Credit where credit is due, U.S. President Donald Trump’s Venezuelan raid and kidnapping has accomplished one important thing: There was hardly a word in the media about the Epstein Files most of the day yesterday!
Now comes the important Canadian question, though: Can the fallout from the raid also get someone to build another pipeline for Alberta?
Never one to let a good crisis go to waste, Danielle Smith seems to have sent an email to a few reporters yesterday saying, as The Canadian Press quoted it, “recent events surrounding Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro emphasize the importance that we expedite the development of pipelines to diversify our oil export markets.”
Naturally, Alberta’s premier said this includes a pipeline to the coast of British Columbia, a region where a lot of people for a lot of reasons don’t want to see any such thing.
This was inevitable, of course, the usual suspects on social media had been saying the same thing in a variety of ways for several hours before Ms. Smith jumped on the bandwagon.
And as these things go, in addition to being predictable, it’s a relatively harmless bit of advocacy by Canada’s best-placed fossil fuel industry lobbyist.
After all, if the Venezuelan armed forces had, say, sunk an American aircraft carrier, or if Chinese paratroops had dropped in to rescue Mr. Maduro, or if Chevron had announced a new oilsands plant in the Orinoco Belt, Ms. Smith would presumably have said exactly the same thing.
In Ms. Smith’s world, every day is a good day to start a new pipeline somewhere, just as no day is a good day to raise the minimum wage. This is just the way things are in Alberta in the early 21st Century.
The most significant problem for Ms. Smith’s pipeline demands is that it’s going to be impossible to find a private-sector investor willing to pony up the dough to build one because pipelines are high-cost, long-term projects and the long-term market for Alberta bitumen is problematic, no matter what happens next in Venezuela.
It is always said in Conservative political circles that this is the fault of Liberal (and if necessary NDP) policies such as carbon taxes, consumer protection laws, environmental laws, and probably even woke books in school libraries. The real problem, of course, is the market.
The market for Alberta bitumen is problematic because most of the world is transitioning to cleaner energy – and in some places even clean energy – because it’s getting to be easier and cheaper to build and install than fossil fuel energy. Some parts of the Americas may have decided they’re going to be technology backwaters to prop up the fossil fuel industry, but how successful that project will be also remains to be seen.
As predicted in this space, publicly traded Canadian oilsands corporations’ stocks immediately came “under pressure” yesterday as a result of the raid. “Cenovus Energy Inc. and Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. were each down about five per cent and Suncor Energy Inc. dropped 1.4 per cent,” The Canadian Press reported. “Enbridge Inc., which operates a vast cross-border oil pipeline network that it plans to expand, and South Bow Corp., whose Keystone system ships crude to the U.S., each fell around three per cent.”
Environmental Defence said yesterday in a statement of its own that is hard to dispute, industry executives “know what is coming and are focused on profit-taking while they still can.”
As a result, as Premier Smith surely understands – because whatever she is, she isn’t a dope – the only way those pipelines she keeps demanding will ever get built is with money from taxes or hijacked pension funds.
Just watch: We will move quickly from arguing the U.S. raid on Venezuela shows the urgency of building a multi-million-pipeline to the West Coast, to blaming the lack of investment on the Liberals, to saying Ottawa is going to have to put up the money.
Throughout this entirely predictable strategy, the UCP will keep its thumb on the scale to encourage a frightening campaign for Alberta independence.
And if none of that works? Well, that’s what the Canada Pension Plan fund is for, isn’t it?
Meanwhile, last night the Epstein Files snuck back into the news, as the U.S. Department of Justice slow-walks the release of more documents.
Political pressure will build Stateside as a result, so another U.S. attack somewhere in the world is probably coming soon. It’ll have to be bigger than the last one, since Saturday’ has already been downgraded from an invasion, to an attack, to an incursion, to a raid. Next thing you know it’ll just be a visit from the cops.
