CanPol: *****-umen Showdown

[Asher]

So, overview: Alberta has tons of oil but we don't get the best price for it because we can really only sell it to the US & Canada in sizable quantities (don't let the Poly econotards tell you Oil is fungible - they don't comprehend the practicality of the world we live in).

One answer is to sell it to Asia. Or more specifically in this case, sell the Bitumen to Asia where it can then be refined. This can most practically be done by building a pipeline from Alberta to the BC coast, where tankers can trade with Asia.

British Columbia -- best known for its weed, hippies, and rioting douchebag hockey fans -- has decided they'd use the opportunity to stick it to Alberta and get some cash. News commentaries on sites from around the country have been flooded with low-IQ BCers demanding the "unsharing Albertans" give up some "royalty money" to BC in exchange for building the pipeline through BC. Some have even talked about "taking away Alberta's province status" ( ). The Canadian constitution explicitly forbids Provinces legislating interprovincial transportation (section 92). They're trying to pretend like they're not doing that -- they're just not going to ever approve any permits.

Anyway, now a ***** fight has broken out.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle4437308/

Premiers' quarrel over resource revenue threatens to scuttle pipeline

A standoff between premiers has left the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline in peril, with Alberta Premier Alison Redford saying she won’t share any resource revenue and B.C. premier Christy Clark saying she’ll block the project without more cash.

Speaking Tuesday morning at an annual pancake breakfast at the Alberta legislature, Ms. Redford rebuffed B.C.’s day-old demand that more money – an unspecified “fair share” – be included if it’s to support the proposed $6-billion pipeline, which would carry Alberta oil to the B.C. coast for shipment to Asia.

“We will not share royalties, and I’ve seen nothing else proposed, and would not be prepared to consider anything else at this point in time,” the Alberta premier said.

B.C. Premier Christy Clark said she was taken aback by the comments, and repeated that Northern Gateway won’t go through without a slice of royalties. "If Alberta is not willing to even sit down and talk, then it stops here," Ms. Clark vowed.

Speaking to The Globe and Mail in Halifax, where premiers’ meetings begin Wednesday, Ms. Clark said B.C. is assuming most of the environmental risk for very little of the cash – just eight per cent of tax revenue, according to one Calgary consultancy’s report.

The war of words isn’t “constructive,” Ms. Clark said, but she hopes it will be the start of a negotiation.

“But we’re just starting. I think she’ll have time to reconsider and think a little bit more about what next steps will be,” Ms. Clark said, adding: “This project is good for Canada. It’s great for Alberta and at the moment it’s not very good for British Columbia. If Alberta wants to see this project go ahead Alberta is going to have to sit down at the table and talk about it."

Ms. Redford said she didn’t have enough information (B.C. hasn’t, for instance, said how much a “fair share” would be) but has said firmly she will “absolutely not” share royalties, calling it a matter of jurisdiction.

“We’re not even clear at this point in time, and that’s fine, but from my perspective I’m not going to sit back and wait for the conversation to continue to be defined without ensuring that Albertans and Canadians understand what Alberta’s position is. And that is that we’ll continue to protect the jurisdiction we have over our energy resources,” Ms. Redford said.

The pair met privately last Thursday in Edmonton, in what Ms. Clark said was a “difficult” discussion. The meeting was unannounced and saw Ms. Redford’s security detail help Ms. Clark duck out a side door to avoid reporters. The two are set to meet again as premiers gather in Halifax. Ms. Redford’s pitch for a “Canadian Energy Strategy” will be a major discussion point, one that will now surely involve her showdown over royalty sharing with B.C.

Quebec will also lead a discussion on confederation, which Ms. Redford says must include the question of resource rights.

“There’s no doubt some of the comments that we’ve heard yesterday from British Columbia will probably really bring that discussion to the floor,” Ms. Redford told reporters. She said any deal on Gateway could set a dangerous precedent.

“...When we start looking at each particular commercial project from the perspective of what the economic benefit might be to the province, that means that every single time you have an economic project or commercial project, there has to be a renegotiation of the balance sheet. It’s not how Canada has worked. It’s not how Canada has succeeded. And I’m disappointed to hear that.”

Ms. Redford will have at least one ally during meetings in Halifax. Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall said he backs Alberta, saying B.C.’s request for funding sets a dangerous precedent.

