Alberta won the energy lottery

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

Some people blamed a small handful of natural gas plants being out of operation. Which is a greater concern – two of 87 gas fired units being down, or 88 of 88 wind and solar farms being down at the same time?

Alberta won the energy lottery millions of years ago. I’m not talking scratchers, but the Powerball. You know, the big American lottery that every so often is over a billion dollars?

Except Alberta’s winnings are much, much larger than that.

So why is it the weekend of Jan. 12-15, the jurisdiction that has more oil, gas and coal than God, because God gave all his to Alberta, was forced to beg its neighbours if they could spare a megawatt?

Because that’s what happened. It got so desperate the night of Saturday, Jan. 13, that the neighbours did not have another megawatt to spare. The Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) and the government of Alberta sent out an emergency alert to every cellphone and TV screen in the province, calling on people to shut off everything from stoves to bathroom fans, as well as unplug block heaters and electric vehicles.

The only way this could happen is complete and utter incompetence at the top. It started with Rachel Notley, but Jason Kenney didn’t seem to do much to reverse her moves. Only Danielle Smith seems to have finally said, “No more!”

Former Alberta premier Rachel Notley’s push to get rid of coal as soon as possible and build as much wind and solar is a prime example of incompetence. While most coal plants converted to natural gas, not all units did, and hundreds of megawatts of cheap, reliable power were lost. Meanwhile, in the last two years Alberta’s wind and solar basically doubled, projects that mostly got their start under Notley. And yet there were moments during the weekend where both wind and solar hit zero output, sometimes at same time. Wind and solar’s theoretical capacity of 6,131 megawatts was a big fat zero.

And yet when Notley announced her departure as leader of the NDP on Jan. 16, she put out a video proclaiming the elimination of coal-fired power and kickstarting renewables among her greatest accomplishments.

Some people blamed a small handful of natural gas plants being out of operation. Which is a greater concern – two of 87 gas fired units being down, or 88 of 88 wind and solar farms being down at the same time, as happened the morning of Jan. 14? Indeed, the vast majority of the 87 gas units and 2 coal units were indeed providing nearly all of Alberta’s power throughout the weekend.

Those four days saw the AESO issue four “grid alerts” in a row. The second one was a much closer-run thing. As a last resort, they put all the grid-scale batteries into play, and those batteries were running out of juice after just an hour. The contingency reserve went to effectively zero.

If the province had not issued its emergency alert, the AESO since reported they were within a half hour of calling for rotating blackouts.

Thankfully, it did work. But what about next time?

The next step was rotating blackouts, and, if that didn’t work, major load shedding. And if that wasn’t enough, a replay of Texas, February, 2021, when 246 died. Except there would be more bodies, because it’s a hell of a lot colder here.

Lessons

There are some lessons from that weekend, and especially Saturday:

Wind and solar totally and utterly fail when we need power the most.
Do NOT expect your neighbour to be able to help you out. Often they can, and do. But as we saw Jan. 13, when your boat is sinking, your neighbour’s may be sinking faster. This was evident by the small amount of power BC sent Alberta. They routinely send 3x that. Montana was sending effectively nothing. And even though Saskatchewan was maxed out in sending what we had, it was not enough to bail out Alberta. Interties are good in many ways, but they must not be entirely relied upon.
As a result, each jurisdiction must ensure it has ample supply within its own borders and control. And that includes enough dispatchable power to backfill every single megawatt of wind and solar, plus the possible loss of one of its baseload units. That 4 per cent contingency reserve is really not enough.
If Alberta did go into rotating blackouts:
1. What would have happened if that half hour turned out into half a day, or longer, with the temperature at -35 C as it was in Calgary? How many lives might be on the line? What would the property loss be, from things like frozen pipes?
2. Whose head would the public be calling for on Monday morning? Oh wait, there was a fourth grid alert that morning.
Alberta has more than five million vehicles registered. What would have happened if five million EVs were all plugged in that weekend?
We cannot, we must not, allow this to happen here in Saskatchewan, or again in Alberta. But yet SaskPower keeps saying we’re going to build an additional 3,000 megawatts of wind and solar. We are on Alberta’s path. Alberta already has 6,131 megawatts of wind and solar. How’s that working out for them? Friday night – 6 megawatts. Saturday night – 90. Sunday morning, zero.

Fossil fuels account for up to 94 per cent of Alberta’s and 89 per cent of Saskatchewan’s power on any given day. We cannot, must not, allow ourselves to think any amount of wind and solar can keep us alive when the temperatures hit -35 C. That weekend in Alberta proved it.

Brian Zinchuk is editor an owner of Pipeline Online and occasional contributor to the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. He can be reached at [email protected].

