Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Dan McTeague

Call out ‘net zero’ for what it is, a scam

Published

5 minute read

From Canadians for Affordable Energy

Dan McTeague

Written By Dan McTeague

Net Zero emissions by 2050. Have you heard this line? It is increasingly hard to miss. Every trendy business, bank, corporation and government boasts about their commitment to it. But what exactly do they mean by it?

In short, Net Zero by 2050 means our country either emits no greenhouse gases or offsets whatever it does emit through measures such as buying carbon credits or investing in carbon capture technology.

Net Zero has been a central project of groups such as the World Economic Forum, the United Nations and other globalist institutions. They’ve spent the past several years pressuring governments around the world to commit to Net Zero and to make those commitments legally binding, so it will be difficult for elected officials to roll them back in the future.

That’s what’s happening here in Canada. This has been a major priority for Justin Trudeau. The Liberals have spent years championing the push to Net Zero, mandating it by law in 2021.

But law or not, Net Zero isn’t actually going to happen.

It is a ludicrous goal, in part because achieving it would be unimaginably expensive. So expensive, in fact, governments the world over don’t even attempt to estimate the total cost. Whenever they’re asked, they just say “the cost of doing nothing will be higher.” But if they don’t know how expensive their own plan is, how on earth could they know that it would be cheaper than not doing it?

External estimates place the cost for Canada alone somewhere in the neighborhood of $2 trillion. That number is so staggering it is impossible to fully comprehend it. It is more than our nation’s entire Gross Domestic Product! Look at it this way — that is the equivalent of spending $1 a second for 63,417 YEARS.

But the fact Net Zero will ultimately fail doesn’t mean attempting it isn’t going to negatively affect your daily life. It will.

Under the umbrella of Net Zero you’ll find,

  • Carbon taxes
  • Clean Fuel Standards
  • Just Transition
  • Emissions caps
  • Cancelled pipelines
  • Electrification strategies
  • Gas and diesel car bans
  • Electric vehicle subsidies
  • Costly building codes
  • Curtailed food production

The list goes on and on.

But beyond the economic impact and the personal hardship, we must remember the end game of this Green Agenda isn’t really about reducing carbon emissions. No, it is much more insidious than that.

At the heart of this Net Zero movement is a desire to fundamentally change our economy and way of life. They are looking for a complete transition from the economy that has made Canada the great nation that it is.

“You will own nothing and be happy.” Remember those words attributed to Klaus Schwab, head of the World Economic Forum (WEF)? Well take those words to heart, because he means it.

The implications of Net Zero are broad and overreaching. And they will have the effect of fundamentally affecting our quality of life.

It will make energy more expensive. It will raise the cost of everything. It will make us less competitive in the global economy, especially against countries such as China because, you will not be surprised to learn, China has not signed on to this suicide pact. (But they are keen for other countries to stifle their economy in pursuit of this absurd goal, not least because they produce 70% of the world’s solar panels.)

Net Zero regulations, policies and mandates are a direct assault on affordable energy, and an affordable way of life. That is the goal of the Green agenda, and if they have their way, Canada, its standard of living and its way of life will suffer.

Net Zero is a scam.

Dan McTeague is President of Canadians for Affordable Energy

Alberta

Canadians owe Smith a debt of gratitude

Published on

CAE Logo Dan McTeague

“Thank you, Danielle Smith!”

That is what every man, woman, and child in our great nation should be shouting from the rooftops this week. Instead, our journalists, politicians, and their army of Leftist loudmouths on social media, are sticking with the story that she’s, somehow, a traitor. That couldn’t be further from the truth, and every one of them should be ashamed of themselves for saying it.

In fact, Smith has been almost entirely alone in fighting for Canada since Donald Trump began broadcasting his intention to use the threat of tariffs to pressure our government on illegal immigration and fentanyl trafficking over our border.

