Alberta's climate change strategy targets carbon, coal, emissions
Source: CBC News
Alberta's climate change strategy includes a tax on carbon, a cap on oilsands emissions, a phasing out of coal-fired electricity and an emphasis on wind power.
"Our goal is to become one of the world's most progressive and forward-looking energy producers," said Premier Rachel Notley. "We are turning the page on the mistaken policies of the past, policies that have failed to provide the leadership our province needed."
But the strategy will not be cheap and will be paid for not only by industry, but by ordinary Albertans.
If the policy is approved, the price of gas at the pump will jump by 4.7 cents per litre and home heating costs will rise by $320 per year by 2017 and $470 by 2018.
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/alberta-climate-change-newser-1.3330153
Quite a change in Alberta.
= new reply since forum marked as read
You must understand, the biggest bottleneck to moving oil from Canada to Texas was from Steele City Nebraska to Cushing Oklahoma to the Texas Coast. Pipelines between those areas were completed this year (2015 for Steele City to Cushing section, The Cushing to Texas coast was finished in January 2014). This was the big bottleneck and these sections are completed and pumping oil:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline
This is in addition to the massive set of pipelines between Nebraska and Texas that already existed before the completion of the above pipelines:
http://www.propublica.org/article/pipelines-explained-how-safe-are-americas-2.5-million-miles-of-pipelines
Notice how MASSIVE are the pipelines is between Nebraska and Texas. The whole purpose of Keystone was to get oil from North Dakota to Nebraska and then to Texas as can be seen in this Map of the proposed route:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/business/keystone-xl-map/
In addition to added pipelines, you have increase capacity to move the oil by rail and barge:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-01-23/buffett-s-burlington-northern-among-winners-in-obama-rejection-of-pipeline
In fact if you look at the red line above, that line was completed to the lower end of the "Upper Mississippi River" by 2010. Thus by 2010 you could ship some of this oil by barge down the Mississippi River.
Now, Burlington Northern also expanded its ability to transport oil by rail
http://www.bnsf.com/customers/oil-gas/shipping/shipping-crude.html
In many ways with Burlington Northern buying tankers and improving its tracts between North Dakota and Cushing (and the completion of the more Eastern Keystone in 2010) you have sufficient capacity to move the oil from both Canada and North Dakota. Thus there is really no need to do the last leg of the Keystone and thus was cancelled.
Please note, you can make the Argument that the Keystone pipeline that has been cancelled, was never needed in the first place, but it is what Environmentalist concentrated on. I suspect that was its true purpose, to tie up opposition on that long leg, thus freeing the other legs from scruity. Sorry, once you look at what WAS completed and that what has been completed will deliver most if not all of the oil the cancelled Keystone part would have done. you can make a good argument this final leg of the Keystone was always intended as a diversion so no one looked at the other parts of the pipeline.
