Energy
When Vancouver reverses ban on natural gas appliances, it’s time to talk about energy choices
From EnergyNow.ca
By Stewart Muir of Resource Works
More News and Views From Resource Works Here
The Practicality of Energy Choice in Vancouver
Vancouver’s decision to reverse the ban on natural gas appliances in new homes should serve as the beginning of a necessary conversation about energy system choices
In a city like Vancouver, where the mountains meet the sea and the urban skyline reflects both our history and our aspirations, policy decisions are often a reflection of our values. Yet, sometimes, even the best intentions can lead us down a perilous path. The recent decision by the City of Vancouver to restore freedom of choice for heating water and space in our homes, reversing an earlier ban on natural gas, is a move I support.
Housing affordability was a major deciding factor, but to me this turn of events – one the nation is watching – also marks a step away from a simplistic and potentially regressive approach to climate action, one that could have stymied our efforts to decarbonize in a meaningful way.
Let me be clear: climate change is real, and the need to reduce emissions is urgent. However, the original gas ban, while well-intentioned, was not the answer. Banning natural gas from our homes might have seemed like a bold move, but it ignored the nuances of our energy system and the challenges we face in transitioning to a low-carbon future.
The gas ban was a decision that felt good for those deeply concerned about climate action; a personal stand against fossil fuels. But feelings alone do not build resilient energy systems, nor do they account for the complex interplay of technologies and fuels that will be necessary to achieve our climate goals. Natural gas, particularly when blended with renewable gases like hydrogen, can and should play a role in our energy future. The idea of banning it outright was akin to throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Consider this: hydrogen, a zero-emissions fuel, is already the focus of enormous national and international investment. Canada is positioning itself as a leader in hydrogen production and technology, recognizing its potential to decarbonize sectors that are otherwise difficult to electrify. Banning natural gas infrastructure would have made it difficult, if not impossible, to integrate hydrogen into our energy mix when the technology matures.
Similarly, renewable natural gas, produced from organic waste, relies on the very distribution networks that a gas ban would have dismantled. The infrastructure for delivering gas to our homes is not a relic of the past but a vital component of our future energy system, one that could deliver clean, low-carbon fuels to millions of Canadians.
Let’s not forget the practical realities of energy demand. Suppose gas was revoked as an option for homes in Canada; the energy required to replace it would necessitate the entirety of our current solar and wind capacity several times over. This is not hyperbole—it’s a fact. And it doesn’t even account for the intermittency of these renewable sources, which means they cannot be relied upon to meet demand at all times.
In British Columbia, we’re already seeing the strain on our electricity system. We’ve become net importers of electricity, a situation that underscores the limits of our current infrastructure. As demand continues to rise—for electric vehicles, air conditioning, and the energy-hungry applications of artificial intelligence—our grid is buckling under the pressure. Tens of billions of dollars in upgrades are required, and these projects will take years to complete. Meanwhile, our neighboring provinces and states are facing similar challenges, leading to a regional energy crunch.
This diagram of Canada’s energy system provides, under close examination, a sober realization of how things work:
There is a lot to take in here, showing as it does the sources of all the energy in Canadian life (on the left) and how they flow into particular uses (right).
In grey shading on the right, the box labelled “Rejected Energy” represents energy that goes to waste. It is a staggering five times the amount of all types of energy used in our homes. I can understand that this area of high potential is hard to create excitement about. Nonetheless, it is a real source of ongoing progress, represented by ever more efficient ways of using fuels and upgrading equipment, and we aren’t talking about it.
Energy experts understand that banning a single type of energy without considering the broader system is not just imprudent; it’s dangerous. It could lead to shortages, higher costs, and ultimately, a failure to achieve our climate goals. Yet, I also recognize the appeal of actions that seem to offer immediate, tangible results. There’s a strong emotional pull in taking control of what happens in our own homes, in feeling like we’re doing our part.
This is why I’m calling for more energy education and diverse conversations that are constructive, respectful, and grounded in reality. We need to move beyond the tired narrative of “faceless corporations” versus the environment. The truth is, the people in both policy and industry are striving for the same outcome: a world with lower emissions and better outcomes for all.
The City of Vancouver’s decision to reverse the gas ban is a wise one, but it should be just the beginning. I urge the city to initiate a robust process of energy education, one that equips residents with the knowledge they need to make informed decisions about their energy use. And as a resident of this city, I am more than willing to take part in this vital conversation.
Our future depends on it.
Stewart Muir is the Founder and CEO of Resource Works.
Energy
Federal Government Suddenly Reverses on Critical Minerals – Over Three Years Too Late – MP Greg McLean
From Energy Now
By Calgary MP Greg McLean
Government in Full Reverse
Canada-U.S. Trade Relations is obviously the most pressing issue facing Canadians today.
