Twenty years ago it was proposed that Canada needed a nuclear powered submarine fleet to defend Arctic Sovereignty. Post War Canada once boasted the lead in submarine hunter killer helicopters and planes to protect its sovereignty. Along comes Harper with much sturm and drang about protecting the Arctic with Ice Breakers. But then the Russians challenge his bluff.

In the next day or two a mini submarine will plant a Russian flag hewn from titanium 14,000ft beneath the North Pole, along with the country's coat of arms.

Although it will be a symbolic gesture and carries no legal weight, it is designed to send the West a clear message: Russia has shrugged off its post-cold war weakness and will be aggressively defending and pushing its national interests from now on.

If it goes smoothly, the flag planting, reminiscent of the kind of propaganda coup beloved by the Soviets, will feed a rising state-orchestrated sense of patriotism and national pride.

It will also be the beginning of what is likely to be a lengthy international struggle for the Arctic Ocean's riches, with Canada, Denmark, Norway, the United States and Russia all having competing interests in the hydrocarbon-stuffed area.

The 1987 military review highlighted Canada's abysmal capabilities of enforcing sovereignty on its Arctic coast. It was therefore announced that MARCOM would receive a fleet of 10-12 nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSN) suitable for operating for extended periods under the Arctic ice. The proposed SSN fleet would force any nation, friend or foe, to possibly think twice before using Canada's territorial seas in the Arctic for operating nuclear submarines. During 1987-1988, MARCOM examined several British and French SSN designs. The planned procurement, however, was cancelled in 1988-1989 during a time of increased defence cuts.

In 1998, the Canadian government made a deal with the United Kingdom to acquire four mothballed, but state-of-the-art Upholder-class diesel-electric submarines that were made surplus by the Royal Navy's decision to operate only nuclear-powered submarines such as the Trafalgar-class boats. The Upholders were considered too valuable and technologically advanced by the Royal and US navies to allow them to fall into the hands of a non-allied nation. Therefore Canada was encouraged through significant discounts to acquire the Upholders. The four submarines were eventually purchased after much foot-dragging by the federal government for $750 million CAD.

The transaction was supposed to have included some reciprocal rights for British forces to continue using CFB Suffield for armoured-unit training and CFB Goose Bay for low-level flight training, while Canada received four well-built and very lightly used high-technology submarines to replace the 1960s-era Oberon class. (It was later revealed that there were no reciprocal rights. It was a plain lease-to-buy arrangement.) After a costly update program which took longer than expected, along with several public and highly embarrassing equipment failures, the Upholders are being successfully reactivated following a decade of mothballing and are now being integrated into the Canadian navy as the Victoria class. Technical problems still seem to plague the fleet however. Part of this deal will see MARPAC receive its first submarine in four decades and returning an active submarine presence to Canada's west coast.

SEE:

Polar Bears Threaten Tories Arctic Sovereignty

Tories Ignore Arctic Climate Change

Petrocan's Arctic Sovereignty

US Declares War For The Arctic

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Petrocan, Canada, Arctic, Sovereignty, Global-Warming, Climate-Change, oil,Inuit,Alaska,Nunavit, Statoil, Russian, Norway, US, IPY, IGS, Exxon,
Arctic, war, icebreaker, icebreakers, Sovereignty, Harper, Bush, Canada, Lawofthesea, 200milelimit, global-warming, ice-melting, Conservatives, government, politics, parliament, Ottaw, Yukon, NWT, climate-change

Leduc #1

You would expect that for the millions we spent on having an Alberta Embassy in Washington, they could hire someone to fact check the speeches.

Leduc #1 was discovered in 1947. This bit of historical revisionism would credit the discovery to the PC government rather than the Socreds.

"This set of circumstances has created a unique mutually beneficial relationship that has delivered safe, secure, reliable supplies of oil and gas to the U.S. since Leduc Number One drilled in 1974 by Imperial Oil – the Canadian sub of Exxon."

Murray Smith

Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Strategy Conference and Investment Forum

Topic: "Energy Supply: Quantities and Qualities"

Denver, Colorado - August 1, 2005

This is not the only controversy to entangle Mr. Smith.

I hope he bones up on his oil industry history now that he has moved on to join the Washington circle at the TD Bank.

Investment bank TD Securities Inc. has created a new advisory board that will include Alberta political heavyweights Jim Dinning, Anne McLellan and Murray Smith, as it seeks an extra edge in the ultracompetitive energy sector.