After all, that dog won’t wag itself.
Another pipeline isn’t going to help Alberta sell their oil/tar. Currently most of Venezuela’s oil is sold to China and that can continue to be sold as is. To expand their markets will take a couple of decades. Some one has to rebuild the Venezuelan oil industry and it is doubtful American oil companies will donate billions of dollars to do so. A change in government, a revolution their investment could go down the drain. Canada has time to wait.
What Venezuela is selling is not so different from the tar Alberta digs up. It is doubtful there is going to be a lot more “tar/oil” coming from Venezuela.
It is funny, we have these massive forest fires in the summer, caused in part by climate change–hotter weather brings more forest fires, and Alberta wants to make things worse so corporations make more money while we the tax payers have to pay to fight the forest fires. Smith can say what she wants, but most people I know aren’t buying. We don’t need more forest fires.
Of course there is the happy thought the alleged criminal maybe found not guilty by a jury.
If trump and heggie want to run things from the USA, good luck with that. If Alberta were to actually seperate, trump may decide Smith has to go and install Heggie. I’d proceed very cam refully and by that I mean put your feet up, sniff around and wait to see what happens. Trump is after all 79, the mid terms are coming up, and we haven’t seen all of the Epstein files.
If Trump is simply wanted to control all of North and South America and continues to invade countries there is no reason to provide him with pipelines in advance. We would be better off to save our tax dollars and re build our military and perhaps pick up a few nuclear war heads. You don’t have to use them, but they’re a nice thing to have in your back pocket. Just ask Israel. I think they originally had about 10 nuclear bombs. I’m sure China, Russia and the U.S.A. would love to carve up the world and each have their own sphere of influence.
It is doubtful Trump will live much longer. Vance doesn’t have it to get elected as President and its going to be a whole different ball game in the U.S.A. The cost of living is going up there and many have lost their health care subsidies so many no longer have health care insurance. The U.S.A. is going to wind up looking like it did in the dirty 30s.
Yes, one unintended consequence of the leadership change in Venezuela imposed by the US is yet another reminder to Canada that our over reliance on the US market for our oil is not wise. So this will lead to more discussion about pipelines, especially to Asian markets, again.
Smith of course is happy to also get infront of this parade yet again, but the same issues and problems as before remain. In particular, they are resistance in BC and cost.
I am not so worried about the revival of Venezuelas decrepit oil industry as talk about it. After all, it will take around 50 to 150 billion of investment and 5 to 10 years to significantly increase production. As we should know, building an oil sands plant is not cheap and does not happen quickly. Also, despite enthusiasm of certain US politicians, many big US oil companies will be reluctant to jump back in there having lost billions in the past from nationalizations.
However more worry in Canada does sure help the more pipelines for Asian markets argument. I’m also not sure though who will pay for this. The Liberals may be more comfortable with pipelines now, but I suspect they still remember how little credit they got for paying for the last one. So I don’t think the Feds will be covering this one even if Smith threatens to hold her breath until she turns blue or something else.
Venezuela has the worlds LARGEST (proven) oil reserves. The fossil fuel industry is the most profitable industry in the history of the world and they’re sitting on years and years of cash flow from “record profits”. Trust me, they get the green light they’re going to be in Venezuela faster than you can say who’s Juan Guaido.
Being an alberta guy of a certain age I know a lot of fellas that work in the oil industry, some of them at a high level. They get presented the reality of the situation just like a private military contractor would; here’s your risks (potential) here’s your reward (guaranteed). One just has to weigh whether or not the bump in danger pay and travel pay is worth the possibility however remote you may be kidnapped. Time was that Canadians spent a lot of time in Venezuela before Chavismo, I can remember a guy who lived down the street from me who made a killing working in the oilfield in Venezuela in the early 90s, kidnapping and robbery were his chief worries there, from what I remember.
He still went.