It’s important to remember how we arrived at this point, but also to question the sincerity of the Liberal Ministers and leadership contenders who are now posing solutions, such as:
- We need to diversify our resource trade
- We need to build pipelines and infrastructure to get our exports to tidewater
- We need to streamline our regulatory burden that stands in the way of development
- We need to halt the escalating carbon tax
- We need to reverse the capital gains tax increase
The Liberals are turning themselves inside out on the policy choices they have made over nine years, and put Canada in a precarious economic position vis-à-vis our trade position.
If you believe what they are saying now, these Liberal Ministers and leadership contenders are saying that Canada needs EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what they have delivered over these past nine years.
I can’t comment on whether these NEW Liberal policy positions completely lack sincerity, or whether they are the result of a ‘deathbed conversion’, but nine years of moving in the exact opposite direction to their new words has led Canada to where it is today – and that is nine lost years for Canadians, our prosperity, and our role in a complex world.
Below is another example of a specific morphing of a Liberal policy – to the one I helped put forth – 3 ½ years ago – regarding Canada’s policy on critical minerals.
Minister Late to Critical Mineral Strategy
Here’s a gem of wisdom from December’s Fall Economic Statement:
Canada will work with the United States and other likeminded partners to address the impacts of non-market policies and practices that unduly distort critical mineral prices. This includes ensuring that market participants recognize the value of critical minerals produced responsibly, with due regard for high environmental standards and labour practices.
Then, on January 16th, the following from Canada’s Natural Resource Minister, Jonathan Wilkinson:
During a panel discussion in Washington on Wednesday, Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson proposed that enforcing a floor on metals prices could be “one of the centerpieces of the conversations we would then be having at the G7” summit later this year.
Western nations have long warned that China’s dominance in everything from nickel to lithium has let the country’s producers flood the market with supply, thereby keeping prices artificially low for competitors. Wilkinson has touted price floors as a way to combat that market control.
What a great idea!
Here’s the relevant excerpt from June, 2021, from a dissenting report on the Natural Resources Committee, when I served as my party’s critic, in contrast to the government’s critical minerals approach at that time:
Recommendation 4: Coordinate with our allies to establish a dedicated supply stock of critical minerals, possibly through a physical storage and floor pricing mechanism for visibility and pricing purposes.
Excerpt: Canada is too small of a market to undertake this effort on its own, but it can play a key role with its longstanding leadership as the mining jurisdiction of choice in the world. Canada’s pre-eminent role as a financing jurisdiction for international mining is well understood. Although we are at the early stages of losing this historical leadership to Australia, acting quickly to solidify Canada’s leadership will be a strong signal. Australia and Europe have already established critical mineral strategies to offset the dominance of the market that China has exerted. At the very least, Canada’s coordination needs to include the United States, and probably Mexico (through CUSMA), as the ongoing funding of a critical mineral supply may require backstopping developments with a price amelioration mechanism. In essence, a floor price to ensure the protection of critical mineral developments from manipulating price volatility – and which has held back developments, or caused the insolvency of several of these developments, due to non-transparent world market pricing mechanisms. … Establishing a steady supply of these critical minerals will lead to more value-added opportunities, in conjunction with our trade partners.
Conservative Dissenting Recommendations
My question to the Minister: ‘What took you so long?’
This approach was presented three and a half years ago – and the Government chose to ignore it then.
No surprise now, perhaps, as we’ve seen this Minister flip-flop on so many of the nonsense policies he’s put forth or acquiesced in at Cabinet:
- The Clean Electricity Regulations (still opaque)
- Canada’ role in shipping hydrocarbons to the world
- Building energy infrastructure
To say nothing of the various Cabinet decisions he has been a part of that have led to Canada’s current weak negotiating position with our allies. We effectively have not had a Minister of Natural Resources under his tenure.
Nothing topped it off more succinctly than his speech at the World Petroleum Show, held in Calgary in September 2023, when his remarks on behalf of the Government of Canada left industry participants around the world questioning whether the Minister was ‘tone-deaf’ or if, in fact, he knew anything about natural resources.
It seems his move to the position I promoted – three and a half years ago – shows that he’s finally listening and learning (or un-learning his previous narratives, perhaps)– but it’s quite late in the day. Time and our future have been wasted.
Canada’s wealth is based on its success as a trading nation. Canada is blessed with immense resources spread across a vast country. It has succeeded as a small, open economy with an enviable standard of living that has been able to provide what the world needs.
Canada has been stuck in a situation where it cannot complete nation‑building projects like the Canadian Pacific Railway that was completed in 1885, or the Trans Canada Highway that was completed in the 1960s. With the uncertainty of U.S. tariffs looming over our country and province, Canada needs to take bold action to revitalize the productivity and competitiveness of its economy – going east to west and not always relying on north-south trade. There’s no better time than right now to politically de-risk these projects.
A lack of leadership from the federal government has led to the following:
- Inadequate federal funding for trade infrastructure.