The formation of the board, which will support TD Securities' energy practice, is intended to provide opinions on public policy, give insight on market conditions and open more industry doors, said Frank McKenna, deputy chairman of Toronto-Dominion Bank and leader of the new advisory board.

David MacInnis, president of the Canadian Energy Pipeline Association, said government and politics have always been important in energy, but there has been a reluctance in the past to admit that fully.

Say it ain't so.

And MacInnis lets the cat out of the bag, big oil admits the need for a planned energy economy.

"The reality is that it's not just regulatory issues that are confounding energy development in this country," he said. "There is a significant lack of co-ordinated, coherent thinking on the policy side. So if a group like this can contribute to the quality of the dialogue, that is a good thing."

Planning is usually associated with socialism but in this case it is more like cartelization if not outright corporatism.

And the TD has created an investment bank of political bagmen and woman for big oil.


Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Frank McKenna, Alberta, tarsands, oilsands, Canada, Washington, royalties, oil, profits,
Anne McLellan, Liberals, Nexxen, Agrium, Oil, Jim Dinning, Deputy PM, Bennett Jones,
Murray Smith, TD Bank, gasoline, gas gouging, gas prices, big oil, petrochemical, refinery,

A Deal Is A Deal

Defying the Harpocrites expectations of pulling a fast one over the Atlantic Accord expecting it to all pass by due to the infamous culture of defeat, today their anti-equalization budget faces opposition in the Senate from none other than the Conservative voice of Atlantic Canada; John Crosby. And he is not in favour of the Harpocrites budget. Nope not by a long shot.

Former East Coast Tory godfather John Crosbie sent two me­mos to Prime Minister Stephen Har­per in a vain attempt to convince him to honour the 2005 offshore accords be­tween Ottawa and Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador.

The memos provide a strong argu­ment in support of those, like Nova Scotia Tory MP Bill Casey, who argue that Mr. Harper and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty have violated the ac­cords with the March budget.

Certainly, few people know more about the issue than Mr. Crosbie, who was instrumental in negotiating the 1980s deals under which the Conserva­tives under Brian Mulroney ceded con­trol of offshore petroleum to Nova Sco­tia and Newfoundland.

“The authors of the Atlantic council report concluded that this government's budget ‘violates the letter and the spirit of the accords,’" said Deputy Leader Michael Ignatieff. “Even former Conservative Minister of Finance John Crosby said ‘they're changing the equalization formula so that it will cancel out the principles of the accord.’

Meanwhile the rage spreads as more Atlantic provinces realize the Tories have created a two tier form of equalization.

While the new equalization formula will provide New Brunswick with a $68-million increase in revenue for the first two years, the province will receive, from 2009 through 2020, a stunning $1.1-billion less than it would have under the existing framework. While Mr. Harper talks about fixing equalization, not only has he broken his promise to honour the Atlantic Accord in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland, but he also has created two classes of equalization.

Acadia University’s Paul Hobson and Memorial’s Wade Locke have done better than running to court. In a study released last week, they ran the numbers on the two equalization options presented in the budget – the old "fixed framework" that uses a five-province standard and the new "O’Brien formula" that upgrades to a 10-province standard, excludes some resource revenues and introduces a cap to claw back equalization if resource revenues push a have-not province above Ontario’s theoretical taxing capacity.

The bottom line: The new system is a financial bust for all four Atlantic provinces over the next 13 years, whether or not they have resource accords with Ottawa.

Jim Bickerton of St. Francis Xavier University in Antigonish believes the political battle surrounding the federal budget underscores a lack of understanding between the federal Conservative government and Atlantic Canada.

Bickerton says any attempt by Ottawa to portray the new equalization deal contained in the recent federal budget as a "fair and generous offer" for Nova Scotia and Newfoundland misses the point about why they were given offshore agreements in the first place.

"The symbolism of this went much deeper than simply just a broken agreement," he says.

Agreements signed in 2005 with Paul Martin’s Liberal government protected the two provinces’ offshore oil and gas revenues from federal equalization clawbacks. After a long and at times dramatic fight dubbed the "Campaign for Fairness," the deals were heralded as key economic development tools.

The current equalization offer forces the provinces to choose between a new formula or their offshore deals, a choice both fear could cost them millions of dollars over the long term.

