Alberta Return 2014-2021: Fill & Download for Free

GET FORM

Download the form

How to Edit and draw up Alberta Return 2014-2021 Online

Read the following instructions to use CocoDoc to start editing and completing your Alberta Return 2014-2021:

  • At first, seek the “Get Form” button and press it.
  • Wait until Alberta Return 2014-2021 is shown.
  • Customize your document by using the toolbar on the top.
  • Download your finished form and share it as you needed.
Get Form

Download the form

The Easiest Editing Tool for Modifying Alberta Return 2014-2021 on Your Way

Open Your Alberta Return 2014-2021 Right Away

Get Form

Download the form

How to Edit Your PDF Alberta Return 2014-2021 Online

Editing your form online is quite effortless. You don't have to download any software via your computer or phone to use this feature. CocoDoc offers an easy tool to edit your document directly through any web browser you use. The entire interface is well-organized.

Follow the step-by-step guide below to eidt your PDF files online:

  • Browse CocoDoc official website from any web browser of the device where you have your file.
  • Seek the ‘Edit PDF Online’ icon and press it.
  • Then you will open this free tool page. Just drag and drop the file, or append the file through the ‘Choose File’ option.
  • Once the document is uploaded, you can edit it using the toolbar as you needed.
  • When the modification is completed, tap the ‘Download’ option to save the file.

How to Edit Alberta Return 2014-2021 on Windows

Windows is the most conventional operating system. However, Windows does not contain any default application that can directly edit document. In this case, you can download CocoDoc's desktop software for Windows, which can help you to work on documents efficiently.

All you have to do is follow the steps below:

  • Install CocoDoc software from your Windows Store.
  • Open the software and then select your PDF document.
  • You can also upload the PDF file from Google Drive.
  • After that, edit the document as you needed by using the diverse tools on the top.
  • Once done, you can now save the finished paper to your cloud storage. You can also check more details about how can you edit a PDF.

How to Edit Alberta Return 2014-2021 on Mac

macOS comes with a default feature - Preview, to open PDF files. Although Mac users can view PDF files and even mark text on it, it does not support editing. Thanks to CocoDoc, you can edit your document on Mac easily.

Follow the effortless guidelines below to start editing:

  • To begin with, install CocoDoc desktop app on your Mac computer.
  • Then, select your PDF file through the app.
  • You can upload the document from any cloud storage, such as Dropbox, Google Drive, or OneDrive.
  • Edit, fill and sign your template by utilizing this tool.
  • Lastly, download the document to save it on your device.

How to Edit PDF Alberta Return 2014-2021 with G Suite

G Suite is a conventional Google's suite of intelligent apps, which is designed to make your job easier and increase collaboration across departments. Integrating CocoDoc's PDF document editor with G Suite can help to accomplish work handily.

Here are the steps to do it:

  • Open Google WorkPlace Marketplace on your laptop.
  • Look for CocoDoc PDF Editor and get the add-on.
  • Upload the document that you want to edit and find CocoDoc PDF Editor by selecting "Open with" in Drive.
  • Edit and sign your template using the toolbar.
  • Save the finished PDF file on your cloud storage.

PDF Editor FAQ

Why are oil prices turning negative in the U.S. and abroad? What does this mean?

