Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
eyeball

Tech Resources pulls plug on Frontier mine.

Recommended Posts

Good news for the planet even if Tech moves to Saudi Arabia, Canada is one more step closer to going in the right direction of history. Yes I realize there would have been jobs jobs jobs but the mine they were planning would also have emitted CO2 for the next 40 years.  It's patently that clear the fossil fuel industry in Canada along with Canada's governments are simply incapable and or unwilling to meet any kind of emission targets in the near mid-term or distant future.

The only solution is constant environmental pressure to oppose every single development that flies in the face of the world's emission targets.

Of course everyone is pointing fingers in every direction casting blame but as Tech made it clear their reason for withdrawing is the nature of the debate around climate change in Canada generally.  

Quote

The company is “not merely shying away from controversy,” Lindsay says in the letter.

“The nature of our business dictates that a vocal minority will almost inevitably oppose specific developments,” he writes. “We are prepared to face that sort of opposition.

“Frontier, however, has surfaced a broader debate over climate change and Canada’s role in addressing it. It is our hope that withdrawing from the process will allow Canadians to shift to a larger and more positive discussion about the path forward.

https://globalnews.ca/news/6586908/teck-resources-withdraws-bid-frontier-mine/

 

Perhaps Tech Resources could be convinced to stick around and invest their in developing emission free power generating technology instead.

Edited by eyeball
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Perhaps Tech Resources could be convinced to stick around and invest their in developing emission free power generating technology instead.

Or perhaps they could do both.  Focus on the present and the future!  What a concept.  Alas, I know I know, only China has the alarmists permission to pollute significantly over the next decade or two.  Only China is allowed to pursue such mines.  Only China is allowed to pursue rare earth materials etc.  This from the sane mouth that pretends selling oil to China is a threat.  God the hypocrisy! :lol:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Good news for the planet even if Tech moves to Saudi Arabia, Canada is one more step closer to going in the right direction of history. Yes I realize there would have been jobs jobs jobs but the mine they were planning would also have emitted CO2 for the next 40 years.  It's patently that clear the fossil fuel industry in Canada along with Canada's governments are simply incapable and or unwilling to meet any kind of emission targets in the near mid-term or distant future.

The only solution is constant environmental pressure to oppose every single development that flies in the face of the world's emission targets.

Of course everyone is pointing fingers in every direction casting blame but as Tech made it clear their reason for withdrawing is the nature of the debate around climate change in Canada generally.  

Perhaps Tech Resources could be convinced to stick around and invest their in developing emission free power generating technology instead.

At one time most of the big oil and mining companies were pretty much contributing heavily to this so called global warming but those days are now long gone. Hello! Try opening up a mine or to try and produce oil in this country. There are so many rules and regulations and taxes in effect that there should be very little worry about more greenhouse gases going into the air and causing more of a rise in CO2 levels.  After a mine is closed trees are planted on that now shut down mine. No doubt the same thing is done in the closure of some oil fields also. 

Canada comes nowhere near to what the developing countries are doing to global warming. Countries such as China and India alone must be creating enough CO2 to make up for dozens of countries like Canada and what Canada puts into the atmosphere. Sure there will always be some pollution happening, but come on, eh, it's not all that bad. It's not like hundreds of millions of acres in Canada that are being exploited all at one time.To anyone who would like to see thousands of jobs go down the tube is only thinking about themselves, and that is what you are doing here, as far as I am concerned. You appear to not give a dam about jobs for Canadians but you probably have no problem with bringing in hundreds of thousands of more new immigrants into Canada who will be contributing even more CO2 into the air. 

When these hundreds of thousands of new immigrants come to Canada there will be more CO2 added to the air. But that is probably okay with you, eh? Ya-ya I know, I am a racist for saying this. Your favorite word to throw at me, right?  ;)  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Shady said:

Or perhaps they could do both.  Focus on the present and the future!  What a concept.  Alas, I know I know, only China has the alarmists permission to pollute significantly over the next decade or two.  Only China is allowed to pursue such mines.  Only China is allowed to pursue rare earth materials etc.  This from the sane mouth that pretends selling oil to China is a threat.  God the hypocrisy! :lol:

When it comes to hypocrisy, liberals like him are always quite capable of meeting that goal of hypocrisy with out any problems at all. Liberalism and liberals??? They really do have a problem with speaking before they think. Just saying. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Shady said:

Or perhaps they could do both.  Focus on the present and the future!  What a concept.

Well sure Canada could stand an investment in increasing our refinery capacity to meet our own needs as we wind down fossil fuel dependency.  But there's no need for developing more Tar Sands at all.