"The broken trust was that the federal government had more or less admitted that this was the region’s one great opportunity to reverse its historic subordinate position within the federation and that it was willing to support them in doing that," says Bickerton.

Locke's work on equalization and the Atlantic Accord have been followed closely in political circles.

This spring, when he determined that Newfoundland and Labrador would actually benefit from the new equalization formula, federal Conservatives championed his work.

However, Locke dramatically revised his analysis when he obtained full details from the federal Finance Department on how the new equalization formula will work.

He found that Newfoundland and Labrador will not only lose money as compared to the status quo, but the province would have received about $11 billion more over the next 13 years had Prime Minister Stephen Harper maintained a 2006 pledge on equalization.

As an Albertan I empathize with the Maritimes. We were there once, in the thirties, despite our coal reserves, it was not enough to keep us afloat as the feds took the resource monies and gave us back a smidgen called equalization.

It was when we struck oil, and had the oil barons take over the State that we declared our constitutional autonomy through provincial control of our natural resources.

Alberta today pays into the equalization payments to other provinces. Not just Ontario. Which irks me no end when the Conservatives talk about capping equalization at the Ontario level. What about the Alberta level, well they don't want to mention Alberta since that might wake up the sleeping giant which hates Ottawa.

Yep you see the broken promise to Atlantic Canada goes along with a letter sent to Saskatchewan and Alberta promising to respect provincial resource rights and not include them in the equalization formula. Signed by the Grande Fromage his-self.

So once the Atlantic Accord was signed it set the conditions for Nova Scotia and Newfoundland to benefit from their offshore resources just like Alberta and Saskatchewan can from their inland resources.

Those resources being oil and gas. Which seem to be unique when it comes to the federal government. Unlike say mining, or hydro-electric power, two resources Ontario and Quebec have but are never considered part of the equalization formula, past or present.

The federal state controls offshore oil and gas reserves in a paternalistic fashion for the good of the provinces where they are. They still control the offshore resources 'in trust' for Nunavut, until such time as that 'territory' actually becomes a province.

Having to give up such a lucrative source of funds, is hard to do. And the Liberals were forced into expanding the Atlantic Accord originally signed by the Mulroney Conservatives. In doing so they gave the Atlantic provinces their just due.

The Harpocrite Conservative opposition demanded the Martin government honour 'their commitment' made during the 2004 election. A promise Harper went on to reiterate in the 2006 election.

But he broke that promise, by tying the provincial rights to resource revenues to equalization payments, a bit of sugar for two years and then claw backs. Albertans would never stand for this kind of treatment, regardless of the party in power in Ottawa.

And the Atlantic premiers as well as Lorne Calvert are correct in admonishing Albertans that Harpers betrayal bodes ill for us as well. Unfortunately it has fallen on deaf ears since the Calgary School Conservatives dominate both the Federal party and Stelmach's regime in Alberta.

It's a matter of fairness. The Maritimes could well become self sufficient with their oil revenues. And then and only then should equalization payments end, as they have with the former have not province of Alberta.

Equalization & The Atlantic Accord - 'A Deal is A Deal' Petition

Nova Scotia Premier Rodney MacDonald is encouraging all Nova Scotians and all Canadians to send a strong and united message to Ottawa by signing a petition on Nova Scotia's website.

www.gov.ns.ca/accord

The only problem with the petition is there is no space to put your city or province. So I used the space for phone number (optional).




Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Stephen Harper, Harper, NCC, Reform Party, Conservatives, Conservative Party, politics, Government, PM, Ottawa, Canada,
Leo Struass, Calgary School,Carl Schmitt,Burkean Conservative,Harper
Canada, poltics, Conservative, parliament,
Harper, Government, Conservatives,
MP, Bill Casey MP, Canada, poltics, Conservative, parliament,
Canada, equalization, royalties, Atlantic Accord, Peter Mackay,
Flaherty, Calvert, Harper, Government, Conservatives, Saskatchewan, Atlantic Accord, Newfoundland, Premier, Danny, Williams, Province,

Made In America Royalty Scheme

Alberta has the dubious distinction of being at the bottom of the royalty payments made by oil companies to governments. It is in good company though.

