this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2025
74 points (97.4% liked)

Canada

7614 readers
562 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Yaztromo@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

The big problem here is that we’re eventually going to hit global peak oil use. Building out new infrastructure like this takes nearly a decade to complete, and paying it off usually takes multiple decades. If it’s going to take you 20 years at 100% capacity to pay off, and 10 years to build, and we reach peak oil earlier than 30 years from now (the IEA predicts 2030, however other international agencies push that out as far as 2050), then building extra capacity just doesn’t make sense.

If the IEA models are correct, then we wouldn’t even be finished expanding or building any new pipelines before global oil demand starts to drop. That risks a big drop in prices, which makes it more difficult to pay off any new pipelines once they come online as transit fees bottom out. And then taxpayers are stuck holding the bag.

[–] Bones747@lemmy.ca 1 points 13 minutes ago* (last edited 11 minutes ago)

I feel like those predictions may have relied on the previous growth of alternative energy sources. But with the new reality of today the demand maybe be driven up for much further then 2030. And starting completely new pipeline projects might not be the best I agree. But putting a rush on existing project should be prioritized I’m my opinion. This clears the bar of national emergency in my books and for that reason alone it should be afforded the appropriate level of response. And even if the peak happens, we have no way of knowing how long it will take the industry to decline to the levels where these pipelines may not be worth it keeping. Most of these predictions rely on technologies that don’t exist yet to keep being invented. There is a non-zero possibility that oil remains a requirement for us and world wide customers in the near/far future. I just think that Canada can do something to capitalize on its oil resources while we figure out how we can cut our dependence to them. Also we need to find way to bring revenue streams to the oil producing provinces. This will strengthen our national unity and help us come together in the face of a fairly adverse situation. Would give us time to invest in alternatives revenue streams for the same provinces so we don’t just one day turn off the taps at once and cut them off of Any way to make a reasonable living.

There are a lot of benefits to forging forward here even if we limit our selves in the name of not over investing like you point out and getting stuck with the bag when oil eventually gets sidelined.