I’m going to try to cover a few different angles in this answer:What is (and isn’t) happening with oil prices right nowWhat the next few months might look likeWhat all this means in economic termsAs preface, my standing here is seven years of living and working in Alberta. While I’ve had just one oilfield client, most of my other Albertan clients operated in a world dominated by downstream effects from said sector, which necessitated me learning a thing or two about it.That said, this is an enormously complex subject, and I’m not an energy analyst. As such, I’ve done my best to be clear about what I know vs. what I suspect. (As ever, my cash-for-corrections policy applies to all that follows.)Ok, diving in.I. Oil Prices TodayLots of buzz today about negative oil prices. To take one particularly dramatic screencap (h/t Chris Hua):But while these numbers make for remarkable headlines and watercooler discussions, they’re not quite what they appear (as Chris knows, to be clear).The skinny version:Lots of people who don’t want to actually buy oil still like to trade it. (This could be for speculation, as part of a hedge, or for other more arcane reasons.)The largest US market for oil futures is the NYMEX (part of the CME Group).Their oil futures benchmark is the WTI (a grade of oil that reflects a historically popular crude output from Texas).TheIr standard WTI futures contract is an obligation to take possession of 1,000 barrels of WTI-grade oil within a given month at a pre-agreed price.All WTI futures settle in Cushing, Oklahoma. (That is, if you purchase a WTI futures contract and hold it to maturity, you have to arrange to actually receive 1,000 barrels of physical crude from Cushing by x date.)Since lots of investors have no desire for the physical product, they traditionally roll their futures forward by selling one month’s contract(s) a day or two prior to maturity and then using said money to buy new ones.Usually this works fine, as someone in the supply chain will just buy those contracts for something close to the day’s spot price.In normal times this is an exceedingly mundane bit of the world’s financial plumbing. But then COVID-19 fell upon us and times were no longer normal. In just two months global oil demand dropped by 20%-30% (sources vary, and none can really be considered authoritative given the complexity of the calculation).While this sort of demand drop has happened to other industries too, the oil economy has some weird quirks:It can be prohibitively expensive to shut down production. Some machinery and infrastructure just isn’t designed to be turned off, or to run below certain thresholds.There’s an impenetrable thicket of contracts across the supply chain. For example, a given producer may have minimum volume obligations to a given pipeline that come with onerous penalties if unmet. Plus there’s an even deeper thicket of insurance claims / swaps.The upshot is that producers will sometimes keep the pumps going despite significant losses so as to avoid even larger losses.Historically, global demand has kept prices from actually going negative. If prices slumped too far buyers would just throw the oil in storage and wait.The trouble is that said system wasn’t built for a black swan event like COVID. We’ve never had this much of a supply/demand mismatch before, and global storage is now rapidly approaching capacity.This has had nasty effects on prices.As for today’s madness, it happens that April 21st is the maturity date for May WTI futures (the CLK20 batch).Why this matters:Imagine you’re a typical trader. You buy futures as a hedge or whatever. But you have no means of ever taking a physical delivery. You’d have to hire some company to retrieve and sell/store the oil on your behalf, which would be an expensive hassle.So you go to sell your maturing contracts on the open market as per usual, except this time global demand is plummeting and storage anywhere near Cushing is suddenly nigh impossible to come by.You didn’t buy an oil option. You bought an oil contract. Meaning you must take possession of the underlying or NYMEX is going to penalize you harshly. And once you have said oil you’re subject to government regulations re: storage and disposal. You can’t just burn or dump it.So buyers look around and say “sure we’ll take your contract off your hands — if you pay us enough”.You don’t care for this. But you have no real alternatives. Thus you pay up.Basically what we saw today was a classic squeeze. It isn’t that oil suddenly lost all value to end consumers. It’s just a weird season in a complex global market wherein settlement day came at a very bad time for lots of contract-holders in a specific region. WTI traders expected business as normal. But the business had changed and they were caught off guard.In contrast, here are the current prices for NYMEX-WTI futures settling in future months:Certainly not great. (WTI was around $50 USD before the COVID crisis began.)But are those left-column prices actually going to hold when future contracts come due? That’s a many-many-billions-of-dollars question.II. Oil Prices This YearOversimplifying a bit, there are four basic inputs to the price of oil-derived fuels:Getting them out of the groundGetting them to a refineryRefining / packagingTransporting them to an end userAs it happens, these costs are very uneven.Take Alberta:Most of our oil/gas comes from wells that require complicated and energy-intensive extractionLabor costs here are substantial (most rig folk do 12 hour shifts for 10-14 days straight, often in remote/inhospitable places, for which they need to be generously compensated)Alberta is landlocked, meaning our exports need to travel great distances by train/pipeline to get to a port/refineryMost of our oil products are “heavy” and require above-average refiningPutting this together, we understand why WCS (Western Canadian Select) trades at a steep discount to WTI. Even in good times this was often a $20/bbl USD delta.So what happens when WTI approaches $0?