GAO: U.S. gives oil companies a big break

Revenue cut for feds from resource taking is far below states like Alaska, Louisiana

Apparently we have a made in the USA royalty scheme here in Alberta. And Big Oil would like to keep it that way.CAPP Presents to the Alberta Royalty Review Panel


Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Stelmach, Alberta, tarsands, oilsands, Canada, equalization, royalties, oil, profits,

Iraq; The War For Oil

Forget weapons of mass destruction the war in Iraq was to make the world safe for Halliburton.

Vice President Dick Cheney was chief executive of Halliburton from 1995 to 2000. Former Halliburton unit KBR Inc. is the U.S. Pentagon's largest contractor in Iraq and has drawn scrutiny from auditors for the quality and pricing of its work for the U.S. army.

Halliburton's relocated CEO outlines major shift in focus

DUBAI, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES — Halliburton will shift some 70 percent of its capital investment over the next five years to the Eastern Hemisphere, which includes oil and gas zones in the Middle East, Russia, Africa, the North Sea and East Asia, the company's chief said Tuesday from his new headquarters in Dubai.

Dave Lesar, arriving for his first week in United Arab Emirates, said Halliburton would quickly expand its Mideast operations as it targets $80 billion in new business over the next five years — 75 percent of which lies in the Eastern Hemisphere.

Dennis Kucinich: Oil was the primary reason for the invasion of Iraq

There were, of course, no weapons of mass destruction, no connection between Iraq and 911, no connection between Iraq and Al Queda's role in 911. Despite that the Bush-Cheney Administration, with the approval of a Democratic-controlled Senate and the Democratic leader of the House, supported and commenced a brutal campaign of shock and awe, of bombing, invasion and then occupation of Iraq.

It's All About Oil
Summary and Notes from Congressman Kucinich’s One Hour Speech Before the United States House of Representatives
On Administration’s Efforts to Privatize Iraq Oil

The Iraqi “Hydrocarbon Law” is an issue of critical importance, but has been seriously mischaracterized and I want to provide the House of Representatives the facts and evidence to support the concerns I have expressed. As you know, the Administration set several benchmarks for the Iraqi government, including passage of the “Hydrocarbon Law” by the Iraqi Parliament. The Administration has emphasized only a small part of this law, the “fair” distribution of oil revenues. Consider the fact that the Iraqi “Hydrocarbon Law” contains a mere three sentences that generally discusses the “fair” distribution of oil. Except for three scant lines, the entire 33 page “Hydrocarbon Law,” is about creating a complex legal structure to facilitate the privatization of Iraqi oil. As such, it in imperative that all of us carefully read the Iraqi Parliament’s bill because the Congress is on the record in promoting oil privatization. This war is about oil.


Fighting overshadows Iraq's oil law

As a result, the US Embassy in Iraq is pressuring the sectarian groups to pass the oil law as soon as possible. Still, Washington does have an agenda as to what the law should look like.

US-funded consultants had a significant role in shaping the draft oil law in Iraq. Firms such as BearingPoint were brought in to advise the Iraqi government and advocated allowing for private competition in the oil sector. It is Washington's belief that Iraq's oil sector will be most efficiently exploited and managed through the competition of private oil firms, including foreign companies. As such, Washington would like to reduce the role played by INOC in the oil sector. However, at this point passing the oil law is more important to Washington than granting rights to foreign oil companies.

US hunts for oil in Persian Gulf

Al-Sharaa underlined that Arabs know very well that the United States is in need of oil and is the world's largest oil consumer, adding that the US therefore intends to dominate the oil rich Persian Gulf region.

The Syrian Vice President went on to say that, the only reason for US navy and military maneuvers or troop deployments to the region is to monitor the smooth flow of oil to the United States.


Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Halliburton, US dollar, oil, Iraq, US, economy, petro-dollars, trade deficit, Imperialism, recession,

Oil Speculation

The reason for the gas gouging at the pump. Speculation in the oil market.

Algerian Energy Minister: shortage of oil supply does not cause prices rise According to him, doubts are surrounding oil markets; which has been used by speculators to raise the prices.


Oil mergers forcing prices up: study

Oil rises ahead of US inventory data

Oil Prices Rise After Inventory Report

Oil rises as warships enter Gulf

BP leak reduces Alaskan oil flow

Oil, gasoline futures end higher; traders weigh supply risk



ags:

gasoline, gas gouging, gas prices, big oil, petrochemical, refinery,

Gas Gouging

Gas gouging is here again. The reason of course is that it is spring. And prices rise in the spring just like dandelions.

