While avoiding condemning Maxime Bernier’s choice of language and engagement (moving from just winking at white nationalists to now trying to delegitimize the media), Andrew Scheer has resumed his practice of shitposting misleading statistics memes over Twitter, and yesterday it was in relation to gasoline prices. Yes, Statistics Canada reported that the inflation rate in June was 3.0 percent, which is the Bank of Canada’s upper bound for their target, and yes, it was fuelled in part by gasoline prices. (Core inflation, stripped of volatile factors like gasoline, remains closer to the 2.0 percent target, so it’s not really anything to worry about). But why would those gasoline prices be higher? Hmm…

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1030574821543829504

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1030574941060517888

That’s right – the world price of oil has increased over the past year after its recovery from the price collapse nearly two years ago, and that’s an unambiguous good thing for provinces like Alberta, who rely on oil prices being on the higher side for their economies. Trying to cast this as a carbon tax issue – and that oh noes, carbon taxes will make this even worse – is a bit disingenuous considering how small of a fraction of the price that entails.

Since the election, the CPC's attitude to economics is "burn the fucking textbooks, we have a base to pander to."

Of course, that's also the NDP's attitude, which may explain why they continue to not be a serious contender for power.

— Stephen Gordon (@stephenfgordon) August 17, 2018

Meanwhile, with a number of voices (Jason Kenney and Scheer among them) calling for the revival of Energy East in light of the Saudi Arabia spat, energy economist Andrew Leach crunched the numbers on the economic case for that pipeline. Short version: there is no economic case. Stop trying to pretend there is one or blaming Justin Trudeau for its demise.

It's true that the light and synthetic crude market in Western Canada has shifted from mostly trading at a premium to Brent pre-2010 to mostly trading at a discount. It's just that the discount has seldom been large enough to make up the cost of an Energy East toll. pic.twitter.com/fI3XnW82mm

— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) August 16, 2018

To put those into perspective, consider what the proposed Energy East project would have held in terms of shipping costs. These are from their application, and so consider them VERY conservative. Even on a 20yr subscription, the estimated tolls were $9.28/bbl to Saint John. pic.twitter.com/iAsAK9twSV

— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) August 16, 2018

Energy East was always a longer, more expensive route and its viability hinged on 1) access to existing gas infrastructure to "shrink the distance" and 2) shippers not having access to other means to ship out growing supplies of heavy crude, mostly dilbit, from the oil sands.

— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) August 16, 2018

In the absence of other, lower-cost shipping services (KXL, TMX, Enbridge expansions, etc.) or under much more aggressive growth forecasts, the market would have (and did) support Energy East as an option. Things have changed a bit since. pic.twitter.com/eCRPbW5nxi

— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) August 16, 2018

Option value at port matters a lot, and you could have clocked with an egg timer how long it would have taken for Irving to pitch a refinery expansion in Saint John in return for domestic priority on the pipeline. Would they have succeeded? Likely not. But it's an added risk.

— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) August 16, 2018

Unless you're going to argue that we'd be better off seeing a significant increase in the cost of crude acquisition in Eastern Canada or a decrease in the netbacks on lights to Western Canada, that math's not going to change.

— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) August 16, 2018

Good reads:

• Next week’s Cabinet retreat is expected to have ministers focusing on how to craft the narrative that will carry them to the next election.
• The Canadian forestry industry is pushing back against Donald Trump’s latest and wholly incorrect statements about Canadian lumber.
• Here is your update on the state of NAFTA talks.
• The American national security review has cleared the proposed sale of the Trans Mountain pipeline to the Canadian government.
• The Conservative campaign to put a wedge between support for immigration and asylum seekers seems to be bearing fruit, according to a recent survey.
• A union-sponsored survey of CRA auditors shows that *gasp* it’s easier for the wealthy to avoid taxes. Wow. Such insight!
• The National Post has a deep dive into Andrew Scheer’s strategy up to the next election, along with the pitfalls he faces along the way.
• Tony Clement says that the Maxime Bernier we’re seeing on Twitter of late isn’t the same Bernier he supported in the leadership. Okay then.
• Speaking of Bernier, the park in Winnipeg named for the founder of Pakistan that he railed against just had its sign destroyed, so well done there.
• Susan Delacourt notes the Liberals are spending time talking about old promises when they’ve been largely on the defensive of late.
• Jen Gerson offers some pointers to Jagmeet Singh about what he could learn from Rachel Notley.
• Kevin Carmichael gives us a sense of what to expect now that inflation has made a comeback.

Odds and ends:

Here’s a look at how Candice Bergen, is dealing with being mistaken for Candice Bergen, Murphy Brown actress, on Twitter.

Help Routine Proceedings expand. Support my Patreon.