(We’ll get to an actual answer in a minute. For now you get the rhetorical point.)Anyway, as to the macro/global situation:The three largest oil producers today are the US (18m barrels per day), Saudi Arabia (12m bpd), and Russia (11m bpd). (These numbers shift, so don’t take them as ultra-precise. But for easy math we can use 100m bpd as our baseline for global output, which is fairly close to actual.)Per above, these countries have very different cost structures.Saudi Arabia has everything easy (trivial extraction, cheapish migrant labor, nearby/domestic refineries, central location for exporting, etc)The US has trickier extraction and much higher labor/regulatory costsWhile Russia has better labor costs than the US in general, most of their oil is in remote/frozen SiberiaAs global demand has dropped, said countries have been uncooperative as far as agreeing on both production cuts and price stabilizationThe Saudis agreed to a production cut with OPEC+, then started offering heavy discounts immediately thereafter (while they need prices to rebound eventually to make their national budget work, they’re rich enough to be patient)Russia has low debt, lots of foreign reserves, and very strong geopolitical incentives to see oil ecosystems in US/Canada collapseMost producers in the US will need government intervention to avoid bankruptcy (while breakeven numbers vary by region/type, it seems that sustained WTI pricing under $40/bbl would wipe out a huge chunk of the industry within the year)In a world where demand stays 20% below baseline for even a few more months, the US and Canada are in deep trouble. That’s because Russia and the Saudis can pretend at diplomacy by agreeing to concessions that don’t actually change the core dynamic all that much. Say they confer with a few neighbors and bring joint production down from ~30m bpd to ~23m bpd. This would still only be equal to roughly a third of the theoretical oversupply, thus still allowing buyers enormous leverage, thus still keeping prices perilously low.Can Trump and OPEC+ work something out? It’s possible. Every nation has its pressure points. But given how most in OPEC+ would benefit from permanent damage to US/CAD production capacity, it’s difficult to imagine a scenario in which they don’t distract/delay. (Bear in mind that the US is in an election year, and Canada currently has a vulnerable minority government. These are not ideal bargaining positions.)That all said, what’s going to happen in a month when the next set of futures contracts approaches settlement? Will much have changed?Maybe more countries do open back up. But even raising global demand to say 85% of baseline wouldn’t quite solve the problem. Pricing won’t recover until demand actually meets reduced production. There’s a chasm to close there right now.The storage situation isn’t likely to improve. The glut is just too large. All the tankers in the world have a joint capacity of something like 200–250m barrels (‘Unprecedented levels’ of floating storage, but where next for the tanker market?). But most still have deliveries to do, and the current surplus is quickly filling all available containers. What happened in Oklahoma will happen in more places.So maybe those June WTI futures do close at $20 or higher. It’s possible. But even that price would be something close to a death knell for many US/CAN producers. And that would still require a lot of things going very right.[EDIT: Some eight hours after first writing this, June WTI futures are down from 21.36 to 14.87. July’s are also down over $4. The only good news is that May’s numbers are now positive again, if barely. About $3 /bbl right now. We’ll see where they end up when the contracts close out for the month at 2:30pm ET today.]III. Likely FalloutI’m going to focus mainly on Alberta/Canada, as it’s the market I understand best.Some baseline context:The oil/gas industry here contributes something like $20bn CAD a year to provincial/federal coffers via royalties and taxes. (This doesn’t include income taxes on ~500k workers. More here: What Canada's energy sector paid governments from 2000 to 2018.)The high average pay from said jobs circulates everywhere in Alberta. It’s what makes the larger provincial economy sustainable. And high income-tax receipts from Alberta are also central to inter-provincial transfer schemes / federal budget balancing.Alberta set up a rainy day wealth fund decades ago. But this was severely mismanaged, and only had $18 billion CAD in it as of Dec 2019. (In contrast, Norway’s equivalent had well over $1 trillion USD when this crisis started, despite roughly half the daily production in recent years.)Alberta’s economy never quite recovered from the 2014 oil crash. Unemployment when I moved here in 2012 was a little over 4% (more or less full employment). Just before COVID started it was 7.2% (and about triple that for young men, who are historically the province’s top earners).Keeping that in mind, here are the underlying assumptions behind Alberta’s 2020–2021 budget (which had already been revised downward before COVID began):Translating this:The province was expecting some $4.3bn CAD in oil royalties (gas is an aside here).That number was based on ~3.7m bpd output at an average price of $51.20 CAD /bbl and a $.76 USD exchange rate.(Note: The price for CLS crude is different than for WCS bitumen. And even those are just two rough categories that don’t cover the full range of export grades. But the budget didn’t get more specific, so I won’t here either.)Anyway, comparing to current numbers:WCS is currently trading at $4.23 USD / $6 CAD. That’s about 12% of expected.Our dollar is down to $0.71 USD.Production is currently ~90% of baseline, and will likely fall to 50-60%.Oh, and unemployment in Alberta is projected to soon hit 25%.Oh, and capex investment (which creates jobs and obligates producers to stick around for future decades) is rapidly drying up.Oh, and many of the production facilities going offline now can only be brought back online at tremendous costs. So the choice is between managing that and eating the ongoing losses as WCS falls towards $0 (or perhaps even to negative levels).Put another way, Alberta is fucked. Our lack of diversification caught up to us, and even extraordinary intervention by the federal government (likely a necessity) won’t fully curtail the generational damage being inflicted.While the prognosis may not be quite as dire for Texas or Oklahoma or the Dakotas (I really don’t know), all oil-dependent economies are facing the same general reckoning. Even if demand/prices recover by next year, the damage will have been done.Hence why I’m sympathetic to protestors who want to re-open the global economy. I don’t think the science checks out. Based on what we know today, letting the curve go unmanaged seems likely to cause more net carnage than a well-considered shutdown. But I can appreciate that this is not enormously comforting to people watching what was already a bad situation descend into something from which there can be no easy return.Edit/Update January 2021Coming back here some nine months later to make two notes:Bloomberg published an interesting backgrounder on some (likely legal) trading shenanigans that played into just how aggressive the prices went at settlement in April.The global lockdowns in the spring lifted much faster than most feared, allowing oil demand to recover to something close to baseline before any kind of catastrophic damage was done to this part of the economy. We should be very thankful for that, while also appropriately alarmed at what would happen if a worse pandemic hit. (Not to trivialize COVID, which is a serious disease brought on by a serious virus, but this was not the big one. And as far as stress tests go, what we learned is that the system can handle huge swings that go on for a month or two. But should we ever be in a position where the world couldn’t restart again that quickly, lots of these markets are going to break in weird ways.)

