Energy
The 2015 Paris agreement outdated by AI advancement

From Resource Works
Evolving economy is running circles around green ambitions
In 2015 world leaders met in Paris to set the course for climate action and agreed to limit global warming to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels. Those targets relied heavily on getting to 100% renewable energy, electrifying transport and reducing fossil fuels. But one big factor was left out of those plans: the rapid growth of artificial intelligence (AI) and the massive energy it’s consuming. Now as AI is becoming a pillar of the global economy, climate goals remain stagnant, and we need to ask the big questions about how we reconcile progress with responsibility.
AI’s rapid growth, especially since the introduction of generative AI tools like ChatGPT and MidJourney, has upended industries and created unprecedented demand for computer power. Training and running advanced AI models requires vast amounts of energy, mostly to power the data centers where the computations are done. These facilities use as much electricity as a medium sized city and are straining local grids and making it harder to decarbonize the power system.
The scale of this demand was not factored in when nations were setting their climate strategies in 2015. While many plans accounted for electrification of transport and heating, AI was still an emerging idea. Today the data center industry, driven by AI, cloud computing and internet usage, accounts for about 3% of global electricity consumption and that’s expected to rise sharply as AI adoption grows.
The energy challenges of AI are particularly acute in British Columbia, Canada where a clean electricity grid was once the foundation of the province’s climate strategy. BC Hydro, the publicly owned utility, generates most of its electricity from hydro. But recent data shows BC Hydro can’t meet domestic demand without importing electricity from neighboring regions including Alberta and the US where fossil fuels dominate the energy mix.
In the last fiscal year BC imported over 13,600 gigawatt-hours of electricity – more than double the annual output of the controversial Site C dam, a $16 billion hydro project currently under construction. Importing electricity undermines the province’s green credentials and raises questions about how it will meet future demand as data centers grow to support AI.
Climate goals initially focused on reducing emissions from transport and industrial processes are now being challenged by the energy demands of AI. For example, policies promoting electric vehicles (EVs) assumed electricity demand would grow incrementally but AI is upending those calculations. Data centers designed to power AI workloads require massive energy densities and continuous operation and are adding stress to grids already dealing with EVs and renewable energy integration.
Globally nations are facing similar dilemmas. In the US data centers are driving demand for new natural gas plants even as the federal government is committing to decarbonize the grid by 2035. Meanwhile countries like Ireland and the Netherlands have temporarily halted approvals for new data center connections to protect grid stability and meet emissions reduction targets. These tensions are highlighting the growing challenge of balancing climate goals with the demands of a digital economy which now has the added pressure of AI.
AI and its energy demands have added a new layer of complexity for climate policymakers. Some say the solution is to accelerate the transition to renewable energy and invest in advanced technologies like small modular reactors (SMRs) and energy storage. Others say it’s about improving data center efficiency through liquid cooling and more efficient chips.
But these solutions take time and capital and may not be enough to keep up with the rapid growth of AI driven energy demand. Policymakers will have to make tough choices: should resources be directed towards building more renewable capacity to support AI or should data center growth be limited? And how can we make sure AI’s benefits outweigh its costs?
The AI revolution has blown apart assumptions about energy demand and emissions reduction pathways and we need to face the reality of our existing climate strategies. As British Columbia is trying to balance the promise of AI with a sustainable future the time to act has never been more pressing. A net zero world will require not only innovation but also a willingness to confront the trade-offs that come with plugging in these transformative technologies to our planet.
Daily Caller
‘Drill, Baby, Drill’ Or $50 Oil — Trump Can’t Have Both

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By David Blackmon
President Donald Trump has often made clear his goal of cutting prices for energy as part of his overall agenda to break the back of chronic inflation left behind by the Biden presidency. When talking about this goal, the president has placed special emphasis on lowering the price of crude oil, given its integral relationship to gas prices at the pump and transportation-related costs which go into the price of food, clothing and other consumer goods.
“A very big thing that I’m very happy with is oil is down,” Trump said in remarks in the Oval Office on Wednesday. “We’re getting that down. When energy comes down, prices are going to be coming down with it. So, in a very short period of time, we’ve done a very good job.”
White House advisor Peter Navarro has been quoted by The New York Times and other media outlets as saying that an average oil price of $50 per barrel would help tame inflation and set the stage for a return to a healthier economy. If that is indeed the goal, this week’s confluence of events, featuring a bigger-than-expected increase in oil production quotas from the OPEC+ oil cartel preceded less than 24 hours earlier by the president’s announced reciprocal tariffs on a wide array of countries went a long way to doing the trick.
Just prior to Trump’s tariff announcement Wednesday afternoon, the price for West Texas Intermediate crude stood at $70/bbl. Less than 48 hours later, the price had fallen below $61, a drop of about 15%. It was the largest 2-day decline in crude prices since 2021. How much of the price decrease is due to the tariffs as opposed to the OPEC+ agreement to pour another 137,000 barrels per day onto the international market is hard to know, but there is no doubt both actions had an impact.
As I’ve noted previously, this action to force lower prices for oil and natural gas lies directly at odds with the concurrent Trump “drill, baby, drill” objective which he sees as a key part of his American Energy Dominance agenda. The White House gave a nod to the oil refining segment in the Wednesday tariff announcement by exempting energy imports, another action at least in part aimed at lowering prices for gasoline and diesel fuel.
But that nod to the downstream segment does little for upstream companies who have seen supply chain muck-ups and Biden-era inflation raise break-even prices above Friday’s levels. The Q1 2025 Energy Survey Report published March 26 by the Dallas Federal Reserve estimates that drillers in the Permian Basin require a $61 oil price just to break even on drilling new shale wells. The needed breakeven price rises higher in other, less prolific basins. CNN quoted independent oil analyst Andy Lipow as saying that many upstream companies require prices closer to Monday’s $71/bbl level for new shale wells. It almost goes without saying that operators will have little incentive to “drill, baby, drill” if they stand to lose money doing it.
In an interview with Fox Business host Stu Varney on Tuesday, Energy Secretary Chris Wright, himself a former oil industry executive, said, “If your state has expensive energy, it’s because of choices made by politicians in those states to virtue signal somehow they’re on some global mission. They’re going to solve climate change by making your utility bills more expensive and your businesses want to relocate out of the states. That’s just nonsense.” He added that Trump was pursuing energy policies based on common sense, saying, “common sense will deliver more investment in our country and lower energy prices.”
No doubt, few executives in the industry would agree that a pursuit of $50 oil prices has anything to do with common sense for their companies. If prices should drop that far and linger there for any length of time, layoffs and idled drilling rigs will become the prevailing topic of the day in oil and gas.
So, while the White House might continue touting its “drill, baby, drill” slogan for the time being, we won’t hear it echoing through the barbecue and Tex-Mex joints in Midland, Texas, for the time being.
David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
2025 Federal Election
Poilievre To Create ‘Canada First’ National Energy Corridor

