Oil Is Still “Evil” In Canada; Should We Lease Trump To Ottawa To Enlighten Baby Trudeau?

Justin Trudeau, that cuddly metrosexual pajama boy, recently took a break from cozying up to Muslims and illegal immigrants to kiss some environmentalist butt.  Trudeau, a child of privilege and scion of a proud leftist heritage, is working hard to deny Canadian citizens cheap energy, as well as a significant stream of US dollar income.  And apparently a majority of the milquetoasts in mukluks north of our border are down with that.

Canada, as of now, shows no signs of anything resembling a Trump-esque movement to defenestrate the apocalyptic greenies, or shut down the asinine regulations that prevent the flow of hydrocarbons.  No, it’s double down on stupid time in Alberta.

Why should we care?  Because, under Trump, we see an approach to energy that is unique in the western world.  PDJT believes in all forms of energy from all sources, all flowing to market with minimal restriction.  And Trump aggressively supports energy independence for our homeland.

We deplorables rejoiced with Trump a few weeks ago, when the first supertanker loaded with tar sands crude, exported from the USA, docked in Dubai.  Imagine: North American crude so inexpensive that even the Sons of the Desert cannot produce their own for less.

But the majority of other western nations disagree with Trump’s approach, and often vehemently so:  They prefer “environmentally-sensitive” energy, with sources controlled by sovereign governments, and prices fixed so high as to discourage “excess” consumption and economic growth out here  where all we deplorables live.  Do not lose sight of this fact while you are celebrating the new status of the USA as a net energy exporter:  We do not share that blessing with Canada, nor most of the EU nations.

Here’s an article by Canadian journalist Rex Murphy that tells this sad tale.  Murphy is a Major in the Royal Canadian Mounted Snark Police, and writes sarcastic social criticism with a skill equal to that of H.L. Mencken or Sam Clemens.  Murphy is one of my role models.  Read on and see why:

Rex Murphy: In pipeline wars, Trudeau stands as always with Paris, never Alberta … The oilsands are as a pinprick in the world’s energy production, yet as the eco Furies paint them, they are Armageddon’s launch pad


The clash between B.C. and Alberta goes a lot deeper than the current headlines.

At least 10 or 20 years of ruthlessly organized, internationally endowed, wildly overblown scare propaganda against the Canadian oil industry, most especially as symbolized by the Fort McMurray oilsands project, has preceded it. The shielding umbrella under which the campaign has been waged, and the spurious ideological warrant behind it, has been the global warming fetish that locates the Earth’s imminent doom in the industrial economies of modern capitalism. Its foot soldiers have been a tormented assembly of every hard left groupuscule from the trendy Chavistas (Naomi Klein Inc.) to the fatuous (Bill Nye) to the grimly Calvinist Greens. At both ends they are an angry and a zealous lot, unscrupulous in their messaging and remorselessly uncompromising in their aims: shut down oil, cost to the world be damned.

Alberta, in particular, has been their toy. They have had 20 years to spread the message that Alberta’s oil, and Fort McMurray in deep particular, are both trigger and emblem of the coming catastrophe, that the hundreds of thousands who toil in the oil sands are as the orcs of Mordor moving ever closer to returning the Earth to Darkness and working Nature’s ruin.

No other state or province, and no other single project has borne the weight of calumny and accusation as have Alberta and the oil sands. No campaigns against projects in China, India, the Middle East, the U.S. or Latin America have been of even near duration or intensity as their relentless crusade against Fort McMurray. The oil sands are as a pinprick in the world’s energy production, yet as the eco-Furies paint them, they are Armageddon’s launch pad.

When, despite protest, propaganda, misrepresentation and chronic interference, the oil sands project did move ahead, when, despite the “infinite regress” (C. Cosh) of environmental assessment and reassessment, it lurched to production, clearly novel tactics had to be summoned, the campaign reframed.

Enter the pipeline frenzy. The innocent pipeline as Destroyer of Worlds. Once oil was there to be delivered, there arose the intractable opposition to every and any pipeline, turned to any point of the compass, within Canada or outside, coming out of Alberta. The professional petrophobes had failed to keep the oil in the ground; now they determined to landlock it in Alberta.

They couldn’t stop the oil from being harvested, so they would turn Alberta into an energy jail.

Delay and obstruction are activists’ favoured munitions, as seen in so many other pipelines and projects. Petronas and its $36-billion project was procrastinated into oblivion. Energy East was cancelled over ever-extended regulations. Stall, freeze, regulate, litigate, occupy and demonstrate — anything that slows progress or jams an operation — if it’s the oil sands, all’s on the table. Obama speciously dawdled for his whole two terms on Keystone. Fortunately, on that one Mr. Trump was more prompt.

The tactics change, the game remains the same — stop Alberta and its “toxic” world-ruinous oil sands. It is in this context we should view recent events, and the emergence of the Alberta-B.C. clash.