“We worry a bit about the thin edge of the wedge. And that’s problematic, because of course there’s a great benefit to those parts of Canada that have had for 100 years port development opportunities. We need to be able to get our products to market, so I think we have some general concern about any precedent that might come from this,” Mr. Wall told The Globe in advance of the meetings. “We would support the Alberta position on it.”

He and also Ms. Clark discussed the issue last week. “We were pretty clear that we couldn’t agree to this,” Mr. Wall said.

In addition to a “fair share,” B.C. laid out four other conditions for its support. The project must pass a National Energy Board inspection that’s already underway, must have “world-leading” prevention and response plans for a marine spill, “world-leading” prevention and response plans for a land spill; and, finally, respect treaty rights and first nations concerns. Enbridge, the company that proposed the pipeline, said it’s already making progress and is going above and beyond the industry standard, but its cause has been hampered by a series of pipeline spills across North America in the past year.

Underpinning the standoff is a ticking electoral clock in B.C., where voters will go to ballot boxes next year. Polls show NDP leader Adrian Dix, who flatly opposes Northern Gateway, on track to oust Ms. Clark’s Liberals and become premier. If Ms. Redford wants B.C.’s help on the project, she’ll either need to strike a quick deal or hope Ms. Clark’s fortunes turn around.

Ms. Redford told the Globe Monday evening that B.C. has other options for raising revenue. “There are a lot of decisions the province of B.C. can make that will allow for people in B.C. to perhaps attain greater benefit, but those are decisions that need to be made within the province of British Columbia. If they decide to increase export taxes or something, that’s up to them,” she said.

Ottawa supports the pipeline, saying accessing Asian markets for Canadian energy is critical to the national economy.

In statements Monday, both the Prime Minister’s Office and Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver steered clear of weighing in on the spat between Alberta and B.C., with Mr. Oliver saying simply: “We look forward to working with the provinces to secure the long-term prosperity of Canada.”

The proposed pipeline would carry Alberta oil – both refined crude and diluted oil sands bitumen – to the northern B.C. coast, where it would be loaded onto tankers. Critics say the risk of a spill outweighs the economic benefit to government, which one consultant’s report estimates at $81-billion over 30 years. About 8 per cent of that revenue was projected to go to the B.C. government, according to one report.

Enbridge last week pledged an additional $500-million for safety precautions along the route, while Alberta announced an external review of its pipeline system.

Ms. Clark said her province is taking 100 per cent of the risk of a leak in the ocean, and 58 per cent risk on the land side.

"I get it that this is a very easy calculation for Alberta. They get the vast majority of the benefits and take almost none of the risk. I get that," she said. "But it's a very different calculation in British Columbia where we're taking the vast majority of the risk and getting almost no benefits from it ... we have to balance that calculation."

"almost no benefits" "almost all of the risk"

I suppose the ridiculously complex process of extracting bitumen isn't risky. It's easy! Anyone could do it.

Also never mind that if there is a spill, Enbridge is fully on the hook to clean it up and pay for it (and restitution).

Douches.

[Hauldren Collider]

BC

[gribbler]

Hopefully Obama only intends to stall the XL pipelines until the next election.

[Jon Miller]

What about sending it to Thunder Bay?

JM

[Ben Kenobi]

This can most practically be done by building a pipeline from Alberta to the BC coast, where tankers can trade with Asia.

Yeah, what Asher won't tell you is that Northern BC is getting assraped by Vancouver et al. Pushing a pipeline through that bypasses Vancouver is what the holdup is - it's not the folks in Northern BC trying to push in a poison pill, its the vancouverites.

Don't lump all British Columbians in one bin.

[regexcellent]

I'm under the impression that most of the people in British Columbia live in Vancouver, around Vancouver, or on Vancouver Island. Yes, there's a port at Prince Rupert, but there are what, a few thousand people there?

BC is like the distilled hippie culture of the American Pacific Northwest. I can't even tell them apart by accent.

[Jon Miller]

There is also Kelowna and Vernon.

JM

[Ben Kenobi]

I'm under the impression that most of the people in British Columbia live in Vancouver, around Vancouver, or on Vancouver Island. Yes, there's a port at Prince Rupert, but there are what, a few thousand people there?