The response from the media was first mockery and scorn — ‘Look at this American buffoon! He doesn’t even know how much he needs us!’ — followed by outrage at Trump and any Canadian who dared to suggest he might have a point. “Where is their patriotism?!” asked elitists who have spent their careers scoffing at any and every expression of Canadian pride.

And the response from our governing class has been all virtue-signaling and egotism. Yes, Justin Trudeau flew to Mar-a-Lago to make a perfunctory case against the tariff, but he took every opportunity which presented itself to trash Trump, accuse the American people who elected him of sexism, and imply that Canadians who might consider voting conservative were just as bad.

Meanwhile, Doug Ford began his chest-thumping ‘Captain Canada’ act, while calling an early election with an eye towards keeping himself in power for a few more years. The argument for this move didn’t stand up to the slightest scrutiny. Why did Ford call an election in the middle of what he described as an all-hands-on-deck national emergency? Because he needed a huge majority in Queen’s Park to authorize the COVID-19-level government spending and interventions he needed to respond to Trump’s tariff… never mind the fact that the opposition parties are entirely on board with government spending and intervention.

Maybe he was worried that there are still a few conservatives left in his own caucus who’d object to him driving Ontario’s finances further into the mud? He shouldn’t be – if they stuck with him as he sunk billions into the dying EV industry, they’re likely to stick with him now.

In any event, Ford has created a situation where, in the midst of a crisis, his attention is split between governing and campaigning. It’s self-interest all the way down!

Smith, on the other hand, sprang into action. She flew to the States, first to Mar-a-Lago and then to Washington, and tirelessly made the case to all of the major players on this file — Trump himself, Energy Secretary Chris Wright, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and others — that the U.S. and Canada are better off working together.

She made it clear that Albertans are also concerned about the border, and about fentanyl trafficking. She criticized Trudeau’s anti-Trump tirades as “not helpful,” slammed proposals to cut off Canadian oil and gas to the U.S., and called for Ottawa to appoint a border and drugs czar, ideally a retired general, rather than some political flunky, an idea which has gotten support from retired members of our military corps.

Her instinct has always been towards turning down the temperature, rather than trying to heat things up — that, by the way, is called “diplomacy” — and she never missed an opportunity to stand up for our oil and gas industry. When our Laurentian elite began sabre rattling about slapping an export duty on Canadian energy heading south, she stood opposed to that as well.

And this is at the heart of the Liberal critique of Smith. She’s betrayed Canada, they say, because she only cares about Alberta and its energy industry. She stands opposed to any action which might imperil Albertan oil and gas.

To which I say: Of course! And good on her for it.

Because, remember, it isn’t only Alberta’s oil and gas industry. It’s Canada’s. And though Justin Trudeau, Mark Carney, and their “green” ideologue friends might wish it otherwise, oil and gas remains the backbone of the Canadian economy. It is our “golden goose,” in the words of economists Jack Mintz and Philip Cross, in a recent study of Canada’s resource sector. And it is far too important to the livelihood of Canadians — not just Albertans mind you — for the Trudeau Liberals to use it as a bargaining chip. Especially since they’ve spent years hamstringing it, while suggesting that we’d ultimately be better off if it went the way of the Dodo.

It’s worth noting that when the (short-lived) tariffs were announced, the White House underlined Smith’s advocacy by singling out oil and gas for a lower rate. More importantly, the concessions from Trudeau which got us our present reprieve — the drug czar and enhanced border enforcement especially — were first proposed by Smith!

So, a separatist? A traitor? Perish the thought! Smith is an advocate for our interests, and a great Canadian.

Hopefully, as we try to avert the unwelcome return of these tariffs, the government looks to Danielle Smith for some guidance. Especially because, chances are, her advice will be, ‘Call an election, so our prime minister has a mandate from the people and can negotiate from a position of strength!’

For the good of Canada, here’s hoping they listen.

Dan McTeague is President of Canadians for Affordable Energy

Support Dan’s Work to Keep Canadian Energy Affordable!