Why is Canada warming twice as fast as the rest of the world? Is it possible to reverse this?

This claim is false and I know first hand having lived here all my life that Canada is getting much colder with the Polar Vortex coming down every year. The data shows Canada is barely warming at less than half of the UN predicted amount.Historic blizzard sets new all-time daily snowfall record -- Newfoundland and Labrador, CanadaPosted by Julie Celestial onJanuary 20, 2020 at 15:04 UTC(1 year ago)Categories: Featured articles, Ice & snow, Severe stormsA powerful blizzard brought intense winds and record-breaking snowfall to parts of the Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador on Friday and Saturday, January 17 and 18, 2020. "It’s snow and a hurricane, and snow and a hurricane shuts down a city," Natural Resources Minister Seamus O'Regan​ said, referring to the scale of the blizzard and epic snowfall rates in the province's capital, St. John's. One person is missing.The area of low pressure responsible for the snow and wind emerged from the northeastern United States early Thursday, January 16 and began to rapidly intensify as it moved over the Gulf of Maine, according to Environment Canada.The system deepened into a powerful storm as it tracked southeast of the Avalon Peninsula on Friday, before departing into the North Atlantic early Saturday, January 18.The storm battered the eastern half of the island with heavy snowfall, extremely high winds, and damaging coastal storm surge.Epic snowfall rates of more than 10 cm (3.9 inches) per hour were falling in St. John's at times through Friday morning. By the lunch hour, over 30 cm (11.8 inches) was already on the ground.In 24 hours ending 06:00 UTC on January 18 (02:30 NST), 76.2 cm (30 inches) of snow was recorded at St. John's International Airport, breaking the previous all-time daily snowfall record set on April 5, 1999, at 68.4 cm (27 inches).Canada is Warming at Only 1/2 the Rate of Climate Model Simulations3 weeks agoCharles RotterReposted from Dr. Roy Spencer’s BlogJanuary 21st, 2021 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.Canada has huge year-to-year variability in temperatures due to its strong continental climate. So, to examine how observed surface temperature trends compare to climate model simulations, you need many of those simulations, each of which exhibits its own large variability.I examined the most recent 30-year period (1991-2020), using a total of 108 CMIP5 simulations from approximately 20 different climate models, and computed land-surface trends over the latitude bounds of 51N to 70N, and longitude bounds 60W to 130W, which approximately covers Canada. For observations, I used the same lat/lon bounds and the CRUTem5 dataset, which is heavily relied upon by the UN IPCC and world governments. All data were downloaded from the KNMI Climate Explorer.First let’s examine the annual average temperature departures from the 1981-2010 average, for the average of the 108 model simulations compared to the observations. We see that Canada has been warming at only 50% the rate of the average of the CMIP5 models; the linear trends are +0.23 C/decade and +0.49 C/decade, respectively. Note that in 7 of the last 8 years, the observations have been below the average of the models.Fig. 1. Yearly temperature departures 1991-2020 from the 1981-2010 mean in Canada in observations (blue) versus the average of 108 CMIP5 climate model simulations (red). The +/-1 standard deviation bars indicate the variability among the 108 individual model simulations.Ottawa freezes its way to coldest capital city in the worldTemperature slipped below those of capitals in Russia, Kazakhstan and MongoliaCBC News ·Posted: Jan 19, 2019 9:44 AM ET | Last Updated: January 19Ottawa is the seventh coldest national capital in the world based on average annual temperature. (Canadian Press)If you were out early Saturday morning and felt like you were in the coldest place on earth, you were right — at least when it comes to capital cities around the globe.The temperature in Ottawa fell below every other national capital in the world on Saturday morning — and that doesn't include the wind chill.Ulan Bator, the capital of Mongolia, is on average the coldest capital city in the world, according to World Atlas.But the temperature in Ottawa — ranked the seventh coldest capital based on annual average temperature — dipped to –24 C, compared to –23 C in Ulan Bator.With the wind chill it felt like minus Горящие туры из Минска: агентство SEAVIEW comparison here are the temperatures in other capital cities that are colder than Ottawa on average:Astana –3 CMoscow –4 CHelsinki –2 CReykjavik 1 CTallinn –2 CTo top it all off, Environment Canada has issued an extreme cold warning and a winter storm warning for Ottawa.Ottawa and some surrounding areas could see up to 25 centimetres of snow over the next 24 hours.https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/o..Further, it does not matter as the so called global warming is global and Canada is not the centre of the climate universe at only 6% of the world’s land mass. We make no difference to global warming which is not happening.Writing in Real Clear Markets, Aaron Brown looked at the official NASA global temperature data and noticed something surprising. From February 2016 to February 2018, "global average temperatures dropped by 0.56 degrees Celsius." That, he notes, is the biggest two-year drop in the past century."The 2016-2018 Big Chill," he writes, "was composed of two Little Chills, the biggest five month drop ever (February to June 2016) and the fourth biggest (February to June 2017). A similar event from February to June 2018 would bring global average temperatures below the 1980s average."https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-global-warming-earth-cooling-media-bias/Highest snowfall observed in N.L. storm was 93 cm: Environment CanadaBy Kerri Breen Global NewsPosted January 19, 2020 3:56 pmUpdated January 20, 2020 9:13 pmTimelapse captures the Newfoundland winter storm coming through before winds blow at night – Jan 19, 2020Newly-released figures from Environment Canada are shedding light on the magnitude of Newfoundland‘s historic blizzard.READ MORE: Troops arrive in Newfoundland to assist after historic blizzardGlobal temperatures are in a long term 7000 year decline.Holocene climatic optimum - WikipediaThis graph is taken from Wikipedia. It shows eight different reconstructions of Holocene temperature. The thick black line is the average of these. Time progresses from left to right.On this graph the Stone Age is shown only about one degree warmer than present day, but most sources mention that Scandinavian Stone Age was about 2-3 degrees warmer than the present; this need not to be mutually excluding statements, because the curve reconstructs the entire Earth's temperature, and on higher latitudes the temperature variations were greater than about equator.Some reconstructions show a vertical dramatic increase in temperature around the year 2000, but it seems not reasonable to the author, since that kind of graphs cannot possibly show temperature in specific years, it must necessarily be smoothed by a kind of mathematical rolling average, perhaps with periods of hundred years, and then a high temperature in a single year, for example, 2004 will be much less visible.The trend seems to be that Holocene's highest temperature was reached in the Hunter Stone Age about 8,000 years before present, thereafter the temperature has generally been steadily falling, however, superimposed by many cold and warm periods, including the modern warm period.However, generally speaking, the Holocene represents an amazing stable climate, where the cooling through the period has been limited to a few degrees.History of Earth's ClimateFurther the alleged double warming by Canada is not happening - there is nothing to reverse. If you live in Canada you know this data is bunk as Canada is bloody cold and much worse than usual for the past decade or more. Here are examples from the real world not fudged data.Climate change is any significant long-term change in the expected patterns of average weather of a region (or the whole Earth) over a significant period of time. W.This means while we can observe the weather we cannot ever observe climate change as it is just a made up statistic of weather over a long time scale.CANADA AND THE WORLD ARE IN THE GRIPS OF AN ICE AGE FROM 2.5 MILLION YEARS AGOWEATHER IS ALL THERE IS WHEN IT COMES TO CLIMATE CHANGEThe issue is whether there is a new average weather pattern measured over centuries or millennia that is not just natural variation? The answer is clearly no as the average weather swings naturally between hot and cold without an increase of more than 0.8 C over the past 150 years. This does not qualify for global warming climate change.It is relevant to observe the weather record both hot and cold as over time they will create a climate statistical base..The idea that Canada needs a carbon tax to prevent MORE above average warming here based on data over last 70 years is unbelievable. The data is surely suspect for those of us living here for the past 70 years. The proof the earth is cooling again is seen visibly by the expansion of polar ice POLAR VORTEX.EATHERJanuary 30, 2019 3:52 pmUpdated: January 31, 2019 4:28 pmCanadian prairies colder than North Pole, almost as cold as MarsBy Mike KoncanWeather Anchor/Reporter Global News43