As far as “past nationalization” they still see that infrastructure as theirs, not Venezuelas. Who do you think has been lobbying the US Government for 25 years ? Trust me. It’s not like the board of directors has to do it. They get the chance they’ll take it 150% of the time.
To be honest I don’t understand the push to Asia. If anything the NDP push to add value to the supply chain before we ship out of province seems like a better way to shore up profitability.
Even if we can build a pipeline on the north coast which; I honestly doubt it, what’s our guarantee Asian markets (China?) are going to build out their refinery capacity for our substandard product ? Just as a favour to us? If their refineries are already running at capacity with oil from other sources, how do we force them to take on ours as a priority ? The whole thing is nonsense. Is their an available glut of shipping tankers or will we be competing for those as well ? We all know what happens when demand increases without a corresponding change in supply… why do people let Danielle smith get away from saying this nonsensical garbage ?
Another excellent blog. Danielle Smith can jump, scream, and holler all she wants, but a pipeline to the British Columbia coast is not feasible. Low oil prices make it unviable, and no private investors will throw money at it. The environmental risks still linger. Blaming Mark Carney and David Eby will not fly. Danielle Smith thought she could win Donald Trump over, but alas, she wasted money going to meet with him in Florida, under the guise of her being on vacation. He isn’t interested in the oil from Alberta. Nobody likely is, because it is a substandard product, with an enormous cost to process. Donald Trump is trying to detract from his poor governing, as is Danielle Smith.
Greenland, here they come! Isn’t that what the pregnant wife of Stephen Miller/ex-employee of Elon Musk promised on social media, shortly before Elon and El Jefe broke bread for the first time since their acrimonious DOGE breakup? (Tsk, tsk, Katie. Watch the rumours.) It’s hard to say if the US government has turned into a poorly-written soap opera or bad reality TV, but the threat is real. From El Jefe’s rude racist jab about a one-dogsled country to Miller’s preposterous claim that Denmark has no right to Greenland, despite 300 years’ presence, it sure seems like provocation before the fact. It’s just a matter of time. Will they give it a week?
Note: DOGE, dog sleds, tails wagging dogs. Did none of these people have pets when they were growing up to tune them in? Dogs need to be fed, watered, walked, groomed and taken to the vet on schedule. If you don’t take care of your dogs and socialize them, they might turn feral and bite you in the butt. Some dogs have fleas.
Which O&G insiders have been selling stock? How about those mutual funds? Wait and see.
Two thoughts here.
First off, pipelines aren’t the issue, customers are. If the American refineries stop taking Alberta oil, there will be plenty of pipelines sitting empty. More than enough to get our oil to tidewater. These go through “enemy” territory but even Russia is able to ship gas through enemy territory during an actual war. Pipeline companies will be more than happy to ship Alberta product to tidewater in the USA. Where are the customers for all this oil? That’s the issue.
Secondly, pipeline companies don’t care about oil prices, customers for oil, any of it. These are the concerns of producers and shippers not pipeline companies. Pipelines are justified by long term shipping contracts. The producers will be reluctant to sign such agreements but the Government of Alberta now is taking royalties in kind and has the kind of volumes required to “justify” a pipeline. Stay tuned for a pipeline proposal backed by long term shipping agreements with the GoA.
“Alberta bitumen is problematic because the most of the world is transitioning to cleaner energy” It perhaps appears there is an extra “the” after because?
I too was amazed that Dingy was silent for so long on this one. I figured she would be all over this in a heartbeat as after killing people in emergency rooms, stopping vaccinations, and jumping over water main pipes in a single bound, what else would she do with her time other than bolster her pet project?
Fixed. Thanks. DJC
I swear, that woman is nothing but a bag of hair.
Did she not see the American Navy blockading the ports of Venezuela?