Related Topics:#AlbertaEnergyGrid #BrianZinchuk #CoalGasWindSolar #FrontierCentreForPublicPolicy

Up Next

Completing Trans Mountain, Indigenous LNG: What to watch in Canadian energy in 2024

Don't Miss

Trudeau gov’t ‘green’ heat pump scheme to cost nearly quadruple initial estimate

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Trump signs four executive orders promoting coal industry

Business / 3 hours ago

Trump raises China tariffs to 125%, announces 90-day pause for countries who’ve reached out to negotiate

Justice / 3 hours ago

Canadian government sued for forcing women to share spaces with ‘transgender’ male prisoners

Alberta

Alberta takes big step towards shorter wait times and higher quality health care

Published on April 9, 2025

Todayville Content Team

From the Fraser Institute

By Nadeem Esmail

On Monday, the Smith government announced that beginning next year it will change the way it funds surgeries in Alberta. This is a big step towards unlocking the ability of Alberta’s health-care system to provide more, better and faster services for the same or possibly fewer dollars.

To understand the significance of this change, you must understand the consequences of the current (and outdated) approach.

Currently, the Alberta government pays a lump sum of money to hospitals each year. Consequently, hospitals perceive patients as a drain on their budgets. From the hospital’s perspective, there’s little financial incentive to serve more patients, operate more efficiently and provide superior quality services.

Consider what would happen if your local grocery store received a giant bag of money each year to feed people. The number of items would quickly decline to whatever was most convenient for the store to provide. (Have a favourite cereal? Too bad.) Store hours would become less convenient for customers, alongside a general decline in overall service. This type of grocery store, like an Alberta hospital, is actually financially better off (that is, it saves money) if you go elsewhere.

The Smith government plans to flip this entire system on its head, to the benefit of patients and taxpayers. Instead of handing out bags of money each year to providers, the new system—known as “activity-based funding”—will pay health-care providers for each patient they treat, based on the patient’s particular condition and important factors that may add complexity or cost to their care.

This turns patients from a drain on budgets into a source of additional revenue. The result, as has been demonstrated in other universal health-care systems worldwide, is more services delivered using existing health-care infrastructure, lower wait times, improved quality of care, improved access to medical technologies, and less waste.

In other words, Albertans will receive far better value from their health-care system, which is currently among the most expensive in the world. And relief can’t come soon enough—for example, last year in Alberta the median wait time for orthopedic surgeries including hip and knee replacements was 66.8 weeks.

The naysayers argue this approach will undermine the province’s universal system and hurt patients. But by allowing a spectrum of providers to compete for the delivery of quality care, Alberta will follow the lead of other more successful universal health-care systems in countries such as Australia, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland and create greater accountability for hospitals and other health-care providers. Taxpayers will get a much better picture of what they’re paying for and how much they pay.

Again, Alberta is not exploring an untested policy. Almost every other developed country with universal health care uses some form of “activity-based funding” for hospital and surgical care. And remember, we already spend more on health care than our counterparts in nearly all of these countries yet endure longer wait times and poorer access to services generally, in part because of how we pay for surgical care.

While the devil is always in the details, and while it’s still possible for the Alberta government to get this wrong, Monday’s announcement is a big step in the right direction. A funding model that puts patients first will get Albertans more of the high-quality health care they already pay for in a timelier fashion. And provide to other provinces an example of bold health-care reform.

Nadeem Esmail

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute

Alberta

Alberta’s embrace of activity-based funding is great news for patients

Published on April 9, 2025

Todayville

From the Montreal Economic Institute

Alberta’s move to fund acute care services through activity-based funding follows best practices internationally, points out an MEI researcher following an announcement made by Premier Danielle Smith earlier today.

“For too long, the way hospitals were funded in Alberta incentivized treating fewer patients, contributing to our long wait times,” explains Krystle Wittevrongel, director of research at the MEI. “International experience has shown that, with the proper funding models in place, health systems become more efficient to the benefit of patients.”

Currently, Alberta’s hospitals are financed under a system called “global budgeting.” This involves allocating a pre-set amount of funding to pay for a specific number of services based on previous years’ budgets.

Under the government’s newly proposed funding system, hospitals receive a fixed payment for each treatment delivered.

An Economic Note published by the MEI last year showed that Quebec’s gradual adoption of activity-based funding led to higher productivity and lower costs in the province’s health system.

Notably, the province observed that the per-procedure cost of MRIs fell by four per cent as the number of procedures performed increased by 22 per cent.

In the radiology and oncology sector, it observed productivity increases of 26 per cent while procedure costs decreased by seven per cent.

“Being able to perform more surgeries, at lower costs, and within shorter timelines is exactly what Alberta’s patients need, and Premier Smith understands that,” continued Mrs. Wittevrongel. “Today’s announcement is a good first step, and we look forward to seeing a successful roll-out once appropriate funding levels per procedure are set.”

The governments expects to roll-out this new funding model for select procedures starting in 2026.

* * *

The MEI is an independent public policy think tank with offices in Montreal, Ottawa, and Calgary. Through its publications, media appearances, and advisory services to policymakers, the MEI stimulates public policy debate and reforms based on sound economics and entrepreneurship.