153.4k

 

 

 

moreToronto under extreme cold weather alert ahead of big temperature drop SundayFullscreenWATCH: Extreme cold warnings for much of Canada- A A +ListenThe term ‘extreme’ has been circulating across the continent as provinces and states experience cold weather, but few places are as cold as the prairies.Polar Vortex is also a great buzzword, and it has a major impact on the weather and temperatures around a big chunk of the country.The atmospheric conditions are an upper level low pressure system higher up above the earth’s surface. Around the eastern prairies, a ridge of high pressure has built up, essentially meaning that the eastern prairies are getting a steady stream of air from the top of the world.READ MORE: Extreme cold warning continues along eastern SaskatchewanSimply put, Manitoba and Saskatchewan are being blasted by air from above the Arctic, making them the coldest places in the country, and quite possibly on the planet.Cold air sitting over much of Canada Wednesday Jan 30, 2019.Global NewsThe coldest place in the country on Wednesday is Key Lake Sask., with an air temperature reading of -47.2 Celsius.The award for coldest major city in Canada goes to Winterpeg. At 7 a.m. the temperature was -39.8 C and the wind chill was as cold as -52.Winnipeg has been dealing with colder than normal temperatures for almost two straight weeks. Typically this time of year, temperatures range from -21 C to -11 C. Only once in the last two weeks have temperatures gotten to that point — cold nights below -25 C have become the norm.Colder than where?When it gets this cold, it’s hard not to compare to other notable frozen locations, as it turns out, -39.8 C is hard to beat.The North Pole was expected to hover around -32 C Wednesday.Siberia, typically the coldest place on earth, will likely deal with light snow and temperatures ranging from -15 to -23 C. The winds there will also be light, so wind chill will not be much of a factor.Taking it out of our atmosphere, Mars hasn’t given an updated forecast for Wednesday, but expected a high of -7 C Tuesday. Even though the forecasted low was -70 C, an afternoon on the red planet doesn’t sound so bad compared to Winnipeg.WATCH: Winnipeg’s freezing cold temperatures are colder than MarsThe extended cold snap for around the prairies has broken some records in northern Manitoba but nothing for Winnipeg. Record lows this time of year usually range between -40 and -44 and have typically been set back in the 1880 and 1890s.Where Winnipeg could break a record is in coldest daily maximum temperature — the coldest “high.” This time of year, the records go back to some of the coldest dates in local memory as recent as 2004 but also 1996 and 1966. They also go back even further for the first days of February back to 1886 and 1891.WATCH: ‘Polar vortex’ grips major U.S. cities in historic low temperaturesThe record on Jan. 30, set in 2004, is -30.8 C. Winnipeg was expecting a high of -31 C Wednesday, so it will be close.As the weekend approaches, the temperatures around the southern prairies are expected to moderate and start to return closer to normal with these days likely ending up as the coldest of the entire winter.See also weather stations in Europe shown no warming since 1988.ClimatView / World Climate / TCCCanada will Break 100-Year-Old Cold Record This Apriladmin March 24, 2019 News Comments Off on Canada will Break 100-Year-Old Cold Record This April 1,569 ViewsFor the first week of April, the coldest temperature anomalies on earth could be found in Alberta and Saskatchewan. This means the province has been experiencing the biggest gap between recorded daily temperatures and what is normal.Record-breaking cold will hit Eastern Canada, including Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal this April. Environment Canada said more than 20 communities in Ontario will experience extreme cold weather than they had ever recorded in April.Both Quebec and Ontario will experience unusal freezing temperatures , with Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba reaching temperatures far below normal recorded in April.British Columbia is the only province expected to see normal temperatures this spring.Canada’s southern regions may not have it as bad but are still affected to a significant degree. Parts of Manitoba are going to face with coldest temperature as low as -25 C, while northern Ontario and northern Quebec are going to see temperatures of around -20 C and -25 C, respectively.Yes, it’s true.it’s almost spring and Canadian spring season is going to absolutely suck.To give you an example, temperatures are expected to hit the -25 C and -34 C in April 2019.April is shaping up to be the coldest month on record in Canada.For the first week of April, the coldest temperature anomalies on earth could be found in Alberta and Saskatchewan. This means the province has been experiencing the biggest gap between recorded daily temperatures and what is normal.Record-breaking cold will hit Eastern Canada, including Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal this April. Environment Canada said more than 20 communities in Ontario will experience extreme cold weather than they had ever recorded in April.Both Quebec and Ontario will experience unusal freezing temperatures , with Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba reaching temperatures far below normal recorded in April.Yes, it’s true.it’s almost spring and Canadian spring season is going to absolutely suck.To give you an example, temperatures are expected to hit the -25 C and - -34 C in April 2019.British ColumbiaVancouver