The USA gets an added benefit out of this. They get to pressure Canada even harder, pushing us to economic collapse. No oiligarchs are going to pay to build any facilities or pipelines for Canadian oil. So, we either bankrupt ourselves building it for this idiot while we’re losing money on the oil she’s already pumping–and if we build to the west coast, because we’re not selling the *them*, the USA will just blockade the ports and pirate any shipments to Asia or Europe.
We don’t need Alberta oil at this point other than building a refinery for ourselves so we don’t rely on the USA. What we *need* is to invest in refineries for anything extract-able, sensible national affordable housing, communications and transit plans for *everyone* to cool down the economic pressure when it comes and a national security plan that includes hypersonic missiles hidden underground (not nukes, too detectable) pointed straight at Washington with the caveat, “If we go, you go”
Love him or hate him, Nasrallah was right when he told the world, “The only thing that will stop these people is the strength of your weapons.”
There is no transparency at any level in the economy, and thus no possibility of rational assessments by the citizenry. All one needs to know is that we live in a socioeconomic matrix that includes billionaires and subsistence farmers. Homo sapiens sapiens has not been around long but for most of our brief time onstage we lived in small groups with almost entirely shared interests. And now we accept the notion that a desirable political outcome is an improved minimum wage while Peter Nygaard bootstraps himself into jailbait heaven. Silly.
@Murphy
While the USA keeps selling more and more weapons they can’t build because they don’t have the manufacturing capacity. Just wait until their starving vassals realize that no weapons are coming then start demand their billions back from the shakedown while the USA’s opponents look on in glee.
That’s not gonna end well. Ask Athens.
Hello DJC and fellow commenters,
It looks as if Donald Trump, at least for the moment, is supporting the vice-president, ?now acting president? of Venezuela. He also seems to be saying that she needs to follow U S policy and that, if she doesn’t, she will be ousted, too. That suggests to me that nothing much will change in Venezuela with respect to lack of political stability. I wonder, then, if U S oil companies will be interested in extracting Venezuelan crude.
As for another pipeline, do the so-called Asian markets have the ability to refine “western Canadian select”? If they can refine it, do they have enough refinery capacity to absorb the amount that Alberta/Canada would have to sell to make a pipeline at all financially viable? If not, does that mean that Canada would have to refine it to some degree?
It seems to me that there a lot of steps that Canada would have to go through to make sure that there are actual markets for our heavy crude. At the moment, the twinned TMX is not making any profit. The substantial debt of the pipeline is carried by a separate ?shell? company which, I have read, was set up under Chrystia Freeland. So, if an existing pipeline isn’t making any profit, why would an additional pipeline make any sense, especially if the price of oil might drop even further if this touted Venezuelan oil ever comes back on the market and, presumably, would lead to lower prices since more crude would be available.
I am not an expert in any way on oil and the price of oil, but these are questions that come to mind. Danielle Smith does not seem to have made an economic case for an additional pipeline, but perhaps she has explained the rationale and I haven’t read about it.
I don’t at the moment, I don’t see any financial benefit to building an additional taxpayer-funded pipeline. Additional environmental damage to northern Alberta doesn’t seem to be worth it either.
DC: “The market for Alberta bitumen is problematic because the most of the world is transitioning to cleaner energy …”
Does Alberta’s oilsands industry have enough runway left to support expansion to fill another pipeline for several decades? That’s the billion dollar question.
Globally, the transition has not even started yet.
Fossil fuels and emissions are still growing and have yet to peak.
Transition means transition AWAY FROM A towards B. There is no transition away from A if A is increasing.
AI: “Many mainstream energy analysts and organizations have indeed frequently projected that ‘peak oil demand’ is imminent, only to revise or postpone that date as global oil demand has continued to grow, particularly after economic recoveries or due to resilient demand in developing economies.”
The timing of the oil demand peak is still uncertain.
In the IEA’s Current Policies Scenario (CPS), oil and gas demand do not peak before 2050.
“Demand for oil rises to 113 MMbpd by 2050, mainly due to its increased use in emerging market and developing economies for road transport, petrochemical feedstocks, and aviation.”