Two decades of incessant campaign and propaganda have had a cumulative effect — an abiding weight of preconception and indisposition against any fair reading of Alberta’s dilemma. It lubricates the singular and farcical association of the oil sands and the green nightmare of CO2 doom.

And it supplies the backdrop for the political maneuvering of B.C. Premier John Horgan and his Green Council of Three, the shameless demand for yet another environmental assessment — the most transparent political ploy since Dalton McGuinty in Ontario cancelled two gas plants to leverage an election vote.

It should also work to remind people that when Mr. Trudeau endlessly parrots the formula of the “balance between the environment and the economy” it is not a balance he has any personal familiarity or experience with. On how many of his incessant travels has he spoken up for Alberta’s industry, or, equally to the point, condemned the concert of environmental groups making a career out of opposition to Alberta? He has had the choice of venues and the world’s ear. How many times even within Canada? Has there even been one national address on Alberta’s plight — after the price downturn, after the inferno that ravaged Fort McMurray, after the fight of capital and companies from the oilsands? No. Contrast that with his interminable rhapsodies on carbon taxes and climate change.

And so it is that with the latest salvo from B.C., Premier Rachel Notley pushes on alone.

She may have thought she had a deal with Justin Trudeau on “social licence” but she never did —  just a treacle of insincere bromides, verbal goo to serve a moment’s press, forgotten before the camera lights dimmed. Her erstwhile partner in “the balance” hovers blandly above the contest, even as a fracture in the Confederation threatens.

Oh, the Trudeau government has approved the pipeline. Mr. Trudeau has said so himself as recently as Thursday in San Francisco. How lethargic though are his iterations of that approval, passionless to the point of coma. Where’s his presence on the issue? Where’s the prime ministerial voice on its relation to the national interest?  Where’s his rebuke to the grandstanding in B.C.? He’s been stronger lobbying Jeff Bezos on Amazon for Toronto than the country or the world on the oil sands.

A province that fed the national economy during rough times is having rough times itself. Return the favour, serve the national interest, and declare the time for obstruction, assessments and political theatre is over. Alberta should not have to keep selling its resource at a blinding discount because the prime minister shivers over the thought of a backlash from Greenpeace, the World Wildlife Fund, or a frown from the one-member, one-cause party in the House of Commons.

The Trudeau government it is clear, from the mouth of its leader, and the cast of its advisers, and the character of its ministers on this file, devotes far more sympathy to those who warn of oil, fear global collapse and participate in global campaigns against it, than the opposite. They are ParisPeople more than CalgaryPeople, more Rio than Fort Mac. The IPCC will never convene in Edmonton.

— SafeSpace —

Tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Oil Is Still “Evil” In Canada; Should We Lease Trump To Ottawa To Enlighten Baby Trudeau?

  1. Uriel says:

    Not sure where to start with this one SafeSpace still laughing over the wording. But I agree environmentalists are the bane of oil companies though in all fairness some of the more important safeguards would not have happened had they not been pushing. Still they do tend to go overboard. Wonder if anyone has checked out how some countries have provided animal crossovers and such…or made studies on the safety of well taken care of pipelines and how animals have been affected? Needless to say, all these “whoseits” who complain about energy are also some of the biggest hypocrites using lots of airplane rides and oodles of cars in order to get places instead of using the highways of internet. Guess they don’t realize that free enterprise has provided new improved ways to go from point A to B without using a lot of petrol or hundreds and thousands of other things. Or that those pipelines have provided a lot of the gidgets and gadgets that make those highways possible. Maybe they should also have to check the next time they go to a grocery, pharmacy, bank, office, doctor’s office, hospital yada yada at just how much those pipelines help bring about products they use every day. Geez some people are so dumb.

  2. Whitetop says:

    Uriel, all you have to do is look at algorezeera to see the hypocrisy of the environmentalist. The environmental VP turned to making as much money off his fraud climate change after he lost his bid for the WH. Large footprint estate, owns his own jet which leaves a large carbon footprint. Liberals look to his kind for leadership.
    Pipelines are the safest form of transportation for hydrocarbons. Warren Buffett and his BNSF RR had several wrecks hauling oil but that never gets any press. One only has to look at the record of the Alyeska PL to know you can construct and operate a pipeline in a fragile environment without disasters.

    • SafeSpace says:

      Thanks, Whitetop, for your comments. True that pipelines are far and away the safest and least environmentally risky way to transport crude. Buffett’s trains have a nasty habit of derailing in urban areas … and are a high-value terrorist target.

      Besides their hatred of any extracted petroleum, the greenies additionally oppose Alberta tar sands crude because it has a high sulfur content. Never mind that refining minimizes that, as do modern industrial combustion burners (I used to work for an engineering firm that built exactly such burners, for power generation use).

Don't be bashful leave a comment and let us know what you think - Please note our Comment Policy (Please keep all comments on topic and relevant to the discussion. Thank You. )