PILGRIM: Now, this spring, gas price is an annual event. In 22 of the last 23 years, prices have risen some time after March 15th and go up until about mid-May.

The Center for Policy Alternatives reports that Canadians are paying as much as 27 cents per litre too much for gas.

 "For example, drivers in Toronto are currently being overcharged 15 cents
per litre," Mackenzie says. The situation is the same across the country: 
in Halifax drivers arecurrently overpaying 19 cents per litre;
21 cents per litre in Winnipeg; 18 cents per litre in Edmonton;
and a whopping 27 cents per litre in Vancouver.

You can use their handy dandy tool to find out how much you are being
screwed by Big Oil.

And from GasBuddy.com

Edmonton
Today 104.855
Yesterday 104.877
One Week Ago 105.102
One Month Ago 98.740
One Year Ago 101.510

Using the above price for gas Hugh Mackenzie's Gas price gouge: The sequel.calculator finds that in Edmonton;

Your gas prices are 21.1¢ per litre above the normalized cost of 82.9¢ per litre in Edmonton
With today's crude oil price of $62.01 USD per barrel and the US dollar at $1.11 CAD, the price of regular unleaded gasoline in Edmonton should be 82.9¢ per litre at normal profit margins. At a price of $1.04 per litre, you are paying 21.1¢ per litre in pure excess profit. Across Canada, an extra margin of 21.1¢ per litre generates an additional profit of 21.1 million dollars per day

Further from Gasbuddy.com we find that prices for gas have steadily increased over the past six years.

"Expect even higher profits, especially during the second and third quarters, their busiest season," said Jason Toews, co-founder of gasbuddy.com, a website that compares gas prices across the country. Toews predicts prices will peak at $1.30 a litre for self-serve, regular unleaded by August. This means more money for Big Oil, while gas retailers, Toews says, are making very little.

And even if there is competition between Gas Stations over prices this happens; Wisconsin Gas Station Owner Ordered To Raise Prices

So much for the free market.

And even without provincial and federal taxes on gasoline, that Linda Letherdale and her pals at the Canadian Taxpayers Federation whine about, the price would still be going up.

Oil prices rose Thursday despite a U.S. report showing that stocks of gasoline, crude and distillate fuels all rose,

"At this point it doesn't even matter any more what the reasons behind the price rise are," said Bruce Cran, president of the Consumers' Association of Canada.

He said consumers are "exhausted and frustrated" and are being gouged at the pumps for reasons that aren't clear.

"We've got no satisfactory explanations as to why these huge price rises take place year after year," said Cran, whose group received hundreds of calls Tuesday from motorists looking for answers.

According to MJ Ervin & Associates Inc. a Calgary-based consulting firm, the national average price of gas on Tuesday was reported at about $1.10 a litre, up five cents from the average price in March and 19 cents from the average price in January.

"This is a trend that we see every spring," said Catherine Hay, Senior Associate with MJ Ervin and Associates.

"This is something that we see in anticipation of the big driving season every year," she said.

Hay said this time last year the national average gas price was $1.08, only two cents lower that this year

Just like dandelions

tags:

Canada, Edmonton, gasoline, gas gouging, gas prices, big oil, petrochemical, refinery,

Sustainable Capitalism

Is nuclear power, and it is green, including its glow. And it is now being promoted as an environmental, green, alternative to the Peak Oil crisis.

And the Conservative governments in Ottawa as well as in Alberta embrace the green glow of nuclear power.

IPCC sees role for nuclear energy in new report

Current nuclear power is included as a 'key mitigation technology' in the field of energy supply while advanced nuclear power is considered key for the 2030 timeframe, alongside advanced renewables like tidal and wave energy, concentrating solar and photovoltaics.

The text states: "Given costs relative to other supply options, nuclear power, which accounted for 16% of the electricity supply in 2005, can have an 18% share of the total electricity supply in 2030 at carbon prices up to 50 US$/tCO2-eq (tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents), but safety, weapons proliferation and waste remain as constraints.

Nuclear industry welcomes climate report backing

The world nuclear power industry welcomed on Friday the tacit backing given to their technology by some of the world's top scientists and economists in the latest analysis of the climate change crisis.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) meeting in Bangkok said tackling global warming was both technologically and financially feasible as long as action was taken promptly, and that nuclear power could be in the arsenal.

