Tsvetana Paraskova Tsvetana is a writer for Oilprice.com with over a decade of experience writing for news outlets such as iNVEZZ and SeeNews. More Info Share Facebook Twitter Google + Linkedin Reddit Premium Content Iran: A Geopolitical Time Bomb A Worrying Sign For Global Oil Demand The 100-Year Old Wildcatter Poised For A Breakout The Last U.S. Oil Major In Venezuela China Determined To Avoid Another Natural Gas Crisis By Tsvetana Paraskova – Dec 12, 2018, 9:00 AM CST Join Our Community Last winter, China gobbled up spot cargoes to meet soaring natural gas demand in freezing temperatures, upending the liquefied natural gas (LNG) market, which was thought to be on the verge of oversupply just a year ago.

The Chinese coal-to-gas switch policy for millions of households backfired with severe gas shortages last winter, lifting domestic Chinese LNG prices to more than US$20/mmBtu and driving Asian spot LNG prices up. This winter, China’s authorities are determined to avoid another natural gas supply crunch. And they are handling supplies much better than past winter—domestic natural gas production is rising, state energy giants are boosting gas pipeline infrastructure and connectivity, and the coal-to-gas switch is more measured and moderate, taking into account expectations of demand. Chinese natural gas imports are soaring, but procurement for this winter’s demand started early to avoid a last-minute rush and a

China’s natural gas storage tanks are close to full. The element of surprise that pushed LNG prices soaring last winter has been eliminated. This year, weather is also in favor of Chinese authorities. Milder weather a month into the heating season and forecasts for a milder-than-usual winter have led to expectations that China won’t see another supply crunch between December and February. As a result, spot LNG prices in Asia fell last week to their lowest level in six months, with spot prices for January delivery down US$1 in one week to US$8.80/mmBtu—the lowest price since May this year and down from last year for the first time in 2018. That’s because demand is softer, storage is nearly full, and buyers from China to South Korea to Japan had moved in as early as in September and October to procure LNG cargoes to avoid last year’s rush and surging market prices. A drop in spot LNG prices in Asia is not typical for the winter season in the northern hemisphere. Related: Citi: Oil Prices Are Going Nowhere Next Year Prices and natural gas demand soared last winter as China was scrambling to procure supplies in a colder-than-usual season. The authorities had to backtrack on the coal ban in some areas to ease the crunch. This year, milder weather has surely helped, but China started to carefully plan supply, as soon as last winter’s season ended

Billl C 69 and the Conservative opposition to it.

Bills C69 and C48 are top of the agenda for the Conservatives meet in Calgary. Bottom line for these two bills is they effectively prevent the additional pipeline from proceeding. This, because of conflict with the parties concerned.

Bill C69 did away with two pieces of Harper/Kenny legislation that was irresponsible, to say the least.  First off  National Energy Board Act:  This was legislation that allowed Harper to become a dictator in his own mind at least.  Any conflict with a native group could be set aside by the Minister in charge.   In action, it caused endless delays in the West coast pipeline.  Reason?  The US does not want us shipping off the west coast it will cut deeply into their markets in Indochina and China and, they will not be able to use their oil supply on or off as a bargaining chip!

Secondly: Canadian Navigable Waters Act; was changed by Harper/Kenny to a free-for-all.  One outstanding item is the BC dam on the Peace River.  A navigable river the dam was built and was criticized for not being able to produce enough electricity to pay for its self.  It was however built to create a sump in the Peace River suitable for drawing large amounts of water out of.   This brings me to the Weatherford Project.   So named after the company who designed and specked it.
Weatherford is immensely designed to move 2/3rds of the flow of the Peace River to the US border.  If Conservatives build this Canadian’s will pay for the build so the US can get cheap water.   If the Peace River has been turned back into navigable water that project is dead.
What do I mean by immense?  The design calls for 4 large diameter pipelines and 6 pumping stations.  Each pumping station to use the electrical power of a city!
The Conservatives again looking after US interests, not Canada’s!