Solar and wind deployment “faces integration challenges that slow further growth”.
IEA: Stated Policies Scenario (STEPS)
“Oil demand peaks at 102 MMbpd around 2030 before GRADUALLY declining.”
Even in a world where global demand is declining, there will still be a need for exploration for new reserves — or expansion of current operations — as old reservoirs run dry.
The oilsands industry is capital intensive with high upfront costs. But once those costs are paid off, oilsands mines can operate relatively cheaply for decades. Which gives the oilsands an advantage over U.S. shale oil, whose costs are rising.
While U.S. shale oil costs go up, oilsands costs are going down.
Cheaper, more profitable oilsands operations in Canada are likely to outlast U.S. shale oil.
“Oil prices are down. It means something different in Canada vs. the U.S.” (CBC, 2025)
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/oil-down-canada-us-1.7530208
China’s imports of Canadian oil are growing.
Asian nations like China, South Korea, and India are building more heavy oil refineries. Not something command economies like China undertake unless they plan to run them for decades.
(cont)
2) Rystad Energy’s analysis, among others, suggests that previous forecasts of more rapid decline in oil demand may be optimistic, due to the lack of cheaper and better alternatives in several sectors:
“Stronger for longer: Oil demand to grow in the mid-term, future trajectory depends on clean tech and policy” (Rystad Energy, 2024)
“Oil demand will rise further in the medium term, according to Rystad Energy research and modeling, as low-carbon alternatives are not yet sufficiently developed or economically competitive to offset the growing demand for transportation and industrial services. Rystad Energy’s latest Oil Macro Scenarios report explains how the 13 sectors that rely on oil will face a more complex transition than expected just a couple of years ago. These findings underscore the notion that oil demand remains sticky and the process of substituting the capital stock associated with oil consumption will be complex and lengthy due to the competitive advantages of oil in multiple transportation sectors and industrial processes.
“As oil demand is likely to stay on an upward trajectory in the medium term, the probability of a fast transition away from oil decreases unless we witness breakthroughs in those low-carbon energy carriers that can technically and economically substitute oil. Our updated mid-term forecast should bring a dose of realism to the oil transition narrative, alongside a renewed sense of urgency to explore and invest even more – wherever it makes economic sense – in clean tech and renewables, to achieve those breakthroughs.
“Our research confirms that oil demand remains sticky and it will take time and resources to switch the capital stock associated with its consumption.”
https://www.rystadenergy.com/news/stronger-for-longer-oil-demand-to-grow-in-the-mid-term-future
Guyana. The major US oil companies are investing heavily in Guyana, which is a relatively stable country with fewer risks to capital and employees. It’s also conveniently located for transport to US refineries. They aren’t all that interested in Venezuela unless the US administration offers up political stability and military protections for infrastructure. Trump, as usual, has his head stuck in the 1980’s. Or stuck somewhere.
Interesting stuff, Geoffrey, and I suspect most of us reading this blog aren’t in a position to challenge either the IEA’s forecast or Rystad energy’s analysis. To my mind, though, they leave some questions unanswered.
First, the up front costs of oil sands development are huge. You’re correct that once these are paid off (and exactly how long does that take, and under what market conditions?), they are only moderately expensive to run. Nonetheless, they are still expensive relative to oil reserves in other parts of the world. The price of Western Canada Select (WCS, the oil blend produced from the oil sands) has always been significantly lower than the benchmark West Texas Intermediate (WTI) price per barrel. Currently the WCS price is about $46 per barrel, while WTI is at just under $58 per barrel.
The IEA forecasts you cite, quite aside from the assumptions that underpin them, are forecasts of global demand. They don’t really provide a hard basis for predictions about future prices for specific oil sources.
