Energy
COMMENTARY: Let’s Hear From Real “Experts” When it Comes Our Critical Electrical Systems – Not Bureaucrats, Academics, Activists and Partisan Politicians

From EnergyNow.ca
By Deidra Garyk
We need to redefine who is an “expert”
Experts cannot only include bureaucrats, politicians, academics, activists, and white-collar corporate elites. We must include the people who do the work to keep society functioning, such as electricians, utility system operators, and oilfield and construction workers.
Who is given the mic (or the pen) is given the power to influence perceptions, sometimes resulting in demands for unworkable plans.
The Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) issued an emergency alert Saturday, January 13 asking Albertans to immediately reduce their electricity use or risk rotating outages. The extreme cold across the West caused an increase in demand and a restriction of imports, and that resulted in the worst-case scenario.
Albertans did what Albertans do – they pulled together and shut down unnecessary usage, averting a crisis.
Alberta is a modern, energy-rich province, the envy of the world, in many ways. How did this crisis happen?
Reporting afterwards on the alert, Calgary newstalk radio QR 770 interviewed an “expert” – a multi-degreed economics and law professor at an Alberta university and part-time climate activist. He said several words and asked a similar question, but otherwise contributed little of substance because he does not have adequate expertise to identify practicable solutions.
I would like to know why QR 770 did not interview a utility system expert to explain what happened and why. AESO made experts available to media to answer questions. The role of the media is to inform the public, and that is best accomplished by interviewing a broad cross-section of people with real-world knowledge.
The Official Opposition in Alberta put out a statement trying to capitalize on the situation, as any political party would. Shadow Minister for Energy and Climate Nagwan Al-Guneid demanded immediate action be taken by the governing UCP while praising renewables for getting the province through the alert, and simultaneously forgetting it was her government that mandated all coal fired power plants be shut down by 2030. They even paid three power plant operators $1.36 billion to shut down their plants early.
Wind and solar renewables did not get Alberta through the most critical time – the coldest, darkest hours – of the electricity crisis and the data shows it. The assertion was at best missing context, and at worst disinformation for ideological gain.
Again, we need to redefine who is an “expert”.
There is a place for opposition parties, academics, corporate leaders, and even activists. However, they have an obligation to be serious and come to the discussion table in good faith. Otherwise, we have people with severe climate anxiety and a decade of “climate-induced insomnia” demanding that Canada build net zero hospitals powered by wind and solar to decarbonize and climate-proof the health care system.
The table must be expanded and seats added to include the people working closest to the source. Therefore, it would be beneficial for media organizations to interview the “invisible” people who work thanklessly to keep the systems running so much so that we take them for granted. We could all benefit from better understanding how the world works and how things are made.
I want to hear from electrical engineers, electricians, pipeline operators, oilfield workers, energy marketers, utility system operators, and anyone else who works to keep the electricity system functioning without fail.
They too must come to the discussion in good faith, ready to participate in complex but meaningful problem-solving discussions as their input is essential.
The reason the grid nearly failed and caused rolling blackouts is multi-faceted – extreme cold, taking coal plants offline early, not adding sufficient reliable power generation, renewables not producing during peak demand, increased population, increased business activity, and burdensome federal regulations, to name a few. It will take a truly diverse group of experts to build the grid that is able to withstand the most adverse weather to consistently deliver power during the coldest and deadliest times.
Over the weekend there were pleas on social media to get adults in the room to address the electricity grid crisis. We will not get adults in the room to create prudent energy policy for real people until we redefine who is an “expert”. This weekend proved that we need to do that soon.
About Deidra Garyk
Deidra Garyk has been working in the Canadian energy industry for almost 20 years. She is currently the Manager, ESG & Sustainability at an oilfield service company. Prior to that, she worked in roles of varying seniority at exploration and production companies in joint venture contracts where she was responsible for working collaboratively with stakeholders to negotiate access to pipelines, compressors, plants, and batteries.
Outside of her professional commitments, Deidra is an energy advocate and thought leader who researches, writes, and speaks about energy policy and advocacy to promote balanced, honest, fact-based conversations.
Connect with Deidra on Linkedin
Visit her website: DEIDRA GARYK: Canadian Energy Advocate
Automotive
Federal government should swiftly axe foolish EV mandate