Quote

Alas, I know I know, only China has the alarmists permission to pollute significantly over the next decade or two.  Only China is allowed to pursue such mines.  Only China is allowed to pursue rare earth materials etc.  This from the sane mouth that pretends selling oil to China is a threat.  God the hypocrisy! :lol:

No hypocrisy here I've consistently maintained that dealing with China, as with any dictatorship in any capacity as both buyers or sellers, is a threat.  The real hypocrites are those who want to appear as if they're punishing China for it's shitty economic ethos and practices while selling it all the oil we possibly can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Well sure Canada could stand an investment in increasing our refinery capacity to meet our own needs as we wind down fossil fuel dependency.  But there's no need for developing more Tar Sands at all.

No hypocrisy here I've consistently maintained that dealing with China, as with any dictatorship in any capacity as both buyers or sellers, is a threat.  The real hypocrites are those who want to appear as if they're punishing China for it's shitty economic ethos and practices while selling it all the oil we possibly can.

The world will never be able to totally do without fossil fuels. What kind of a bloody world are you living in? The more tar sands development the better for Canada and Canadians. A few thousand square miles of land here and there being used to develop oil and minerals in Canada is not going to cause the earth to come to an end. It just will not create the tens of thousands of new jobs for Canadians. As I said to you in another above post. The more new immigrants that we keep bringing into Canada by the hundreds of thousands every year they will only add more CO2 into your precious environment. All my common sense and logic racism that I keep trying to promote here has to be getting to you by now, eh? Come on? Tell me that more new hundreds of thousands of new immigrants every year is not causing more pollution into the atmosphere. You have to agree with that, right? If you want Canada to stay as green as possible, then you should be fighting for less immigration. Makes a world of common sense and logic to me, don't you think? Hello! 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Good news for the planet even if Tech moves to Saudi Arabia, Canada is one more step closer to going in the right direction of history. Yes I realize there would have been jobs jobs jobs but the mine they were planning would also have emitted CO2 for the next 40 years.  It's patently that clear the fossil fuel industry in Canada along with Canada's governments are simply incapable and or unwilling to meet any kind of emission targets in the near mid-term or distant future.

The only solution is constant environmental pressure to oppose every single development that flies in the face of the world's emission targets.

Of course everyone is pointing fingers in every direction casting blame but as Tech made it clear their reason for withdrawing is the nature of the debate around climate change in Canada generally.  

Perhaps Tech Resources could be convinced to stick around and invest their in developing emission free power generating technology instead.

You think they could develop that in the North especially around all those remote communities who do not have manufacturing plants nearby nor any other means of income except the public purse.  Would be great if they could but the fact is that can't and won't happen - due to the remoteness.  So as you cheer for the demise of the Teck  mine, know that you are supporting the continued impoverishment of those communities.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, eyeball said:

Good news for the planet even if Tech moves to Saudi Arabia, Canada is one more step closer to going in the right direction of history.

Into the toilet?

Quote

Yes I realize there would have been jobs jobs jobs but the mine they were planning would also have emitted CO2 for the next 40 years

.For a lot of natives. It would have provided 2500 long term, well paid jobs. But yes, it would have emitted CO2 - 25% more CO2 than a pair of cement factories which were recently built in Ontario and Quebec, which faced no environmental hearings, which the Quebec government exempted from environmental regulations, and which will produce perhaps 250 jobs. But... they were jobs in Quebec and Ontario. So everyone rushed them through without questioning anything.

Quote

The only solution is constant environmental pressure to oppose every single development that flies in the face of the world's emission targets.

But only in Canada. Nowhere else. Hundreds of coal fired power plants going up, new coal fields opening up, places around the world spewing away happily and making money out of it. But no, only Canada must do this, beggar ourselves, while others play. Because... well, we're so gosh darn noble!

Perhaps Tech Resources could be convinced to stick around and invest their in developing emission free power generating technology instead.

Or perhaps build rocket ships, or make office chairs or something? It doesn't work that way. They're a resource company, and they said that Canada is too politically unstable for resource development at this time. That's the sort of language they usually use for third world companies who have guerrila war problems. No, they'll find a third world country with more stability and invest money and create jobs there.

Edited by Argus
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mowich said:

So as you cheer for the demise of the Teck  mine, know that you are supporting the continued impoverishment of those communities.

No I'm afraid you're full of crap that's not what I'm supporting at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Argus said:

Into the toilet?

Not at all, as a country that is committed to reducing it's CO2 emissions.

Quote

For a lot of natives. It would have provided 2500 long term, well paid jobs.

It's unfortunate that people are banking so much hope in the growth of an industry that so many people are trying to stop. Native people have to take responsibility for making ill-advised decisions too Argus.  That's something you argue for isn't it?