So let’s turn back to Alberta and the future of bitumen-based oil production. The first thing we should note is the problem of production costs. As you point out, start-up costs for oil sands production facilities are very high (and quite often disappear into a fog of oil company accounting practices and invisible but very real taxpayer subsidies for such operations). So, it should be noted, are the externalities (costs such as environmental damage that are not born by the oil companies). The environmental costs of bitumen production are immense, something the Klein government acknowledged when they designated Northeastern Alberta a “an economic sacrifice zone”.
The answer to these problems is supposed to be pipelines to tidewater (pipelines being Premier Smith’s universal remedy for what ails us). The problem is that these too are incredibly expensive both in construction costs and in further environmental costs. The last pipeline to the West Coast was abandoned in mid-construction by the builder, Kinder Morgan, when construction cost began to rise and projected revenues couldn’t justify the project. The only reason the pipeline was completed was that the taxpayers, represented in this case by the Liberal government of Justin Trudeau, opted to assume these costs.
Private sector investors just aren’t seeing pipelines to the West Coast as viable economic opportunities, which is why Smith and a chorus of energy industry lobbyists want the taxpayers to foot the bill.
The Alberta government continually flirts with the threat of separation from the rest of Canada, and with ripping off a healthy chunk of the Canada Pension Plan’s assets. That this same government should be now be demanding that Canadian taxpayers should underwrite more of these projects isn’t ironic, it’s laughable.
Clearly oil and gas aren’t Alberta’s only resources, Danielle Smith appears to have an inexhaustible reserve of brass.
I think you nailed it.
The mission of our neoliberal federal government — and the O&G lobbyist occupying the Premier’s Office — is to prop up the O&G industry at all costs.
For the benefit of Big Oil, its mostly foreign shareholders, and the Big Banks that back them.
The Liberals and Conservatives both cater to Corporate Canada. Serving corporate interests, not the public interest.
Hence, our governments funnel billions of public dollars into O&G projects, CCS, clean-up and reclamation (RStar!), and even perhaps SMRs in the oilsands.
So it does not really matter what the costs of oilsands “development” is. The price of oil is immaterial. Standard economics does not apply. Our industry-captured governments — of all stripes — will download as much of the costs onto taxpayers as possible. The O&G industry is profitable and viable only because it externalizes its costs.
Privatize the profits, socialize the costs. The O&G industry’s business model.
AB’s oil & gas industry has barely started to fund its clean-up liabilities: north of $260 billion*. How much of that bill will our “golden goose” industry foist upon taxpayers?
*2018 internal Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) figure.
Pegged at $320 billion (2025) after adjusting for inflation by Martin Olszynski, UofC associate professor and chair in Energy Resources and Sustainability.
One third of a trillion dollars. Who’s going to pay?
“Drill & Dash: The Oil & Gas Liability Crisis with Martin Olszynski” (Energy vs Climate podcast, 23-Oct-2025)
FFS…someone give Smith a shovel and let her start digging. She might get from Conklin to Wandering River in a couple/5 years.
Tell Danielle Smith she knows where can stuff her poisonous, tar sands oil. We do not want the toxic bitumen in beautiful British Columbia. Remember the Kalamazoo.
The US presidunce is said to be “transactional” because he prefers to get things over and done with quickly—like the fracas in Caracas: he “got” Venezuelan President Maduro and his wife in an nighttime commando raid, and he will smear them with every heinous allegation imaginable— all very perfunctory: conveniently, tRump can continue the riff he’s long deployed against all Latinos and recently aimed at a certain, quazi-legal immigrant, a Mr Kilmer Abrego Garcia, without having to remember the particulars of Garcia’s illegal deportation—the series of court-orders forcing the administration to return him to the US, subsequent injunctions to secure his release despite the DoJ pursuing spurious human-smuggling charges against him, &c— and, best of all, without having to remember or pronounce his name. After all, what good’s prejudice if tRump can’t use it indiscriminately?
