1. What is "CStar"? (Royalty reduction program to incentivize well drilling (2016, NDP govt.).
2. What is the proposed #RStar program and how would it extend CStar?
3. What royalties are (fee paid to owner of a mineral like oil, gas, coal by producer). 1/n
CStar simplified: Left graph shows how C* works. A formula that represents drilling costs (based on depth, horizontal reach and fracturing sand costs) is used to calculate C*. The well licensee pays reduced 5% royalty until the well produces product equaling C*. 2/n
Once C* is reached the higher, normal royalty rate (up to approx. 40% max.) varies based on factors such as type of product(s) produced by the well, market price, etc. until the well reaches Maturity Threshold, after which the percent royalty once again starts to reduce.
3/n
RStar (details being sorted out): R* simply extends C* or increases the length of time the well produces at the reduced 5% royalty rate. R* is a credit for cleanup costs expended on a different well or wells ($1 for $1 or other amounts not yet set). R* is blue graph line. 4/n
Link to Alberta's "Modernized Royalty Framework (MRF)" provided below.
Provincial (publicly-owned) minerals are leased to producers who pay a percentage of revenue from all wells (or mining) to the province based on contractual & legislated factors. 5/n
RStar - citizen pay - is contrary to laws that require well licensee (polluter) to pay to close its wells and clean up its sites. Failing this, the Orphan Fund (funded by levies on industry) is to cover "closure" costs so citizens are always protected (never have to pay): 6/n
A Pilot for some form of RStar (Liability Incentive Plan Pilot) with a cap of $100 million is proposed to target the worst, contaminated sites owned by existing companies that have been inactive for at least 20 years. Remediation has clearly been delayed, which is illegal.
7/n
As such a Pilot program is proposed by the Premier and minister of energy that would have to be conducted illegally absent significant amendments to existing law (proponents not outlining any law changes). UCP refused to endorse polluter pay principle in the Legislature.
8/n
Attend a session on March 23 to protect polluter pay. The principle applies to all industrial site cleanup, not just oil and gas. If we allow a leak in the polluter pay dam so to speak citizens could be overwhelmed with over a $trillion in various industry cleanup costs. 9/n
Polluter pay is the only way.
Special thanks to the following hosts of Protecting Polluter Pay. Feel free to use the above graphs to explain C* and R* if you so choose. Happy to contribute however I can. @KathleenGanley @heathersweetab
10/n finish
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
a) Ensure the Regulator charges a levy on industry each year to be sufficient to retire all orphans as required by law; or
b) Cabinet can name another body to do the job in accordance with law if the Regulator can’t or won’t, as also contemplated by law.
2/n
The law is Part 11 of the Oil & Gas Conservation Act. We just need to ensure it’s enforced or make the changes the law provides for when enforcement is an issue. No need to reinvent the wheel on the world’s best orphan law!
UCP Bill 1 also created Alberta Critical Infrastructure Defence Act. The law is also SAID to be a clamp down on protestors, but it clearly allows for huge fines and jail terms:
- for those entering on a well site without excuse; or,
- for oil & gas personnel going off site. 1/n
To facilitate the discussion I drew in red boundaries of a well site said to be established by a 1962 "surface lease" below:
Inside the red boundary is "essential infrastructure" of the well licensee. Outside the red boundary is the agricultural "essential infrastructure". 2/n
Section 2 of the Act entitled "Prohibition" sets out the offence, which is to ENTER UPON "essential infrastructure" without lawful right, excuse, or justification: 3/n
When NDP formed government, wells named as orphans by the AER increased because licensees went bankrupt. The governing party has no control and should not interfere with how the AER enforces the law governing the Orphan Fund. Bankruptcy is federal law.
2/n
Premier says NDP “weren’t making polluters pay”. Whether this statement is linked to the increase in so-called abandoned wells is not clear. Regardless it’s regulators and tribunals that make polluters pay, not the government of the day.
3/n
This claim that the AER does not need to consider the public interest is inaccurate. It can be traced back to when the AER’s enabling statute was drafted, but related regulations (below) that require consideration of what amounts to the public interest were not yet drafted. 1/n
The courts have also confirmed that the AER must consider the public interest and the AER denied metallurgical coal licenses and permits finding the project was not in the public interest. That decision still stands.
2/n
It’s true that the Responsible Energy Development Act is silent on the public interest or related factors for the AER to consider. However, section 15 of the REDA addresses this by referring to any factor it must consider such as in S. 3 of the REDA Regulations given above. 3/n
I must be an “activist” according to @BlairKing_ca’s definition. One Tweeting in support of the Alberta Energy Regulator had better be offering only extremely limited support like I do. This is because the AER just can’t manage to carry out its complex, difficult mandate. 1/n
I can prove what I said. In fact the record of AER Proceeding 411 and Decision Report No. 2022 ABAER 002 clearly document just how incompetent, captured, or both the AER is. Many other documents available from the AER’s website prove this.
2/n
I agree with @BlairKing_ca that there are some honest civil servants at the AER. But if they are ignorant of the law, poorly trained, don’t understand essential duty of procedural fairness, or are threatened or overruled by their captured superiors, they’re neutered.
3/n
Has @PeterGuthrie99 provided a bold, courageous solution to oil and gas municipal tax delinquency?
Or is Ministerial Order 043/2023 to the Regulator just a "nothingburger" as per a law professor emeritus? 1/n edmonton.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=2…
Prof. @BankesNigel breaks down the Ministerial Order from the Minister giving instructions to the @AER_news in this Tweet to the Minister: In short, he concludes it's a nothing burger drafted in haste: 2/n
The scandalous fact that UCP MLA's openly denounced the polluter pay principle by defeating Motion 505 in the #Ableg was overshadowed by the municipal tax "crackdown" news. Does this account for the hastily-drafted wording about "selling" well licenses (they can't be sold): 3/n