There's roughly 200k people in Northern BC - that includes the stretch from Prince Rupert to Prince George to Dawson Creek. There's a fair amount of Oil on the BC side the oil doesn't stop in AB so this would be a good way to not only hook up the AB oil to BC but also the BC oil to the rest of the province.

But yeah, provincial politics are dominated by the Vancouverites. Everyone else is 'beyond Hope' where few, if any, Vancouverites tread.

The Lower mainland alone has 2.6 million, which is 60 percent of the province with the Island having another 3/4 million people. So altogether, around 3.5 million people live in just the Lower Mainland and Vancouver Island, over 80 percent of the population of the province.

Which is why a pipeline that bypasses these *******s is so difficult to get done.

[regexcellent]

Dawson Creek is in Yukon...or is that Dawson City? I don't remember the Robert Service **** that well.

The real answer is for America to elect a president who isn't beholden to retarded environmentalists that you find on the west coast. By the way, what is it with Pac Northwest, both in the US and Canada, and being filled with drug-addled hippies? I haven't figured it out. Is it all the coffee shops, or is that a symptom rather than a cause?

[Ben Kenobi]

Dawson Creek is in Yukon...or is that Dawson City? I don't remember the Robert Service **** that well.

There's a region in the eastern part of Northern British Columbia that is east of the Rockies, that has all the oil in BC - same thing as what you find in Alberta. It's called the Peace River region. It borders Alberta. Dawson Creek is the start of the Alaska Highway and is on the BC side of the BC/AB border. It's somewhat west and north of Edmonton.

The real answer is for America to elect a president who isn't beholden to retarded environmentalists that you find on the west coast. By the way, what is it with Pac Northwest, both in the US and Canada, and being filled with drug-addled hippies? I haven't figured it out. Is it all the coffee shops, or is that a symptom rather than a cause?

It's the weather in Vancouver.

[Uncle Sparky]

No need to worry. No matter who gets the Canadian bits of money, most of the Tar Sands is already owned by Chinese interests, including CNOOC Ltd, the state owned co. They will get the oil. Doesn't matter how crappy the environmental protection is, if they have to build the pipline through the Harper family cemetery, our fine PM will makesure it happens. Besides owning Husky Energy (HK owned), this just in -
http://www.thestar.com/business/arti...-oil-resources

State-controlled Chinese oil giant CNOOC Ltd. has made a $15.1 billion (U.S.) offer to buy Calgary-based Nexen Inc., which has operations in the oil sands as well as overseas.

The blockbuster deal—China’s biggest takeover of a foreign energy firm—needs sign-offs from shareholders, Industry Canada and the Competition Bureau, reignites the controversy of foreign ownership of Canadian companies and puts political pressure on Ottawa’s energy strategy.

But while nationalists decried the deal, observers expect the takeover will be approved, and predicted more transactions in the offing.

“How are you going to feel about the next three deals, where you’re talking about an additional $50, $60, $100 billion?” said Richard Dixon of the University of Alberta.

He said the question will recur since the Chinese are looking for more secure supplies of oil, but 75 per cent of the world’s supply is held by state-owned companies and not for sale. Of the remaining “free” oil open to acquisition, half the reserves are in Alberta, he said, making it likely the energy-hungry Chinese will be back.

As if to underline his words, on Monday Talisman Energy announced plans to sell a 49 per cent interest in its North Sea operations to China’s Sinopec for $1.5 billion.

Though the Harper Conservatives blocked the takeover of Potash Corp. in BHP Billiton in 2010, they aren’t likely to do the same with Nexen, said Walid Hejazi of Rotman School of Management.

“They have a majority government now. They committed to make Canada more open to foreign investment,” he said, adding that specifically means beyond the United States.

Maude Barlow, who heads the Council of Canadians, was distressed.

“What is the hurry to give the stuff away?” she asked. “Are we the Boy Scout of globalization? Canada is the most open country in the world in terms of come on in and buy anything and we won’t set any rules.”

In Ottawa, the NDP is calling for a thorough and transparent public review of the friendly deal.

CNOOC, or China National Offshore Oil Company, made an $18.5 billion (U.S.) offer for Unocal in the U.S. in 2005, but it fell apart as U.S. politicians raised national security concerns.

This time around, CNOOC has made specific gestures to head off concerns about a state-controlled Chinese enterprise buying an Alberta company.

