Alberta
Danielle Smith vows to protect Albertan farmland from Trudeau’s radical ‘net zero’ push

From LifeSiteNews
‘You cannot build wind turbines the size of the Calgary tower in front of a UNESCO World Heritage Site, or on Nose Hill or in your neighbor’s backyard,’ the province’s premier declared.
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said her province will continue to rely on reliable carbon-based fuel sources for power generation for decades to come after introducing sweeping new regulations restricting the development of so-called “renewable” energy generation from wind turbines and solar farms, saying these types of technologies are not the “silver bullet” the federal government claims they are for power generation.
“You cannot build wind turbines the size of the Calgary tower in front of a UNESCO World Heritage Site, or on Nose Hill or in your neighbor’s backyard,” Smith said to media on February 28 after announcing the new regulations on so-called “green” power generation.
“We have a duty to protect the natural beauty and communities of our province.”
Breaking…
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith: “You cannot build wind turbines the size of the Calgary Tower in front of a UNESCO world heritage site, or on Nose Hill, or in your neighbour’s back yard.”
Alberta announces new rules for renewable energy projects:
“Renewables have a… pic.twitter.com/a7RN8ZbvAs
— Paul Mitchell (@PaulMitchell_AB) February 28, 2024
Smith’s United Conservative Party government’s new “Renewed path forward for renewable energy” flies in the face of what mostly left-leaning proponents of “green power” claim is needed to rid the world of using “fossil fuels.”
Indeed, the federal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is trying to force net-zero regulations on all Canadian provinces, notably on electricity generation, as early as 2035. Alberta is adamantly opposed to this.
Natural gas and coal are abundant in Canada, notably in Alberta. In the new year, an extreme cold snap sent temperatures plummeting to nearly minus-50 degrees Celsius (58 degrees Fahrenheit) in much of western Canada. It was so cold that the province of Alberta’s power grid almost collapsed due to a failure of wind and solar power.
The UCP had put in place a pause on final approvals for large renewable energy projects, which was lifted on February 29. The UCP’s new guidelines stipulate that new wind or solar projects can only be allowed on Class 1 and Class 2 irrigable lands “unless the proponent can demonstrate the ability for both crops and/or livestock to coexist with the renewable generation project.”
Also, new buffer zones of a “minimum of 35 kilometres” will be established around “protected areas” and other “pristine viewscapes” that the province designates.
All new wind projects will no longer be “permitted within those buffer zones,” and other proposed developments “located within the buffer zone may be subject to a visual impact assessment before approval.”
Alberta’s new rules of solar and wind power generation drew the ire of Trudeau’s Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault, who wrote on X (formerly Twitter) last week that “Renewable energy companies expect to be treated fairly.”
“By placing overkill conditions on new renewable energy, it has the same effect as a moratorium by burying projects in red tape,” he wrote.
The Alberta government notes, despite what some in the federal government might claim, that it is home to about 90% of the renewable power projects in Canada, besides those from nuclear or hydro.
Alberta’s rules stipulate that any renewables that come online must be backed by “baseload” or natural gas/coal power generation, as wind and solar obviously are not reliable when it is dark or there is no wind.
“They are not the silver bullet for Alberta’s electricity needs and they are not the silver bullet of electricity affordability because each new development risks driving up the transmission costs and makes Alberta’s utility bills even more expensive,” Smith said.
In January, LifeSiteNews reported that Canadian Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, while speaking at the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) 2024 meeting in Davos, Switzerland, said it is up to the government to “make” sure the “decarbonization” of Canada’s energy sector “happens.”
Her comments came just after Alberta’s power grid was saved from near collapse due to a cold snap that saw carbon-based energy saved the day after “renewables” failed.
The reduction and eventual elimination of the use of so-called “fossil fuels” and a transition to unreliable “green” energy has been pushed by the WEF – the globalist group behind the socialist “Great Reset” agenda – an organization in which Trudeau and some of his cabinet are involved.
Canada has the third largest oil and gas reserves in the world, with most of it in Alberta. However, since taking office in 2015, Trudeau has continued to push his radical environmental agenda similar to the agendas being pushed the WEF’s “Great Reset” and the United Nations’ “Sustainable Development Goals.”
Alberta
Low oil prices could have big consequences for Alberta’s finances