Canadians for Affordable Energy is run by Dan McTeague, former MP and founder of Gas Wizard. We stand up and fight for more affordable energy.

Donate Now

Continue Reading

Automotive

Trudeau must repeal the EV mandate

Published on

CAE Logo
By Dan McTeague

Last Monday, Transport Canada released a bombshell statement, announcing that the Trudeau government’s program granting a $5,000 rebate to Canadians purchasing an Electric Vehicle (EV) had run out of money and would be discontinued, “effective immediately.” This followed a prior announcement from the government of Quebec that they would be suspending their own subsidy, which had amounted to $7,000 per EV purchased.

This is, of course, a game changer for an industry which the Trudeau government (as well as the Ford government in Ontario) has invested billions of taxpayer dollars in. That’s because, no matter the country, the EV industry is utterly dependent upon a system of carrots and sticks from the government, in the form of subsidies and mandates.

EVs have remained notably more expensive than traditional Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicles, even with those government incentive programs. Without them the purchase of EVs becomes impossible for all but the wealthiest Canadians.

Which is fine. Let the rich people have their toys, if they want them. Though if they justify the expense by saying that they’re saving the planet by it, I may be tempted to deflate them a bit by pointing out that EVs are in no way appreciably better for the environment than ICE vehicles, how all the lithium, nickel, cobalt, manganese, aluminum, copper, etc, contained in just one single EV battery requires displacing about 500,000 lbs of earth. Mining these materials often takes place in poorer countries with substandard environmental regulations.

Moreover, the weight of those batteries means that EVs burn through tires more quickly than gas-and-diesel driven vehicles, and wear down roads faster as well, which among other issues leads to an increase in particulate matter in the air, what in the old days we referred to as “pollution.”

That is a potential issue, but one that is mitigated by the fact that EVs make up a small minority of cars on the road. Regular people have proved unwilling to drive them, and that will be even more true now that the consumer subsidies have disappeared.

Of course, it will be an issue if the Trudeau Liberals get their way. You see, Electric Vehicles are one of the main arenas in their ongoing battle with reality. And so even with the end of their consumer subsidies, they remain committed to their mandates requiring every new vehicle purchased in Canada to be electric by 2035, now just a decade away!

They’ve done away with the carrots, and they’re hoping to keep this plan moving with sticks alone.

This is, in a word, madness.

As I’ve said before, the Electric Vehicle mandate is a terrible policy, and one which should be repealed immediately. Canada is about the worst place to attempt this particular experiment with social engineering. It is famously cold, and EVs are famously bad in the cold, charging much slower in frigid temperatures and struggling to hold a charge. Which itself is a major issue, because our country is also enormous and spread out, meaning that most Canadians have to do a great deal of driving to get from “Point A” to “Point B.”

Canada is sorely lacking in the infrastructure which would be required to keep EVs on the road. We currently have less than 30,000 public charging stations nationwide, which is more than 400,000 short of Natural Resources Canada’s projection of what we will need to support the mandated total EV transition.

Our electrical grid is already stressed, without the addition of tens of millions of battery powered vehicles being plugged in every night over a very short time. And of course, irony of ironies, this transition is supposed to take place while our activist government is pushing us on to less reliable energy sources, like wind and solar!

Plus, as I’ve pointed out before, the economic case for EVs, such as it was, has been completely upended by the recent U.S. election. Donald Trump’s victory means that our neighbors to the south are in no immediate danger of being forced to ditch gas-and-diesel driven cars. Consequently, the pitch by the Trudeau and Ford governments that Canada was putting itself at the center of an evolving auto market has fallen flat. In reality, they’ve shackled us to a corpse.

So on behalf of my fellow Canadians I say, “Thank you,” to the government for no longer burning our tax dollars on this particular subsidy. But that isn’t even half the battle. It must be followed through with an even bigger next step.

They must repeal the EV mandate.

Dan McTeague is President of Canadians for Affordable Energy.

Continue Reading

Trending

X