They include keeping Nexen’s current management team and employees, establishing Calgary as CNOOC’s North and Central American headquarters, which will manage Nexen’s global operations, implementing and enhancing capital expenditure program in Canada, and a proposed listing of CNOOC’s shares on the TSX.

“We intend to be a local company as much as a global one,” CNOOC chief executive Li Fanrong pledged in a conference call Monday.

Related:The deal at a glance

Related:China’s Canadian thirst

The two companies each have something the other wants.

State-controlled CNOOC is looking for energy assets to power Chinese growth.

And Nexen, which has been plagued with operating problems at its Long Lake oil sand operation in Alberta, needs CNOOC’s plentiful cash to fund its plans in Alberta and elsewhere.

CNOOC is offering a hefty premium of more than 60 per cent on Nexen’s recent share price.

The $27.50 (U.S.) offer is a “very high price,” said Lysle Brinker of HIS Herold, whose own analysis put a value of $21.50 a share on Nexen.

Nexen shares closed Monday on The New York Stock Exchange at $25.90 (U.S.), up $8.84.

“Nexen will be challenged to fully finance its projects going forward. Having the deep pockets of the Chinese will be helpful,” Brinker said.

He said it’s unlikely competing bids will emerge.

“This is really a knock-out bid,” he said. “It’s hard to see anyone coming along to top it.”

Experts believe it’s unlikely regulatory hurdles will emerge, either.

While some criticize when Canadian companies are bought by foreign investors, Hejazi at Rotman argues there are benefits, especially for Alberta.

“There’s no hollowing out,” he said. “In fact, all of their commitments are keeping it in Canada.”

But Barlow warned that controlling a state-controlled company like CNOOC is even tougher than controlling private multi-national oil firms in areas like environmental protection.

“It’s a whole new ball game when you’re talking about a state-owner company of a superpower that is scouring the world for permanent access to resources,” she said.

After today’s deals, Chinese companies will have spent about $49 billion on buying Canadian fields and oil companies, according to Bloomberg data, compared to $3.5 billion in U.S. acquisitions.

The takeover will give CNOOC full control of Nexen’s trouble-plagued oil sand operation at Long Lake. The Chinese company acquired Nexen’s partner at Long Lake, OPTI Canada, a year ago after OPTI filed for protection from its creditors.

The Long Lake project uses bitumen from its own underground wells to fuel its operations, and has an on-site upgrader to produce synthetic crude. It has never hit production targets since it began operating in 2008.

Industry Minister Christian Paradis said in a statement CNOOC is expected to file an application shortly for review under the Investment Act. The minister has 45 days for the review, although extensions can be granted. In the end, he must be satisfied “that a proposed investment is likely to be of net benefit to Canada.”

Laura Dawson, president of Dawson Strategic, which specializes in cross-border market issues, said every significant acquisition undergoes Industry Canada’s scrutiny and the “net benefit” test to Canada.

“When it comes to Canadian resources, stuff in the ground, I think the industry minister does tend to give a sober second thought,” she said. “If it’s a manufacturing industry, and nobody wants to pick it up, the net benefit to Canada is pretty clear.

“If it’s a resource that’s in high demand, they give it an extra level of focus,” she said.

But Dawson added any foreign investor —Chinese, Australian, whoever—must follow Canadian environmental, labour, regulatory and commercial rules, and if they don’t, there are severe consequences.

The Chinese are likely to put that to the test, said Dixon. Up to now, the Chinese have mainly acquired minority stakes or partnerships in Canadian energy ventures. The Nexen deal marks a change as they look for a majority stake in a major player, he said.

[Uncle Sparky]

... silly place...

[Asher]

No need to worry. No matter who gets the Canadian bits of money, most of the Tar Sands is already owned by Chinese interests, including CNOOC Ltd, the state owned co. They will get the oil.

Okay, let's step back from the hysteria for a second.

Nexen is a small-time player in the oil sands. The vast majority of the oil sands are owned by America-based multinationals.

[Uncle Sparky]

I thought we did this a couple of months ago. No hysteria needed - currently Canada and Canadians own under 30% and that's going down. But I'm really not concerned - these be nationalized in a few years.

I think it will be hilarious when Canada nationalizes communist Chinese assets.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

That would be hillarous, even more so if they nationalize US assets Go Canada

[Hauldren Collider]

No, that would be idiotic. Who cares if the Chinese own the oil fields? Canada still gets the tax money either way, and Canadians get jobs either way. It's like complaining about outsourcing. Only anti-trade idiots do it.

