Welcome To The Questerre Energy HUB On AGORACOM
(Edit this message through the "fast facts" section)
Message: from: Le Devoir
Your Vote:
Did you know?
You can earn activity points by filling your profile with information about yourself (what city you live in, your favorite team, blogs etc.)
French to English translation
The neighbor's shoes
Chantal Hébert Canada March 15, 2010
Without fanfare, at least in the media in Quebec, Alberta society Questerre just put into operation the first natural gas well in Quebec. This happens at Sainte-Anne-de-Lotbinière, 75 km from the City.
There are still far from the cup to his lips, but the potential discovery has recently led the Globe and Mail published an article in which futuristic evoked the hypothesis of a major redrawing of the map to the Canadian energy favor of such development.
The Toronto newspaper was right in suggesting that the emergence of Quebec as a power gas undoubtedly change the background on which to place the debate on energy-environment equation.
Ultimately, such a development could also have a significant impact on geopolitics in Canada.And who says new deal also says questions unpublished. For fun educational exercise, here's a sample.
If Quebec had the opportunity to become a mégapuissance gas, he refuses to exploit the full potential on behalf of its environmental aspirations?
The exploitation of natural gas in Quebec on a large scale would have the advantage of first supply local energy markets of the eastern United States. The delivery of natural gas in Quebec to the United States would also be less expensive than projects like the controversial pipeline that will connect Alaska to the U.S. market.
Natural gas is not oil, and until proven otherwise, its operations in Québec do not include all the environmental drawbacks of the oil sands. However, this kind of activity is far from being harmless to the environment. On the other hand, natural gas is not renewable energy. Such as coal and oil, it belongs to the family of fossil fuels. In the fight against climate change, its contribution was more a part of the problem than the solution.
On the other side of the scale, there would be the prospect of billions of dollars in royalties to the Treasury Quebec. Instead of looping his for years wondering what to cut or impose anything, the Quebec government could reverse the exercise and ask what to invest.
The existence of an expanded tax base by bringing in the gas industry would give him more leeway to accelerate completion of projects such as CHUM, or the establishment of a network of transit more ambitious.
Using strategically impact of wealth is not made to last, Quebec could adopt a number of sustainable infrastructure. And the exercise would release inevitably the way of additional money for education, health services and early childhood. The large-scale natural gas in Quebec would have a positive impact on employment.
The Quebec economy - in a more modest - runs more smoothly than Ontario in recent years.The accession of Quebec to the club of major energy-producing fossil accentuate this advantage. Ultimately, Quebec could still gain access to another club, rather selective in Canada, the provinces rich.
Instead of being the province that receives the lion's share of the allocation of equalization, Quebec - using the same formula per capita - could become one that pays the highest amount in the program.
As part of Equalization, taxpayers in provinces that contribute to the plan to send more taxes to Ottawa than they cost in federal transfers of all kinds.
A Quebec whose living standards would be boosted by its gas royalties would he see some of that wealth transferred by Ottawa every year to poorer provinces, like Ontario or New Brunswick?
Knowing that, by definition, the prosperity that flows from the natural gas would be temporary, the idea that its impact in all its forms, including through the tax system, would not it not logically , support the argument sovereignty?
Under the current rules of equalization, the provinces plan beneficiaries are free to dispose of the money they receive as they see fit. But if Quebec was a major contributor to the plan might help but question the relevance of having contributed at least indirectly, to the introduction of significant tax cuts in Ontario or at Fredericton launch an ambitious program of universal home care for seniors?
Purely hypothetical in the Quebec context, issues of this column are or have been topical in Alberta. And to all, Edmonton has so far responded yes. This includes, until further notice, both the all-round development of its natural that the concept of diversion through the equalization of part of its affluence to the rest of the federation. Question: responses of Quebec would be different and, if so, how?
***
Chantal Hébert is a political columnist for the Toronto Star.
***
chebert@thestar.ca
province, Quebec (province), energy
4 Recommendations
Loading...
Loading...
New Message
Please
login
to post a reply