From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill
Amid the tariff war, the price of West Texas Intermediate oil—a common benchmark—recently dropped below US$60 per barrel. Given every $1 drop in oil prices is an estimated $750 million hit to provincial revenues, if oil prices remain low for long, there could be big implications for Alberta’s budget.
The Smith government already projects a $5.2 billion budget deficit in 2025/26 with continued deficits over the following two years. This year’s deficit is based on oil prices averaging US$68.00 per barrel. While the budget does include a $4 billion “contingency” for unforeseen events, given the economic and fiscal impact of Trump’s tariffs, it could quickly be eaten up.
Budget deficits come with costs for Albertans, who will already pay a projected $600 each in provincial government debt interest in 2025/26. That’s money that could have gone towards health care and education, or even tax relief.
Unfortunately, this is all part of the resource revenue rollercoaster that’s are all too familiar to Albertans.
Resource revenue (including oil and gas royalties) is inherently volatile. In the last 10 years alone, it has been as high as $25.2 billion in 2022/23 and as low as $2.8 billion in 2015/16. The provincial government typically enjoys budget surpluses—and increases government spending—when oil prices and resource revenue is relatively high, but is thrown into deficits when resource revenues inevitably fall.
Fortunately, the Smith government can mitigate this volatility.
The key is limiting the level of resource revenue included in the budget to a set stable amount. Any resource revenue above that stable amount is automatically saved in a rainy-day fund to be withdrawn to maintain that stable amount in the budget during years of relatively low resource revenue. The logic is simple: save during the good times so you can weather the storm during bad times.
Indeed, if the Smith government had created a rainy-day account in 2023, for example, it could have already built up a sizeable fund to help stabilize the budget when resource revenue declines. While the Smith government has deposited some money in the Heritage Fund in recent years, it has not created a dedicated rainy-day account or introduced a similar mechanism to help stabilize provincial finances.
Limiting the amount of resource revenue in the budget, particularly during times of relatively high resource revenue, also tempers demand for higher spending, which is only fiscally sustainable with permanently high resource revenues. In other words, if the government creates a rainy-day account, spending would become more closely align with stable ongoing levels of revenue.
And it’s not too late. To end the boom-bust cycle and finally help stabilize provincial finances, the Smith government should create a rainy-day account.
Alberta
Governments in Alberta should spur homebuilding amid population explosion

From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill and Austin Thompson
In 2024, construction started on 47,827 housing units—the most since 48,336 units in 2007 when population growth was less than half of what it was in 2024.
Alberta has long been viewed as an oasis in Canada’s overheated housing market—a refuge for Canadians priced out of high-cost centres such as Vancouver and Toronto. But the oasis is starting to dry up. House prices and rents in the province have spiked by about one-third since the start of the pandemic. According to a recent Maru poll, more than 70 per cent of Calgarians and Edmontonians doubt they will ever be able to afford a home in their city. Which raises the question: how much longer can this go on?
Alberta’s housing affordability problem reflects a simple reality—not enough homes have been built to accommodate the province’s growing population. The result? More Albertans competing for the same homes and rental units, pushing prices higher.
Population growth has always been volatile in Alberta, but the recent surge, fuelled by record levels of immigration, is unprecedented. Alberta has set new population growth records every year since 2022, culminating in the largest-ever increase of 186,704 new residents in 2024—nearly 70 per cent more than the largest pre-pandemic increase in 2013.
Homebuilding has increased, but not enough to keep pace with the rise in population. In 2024, construction started on 47,827 housing units—the most since 48,336 units in 2007 when population growth was less than half of what it was in 2024.
Moreover, from 1972 to 2019, Alberta added 2.1 new residents (on average) for every housing unit started compared to 3.9 new residents for every housing unit started in 2024. Put differently, today nearly twice as many new residents are potentially competing for each new home compared to historical norms.
While Alberta attracts more Canadians from other provinces than any other province, federal immigration and residency policies drive Alberta’s population growth. So while the provincial government has little control over its population growth, provincial and municipal governments can affect the pace of homebuilding.
For example, recent provincial amendments to the city charters in Calgary and Edmonton have helped standardize building codes, which should minimize cost and complexity for builders who operate across different jurisdictions. Municipal zoning reforms in Calgary, Edmonton and Red Deer have made it easier to build higher-density housing, and Lethbridge and Medicine Hat may soon follow suit. These changes should make it easier and faster to build homes, helping Alberta maintain some of the least restrictive building rules and quickest approval timelines in Canada.
There is, however, room for improvement. Policymakers at both the provincial and municipal level should streamline rules for building, reduce regulatory uncertainty and development costs, and shorten timelines for permit approvals. Calgary, for instance, imposes fees on developers to fund a wide array of public infrastructure—including roads, sewers, libraries, even buses—while Edmonton currently only imposes fees to fund the construction of new firehalls.
It’s difficult to say how long Alberta’s housing affordability woes will endure, but the situation is unlikely to improve unless homebuilding increases, spurred by government policies that facilitate more development.
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
The Federal Brief That Should Sink Carney
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
How Canada’s Mainstream Media Lost the Public Trust
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Ottawa Confirms China interfering with 2025 federal election: Beijing Seeks to Block Joe Tay’s Election
-
Media21 hours ago
CBC retracts false claims about residential schools after accusing Rebel News of ‘misinformation’
-
COVID-192 days ago
Nearly Half of “COVID-19 Deaths” Were Not Due to COVID-19 – Scientific Reports Journal
-
John Stossel2 days ago
Climate Change Myths Part 2: Wildfires, Drought, Rising Sea Level, and Coral Reefs
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Real Homes vs. Modular Shoeboxes: The Housing Battle Between Poilievre and Carney
-
Bjorn Lomborg20 hours ago
Net zero’s cost-benefit ratio is CRAZY high