[Jon Miller]

I can understand why people would care who owns what.

But the chinese should be wealthy, they have been working hard/producing a lot. So they should be owners too.

JM

[Wezil]

Forget the BC government, BC natives will be the big obstacle.

There won't be much $$ left once Alberta pays off everyone with their hand out. It looks like AB could really use some supporters. Too bad they don't seem to think so.

[Asher]

Forget the BC government, BC natives will be the big obstacle.

There won't be much $$ left once Alberta pays off everyone with their hand out. It looks like AB could really use some supporters. Too bad they don't seem to think so.

Just means it's time to get buddy buddy with Washington State.

BC wants to hold Canada hostage unless you pay a toll to use their ports. It's rather unconscionable as a Canadian to do such a thing.

[Wezil]

Despite your opening post - Their (the BC gov's) concerns are legit.

A oil spill off the coast would be an order of magnitude worse than a spill from a pipeline leak. Just saying "Don't worry, we'll clean up the inevitable spill" isn't very reassuring.

But again, this is only a sideshow. The natives are your real problem.

[Asher]

Despite your opening post - Their (the BC gov's) concerns are legit.

A oil spill off the coast would be an order of magnitude worse than a spill from a pipeline leak. Just saying "Don't worry, we'll clean up the inevitable spill" isn't very reassuring.

How many tankers have spilled oil in the past decade?

They're ridiculous -- triple hulled, computer-controlled guidance over very well-charted water, etc. The pipeline is actually the riskier part, not the off-shore spill.

Still, they're already getting something like $7B out of it. That's a lot of money for agreeing to have people spend billions of dollars and generating thousands of jobs in your province.

[Wezil]

Why only a decade? Will you only use this pipeline for ten years?

Money in compensation for damage is nice but you still have the damage.

Unlike Albertans, the rest of us have a hard time accepting the 0% environmental damage spin that you guys lap up so readily (still an almost unanimous gut laugher whenever I mention it to non-Albertans).

[Wezil]

Enbridge.

Wasn't their last spill reaction referred to as "Ketstone cops"?

[Asher]

Why only a decade? Will you only use this pipeline for ten years?

Because tankers today are not the tankers of 10 years ago. There's been a ton of regulation changes.

This is the problem, no one seems to know what they're talking about but that doesn't stop them from being all-knowing.

BC is trying to cash in, there's nothing else about it. If they were truly that "concerned" about environmental disasters, they simply wouldn't allow it AT ALL. They're happy to have the pipeline, they're just trying to take advantage of the situation to wring (more) money out of Alberta.

[Asher]

http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion...810/story.html

Cat fight between Alison Redford, Christy Clark will heat up premiers' meeting

It's not politically correct to call it this, but a real cat fight has broken out between B.C. Premier Christy Clark and Alberta Premier Alison Redford. One of my colleagues jokingly called the war of words between the two women "premieron-premier violence."

While it hasn't come to blows, the rhetorical rage between Canada's two most western premiers has ramped up to an uncharacteristic hissing match.

By some accounts, things didn't go well between the two last Thursday, when Clark flew to Edmonton for a surreptitious meeting at the Alberta legislature.

Clark played coy, avoiding media by having Redford's office set up a running black SUV playing decoy out front while Clark sneaked out a side door to avoid reporters. Where's Greenpeace when you need them? I thought idling vehicles is a veritable crime nowadays?

On Monday, Clark's Liberal government held a news conference that revealed the five conditions that would allow for Enbridge's Northern Gateway pipeline to be built from near Edmonton to Kitimat, B.C.

Some of the conditions - including using the top environmental standards to build the pipeline and to cleanup an unlikely spill on land or sea - are no brainers.

B.C. also demands that Enbridge consult with affected aboriginal groups, which is happening now. What's more, the oilsands industry is recognized as a leader in providing high-paying work and training programs for aboriginals - to the point that earlier this year, Eric Newell, the former CEO and president of Syncrude was chosen as the second recipient of the award for excellence in aboriginal relations from the Canadian Council for Aboriginal Business. The first recipient last year was former prime minister Paul Martin.