SUMMARYPart 1 enacts the Impact Assessment Act and repeals the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012. Among other things, the Impact Assessment Act(a) names the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada as the authority responsible for impact assessments;(b) provides for a process for assessing the environmental, health, social and economic effects of designated projects with a view to preventing certain adverse effects and fostering sustainability;(c) prohibits proponents, subject to certain conditions, from carrying out a designated project if the designated project is likely to cause certain environmental, health, social or economic effects, unless the Minister of the Environment or Governor in Council determines that those effects are in the public interest, taking into account the impacts on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada, all effects that may be caused by the carrying out of the project, the extent to which the project contributes to sustainability and other factors;(d) establishes a planning phase for a possible impact assessment of a designated project, which includes requirements to cooperate with and consult certain persons and entities and requirements with respect to public participation;(e) authorizes the Minister to refer an impact assessment of a designated project to a review panel if he or she considers it in the public interest to do so, and requires that an impact assessment be referred to a review panel if the designated project includes physical activities that are regulated under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and the Canada–Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act;(f) establishes time limits with respect to the planning phase, to impact assessments and to certain decisions, in order to ensure that impact assessments are conducted in a timely manner;(g) provides for public participation and for funding to allow the public to participate in a meaningful manner;(h) sets out the factors to be taken into account in conducting an impact assessment, including the impacts on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada;(i) provides for cooperation with certain jurisdictions, including Indigenous governing bodies, through the delegation of any part of an impact assessment, the joint establishment of a review panel or the substitution of another process for the impact assessment;(j) provides for transparency in decision-making by requiring that the scientific and other information taken into account in an impact assessment, as well as the reasons for decisions, be made available to the public through a registry that is accessible via the Internet;(k) provides that the Minister may set conditions, including with respect to mitigation measures, that must be implemented by the proponent of a designated project;(l) provides for the assessment of cumulative effects of existing or future activities in a specific region through regional assessments and of federal policies, plans and programs, and of issues, that are relevant to the impact assessment of designated projects through strategic assessments; and(m) sets out requirements for an assessment of environmental effects of non-designated projects that are on federal lands or that are to be carried out outside Canada.Part 2 enacts the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, which establishes the Canadian Energy Regulator and sets out its composition, mandate and powers. The role of the Regulator is to regulate the exploitation, development and transportation of energy within Parliament’s jurisdiction.The Canadian Energy Regulator Act, among other things,(a) provides for the establishment of a Commission that is responsible for the adjudicative functions of the Regulator;(b) ensures the safety and security of persons, energy facilities and abandoned facilities and the protection of property and the environment;(c) provides for the regulation of pipelines, abandoned pipelines, and traffic, tolls and tariffs relating to the transmission of oil or gas through pipelines;(d) provides for the regulation of international power lines and certain interprovincial power lines;(e) provides for the regulation of renewable energy projects and power lines in Canada’s offshore;(f) provides for the regulation of access to lands;(g) provides for the regulation of the exportation of oil, gas and electricity and the interprovincial oil and gas trade; and(h) sets out the process the Commission must follow before making, amending or revoking a declaration of a significant discovery or a commercial discovery under the Canada Oil and Gas Operations Act and the process for appealing a decision made by the Chief Conservation Officer or the Chief Safety Officer under that Act.Part 2 also repeals the National Energy Board Act.Part 3 amends the Navigation Protection Act to, among other things,(a) rename it the Canadian Navigable Waters Act;(b) provide a comprehensive definition of navigable water;(c) require that, when making a decision under that Act, the Minister must consider any adverse effects that the decision may have on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada;(d) require that an owner apply for an approval for a major work in any navigable water;(e) set out the factors that the Minister must consider when deciding whether to issue an approval;(f) provide a process for addressing navigation-related concerns when an owner proposes to carry out a work in navigable waters that are not listed in the schedule;(g) provide the Minister with powers to address obstructions in any navigable water;(h) amend the criteria and process for adding a reference to a navigable water to the schedule;(i) require that the Minister establish a registry; and(j) provide for new measures for the administration and enforcement of the Act.Part 4 makes consequential amendments to Acts of Parliament and regulations.
Available on the House of Commons website at the following address: http://www.ourcommons.ca

Post Media (Bell Media) fights back.

On tonights CTV a news story was run that is positively astounding!
The report refers to a “survey” done by them which shows that “most” people in Canada “feel” the internet is full of “Fake News”   They go so far as to site Facebook, the only major media they don’t control as being insecure and full of Fake News.

They, CTV went onto say the internet is full of Fake news and further said it follows Trump’s ongoing complaints about Fake News.

This comes because of people using the United Conservative Facebook page and Scheer’s Facebook pages as an open forum. Talking about Scheer’s ongoing lying and climate change.  As well, the LDS involvement in the Conservative party.

You can be very sure they never laid a complaint with our Government!

The #Conservatives have enough provinces and population by which they can change our constitution regardless of who gets in.   Scheer’s chances have tanked; there lies their problem.  If a liberal Government is in place it can string out changes until the next election and, by that time Bell Media will have been dismantled.

