So like uh, an oil pipeline has something to do with climate change? New one on me for sure.

He’s too busy making beastiality legal and celebrating Castro as a hero , to do other things right now. What a wingnut we have leading this country. He actually helped passed a law saying it wasn’t illegal to have relations with certain animals, using certain acts. You can’t make this stuff up, check it out.

Co2 followed warming and cooling by 500-800 years, no they have it reversed around and it is the driver

these pipelines will get the go ahead.
No one says no to big oil business..
Justin can justify it by saying that they have a clean up program in place now, even though they will never be able to clean up a large spill….
the Exxon Valdez spilled its load march 24,1989 and it still isn’t totally cleaned up and a burst pipeline will create a much bigger mess.
Does this “yes man” Justin care, we shall see….

WARNING: The following comment contains scientific facts which are presented in the form of a University study on the climate impacts a Northern Gateway Pipeline would have on our environment, and global atmosphere!

“The Northern Gateway Pipeline Project alone would export 525,000 barrels per day of diluted bitumen or synthetic crude oil. Over the life of the project, which is expected to be 40 years.”

“Using life-cycle analysis estimates of GHG emissions from oil-sands derived fuels (5, 6), we calculate that the Northern Gateway Pipeline Project would facilitate “well-to-wheels” GHG emissions of 100 MtCO2eq/yr (best estimate), with a range of 84 to 102 MtCO2eq/yr (see Appendix for details on the calculations). Emissions of 100 MtCO2eq/yr are equivalent to 150% of British Columbia’s 2009 GHG emissions of 67 MtCO2eq (7). They also correspond to 14% of Canada’s 2008 emissions, and are almost equivalent to Canada’s entire 2008 electricity sector (120 MtCO2eq) (3).”

www .ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/documents_staticpost/cearref_21799/83858/Greenhouse_Gas_Emission_Report.pdf

With the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline Project’s total well-to-wheel carbon emission impact of 150% of BC’s entire 2009 Green House Gas emissions, and 14% of Canada’s entire 2008 Green House Gas emissions, it is obvious Canada will not be meeting our Green House Gas emission reduction targets as we promised the world at the Paris Climate Accord Summit.

Of coarse they are going to be okayed . By the time they are built or shortly after they will be as valuable as horses and oxen were when the horseless carriage was ten years in the making . Isn’t it ironic that at a time like now that producing countries are desperate to slow down production canada wants to ramp it up . Some how adding more product is going to be good for prices as demand falls .

My predictions.

Line 3: Approved.

Trans Mountain: Approved.

Northern Gateway: Not approved. Besides I think the writing is on the wall for this project..They essentially buried it in red tape with the environmental conditions as well the based on the court decision it poses a huge risk to First Nations consultation.

carbon and CO2… 14 trillion in hidden tax havens and lord knows how much money is being generated from it. Until it is illegal to make money off of it no truths will come out.

Essentially that is my message. When I spoke at COP21 (the United Nations climate change conference in Paris in 2015) that was my message. It was not necessarily well received (laughs) because a lot of government officials think that this whole thing is happening because of them. But some governments did get it, especially in Northern Europe, some governments have already unbundled utilities—historically Australia and New Zealand. Chile does not subsidize anything directly or indirectly. So you are starting to see really high growth in solar in Chile. Yes, they have great sunshine but also the government does not subsidize anybody and therefore the least cost option gets to win. And right now solar is the least cost option.

It is cheaper than anything—cheaper than gas, cheaper than oil, cheaper than coal, cheaper than anything. I mean it is still going down. In Abu Dhabi 2.4 cents. That’s half of the cost of coal. This is from an interview of Tony Seba’s by foundingfuel.com I say pipe lines yes . Subsities for energy companies no .

So you spoke at the Paris conference. Are you sure it wasn’t held on Fantasy Island? If in fact you were there, you better have paid your own way. Being there on some one else,s dime would only underscore the low caliber nutbars that attended.

It has been well established that solar and wind are not the cheapest large scale power sources. They exist because of massive subsidies paid for by consumers. Your repeated denial of that fact reinforces your lack of economic reality. One more time, what are the specific subsidies for energy producers?

By the way, care to comment on your arbitrage spread profits? Do you even know what arbitrage is? You couldn’t spell it on your previous self righteous post.