Ultimately, it comes down to money. Clark wants Alberta to share its resource royalties for allowing the building of the pipeline, of which 58 per cent of it runs through B.C. As has already been expressed by Redford and Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall, such a deal would set a dangerous precedent in Canada and could grind co-operation and the movement of each province's respective natural resources to a grinding halt.

In Halifax for the Council of the Federation meeting that starts today and runs until Friday, Clark said, that unless Redford agrees to give more money to B.C., Northern Gateway will not be built with B.C.'s blessing.

"If Alberta doesn't decide they want to sit down and engage, the project stops. It's as simple as that," Clark said in an interview Tuesday.

"So the ball is in Alberta's court today to decide whether or not they want to sit down."

Alberta Premier Alison Redford used more diplomatic language, accusing Clark of "pitting one province against the other."

Redford said that she believes Clark is suggesting "that somehow the fundamental fiscal arrangements of confederation need to change.

"When you start doing that, that means every commercial project in Canada will now become or would become a matter for interprovincial negotiation."

Clark's response bordered on insulting.

"I think it's a little unreasonable to suggest that I'm trying to destroy confederation. I'm only trying to get B.C.'s fair share out of this project and make sure we're protecting our environment. It's as simple as that," she said.

"It doesn't have to be some massive project to reopen the constitution for heaven's sake. That's just silly," she added.

Those comments are akin to a cat hissing, raising it's hackles and baring its teeth.

Whenever you see words like "for heaven's sake" and "silly" used by a politician, they are really saying, "my opponent is an idiot."

"We need to sit down as provinces and with the federal government and have a discussion and a negotiation about how B.C. is going to get its fair share. It doesn't mean some rebalancing of the country for goodness sake."

"For goodness sake," is another hiss.

Maybe if Clark learned the language of diplomacy, she wouldn't be so unpopular.

When Clark was asked what powers B.C. has to prevent the pipeline from being built, Clark said her government would have to issue about 60 permits for it to go ahead, and BC Hydro needs to provide power.

But, Clark said it would never come to that.

"It is impossible to imagine that this project could go ahead, through British Columbia, over the objections of the government of the province. It's just impossible to imagine," she said.

She's right. That would be a huge mistake and would never happen.

The proposed pipeline is expected to pump $81 billion in tax revenue into the Canadian economy over 30 years. B.C. would receive about one-tenth of that.

If B.C. wants a bigger cut of the pie, it needs to open discussions with the federal government for that. It can also discuss receiving more money from Enbridge directly. But expecting a toll from a provincial government or even more royalties from Alberta directly would create a tit-for-tat mess that would damage Canada.

Clark reiterated Tuesday what was repeated Monday all day long, that B.C. would assume 100 per cent of the environment marine risk and 58 per cent of the land risk from the pipeline, that would move 500,000 barrels of bitumen per day. But she's incorrect. Enbridge would assume 100 per cent of the cleanup cost of a land spill and the shipping company would be responsible for a marine spill. Taxpayers would not be forced to pay.

Alas, unlike most Council of the Federation meetings, this one promises to be as exciting as a cat fight.

[Main_Brain]

When Russia and Germany had a similiar Problem with Poland we built the Pipeline arround it. Guess thats not an Option here?

[H Tower]

Alllow me to fill in for Alby, as he hasn't posted yet.

"Women and politics, or power, don't mix. Nothing good ever came out a woman in charge."

[Wezil]

When Russia and Germany had a similiar Problem with Poland we built the Pipeline arround it. Guess thats not an Option here?

Sure. That's the Washington State option Asher mentioned.

In all likelihood it will be the easiest route. I don't know why it isn't the 1st option, perhaps Asher can provide that.


BC isn't going to be agreeable at the price offered and as I have pointed out a couple times the natives are almost 100% opposed. This pipeline has some very big hurdles if it is going through BC.

[Wezil]

Because tankers today are not the tankers of 10 years ago. There's been a ton of regulation changes.

This is the problem, no one seems to know what they're talking about but that doesn't stop them from being all-knowing.

Are you really arguing tanker spills are a thing of the past? Really?

Can I add that to the 0% enviro damage claim?

[Elok]

I don't think I'd be terribly fussed about this in any case, but crop yields are already declining from the screwy weather here on the Eastern Shore. I'm not going to fret over lost opportunities to transfer yet more carbon into the atmosphere.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/201...ns-spotty-rain