Natural gas is cheaper than cheap. Why rush out to sell our resource now? Why not wait until it’s worth something?

The argument that it’s worth something more in Asia is weak. It’s worth a bit more, but not much more.

There is some risk. If we build all this infrastructure and then the price in Asia goes down, we will have to sell at that price. The infrastructure has to be paid for.

What’s wrong with leaving it where it is until it’s worth more and until there is less competition/risk?

Icicle,I love you.
Cheers

Icicle:-“What’s wrong with leaving it where it is until it’s worth more and until there is less competition/risk?”
———————————————

We can’t make the ‘money system’ seem as if it’s working that way, Icicle. It’s currently predicated on a physical impossibility. That is, that every country continually needs to export more than it imports if its people are going to be allowed to live ‘financially’.

And the more they can export and the less they can import the ‘richer’ they’re going to become.

Now anyone who cares to give the matter a moment’s thought would quickly realise if you’re sending out more real wealth than your receiving back in alternate real wealth your country is phyically becoming ‘poorer’, not ‘richer’.

But finance, as it’s currently arranged, mis-represents that, and in fact, shows the exact opposite. And we all know we can’t ever change the ‘figures’ to properly reflect the ‘facts’, because those ones with the “$” sign in front of them are supposed to be the most sacred holy of all holies, and completely beyond reproach.

I think the challenge is at this time would be to use natural gas in place of coal, to help clean up our air. If we wait, the air may get much more polluted from coal use due to lack of natural gas.Make sense?

Socredible = ?

you speak in many circles.

You’re just figuring that out now, He Spoke?

Let us look around us and see what we have – that is not made in China. So, what does that have to do with anything? Well, we have to pay for stuff! Or, we trade! Of course, we don’t have to buy anything from other countries – because we don’t need anything from the outside. Do you think that would work? Not likely.
Then look a bit further – we are a collection of master entitlers. We want everything, governments have to provide but we don’t want to pay for it. The way I see it: is that our resources are the key for trade and what we can sell or trade from that we can sink into the entitlement can for all to enjoy.
I am not sure there is a free lunch anymore.

Good post nuffstuff. Too bad many don’t understand it.

I think the rush to export this LNG, and Oil, is because our biggest trading partner, the good old USA, will be buying less from us in the future.

As usual we have put all our eggs in one basket. Now if the US doesn’t buy our gas and oil at the usual quantity and price, we are royally screwed.

So, we now want to export this commodity to other Countries, and will probably give it away pretty cheap, because the alternative, is a major shut down of the oil and gas industry in Canada.

To think that we can all of a sudden go into the export market of these commodities, and displace Countries like, Russia, Australia, etc; who have been exporting to China, Japan, Korea, for the past 20 years is ludicrous.

We have a serious problem, however the Government is putting the usual spin on it, to make it look like we are on the cutting edge.

Don’t forget that these other exporting Countries will get into fracking, and increase the amount of gas and oil that they have available.

It dosent matter what we export or who we exort it too the bottom line is PROFIT and you or I will never see ny of it.

Big oil hs been grazing of the canadian user for years and now they need to get intoo a greener pasture.
Cheers

But Retired 02: IF YOU invested in a project, wouldn’t it be reasonable to expect to make a profit? I take it from your remarks that you have nothing invested, so why are you concerned about profit? If you want to be part of the profit culture, invest in it. It appears that you and many of the other lefties, who want but don’t give, have some serious jealousy issues.

Im noticing a trend in the world today. Retired or near retired people with homes paid for and RRSPs stockpiled are suddenly saying that all expansion, resource activity and exploration should stop immediately. So, it was ok for the last 40 years while they were doing it, now they can afford to live out their days buying goods from Walmart and the current working stiffs are supposed to sit around and sing Kumbaya and tell the government to lower taxes?

Interceptor I don’t see it that way at all. Take a look at the demonstrators on the news, all young. A lot of these demonstrators are professional at this and bounce from one cause to another. Who funds these people, NGO’s from outside Canada. Who funds these NGO’s like the Tides foundation that supports these professional demonstrators, names like Rockefeller, HP. There is even suspicion money comes from the Saudis since the oil sands are a threat to them.