cold: City experiences chilliest February on recordAverage daily temp was just 0.3 C compared to 30 year average of 4.9 CCBC News · Posted: Mar 01, 2019 1:19 PM PT | Last Updated: March 1A person walks a dog as heavy snow falls in Vancouver, on Feb. 10, 2019. (Darryl Dyck/Canadian Press)You can make fun of Vancouverites' apparent weakness for cold weather all you want, but the past month did set a record for freezing temperatures.According to Environment Canada, February was the coldest month since records began being kept in 1937.ECCC Weather British Columbia✔@ECCCWeatherBCThe numbers are in! Think it was a cold February? That would be an understatement with several locations across the province recording one of their coldest Februaries on record! ‪#BCwx ‪#Brrr ‪#Febrrruary74The numbers are in! Think it was a cold February? That would be an understatement with several locations across the province recording one of their coldest Februaries on record! #BCwx #Brrr #Febrrruary pic.twitter.com/2hpDecHr5z— ECCC Weather British Columbia (@ECCCWeatherBC) March 1, 2019The numbers are in! Think it was a cold February? That would be an understatement with several locations across the province recording one of their coldest Februaries on record! #BCwx #Brrr #Febrrruary pic.twitter.com/2hpDecHr5z— ECCC Weather British Columbia (@ECCCWeatherBC) March 1, 2019Twitter Ads info and privacyThe average daily temperature for the month was 0.3 C compared to the past 30 year average of 4.9 C, a difference of more than four degrees.Children bundled up throw rocks on one of Vancouver's beaches in February 2019. The month was the coldest since records began being kept in 1937. (CBC)The city also made it into the top 10 snowiest Februarys with 31.2 centimetres of the white stuff. The record, 61 centimetres, was set in 1949.In February in Vancouver, there were 13 days when snow fell. That is 11 days more than the average for the month, which is two.Victoria also had the snowiest February on record with 68.3 centimetres of snow. More than 26 centimetres fell on Feb. 11, according to Environment Canada.According to CBC meteorologist Johanna Wagstaffe, the long range outlook for March for the coast is for colder than average temperatures.Lots of evidence the earth is cooling and there is no global warming to worry about.*THE OCEANS ARE COOLING*THE ARCTIC IS NOT MELTING AND HAS REBOUNDED TO PAST SIZEPHOTOS OF THE ARCTIC 1979, 2012 AND 2017 COMPARED TO 79 LEVELS.Largest Increase In November 2018 Sea Ice Volume On RecordPosted on December 13, 2018 by tonyhellerThe increase in Arctic sea ice volume during November was the largest on record.*SEA LEVEL RISE HAS STOPPED GLOBALLY*WINTERS ARE LONGER, COLDER WITH MUCH MORE SNOWWINTER COMES EARLY DOWN UNDER: EARLIEST RECORDED SNOWFALL IN WESTERN AUSTRALIADate: 20/04/19ABC NewsIt is the earliest recorded snow event in the state’s history.Western Australia’s south-west received an unexpected surprise on Good Friday, with snowfall on Bluff Knoll in the Stirling Ranges.A flurry was recorded on the peak, the highest point in the Stirling Ranges, about 100 kilometres north of Albany, after 2:00pm on Friday.It is the earliest recorded snow eventin a calendar year in the state’s history.The last recorded fall before this time was April 20, 1970, according to Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) records.Dozens of hikers made the trek up the 1099-metre tall Bluff Knoll on Friday, which generally records light snow a couple of times each winter but rarely in April.Winter comes early down under: Earliest recorded snowfall in Western Australia - The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)Snow accumulation data shows massive increase.*SOLAR RADIATION IS IN SHARP DECLINE WITHOUT SUNSPOTSWHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR THE CARBON TAX?It is aimed at cooling the climate when there is no warming and this means the tax is nonsense and worse.Washington state voters reject carbon taxISSUE: Why carbon taxes are climatically useless.Trudeau’s plan resembles the papal indulgences of old.He wants Canadians to pay a financial penalty for the sin of using fossil fuel energy, even though fossil fuels power modern civilization.Just as papal indulgences did nothing to remove the sin, Trudeau’s carbon pricing plan does nothing, or next to nothing, to meet Trudeau’s commitments to the United Nations to reduce our industrial greenhouse gas emissions linked to climate change to 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, 30% by 2030.Goldstein Toronto SunENERGYWith Climate Change Science Unsettled, a Carbon Tax is Even More UselessNicolas Loris / @NiconomistLoris / April 18, 2013 / 0 CommentsKurt Strazdins KRT/NewscomReuters’s environment correspondent Alister Doyle provides even more fodder for why a carbon (energy) tax or the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regulation of greenhouse gas emissions is economically and environmentally foolish. Doyle writes:Scientists are struggling to explain a slowdown in climate change that has exposed gaps in their understanding and defies a rise in global greenhouse gas emissions.Often focused on century-long trends, most climate models failed to predict that the temperature rise would slow, starting around 2000. Scientists are now intent on figuring out the causes and determining whether the respite will be brief or a more lasting phenomenon.Figuring out the reasons and severity behind climate change is a worthwhile cause, but Doyle’s article is another example that the science is far from settled as to what is causing climate change, how