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
Energy
75 per cent of Canadians support the construction of new pipelines to the East Coast and British Columbia
-
71 per cent of Canadians find the approval process too long.
-
67 per cent of Quebecers support the Marinvest Energy natural gas project.
“While there has always been a clear majority of Canadians supporting the development of new pipelines, it seems that the trade dispute has helped firm up this support,” says Gabriel Giguère, senior policy analyst at the MEI. “From coast to coast, Canadians appreciate the importance of the energy industry to our prosperity.”
Three-quarters of Canadians support constructing new pipelines to ports in Eastern Canada or British Columbia in order to diversify our export markets for oil and gas.
This proportion is 14 percentage points higher than it was last year, with the “strongly agree” category accounting for almost all of the increase.
For its part, Marinvest Energy’s natural gas pipeline and liquefaction plant project, in Quebec’s North Shore region, is supported by 67 per cent of Quebecers polled, who see it as a way to reduce European dependence on Russian natural gas.
Moreover, 54 per cent of Quebecers now say they support the development of the province’s own oil resources. This represents a six-point increase over last year.
“This year again, we see that this preconceived notion according to which Quebecers oppose energy development is false,” says Mr. Giguère. “Quebecers’ increased support for pipeline projects should signal to politicians that there is social acceptability, whatever certain lobby groups might think.”
It is also the case that seven in ten Canadians (71 per cent) think the approval process for major projects, including environmental assessments, is too long and should be reformed. In Quebec, 63 per cent are of this opinion.
The federal Bill C-5 and Quebec Bill 5 seem to respond to these concerns by trying to accelerate the approval of certain large projects selected by governments.
In July, the MEI recommended a revision of the assessment process in order to make it swift by default instead of creating a way to bypass it as Bill C-5 and Bill 5 do.
“Canadians understand that the burdensome assessment process undermines our prosperity and the creation of good, well-paid jobs,” says Mr. Giguère. “While the recent bills to accelerate projects of national interest are a step in the right direction, it would be better simply to reform the assessment process so that it works, rather than creating a workaround.”
A sample of 1,159 Canadians aged 18 and older were surveyed between November 27 and December 2, 2025. The results are accurate to within ± 3.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
Business
Geopolitics no longer drives oil prices the way it used to
This article supplied by Troy Media.
Oil markets are shrugging off war and sanctions, a sign that oversupply now matters more than disruption
Oil producers hoping geopolitics would lift prices are running into a harsh reality. Markets are brushing off wars and sanctions as traders focus instead on expectations of a deep and persistent oil glut.
That shift was evident last week. Despite several geopolitical developments that would once have pushed prices higher, including the U.S. seizure of a Venezuelan crude tanker and fresh Ukrainian strikes on Russian energy infrastructure, oil markets barely reacted, with prices ending the week lower.
Brent crude settled Friday at US$61.12 a barrel and U.S. West Texas Intermediate at US$57.44, capping a weekly drop of more than four per cent.
Instead of responding to disruption headlines, markets were reacting to a different risk. Bearish sentiment, rather than geopolitics, continued to dominate as expectations of a “2026 glut” took centre stage.
At the heart of that outlook is a growing supply overhang. The oil market is grappling with whether sanctioned Russian and Iranian cargoes should still be counted as supply. That uncertainty helps explain why prices have been slow to react to a glut that is already forming on the water, said Carol Ryan, writing for The Wall Street Journal.
The scale of that buildup is significant. There are 1.4 billion barrels of oil “on the water,” 24 per cent higher than the average for this time of year between 2016 and 2024, according to oil analytics firm Vortexa. These figures capture shipments still in transit or cargoes that have yet to find a buyer, a clear sign that supply is running ahead of immediate demand.
Official forecasts have reinforced that view. Last week, the International Energy Agency trimmed its projected 2026 surplus to 3.84 million barrels per day, down from 4.09 million barrels per day projected previously. Even so, the IEA still sees a large oversupply relative to global demand.
Demand growth offers little relief. The IEA expects growth of 830 kb/d (thousand barrels per day) in 2025 and 860 kb/d in 2026, with petrochemical feedstocks accounting for a larger share of incremental demand. That pace remains modest against the volume of supply coming to market.
OPEC, however, has offered a different assessment. In its latest report, the group pointed to a near balance, forecasting demand for OPEC+ crude averaging about 43 million barrels per day in 2026, roughly in line with what it produced in November.
Reflecting that confidence. OPEC+ kept policy steady late in November, pausing planned output hikes for the first quarter of 2026 while more than three million barrels per day of cuts remain in place. Those measures are supportive in theory, but markets have shown little sign of being persuaded.
Recent geopolitical events underline that scepticism. The ongoing Russia-Ukraine war and Ukrainian strikes on Russian energy infrastructure, including reported hits on facilities such as the Slavneft-YANOS refinery in Yaroslavl, again failed to lift prices. Russia-Ukraine headlines pulled prices down more than strikes lifted them, according to media reports, suggesting traders were more attuned to “peace deal” risk than to supply disruption.
Washington’s move against Venezuelan crude shipments offered another test. The U.S. seizure of a Venezuelan tanker, the first formal seizure under the 2019 sanctions framework, had a muted price impact, writes Marcin Frackiewicz of Oilprice.com.
Venezuela’s exports fell sharply in the days that followed, but markets remained largely unmoved. One explanation is that Venezuela’s output is no longer large enough to tighten global balances the way it once did, and that abundant global supply has reduced the geopolitical premium.
Taken together, the signal is hard to miss. Oil producers, including in Canada, face a reality check in a market that no longer rewards headlines, only discipline and demand.
Toronto-based Rashid Husain Syed is a highly regarded analyst specializing in energy and politics, particularly in the Middle East. In addition to his contributions to local and international newspapers, Rashid frequently lends his expertise as a speaker at global conferences. Organizations such as the Department of Energy in Washington and the International Energy Agency in Paris have sought his insights on global energy matters.
Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.
-
Alberta2 days agoAlberta’s new diagnostic policy appears to meet standard for Canada Health Act compliance
-
Health2 days agoRFK Jr reversing Biden-era policies on gender transition care for minors
-
Business1 day agoGeopolitics no longer drives oil prices the way it used to
-
Business1 day agoArgentina’s Milei delivers results free-market critics said wouldn’t work
-
Business1 day agoDeadlocked Jury Zeroes In on Alleged US$40 Million PPE Fraud in Linda Sun PRC Influence Case
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days agoCanadian university censors free speech advocate who spoke out against Indigenous ‘mass grave’ hoax
-
Daily Caller2 days agoEx-FDA Commissioners Against Higher Vaccine Standards Took $6 Million From COVID Vaccine Makers
-
COVID-192 days agoFreedom Convoy protester appeals after judge dismissed challenge to frozen bank accounts