From the Fraser Institute
Two recent events exemplify the fundamental irrationality that is Canada’s electric vehicle (EV) policy.
First, the Carney government re-committed to Justin Trudeau’s EV transition mandate that by 2035 all (that’s 100 per cent) of new car sales in Canada consist of “zero emission vehicles” including battery EVs, plug-in hybrid EVs and fuel-cell powered vehicles (which are virtually non-existent in today’s market). This policy has been a foolish idea since inception. The mass of car-buyers in Canada showed little desire to buy them in 2022, when the government announced the plan, and they still don’t want them.
Second, President Trump’s “Big Beautiful” budget bill has slashed taxpayer subsidies for buying new and used EVs, ended federal support for EV charging stations, and limited the ability of states to use fuel standards to force EVs onto the sales lot. Of course, Canada should not craft policy to simply match U.S. policy, but in light of policy changes south of the border Canadian policymakers would be wise to give their own EV policies a rethink.
And in this case, a rethink—that is, scrapping Ottawa’s mandate—would only benefit most Canadians. Indeed, most Canadians disapprove of the mandate; most do not want to buy EVs; most can’t afford to buy EVs (which are more expensive than traditional internal combustion vehicles and more expensive to insure and repair); and if they do manage to swing the cost of an EV, most will likely find it difficult to find public charging stations.
Also, consider this. Globally, the mining sector likely lacks the ability to keep up with the supply of metals needed to produce EVs and satisfy government mandates like we have in Canada, potentially further driving up production costs and ultimately sticker prices.
Finally, if you’re worried about losing the climate and environmental benefits of an EV transition, you should, well, not worry that much. The benefits of vehicle electrification for climate/environmental risk reduction have been oversold. In some circumstances EVs can help reduce GHG emissions—in others, they can make them worse. It depends on the fuel used to generate electricity used to charge them. And EVs have environmental negatives of their own—their fancy tires cause a lot of fine particulate pollution, one of the more harmful types of air pollution that can affect our health. And when they burst into flames (which they do with disturbing regularity) they spew toxic metals and plastics into the air with abandon.
So, to sum up in point form. Prime Minister Carney’s government has re-upped its commitment to the Trudeau-era 2035 EV mandate even while Canadians have shown for years that most don’t want to buy them. EVs don’t provide meaningful environmental benefits. They represent the worst of public policy (picking winning or losing technologies in mass markets). They are unjust (tax-robbing people who can’t afford them to subsidize those who can). And taxpayer-funded “investments” in EVs and EV-battery technology will likely be wasted in light of the diminishing U.S. market for Canadian EV tech.
If ever there was a policy so justifiably axed on its failed merits, it’s Ottawa’s EV mandate. Hopefully, the pragmatists we’ve heard much about since Carney’s election victory will acknowledge EV reality.
Daily Caller
Trump Issues Order To End Green Energy Gravy Train, Cites National Security

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Audrey Streb
President Donald Trump issued an executive order calling for the end of green energy subsidies by strengthening provisions in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act on Monday night, citing national security concerns and unnecessary costs to taxpayers.
The order argues that a heavy reliance on green energy subsidies compromise the reliability of the power grid and undermines energy independence. Trump called for the U.S. to “rapidly eliminate” federal green energy subsidies and to “build upon and strengthen” the repeal of wind and solar tax credits remaining in the reconciliation law in the order, directing the Treasury Department to enforce the phase-out of tax credits.
“For too long, the Federal Government has forced American taxpayers to subsidize expensive and unreliable energy sources like wind and solar,” the order states. “Reliance on so-called ‘green’ subsidies threatens national security by making the United States dependent on supply chains controlled by foreign adversaries.”
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
Former President Joe Biden established massive green energy subsidies under his signature 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which did not receive a single Republican vote.
The reconciliation package did not immediately terminate Biden-era federal subsidies for green energy technology, phasing them out over time instead, though some policy experts argued that drawn-out timelines could lead to an indefinite continuation of subsidies. Trump’s executive order alludes to potential loopholes in the bill, calling for a review by Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent to ensure that green energy projects that have a “beginning of construction” tax credit deadline are not “circumvented.”
Additionally, the executive order directs the U.S. to end taxpayer support for green energy supply chains that are controlled by foreign adversaries, alluding to China’s supply chain dominance for solar and wind. Trump also specifically highlighted costs to taxpayers, market distortions and environmental impacts of subsidized green energy development in explaining the policy.
Ahead of the reconciliation bill becoming law, Trump told Republicans that “we’ve got all the cards, and we are going to use them.” Several House Republicans noted that the president said he would use executive authority to enhance the bill and strictly enforce phase-outs, which helped persuade some conservatives to back the bill.
-
Also Interesting2 days ago
9 Things You Should Know About PK/PD in Drug Research
-
Business2 days ago
‘Experts’ Warned Free Markets Would Ruin Argentina — Looks Like They Were Dead Wrong
-
Business2 days ago
Cannabis Legalization Is Starting to Look Like a Really Dumb Idea
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day ago
The Covid 19 Disaster: When Do We Get The Apologies?
-
Media2 days ago
CBC journalist quits, accuses outlet of anti-Conservative bias and censorship
-
Business1 day ago
Carney government should recognize that private sector drives Canada’s economy
-
Automotive2 days ago
America’s EV Industry Must Now Compete On A Level Playing Field
-
Alberta1 day ago
Fourteen regional advisory councils will shape health care planning and delivery in Alberta