- A lack of investment is stifling the infrastructure capacity we need to diversify our exports. This is despite federally commissioned reports like the 2022 report by the National Supply Chain Task Force indicating the investment need will be trillions over the next 50 years.
- Federal red tape, like the Impact Assessment Act.
- Burdensome regulation has added major costs and significant delays to projects, like the Roberts Bank Terminal 2 project, a proposed container facility at Vancouver, which spent more than a decade under federal review.
- Opaque funding programs, like the National Trade Corridors Fund (NTCF).
- Which offers a pattern of unclear criteria for decisions and lack of response. This program has not funded any provincial highway projects in Alberta, despite the many applications put forward by the Government of Alberta. In fact, we’ve gone nearly 3 years without decisions on some project applications.
- Ineffective policies that limit economic activity.
- Measures that pit environmental and economic objectives in stark opposition to one another instead of seeking innovative win-win solutions hinder Canada’s overall productivity and investment climate. One example is the moratorium on shipping crude through northern B.C. waters, which effectively ended Enbridge’s Northern Gateway proposal and has limited Alberta’s ability to ship its oil to Asian markets.
In a federal leadership vacuum, Alberta has worked to advance economic corridors across Canada. In April 2023, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba signed an agreement to collaborate on joint infrastructure networks meant to boost trade and economic growth across the Prairies. Alberta also signed a similar economic corridor agreement with the Northwest Territories in July 2024. Additionally, Alberta would like to see an agreement among all 7 western provinces and territories, and eventually the entire country, to collaborate on economic corridors.
Through our collaboration with neighbouring jurisdictions, we will spur the development of economic corridors by reducing regulatory delays and attracting investment. We recognize the importance of working with Indigenous communities on the development of major infrastructure projects, which will be key to our success in these endeavours.
However, provinces and territories cannot do this alone. The federal government must play its part to advance our country’s economic corridors that we need from coast to coast to coast to support our economic future. It is time for immediate action.
Alberta recommends the federal government take the following steps to strengthen Canada’s economic corridors and supply chains by:
- Creating an Economic Corridor Agency to identify and maintain economic corridors across provincial boundaries, with meaningful consultation with both Indigenous groups and industry.
- Increasing federal funding for trade-enabling infrastructure, such as roads, rail, ports, in-land ports, airports and more.
- Streamlining regulations regarding trade-related infrastructure and interprovincial trade, especially within economic corridors. This would include repealing or amending the Impact Assessment Act and other legislation to remove the uncertainty and ensure regulatory provisions are proportionate to the specific risk of the project.
- Adjusting the policy levers that that support productivity and competitiveness. This would include revisiting how the federal government supports airports, especially in the less-populated regions of Canada.
To move forward expeditiously on the items above, I propose the establishment of a federal/provincial/territorial working group. This working group would be tasked with creating a common position on addressing the economic threats facing Canada, and the need for mitigating trade and trade-enabling infrastructure. The group should identify appropriate governance to ensure these items are presented in a timely fashion by relative priority and urgency.
Alberta will continue to be proactive and tackle trade issues within its own jurisdiction. From collaborative memorandums of understanding with the Prairies and the North, to reducing interprovincial trade barriers, to fostering innovative partnerships with Indigenous groups, Alberta is working within its jurisdiction, much like its provincial and territorial colleagues.
We ask the federal government to join us in a new approach to infrastructure development that ensures Canada is productive and competitive for generations to come and generates the wealth that ensures our quality of life is second to none.
-
Devin Dreeshen
Devin Dreeshen was sworn in as Minister of Transportation and Economic Corridors on October 24, 2022.
Two New Studies Find Fewer Clouds Cause Warmer Temps
Trump gains ground in war against DEI
Germany’s Shocking War on Online Speech: Armed Police Raids for Online “Insults,” “Hate Speech,” and “Misinformation”
Quebecers starting to understand the need for Canadian pipelines
U.S. Conditionally Approves Avian Flu Vaccine for Poultry
“Fake Chinese income” mortgages fuel Toronto Real Estate Bubble: Canadian Bank Leaks
Poilievre can pack a Rally—but can he take on the establishment, China’s influence, and the globalist elite?
-
COVID-192 days agoRed Deer Freedom Convoy protestor Pat King given 3 months of house arrest
-
Business2 days agoGovernment debt burden increasing across Canada
-
Business2 days agoNew climate plan simply hides the costs to Canadians
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days agoBipartisan US Coalition Finally Tells Europe, and the FBI, to Shove It
-
Business1 day agoFederal Heritage Minister recommends nearly doubling CBC funding and reducing accountability
-
Addictions1 day agoBC overhauls safer supply program in response to widespread pharmacy scam
-
International22 hours agoJihadis behead 70 Christians in DR Congo church
-
Health2 days agoTrudeau government buys 500k bird flu vaccines to be ‘ready’ for potential ‘health threats’