On Fake News, the 200 newsprint companies owned by Bell Media are the epitome of Fake News as I have warned.

Expert reports on the state of medical lab services in Edmonton make for grim reading.

Seventy per cent of major health decisions are based on a lab result, but Edmonton’s facilities are aging and outdated.

It’s not just the private DynaLife headquarters, which are crowded, stuck in a downtown office tower never designed to host a state-of-the-art lab. Equipment in Edmonton’s public labs is obsolete. More than three-quarters of the lab equipment owned by Alberta Health Services is considered to be at the end of its useful life, according to a 2017 report by the Health Quality Council of Alberta.

In that same report, experts call lab services the “fastest changing area of health care.” Scientists are constantly finding more precise tests, now using gene analysis to diagnose patients more accurately and earlier, with the promise of reducing overall costs.

But Alberta’s current system for regulating lab services is so fractured and political, decisions around new tests drag on and on, physicians say. It’s “as hard or harder” to get an outdated test removed. Even a simple decision, like moving all Alberta labs to the same test requisition form, had been under discussion for three years when the 2017 report was written. Alberta is falling behind.

I hope that puts UCP Leader Jason Kenney’s promise to cancel the new superlab and its new equipment in perspective.

Heavy equipment is on the construction site of the Edmonton Laboratory Clinical Hub, or “Super Lab,” east of the South Campus LRT station, 11330 65 Ave., in Edmonton on Wednesday, April 10, 2019. DAVID BLOOM /POSTMEDIA

Construction started on the $590-million project last month. Backhoes and bulldozers are preparing the site and retaining walls are being built beside the South Campus LRT station in Edmonton.

Kenney says he’ll save $640 million by also cancelling the $50-million contract to buy out DynaLife. But does he think the status quo with end-of-life equipment is an option? Public labs across Alberta need reinvestment whether it goes into a single new building with DynaLife included or not.

The lab situation has a long and tortured history.

In the mid-1990s, Alberta went through mass consolidation and former premier Ralph Klein cut laboratory services by 40 per cent. In Calgary, that led to a new public-private partnership, a centralized Calgary lab service.

In Edmonton, that didn’t happen, likely because two major hospitals are run by a separate provider, Covenant Health. Lab services stayed fractured, and eventually Alberta Health Services signed a 15-year contract to have DynaLife handle all the community-based lab work.

In the 2010s, Alberta Health Services decided to contract with a private company to create something like the Calgary lab in Edmonton, with consolidated hospital, academic and community lab services. It was going to be a 15-year, $3-billion contract with significant reinvestment.

Major multinational corporations bid on it, seeing little Edmonton as a toehold into the Canadian market. Three were shortlisted and an Australian corporation was picked. But DynaLife took the province to court in frustration and won. A judge ruled the bidding process was compromised.

In May 2016, a new government, the NDP, announced the public superlab model as one part of a plan to integrate services across the province. The Edmonton hub would work in partnership with Calgary. The common lab network, with a shared information system, would give researchers access to a vast quantity of population-level data, something unthinkable in the fractured, private network of American hospitals.

Alberta Health Minister Sarah Hoffman unveiled the location for a new integrated public lab facility in Edmonton on Dec. 21, 2017. LARRY WONG / POSTMEDIA NETWORK

Kenney says he supports the new information sharing system, but is undecided on whether to keep the new oversight body, Alberta Public Laboratories. He argues Alberta will get better results through choice and competition with private players, rather than one public monopoly.

At the end of the day, both public and private models have benefits. Private companies are more likely to prioritize capital investment as key to ongoing success. In Calgary, for example, the private-public central lab was eventually bought out by Alberta Health Services and saw its capital budget decrease to 10 per cent of what it had been. Now 60 per cent of its equipment is considered end of life.

University of Calgary pathologist Dr. Jim Wright watched the NDP plan with some trepidation. In a 2018 opinion piece for Academic Pathology, he wrote about the benefit of the public model: province-wide integration. It promised to come with a strong, science-based board to take politics out of decision making. That could make it nimble, allowing Alberta to invest in new technology to cut expenses and increase patient care, while capitalizing on research potential.

I’m not impressed with Kenney’s plan to cancel the deal, especially when he has no plan but the status quo to replace it.

He accuses the NDP of being ideologically motivated — stuck on the idea that health care must be entirely public. I hope his own ideology doesn’t blind him just as much.

Sure, it makes a good campaign speech to announce $640 million in savings. But that’s a fantasy. Fixing Edmonton’s medical labs is much more complicated.