Clean Electricity Regulations released: carbon capture needed for continued fossil fuel power generation. #Saskatchewan will not “defy the laws of thermodynamics,” says Premier Scott Moe.
I still need to dig deep into this. I’ve sent a list of questions to SaskPower and the provincial government seeking response next week, as this dropped just as we’re packing to head to the cabin. Because of course they would release it during the dog days of August.
Note: these regulations expect the electrical grid demand to grow by 2.5x in 26 years, three months and 21 days. Good luck with that. Expect a column next week.
The elected Bolsheviks and Jacobins could save a lot of money by combining at least half of this regime’s ministries into one Ministry of Energy Poverty, a ministry guaranteed to succeed.
They are f****** idiots.
Destruction of the economy is now mandatory.
So take the current baseload of each fossil fuel plant, and reduce it by ~30%, and then build out power plants to replace that lost power in less than 12 years (“The draft regulations are designed to help Canada achieve a net-zero electricity grid by 2035”)
That’s not including any of the required expansion of the grid to cover increasing demand (expected to be 2.5x by 2050).
(quick and dirty calculation, sask has 4560 MW of power generation, 81% of that by fossil fuel (3648 MW) less 110MW which is already covered by CCS, leaving 3538MW to have CCS build out for. 30% of that gives 1094MW which will need to be added to make up for the loses to run the CCS. )
Can Saskatoon build four 300MW SMRs in under 12 years in the current regulatory environment?
When is the separation referendum?
Who cares what the Trudeau Liberal-NDP government wants or their unrealistic timelines? Tell them to stick their bribes and threats where the sun doesn’t shine.
Unless the federal government is prepared to 100% fund small modular reactors with expedited approval timelines or pay for natgas CCS, then why would Saskatchewan want to make their electricity system more expensive and less reliable? Because that’s what Trudeau wants? Most of the world considers natgas plants clean energy so keep building them as we transition to SMRs in a reasonable time period.
LC, with respect, that comment is part of the problem. The federal government funds nothing, taxpayers do. Does a bad idea become less bad because a different level of government extracted money from you to pay for it? A bad idea is just a bad idea, full stop.
I agree with you. It’s all on taxpayers, present and future taxpayers. But, if the federal government wants to dictate on policies outside of their constitutional boundaries then they need to put up or shut up. I prefer if the feds shut up.
Thought experiment: If the federal government decided to dismantle the dairy marketing boards because of their environmental impact and greenhouse gas emissions, would Quebec demand full compensation for its dairy farmers?
@LC Bennett – “Most of the world considers natgas plants clean energy so keep building them……….”
Oh yea, but do their leaders have dreamy hair and wear pink socks?
Frankly, I wouldn’t care if Trudeau dressed as flamboyantly as Liberace or Elton John if he had common sense, an understanding of economics and wasn’t a vindictive jackass. His hostility to Alberta and Saskatchewan is a malignant disease that infects government policymaking.
Liberace or Elton John have/had common sense?
You may have missed my point. I don’t support Trudeau because of what he does and says. His clothing and looks are irrelevant to me.
Agreed, LC. We dislike him because he’s an idiot and a mere sock-puppet of Katie Telford. We dislike him because his policies are idiotic and his cabinets are filled with people stupider than he is.
Paul, of course they had common sense. Those individuals were in SHOW business. The whole point in show business is to attract attention to whatever talent you pretend to have. You do understand that there’s a slight difference between show business and running a country?
Trudeau is a reflection of the intellect of the average canadian.
@cgh
“You do understand that there’s a slight difference between show business and running a country?”
Please explain it.
@LC Bennett
Yea you obviously missed my point. I could care less how you determine your support for a politician, sorry to say it’s not about you.
It’s about the idiots who have put and kept him in power for the last 8 years. Clear enough?
As useful as nailing farts to a board
“Senior Manager, Sustainability Office,”
I looked that up in The Working Man’s Dictionary. It said: see ‘useless prick’.
Looks to me more like Union Thug!
Add this into the equation and the goal becomes outright fiendish:
“Canada aims to welcome 465,000 new permanent residents in 2023, 485,000 in 2024 and 500,000 in 2025.” – Supplementary Information for the 2023-2025 Immigration Levels Plan
From 2025 until 2025, when our reliance on fossil fuels is expected to primarily end, expect, on average, 4,349,997 more new Canadians.
It’s unfathomable to ramp up production to house that many new peoples while clinging to an unrealistic drop in fuel consumption.
Caption: Look, there’s still something standing, we didn’t demolish everything!
We should have an election soon and we can use it as an opportunity to elect people to actually do what we want. If we can’t elect people who do what we want we need to figure out if the politicians are doing what the majority want or what they want. If they are doing what the majority want it’s time to start new countries for the sane, or do something so the insane can’t drag the rest of us back to the stone age along with them.
It could be that how we make electricity is none of the governments business.
Again, my son (32 yrs) has conceived a very smart voting system: before the actual vote, the person has to do a Q&A abc style to assess how knowledgeable that person is in matters re social/economy/politics in general. The person gets a score, from zero to 1. That will be the weight of that person’s vote. Let’s say the score is zero – well the vote for Chow for ex will be multiplied with zero. Or if it’s 0.1, the weight of the vote will be multiplied with 0.1 etc.
And what questions the person gets would be let’s say 10 random from a pool of 100 Q&As approved by the major parties ahead of time.
Problem with this is that none of the left-leaning parties would ever accept that. Which is 75-80%. Dems and RINOs in US, and Liberals+NDPs+Greens here would strongly oppose such a thing.
Standing on a rooftop, looking down at all the little people they plan to kill.
CAPTION: “That squirrel is mocking me.”
(“It’s raining again.”
“It always rains this is Toronto.”
“hey I made it to sustainability manager. wonder what that means?”)
Just look at the smug pr—s.
They should be more aware of consequences.
Like most little people, instead I’m guessing they are thinking of their lovely lunch, and their unaccountability.
It’s all a facade, for the weak minded.
And three out of 4 are all talking at the same time.
So what “carbon neutral” method did the convicted criminal Environmental Minister take to get from his riding to toronto to stand on that roof?
He should be forced to fly an eHelicopter.
Carbon Capture,now that is called “PlantLife” in old english.
And carbon Neutral?
That is pure BS in any language.
Canada has always been “Carbon Negative” in the bullshit narratives of “carbon is Bad”.
We have very few people,even with our high per capita energy use..yah know Keeping Warm?
And we have an entire boreal forest craving more CO2 in its atmosphere.
The proper response to Oxygen Thieves,such as those in the photo,is to sequester more carbon..Deep in the Ground.
Solves a whole bunch of real and imaginary problems.
Capture all your disposable income. That’s all that’s getting “captured”
And our so called conservative politicians and premiers keep on validating the fraud
Cowards
I am tempted to ask who made Guilbeaut god, but I know the answer.