From Conservative Party Communications
Poilievre will create the ‘Canada First’ National Energy Corridor to rapidly approve & build the infrastructure we need to end our energy dependence on America so we can stand up to Trump from a position of strength.
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre announced today he will create a ‘Canada First’ National Energy Corridor to fast-track approvals for transmission lines, railways, pipelines, and other critical infrastructure across Canada in a pre-approved transport corridor entirely within Canada, transporting our resources within Canada and to the world while bypassing the United States. It will bring billions of dollars of new investment into Canada’s economy, create powerful paycheques for Canadian workers, and restore our economic independence.
“After the Lost Liberal decade, Canada is poorer, weaker, and more dependent on the United States than ever before,” said Poilievre. “My ‘Canada First National Energy Corridor’ will enable us to quickly build the infrastructure we need to strengthen our country so we can stand on our own two feet and stand up to the Americans.”
In the corridor, all levels of government will provide legally binding commitments to approve projects. This means investors will no longer face the endless regulatory limbo that has made Canadians poorer. First Nations will be involved from the outset, ensuring that economic benefits flow directly to them and that their approval is secured before any money is spent.
Between 2015 and 2020, Canada cancelled 16 major energy projects, resulting in a $176 billion hit to our economy. The Liberals killed the Energy East pipeline and passed Bill C-69, the “No-New-Pipelines” law, which makes it all but impossible to build the pipelines and energy infrastructure we need to strengthen the Canadian economy. And now, the PBO projects that the ‘Carney cap’ on Canadian energy will reduce oil and gas production by nearly 5%, slash GDP by $20.5 billion annually, and eliminate 54,400 full-time jobs by 2032. An average mine opening lead time is now nearly 18 years—23% longer than Australia and 38% longer than the US. As a result of the Lost Liberal Decade, Canada now ranks 23rd in the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Index for 2024, a seven-place drop since 2015.
“In 2024, Canada exported 98% of its crude oil to the United States. This leaves us too dependent on the Americans,” said Poilievre. “Our Canada First National Energy Corridor will get us out from under America’s thumb and enable us to build the infrastructure we need to sell our natural resources to new markets, bring home jobs and dollars, and make us sovereign and self-reliant to stand up to Trump from a position of strength.”
Mark Carney’s economic advice to Justin Trudeau made Canada weaker while he and his rich friends made out like bandits. While he advised Trudeau to cancel Canadian energy projects, his own company spent billions on pipelines in South America and the Middle East. And unlike our competitors Australia and America, which work with builders to get projects approved, Mark Carney and Steven Guilbeault’s radical “keep-it-in-the-ground” ideology has blocked development, killed jobs, and left Canada dependent on foreign imports.
“The choice is clear: a fourth Liberal term that will keep our resources in the ground and keep us weak and vulnerable to Trump’s threats, or a strong new Conservative government that will approve projects, build an economic fortress, bring jobs and dollars home, and put Canada First—For a Change.”
-
2025 Federal Election16 hours ago
Mark Carney refuses to clarify 2022 remarks accusing the Freedom Convoy of ‘sedition’
-
2025 Federal Election21 hours ago
Poilievre To Create ‘Canada First’ National Energy Corridor
-
Bruce Dowbiggin18 hours ago
Are the Jays Signing Or Declining? Only Vladdy & Bo Know For Sure
-
2025 Federal Election19 hours ago
Fixing Canada’s immigration system should be next government’s top priority
-
Daily Caller17 hours ago
Biden Administration Was Secretly More Involved In Ukraine Than It Let On, Investigation Reveals
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Canada Continues to Miss LNG Opportunities: Why the World Needs Our LNG – and We’re Not Ready
-
Health2 days ago
Selective reporting on measles outbreaks is a globalist smear campaign against Trump administration.
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Mark Carney is trying to market globalism as a ‘Canadian value.’ Will it work?