So what we have is outside interests being a threat to our country. The real sad part is that Canada gives these NGO’s that are a threat to our economy charitable status.

the true reason we are so hard at it fracking for gas is our province is broke christys big promise to all of us lng is the future it will take us to the land of milk and honey and be debt free by 2015. shes got such a hard on to get it going without any thought about conservation and environment that shes going to screw up the water table and sign long term contracts with china for next to nothing and in the endrun no money no water 58 billion in debt and counting lots of luck cause were gonna need it with these bozos running the province

I think that socredible’s post makes perfect sense.
metalman.

Socredible’s comments make sense, but its only half the truth.

Oil and gas are like a monetary factional reserve currency. They can be leveraged to create further value than they otherwise had… thus the creation of ‘money’.

So if the vast majority of our export value is in energy, then the question should be how and why do those exports create more value through processing in the hands of our trading partners, rather than being processed in our country?

If a hundred liters of fuel can get you to Vancouver here in Canada, or provide the energy needed to build a bike in China sold for cheep in Canada… then we have two different values on that same fuel. If energy can be leveraged to create value far exceeding the original cost, than its multiplier effect is much greater than fuel that is used up for a single purpose of consumption.

The winner in global economics is the country or economy that can best convert energy into the greatest multiplier of increased value… all things being equal in a global market place.

If we are exporting a raw resource because we don’t have the capability to manufacture, refine, and utilize the value multiplier of energy… then building an economic future based on energy exports makes sense in a defeatist mindset… but if we have the expertise and the ability to compete in adding value to the end product through efficient conversion of energy, then good policy would be aiming at moving us up the economic food chain towards a more sustainable long term economy and not in the other direction.

Pushing oil and gas as the end all and be all of economics I think is a simpleton easy out for politicians that don’t know how to create real value, other than picking the low hanging fruit.

So yes to Socredible in that most ‘money’ is created through issuance of debt, but so is it in commodity or stock market capitalization inflation as well, or in the value that can be created through the conversion of energy… so part of what keeps the monetary ponzi of banksters afloat is the value created in the conversion of energy and when recognized in dollars is another form of ‘money’ creation. The question then, is the ‘money’ of debt banksters the equivalent to the ‘money’ of energy value, and thus the root of energy inflation skewing the way wealth is recognized.

I look at it a little differently than you do, Eagle. Not to say that what you’ve said is entirely wrong, or not important, but if you go back to He Spoke’s comment that I “talk in many circles” that’s because anything to do with ‘finance’ is, or at least is supposed to be, ‘circular’.

There is an assumption long held by traditional economists that in any economy, taken as a whole, all financial ‘costs’ = ‘incomes’ = ‘spending from those incomes’.

That all ‘costs’ every business incurs in the processes of providing goods and services can always be fully recovered in the ‘prices’ of those goods and services. Because those ‘costs’ have provided, or ongoing ones are providing, sufficient ‘incomes’ to fully meet those ‘prices’.

In other words, for every article for sale at any time on the markets anywhere, there is an equivalent sum of MONEY in existence in the bank account, or wallet, or under the mattress of someone, somewhere, that can meet that price. (And He spoke, and JohnnyBelt, and Nuffsnuff, would all likely argue that there is ~ and in doing so, (though they obviously don’t realise it), make the same case all those awful ‘Lefties’ have been making for years ~ i.e., “that the poor are poor because the rich are rich.” That there’s enough money, it’s just not equally re-distributed, and all would be sweetness and light, for the ‘poor’ at least, if it was.

It never dawns on them that there ISN’T an equivalency between overall ‘money’ already in the hands of the public, and overall ‘prices’ of goods and services already made and for sale.

Which there ISN’T. Or we wouldn’t be busy prostrating ourselves to try to get SOME OTHER COUNTRIES’ MONEY (not their exports in exchange for ours) to try to make up the shortfall. Or seeing overall debt levels increase exponentially even when governments are supposedly running ‘balanced Budgets’.

The NDP may well be Naturally Dumb People, but those of the BC Liberal persuasion are certainly a long ways from being naturally smart. However, unlike the hardcore others, they should be capable of being taught.