Quote

But yes, it would have emitted CO2 - 25% more CO2 than a pair of cement factories which were recently built in Ontario and Quebec, which faced no environmental hearings, which the Quebec government exempted from environmental regulations, and which will produce perhaps 250 jobs. But... they were jobs in Quebec and Ontario. So everyone rushed them through without questioning anything.

Yes well, that's unfortunate alright and we've discussed many many times the problem of governments that make decisions in back rooms.  You know as well as I do that outlawing in-camera lobbying would put a significant dent in the ability of governments to behave like this but of course it would probably also put a dent in the accountability of oil companies so...   

Quote

But only in Canada. Nowhere else.

No as I've also outlined Canada should be organizing a coalition of like-minded countries committed to the same goals and applying sanctions against and halting trade with countries that refuse to get with the program, especially dictatorships. BTW I notice you never answered why you're so eager to sell oil to a dictatorship you otherwise spend most of your time warning we should stop buying from.

Quote

Hundreds of coal fired power plants going up, new coal fields opening up, places around the world spewing away happily and making money out of it. But no, only Canada must do this, beggar ourselves, while others play. Because... well, we're so gosh darn noble!

So you do get it but virtue makes you puke so.

Quote

Or perhaps build rocket ships, or make office chairs or something? It doesn't work that way. They're a resource company, and they said that Canada is too politically unstable for resource development at this time. That's the sort of language they usually use for third world companies who have guerrila war problems. No, they'll find a third world country with more stability and invest money and create jobs there.

What they really said is that Canada is too environmentally astute to permit further fossil fuel developments. So...sayonara.

Edited by eyeball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My favourite thing about this is the Canada Proud Facebook post on the topic, followed by DOZENS of people posting how the Climate Change hoax scared the country out of Canada, with Trudeau squarely to blame.  I am starting to think some people may not be bright.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The attack on resource development in Canada is an attack on the viability of our most vulnerable Indigenous communities.  

From the Financial Post:

“In the meantime, he said it’s disappointing that 14 Indigenous communities lost out on potential jobs and benefits agreements with Teck for the  project. ‘These opportunities don’t come around very often in the remote areas of our country,’ Legge said.”

Full article:  “Indigenous Communities Blindsided by Teck’s Decision to Pull Frontier Project”

https://business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/disappointment-fear-and-anger-indigenous-communities-blindsided-by-tecks-decision-to-pull-frontier-project

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, eyeball said:

The only solution is constant environmental pressure to oppose every single development that flies in the face of the world's emission targets.

And if most other countries don't do the same, Canada's just shooting itself in the foot and climate change will continue unabated.  Climate change isn't significantly influenced by Canada's emissions from new oil sands development.  It's a blip in the machine.  Canada in total produces 1.6% of global GHG emissions.  The USA is 15%.

Canada shouldn't lead the way on emissions reductions, it should follow.  There's no benefit to the world or to Canada in being a leader, only economic stagnation.  The US, China, EU, India, Russia etc need to be leaders because they produce the most emissions.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Moonlight Graham said:

And if most other countries don't do the same, Canada's just shooting itself in the foot and climate change will continue unabated.  Climate change isn't significantly influenced by Canada's emissions from new oil sands development.  It's a blip in the machine.  Canada in total produces 1.6% of global GHG emissions.  The USA is 15%.

Canada shouldn't lead the way on emissions reductions, it should follow.  There's no benefit to the world or to Canada in being a leader, only economic stagnation.  The US, China, EU, India, Russia etc need to be leaders because they produce the most emissions.

Meanwhile, job opportunities flee aboriginal territories.  Without jobs people are stripped of the dignity of work. Employment, especially of the vulnerable, used to be a central cause of the left.  We can’t put rhetoric ahead of people.  Self-sustainability is essential to self-determination.  It’s essential for having decent living standards.  This fact isn’t up for debate.  

Environmental sustainability is simply not as important, especially if Canada takes such extreme measures in isolation of the superpowers.  We are transitioning to a green economy, but trying to do this radically and on our own will literally cripple the Canadian economy.  It will hit the communities most exposed to resource development first: remote rural areas, including Indigenous territory.  

Edited by Zeitgeist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, taxme said:

they will only add more CO2 into your precious environment

It's your precious environment too, which you'll perhaps realize when it's gone.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mean while china is pumping away. They produce 26.4% of the co2, and our NG would fix that. But for some reason the radical enviros don't want to help the earth, just keep the natives poor.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

...Canada shouldn't lead the way on emissions reductions, it should follow. 

 

No worries, as Canada is definitely not a leader on emissions reductions....now or before.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dialamah said:

It's your precious environment too, which you'll perhaps realize when it's gone.