quickly it’s occurring, and the effect of increased greenhouse gas emissions (natural or manmade) on the earth’s temperature. Doyle continues:Theories for the pause include that deep oceans have taken up more heat with the result that the surface is cooler than expected, that industrial pollution in Asia or clouds are blocking the sun, or that greenhouse gases trap less heat than previously believed.The change may be a result of an observed decline in heat-trapping water vapor in the high atmosphere, for unknown reasons. It could be a combination of factors or some as yet unknown natural variations, scientists say.Richard Tol, a climate and economics professor at the University of Sussex, told Doyle, “My own confidence in the data has gone down in the past five years.”One of The Heritage Foundation’s eight principles of The American Conservation Ethic is that science should be employed as one tool to guide public policy. Science is a critical and informative guiding tool, but it should not dictate public policy, especially when lawmakers distort the science to help them meet their policy agenda. As we explain in the principles, “Commitments to use the force of law should be made with great caution and demand a high degree of scientific certainty. To do otherwise is likely to result in environmental laws based on scientific opinions rather than scientific facts.”Even with the science unsettled, proponents of carbon taxes, the EPA’s greenhouse gas regulations, and green energy subsidies argue that we should enact these policies as precautionary measures and protect future generations. But we’ll be leaving our children and grandchildren a world with higher energy costs and less economic prosperity with nothing to show for it.Since the large majority of America’s energy needs are met with carbon-emitting conventional fuels, a carbon tax would cripple economic growth. Heritage’s Center for Data Analysis recently analyzed the carbon tax legislationproposed by Senators Barbara Boxer (D–CA) and Bernie Sanders (I–VT) and found family income losses of $1,000 per year and 400,000 jobs lost as soon as 2016.It’s not just making our children and grandchildren worse off; it’s making us worse off through higher energy bills, higher product prices, and less economic opportunity. And as the carbon tax increases, so does the economic burden.What’s worse, the climate impact of a carbon tax is almost too small to notice. A $25-per-ton tax would moderate global warming at most by 0.11 degrees Celsius by the end of the century.Congress should be proactive in addressing climate change, but only by categorically rejecting the idea of a carbon tax and removing the ability of the EPA and any other federal agency to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.Climate Change Science Unsettled, Carbon Tax Even More UnwisePCs win Ontario election — here’s a look at the promises Doug Ford madeBy Maham AbediNational Online Journalist, Breaking News Global NewsPCs win Ontario election — here’s a look at the promises Doug Ford madeMY PUBLISHED COMMENT‪James Grant Matkin‪ ·‪This election victory is a great victory for science as Doug Ford promises to fight the phony carbon tax. Climate alarmists are a scourge to the 2 billion living off grid without electricity. They need life giving fossil fuels particularly coal. Demonizing Co2 vital plant food based on pseudo-science in order under the PARIS ACCORD to make the climate colder is just plain madness. Unstoppable solar cycles and ocean currents are far more the control knob of the climate than miniscule amounts of essential human emissions of Co2. We need more Co2 as it is wholly beneficial. Global cooling is the fear for the next few decades and we must eschew inefficient, wasteful and intermittent renewables that under Premier Wynne punished Ontario citizens with high cost electricity rates. Congratulations to Ontario voters for their common sense repudiating climate alarmism.The Ontario Progressive Conservatives under Ford won a majority mandate on Thursday ending more than 15 years of Liberal rule in the province, defeating Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals and Andrea Horwath’s NDP.Some of his big-ticket items include a 20 per cent tax cut for the middle class, scrapping the Liberals’ updated sex-ed curriculum, ending cap and trade, reducing business taxes, while also building new long-term care beds, and a tax rebate for child care. Ford, who at times drew comparisons to Donald Trump, also made a number of populist pledges including cutting gas prices by 10 cents a litre, introducing buck-a-beer and cutting hydro bills by 12 percent.Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservatives win majority governmentThe claim that temperatures are rising too fast in Canada is false. They are not rising at all let alone too fast.Modelling past historical temperatures has not worked largely because it is a very difficult statistical problem.TEMPERATURE IS ACHILLES HEEL OF ALARMISMEven though President Obama and other global-warming alarmists warn of a looming climate apocalypse, they avoid giving a metric to prove their claims. They blame man-made climate change for a vast array of ills, including floods, droughts, wildfires, and tornados. But they never quantify what they say is the driving force behind it all: temperature.German Professor: IPCC in a serious jam... "5AR likely to be last of its kind"P GosselinNo Tricks ZoneMon, 16 Sep 2013 16:59 UTC© Warum die Klimakatastrophe nicht stattfindetProf. Fritz VahrenholtAnd: "Extreme weather is the only card they have got left to play."So says German Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt, who is one of the founders of Germany's modern environmental movement, and agreed to an interview with NoTricksZone.NTZ: CO2 is supposed to be trapping heat in the atmosphere, yet global atmospheric temperatures haven't risen in 200 months (over 16 years). Where has all the "trapped heat" gone? Some leading scientists are frustrated that they cannot find it. What do you think is happening?FV: It's now obvious that the IPCC models are not correctly reflecting the development of atmospheric temperatures. What's false? Reality or the models? The hackneyed explanation of a deep sea warming below 700 meters hasn't been substantiated up to now. How does atmospheric warming from a climate gas jump 700 meters deep into the ocean? If you consider the uncertainties in the Earth's radiation budget measurements at the top of the atmosphere, and those of the temperature changes at water depths below 700 meters, where we are talking about changes of a few hundredths of a degree Celsius over many years, such a "missing heat" cannot be ascertained today. The likelihood is that there is no "missing heat". Slight changes in cloud cover could easily account for a similar effect. That would mean the end of the alarmist CO2 theory. Perhaps this is why we've been hearing speculation about the deep ocean. On the other hand, perhaps this discussion tells us that the alarmist faction needs to deal more with oceanic cycles. It is possible that this is a step in recognizing the central impacts of the PDO and AMO on our climate.Is Global Warming a Hoax?Written by Ed Hiserodt and Rebecca TerrellIsGlobal Warming a Hoax?Temperature increases over the past 140 years are too small and within the range of natural variability to constitute human made global warming. NASA Goddard Institute finds warming of 0.8* Celsius (1.4* Faherheit) since 1880. This means an average of only 0.0175 degree Celsius temperature increase annually. This minute amount is within the statistical error of the data. It does not prove global warming.World of Change: Global TemperaturesIn addition from the beginning data tampering has been rampant to try vainly to show more warming.Massive Data Tampering Uncovered At NASA – Warmth, Cooling Disappears Due To Incompatibility With ModelsBy Kenneth Richard on 16. January 2017Why Did NASA Eliminate The Early 20th Century Warming And Mid-20th Century Cooling?The fundamental reason why NASA has manipulated past temperature data is so that the historical climate record may conform to the IPCC models that presume variations in surface temperatures are predominantly determined by anthropogenic CO2 emissions. Fossil fuels consumption in particular and anthropogenic CO2 emissions in general plodded along steadily at about 1 GtC/year (gigatons of carbon per year) during the 1900 to 1945 period. Then, after 1945, human emissions exploded. They reached 4 GtC/year by the 1970s, 6 GtC/year by the 1990s, and 10 GtC/year by 2014.Massive Data Tampering Uncovered At NASA - Warmth, Cooling Disappears Due To Incompatibility With ModelsThe scientists finding global warming were fooled by randomness and short term data.Climate change occurs when changes in Earth's climate system result in new weather patterns that last for at least a few decades, and maybe for millions of years.WikipediaIn most scientific fields, hypotheses that fail to be verified by real-world observations 85% to 100% of the time are rejected http://immediately.In Consensus Climate Science, when 126 of 126, 111 of 114, 42 of 49… modeled projections are wrong, or when the opposite sign of the modeled trend is observed, the climate models are still regarded as mechanistically correct, especially with regard to the CO2 climate influence.Those who disagree are dismissed as “denialists”.At what point will Consensus Climate Science actually question if the greenhouse gas forcings the models are predicated on need reconsideration?Connolly et al., 2019“Observed changes in Northern Hemisphere snow cover from satellite records were compared to those predicted by all available Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (“CMIP5”) climate models over the duration of the satellite’s records, i.e., 1967–2018.A total of 196 climate model runs were analyzed (taken from 24 climate models). Separate analyses were conducted for the annual averages and for each of the seasons (winter, spring, summer, and autumn/fall). A longer record (1922–2018) for the spring season which combines ground-based measurements with satellite measurements was also compared to the model outputs.The climate models were found to poorly explain the observed trends. While the models suggest snow cover should have steadily decreased for all four seasons, only spring and summer exhibited a long-term decrease, and the pattern of the observed decreases for these seasons was quite different from the modelled predictions. Moreover, the observed trends for autumn and winter suggest a long-term increase, although these trends were not statistically significant.”"Not here to worship what is known, but to question it" - Jacob Bronowski. Climate and energy news from Germany in English - by Pierre L. GosselinThe fear of global warming is the fear of science lies and a radical economic agenda and a political scam. Resilience is the only sensible policy to respond to severe weather and climate change.

View Our Customer Reviews

I was surprised at the ease and efficiency of this app. It worked like a charm and the data was transferred is a very professional format. Finally, QuinnsYourPI.org

Justin Miller