It is common sense. What else is there for most of electricity generation that is carbon free," Ian Hore-Lacy of the World Nuclear Association said.

"If you have a major technology that is capable of being deployed on a larger scale than now that emits no carbon, you don't need a Phd (doctorate) to work out that it has got an awful lot of potential," he told Reuters in London.

The civil nuclear industry, which saw its future evaporating after the reactor explosion at Chernobyl in 1986 sent a pall of radioactive dust across Europe, has seen its prospects improve dramatically in the hunt for a solution to global warming.

See:

Tarsands To Go Nuclear

Nuke The Tar Sands

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Canada, Greenplan, Alberta, Saskatchewan, GaryLunn, JohnBaird, CleanCoal, hydro, nuclear, nuclear power, Ontario Power Workers Union, EPCOR, Utilities, Greenhouse gases, CO2, Conservatives, Government,

Petro Dollars and U.S. Debt

An interesting post on the U.S. Debt and the U.S. Dollar as it relates to American Petro-Economy Imperialism

Cost, abuse and danger of the dollar

By Rudo de Ruijter,
Independent Researcher
Netherlands

Camouflaged conflicts

To keep the permanent demand for dollars going, oil sales must remain in dollars. That is why the US tries to keep as much influence as possible, as well on the US owned IPE and NYMEX world oil markets, as with the people in power in oil exporting countries. By doing so the US secures its oil supply at the same time. Beyond that, lucrative contracts can be obtained from the local governments, and with these contracts a maximum of benefits can be seized from the oil production.

Fear always wins over reason

But when the local governments do not want to sell their oil in dollars anymore, the US has a problem. Then, the US-president will not explain how dependent the US is on the dollar demand. The conflict is always camouflaged. And to do so, always an emotional theme is chosen. In times gone by this was the danger of communists, today it is the danger of terrorists, fundamentalists and other popular bogies, like “the enemy has weapons of mass destruction” or “the enemy tries to make nukes.”

The fact that there is, rationally, not a single proof for such allegations, does not matter. The emotions always win. Even the fact, that these accusations could be turned around and then can be proved, is noticed by hardly anyone. There was no proof Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but the US, the accuser, has weapons of mass destruction and has used them. There is no proof Iran has intentions for nukes, but the US, the accuser, has nukes and has used them, and, afterwards, repeatedly threatened to use them again.

But once again, at the moment accusations are loaded with emotions, humans switch off their intelligence. Then, reason is no argument for peace anymore. The theatre is only about the launched accusations. And because, as a result, only specialists of weapons of mass destruction or nukes are called upon to give their opinion, nearly nobody finds out what the conflict is really about.

Venezuela

In Venezuela, since many years, the US tries to pull down president Chavez, pretexting he is a dangerous communist. Chavez has nationalized the oil industry and has set up Barter-deals to export Venezuelan oil in exchange for medical care from Cuba and others. In Barter deals there is no necessity for dollars and the US has no profit from the oil trade.

Iraq

Until 1990 the US maintained lucrative commercial contacts with Saddam Hussein. He was a good ally. For instance, in 1980 he had tried to free the hostages at the US-embassy in Teheran.

But in 1989 Saddam accused Kuwait of flooding the oil market and making the oil price go down. The following year Saddam tried to annex Kuwait. It led to an immediate turn around of the attitude of the US. With the annexation Saddam would dispose of 20 percent of world oil reserves. The Iraqis were chased out of Kuwait by the US, with an alliance of 134 countries, and condemned to water and bread by a UN-embargo that lasted ten years.

Although the US sought a way to re-establish its influence in Iraq, Saddam’s switch to the Euro on November 6, 2000 [9], would lead to the US invasion. The dollar sank away and in July 2002 the situation got that serious, that the IMF warned that the dollar might collapse. [10] A few days later the plans for an attack were discussed at Downing Street. [11] One month later Cheney proclaimed it was sure now, that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. [12] With this pretext the US invaded Iraq on March 19, 2003. The US switched back the oil trade into dollars on June 5, 2003. [13]

There is a huge difference between trading Iraqi oil in euros and trading it in dollars. This will be explained below. (See: “How do you steal oil reserves?”)

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
US debt, US dollar, oil, Iraq, US, economy, petro-dollars, Venezuela, trade deficit, Imperialism, recession,