You'd rather have First Nations people on welfare than have them have the dignity of a good paying job.  As you people continue to ignore the biggest CO2 emitter in the world, and give them a pass to pollute for another 10 years.  But with the other sides of your mouth, proclaim climate change an urgent issue.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

My favourite thing about this is the Canada Proud Facebook post on the topic, followed by DOZENS of people posting how the Climate Change hoax scared the country out of Canada, with Trudeau squarely to blame.  I am starting to think some people may not be bright.

My favourite thing about you people is your constant proclaiming of climate change as an urgent issue, but continue to give the biggest emitter in the world a pass on reducing emissions for another 10 years.  You'd rather deny First Nations people the dignity of a good paying job, all for symbolism over substance.  Ruin the lives of Canadians so that China can increase emissions for the next decade.  Sound logic there.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Shady said:

My favourite thing about you people is your constant proclaiming of climate change as an urgent issue, but continue to give the biggest emitter in the world a pass on reducing emissions for another 10 years.  You'd rather deny First Nations people the dignity of a good paying job, all for symbolism over substance.  Ruin the lives of Canadians so that China can increase emissions for the next decade.  Sound logic there.

Really has nothing to do with my post, or current events.  If Klein had accepted the Carbon Tax, and agreement secured with all the chiefs instead of most of them I don't think we'd be here today.  

For some reason, you want to ascribe a set of opinions to me and then debate the fake me... 

The position stated by the CEO of the mine is centrist, pro-business, and respectful of frameworks.  Of course the Premier of Alberta is somehow blaming Trudeau for something that he is singled out for... and his Canada Proud herd are mooing in agreement.  When the resource industry is dead and Alberta has zero revenue maybe they'll still elect politicians who blame Trudeau for the problems he caused in 2020...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Shady said:

You'd rather have First Nations people on welfare than have them have the dignity of a good paying job.  As you people continue to ignore the biggest CO2 emitter in the world, and give them a pass to pollute for another 10 years.  But with the other sides of your mouth, proclaim climate change an urgent issue.  

Five old men condemning the up-coming generations to all the wonderful benefits of living on an isolated reserve. The fulfillment of chronic unemployment, poor water and waste systems, the superb freedom from never knowing the meaning of 'work ethic', the exhilaration of dependence on money hand-outs, etc.  . . . . . the list is long.  Hereditary 'Chiefs' = selfish and stupid. Elected Chiefs = know what and how to truly help their folks to better themselves . . . Times have changed:  The buffalo are gone, they're not coming back - - - get over it. 

Shady's post above nailed it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Shady said:

You'd rather have First Nations people on welfare than have them have the dignity of a good paying job. 

Strawman....yawn.

Quote

As you people continue to ignore the biggest CO2 emitter in the world, and give them a pass to pollute for another 10 years.  But with the other sides of your mouth, proclaim climate change an urgent issue.

Speaking for myself I certainly haven't ignored China's emissions and I've repeatedly said we should stop trading with them because of it. WTF is the matter with your capacity to pay attention?  It's clearly Trudeau who's speaking out both sides of his mouth here - speaking for two opposing forces in Canada, conservatives who simply don't give a shit about climate change and progressives who do and he's definitely shown he's far far more your boy than mine.

He wants pipelines, he even bought one to prove it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Strawman....yawn.

Speaking for myself I certainly haven't ignored China's emissions and I've repeatedly said we should stop trading with them because of it. WTF is the matter with your capacity to pay attention?  It's clearly Trudeau who's speaking out both sides of his mouth here - speaking for two opposing forces in Canada, conservatives who simply don't give a shit about climate change and progressives who do and he's definitely shown he's far far more your boy than mine.

He wants pipelines, he even bought one to prove it.

What made you think Trudeau was anything more that a professional politician?  He’s very good at marketing himself and does have a brand, love him or hate him.  He does what’s expedient.  His dad was a visionary for what Canada could be and was ruthless in his means to hammer it through.  Junior is more style than substance, though he’s a pretty good orator.  He’s not afraid of town halls.  He tried to be too many things to too many people.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

What made you think Trudeau was anything more that a professional politician?  He’s very good at marketing himself and does have a brand, love him or hate him.  He does what’s expedient.  His dad was a visionary for what Canada could be and was ruthless in his means to hammer it through.  Junior is more style than substance, though he’s a pretty good orator.  He’s not afraid of town halls.  He tried to be too many things to too many people.  

Whatever else JT is I betchya he's just as afraid of outlawing in-camera lobbying as his dad along with every other professional politician.  How do you feel about doing that btw?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...