tRump’s National Security Advisor during term 1.0, John Bolton, describes in his book, The Room Where it Happened, that The Donald typically arrives late to the office and asks, ‘Well, what should we do today?’ Although mythologized as illustrious native acuity and rapier-speed grasp of issues the instant they arise, it is rather symptomatic of “FTD”, or Formal Thought Dysfunction that disables strategic thinking, which is why tRump is only ever tactical —that is, engaging one thing at a time, like closing a real estate deal, which is then forgotten. There’s only one way it can work: minimally he has to be the the only beneficiary, always and forever the only “winner” and the other party always—and probably forever—the “loser.” That’s why he assiduously only ‘plays cards’ with those who “don’t have any cards”: he’s incapable of keeping score so always winning makes it easy for him to ‘remember’ these tactical one-offs and even easier to forget and delegate to his secretary of sickofanatic apologetics (and creepiest madman in the world), Stephen “Muskuk” Miller who rationalized the many illegalities of Maduro’s kidnapping as mere philosophical “niceties” literally trumped by the “Iron Rule” of history that might makes right.
If tRump’s trite understanding of American-owned foreign manufactories reshoring to the USA as a benefit of his ill-considered, scattershot tariffs on imports from just about every country, we may infer that he hasn’t a clue what to do with the dilapidated infrastructure that exports Venezuela’s massive reservoir of heavy oil that he claims he’s “running” now. As usual, the only thing running in the US administration right now is his mouth. His fire-hoser threats against inevitable protest from Venezuela’s Latin neighbours on the shores of his “Gulf of America” is his lifelong field of expertise. Nobody is surprised that Canada and Greenland are on his list. And while the world concludes that he’s really crossed a bridge too far this time, his rejoinder is as ready as it ever was—and always is.
DJC makes the point that tRump at least succeeded in distracting attention away from the Epstein Files for a whole day. What will he do tomorrow or the next day?—because at least one thing’s certain: the Files ain’t going away. In fact, the sordid details are only beginning to out and whole islands of female litigants are cobbling every corroborative morsel into civil—and possibly criminal—actions that will dog tRump to his dying day. Jeez! There’s only 190-odd more countries to threaten: how long can he keep it up before he runs out?
My own question is, when are we gonna hear what tRump’s nickname for Maduro is?
Whatever or whenever, I wonder what poor Danielle Smith’s gonna do. She’s not leader of history’s most powerful nation. It’s not like she can threaten any nation weaker than her aspired Diagolon dream state—not even Canada. Unlike the prospect of kidnapping and holding the PM for ransom until she gets half the CPP poke, unilateral declaration of independent Alberta is always an option. Unfortunately, since The Donald doesn’t really know what he’s gonna do—except, naturally, what he always does—, she can’t know either. The Fracas in Caracas is spoiling her Rumble in Rupert.
But the real question always was: who’s gonna pay for the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline?
“The Fracas in Caracas is spoiling her Rumble in Rupert.” Well done, Scotty! DJC
Venezuelan oil will probably cost more than our oilsands oil for years, by which time Trump will be out of office, in jail, or dead, like
his tariffs. Also we will be transitioning to electric.
China uses 4 billion tons of coal per year. India is second at 966 million. The US is third at 731 million. The top three consumers of natural gas are the US, which uses twice as much as both China, and Russia. The US uses 19-20 million barrels of oil per day. China is second in consumption at about 75% of US use. India is third at about 25% of US consumption.
I suspect that Smith is getting ready for her exit strategy from public life. Hanging out with separatists used to be fun, but now it’s reached the point of it was all fun and games, and then someone lost an eye. There is no doubt in my somewhat questionable mind that Carney has enlisted some very powerful and particularly violent persons for the purpose of a widespread housecleaning of the Maple-MAGA types. I can imagine that during Carney’s recent visit to Europe to discuss matters of defending NATO against one of its own members, Carney has approached certain entities in regard to assisting Alberta in dealing with the FreeDUMB crazies that are still roaming the land. These people are not just crazies; they are a fifth column engaged in acts of treason. Once the shooting starts between Denmark and the US over Greenland — where the US attacks the Danes — this will lead to a sea change in the handling of the Maple-MAGA types. Maybe some more will get the message and make a fast getaway before it’s too late. Suspect if Smith keeps cavorting with these unsavoury characters, she may find herself in an unfortunate situation.