Honeymoon is over, time to actually start governing

13:53. Kinder Morgan Approved.. Check..

13:58 Line 3 Approved..Check..

14:01: Northern Gateway..Rejected.. Check.. Lets put this one to bed now.!

Japan Leading an Unprecedented Oil and Gas Asset Buying Spree

ht tp://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Japan-Is-Aggressively-Buying-Up-Oil-And-Gas-Around-The-World.html

ht tps://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/11/28/japan-leading-an-unprecedented-oil-and-gas-asset-buying-spree/

This from NASA

ht tps://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/11/28/steepest-drop-in-global-temperature-on-record/

Professor Judith Curry, of the Georgia Institute of Technology, and president of the Climate Forecast Applications Network, said yesterday: ‘I disagree with Gavin. The record warm years of 2015 and 2016 were primarily caused by the super El Nino.’

The slowdown in warming was, she added, real, and all the evidence suggested that since 1998, the rate of global warming has been much slower than predicted by computer models – about 1C per century.

C02 increasing and temperature falling, say what. That can’t be.

That is not from NASA. That is from an article written by David Rose. Here is an article written by Caitlyn Kennedy.

“The most likely explanation for the explanation for the lack of significant warming at the earths surface in the past decade or so is that natural climate cycles – a series of La Nina events and a negative phase of the lesser known Pacific Decadal Oscillation – caused shifts in the ocean circulation patterns that moved some excess heat into the deep ocean. Even so, recent years have been some of the warmest on record and scientists expect temperatures will swing back up soon.

Who to believe, who to believe ?

The rise and exponential growth of renewables has nothing to do with climate change . That’s the straw man that the fossils are holding onto so hard . It’s about cheap , clean , abundant to the point of limitless energy delivered for free across the globe every day till the sun goes out . The fossils know this and they can’t compete on a level playing field .

So Trudeau with his carbon tax well that is just a Liberal tax. Seeing Canada only contributes 1.6% of the worlds anthropogenic c02 whats the point. Oh right the dictator admirer trying to score points with the UN while destroying our economy.

Anyhow no science showing mans c02 affecting climate.

The scientific reality is that on virtually every claim — from A to Z — the promoters of manmade climate fears are falling short or going in the opposite direction.
 Global temperatures have been virtually flat for about 18 years according to satellite data, and peer-reviewed literature is now scaling back predictions of future warming.  The U.S. has had no Category 3 or larger hurricane make landfall since 2005 – the longest spell since the Civil War.  Strong F3 or larger tornadoes have been in decline since the 1970s.  Despite claims of snow being ‘a thing of the past,’ cold season snowfall has been rising.  Sea level rise rates have been steady for over a century, with recent deceleration.  Droughts and floods are neither historically unusual nor caused by mankind, and there is no evidence we are currently having any unusual weather.  So-called hottest year claims are based on year-to-year temperature data that differs by only a few HUNDREDTHS of a degree to tenths of a degree Fahrenheit – differences that are within the margin of error in the data. In other words, global temperatures have essentially held very steady with no sign of acceleration.  A 2015 NASA study found Antarctica was NOT losing ice mass and ‘not currently contributing to sea level rise.’  2016 Arctic sea ice was 22% greater than the recent low point of 2012. The Arctic sea ice is now in a 10-year ‘pause’ with ‘no significant change in the past decade’   Deaths due to extreme weather have declined dramatically.  Polar bears are doing fine, with their numbers way up since the 1960s.
Have climate change skeptics lost the climate debate?

No! Climate skepticism enjoys huge popularity in polling data, and every time a climate bill has come before the U.S. Congress it has failed to pass. There never was any real climate debate! One of the key reasons climate fear proponents don’t want to debate is what happened during a pivotal highprofile debate in 2007 in New York City, where skeptics were voted the clear winners against global warming proponents.
NASA’s Gavin Schmidt appeared so demoralized at losing that debate that he announced debates equally split between believers in a climate ‘crisis’ and scientific skeptics are probably not “worthwhile” to ever agree to again. And climate change promoters listened, with debates becoming rarer and rarer.

ht tps://www.cfact.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/CFACT-Climate-Truth-File-2016.pdf