To me the biggest problem is that no one in Ottawa is actually governing.
In the file of separation for example, Danielle Smith is just moving along and doing whatever she wants about it and nothing is said, nothing is questioned other than courageous citizens, like the Forever Canada, that organize by themselves and still she spits them up and that is it. Where is the Federal Government? Where are the constitutional lawyers? There is nothing?
With the case of Trump and his threats to Denmark, Mexico, Greenland, Panama and whatever else Trump chooses to attack, where is our prime minister? Does he have no balls? Is he scared? Yes of course there are consequences when one takes principled decisions, but believe me, the consequences of nothing are way worse.
Danielle Smith and his Maga friend need a wake up call and better get moving before it is too late.
Is Trump going to attack us if we confront him? Well let him. Sometimes life can be very trying, just remember the second world war. Hitler used the same strategies and, like we are doing now, we pretend it is easier to just get a trade deal.
Good luck with that. Trump has his focus on Greenland and Canada and let us not just ignore it because it will happen if we embolden this nut case.
Just a couple of notes here as there have been some interesting updates coming out of Venezuela.
Number one and perhaps most interesting is it is rumoured Delcey Rodriguez, the vice president, negotiated the surrender of Maduro in order to appease the orange dipshit and retain Chavismo.
There are also competing reports that suggest she’s dealing with more of a traditional palace coup and is unaware of where allegiances lay, which would explain why she’s playing conciliatory games with the Americans.
Also interesting to note no mention of fentanyl in the indictment, and I’ve heard folks who know better than me say the machine gun charge would be a hard to convinct an American on, let alone the head of a state.
It definitely reads as a bit of theatre, placating Donnie obviously had a lot to do with it (reportedly his main motivation was all the dancing Maduro was doing, he felt he was being personally mocked. Seriously)
A third suggestion I’ve seen get a bit less traction ; Delta force just is that good at combined forces operations. Reportedly Maduros wife had to tell him to get dressed, he had about three minutes. When you have the ability to knock down key military, energy, and communications infrastructure for a time, you are effectively making your opponent blind. Reportedly those BuK systems don’t work super reliably in a blackout, there’s also the fog of war, confusion of orders / chain of command to consider. Just because you know an attack is coming doesn’t necessarily mean you’re going to be ready for it.
So in the end,no regime change. The vice president has been sworn in as interim president, she retains control over the police and military, the Bolivarian revolution persists. The concessions to allow American development in Venezuela had already been agreed to by Maduro, it simply wasn’t enough for trump the narcissist. He had to stop that mocking dancing!
What is interesting is that it would appear the oil is coming back on stream either way, which does not bode well for Yankee Doodle Dani and her yapping caucus of idiots.
Bird: Buks are old technology, although they’re still capable of knocking down aircraft. Personally, I suspect someone was paid to turn off the lights. That’s the simplest explanation. Be that as it may, according to Krugman this morning, the size of Venezuela’s oil deposits are exaggerated to the tune of two thirds, the equivalent of 200 billion barrels, a political decision made by Hugo Chavez’s government. Interesting if true. DJC
I’m sure Paul has some basis for his claim but I’m sure he also has no idea how true it is. People have been saying the same things about the Saudis since the early 00s.
What I do think is interesting is how chavismo is seen as this outbreak of dishonesty and corruption when Venezuelan society pre-Chavez was both wildly unequal and corrupt, but also being bled dry by American oil companies, who surely, have all motivation to be truthful.