Vests will be unnecessary. Ina few hours they will glow in the dark.
April Fools!! Here's your Carbon Tax F#ckers!!!
- Thread starter Ron in Regina
- Start date
The draft clean electricity regulations, released last week, serve as a warning that neither the provinces nor industry nor common sense will stand in the way of the federal government’s commitment to meeting the radical emissions targets agreed to in Paris in 2015. Whether the Liberals will successfully force power grids to achieve net zero by 2035 is far from certain, but one thing seems clear: the climate agenda has put the final nail in the coffin of deregulation. Big government is here to stay.
The draft regulations were immediately attacked by the premiers of Alberta and Saskatchewan as being “unconstitutional” and “unachievable.” Although there have been varying estimates of how much the transformation will cost — with Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault disingenuously claiming Canadians will save money by switching away from fossil fuels (which his carbon tax has artificially inflated in price) — there can be little question that it would be an expensive undertaking for the Prairie provinces.
apple.news
Unlike British Columbia, Manitoba, Quebec and Newfoundland, they are not endowed with the geographical features that permit an abundance of hydroelectricity. Nor do they have a legacy of nuclear power, like Ontario does. Saskatchewan currently relies on fossil fuels for more than three-quarters of its electricity supply.
Alberta also relies heavily on fossil fuels, but is considerably greener than a decade ago. The province had planned to phase out coal generation by 2030, but has managed to make the transition ahead of schedule (something that’s almost unheard of in government), with its last coal plant due to be decommissioned later this year.
Most of the coal has been replaced with gas-fired generators, which produces half as much greenhouse gasses. It’s thus not possible to say that Alberta hasn’t been doing its part to try to reduce the country’s overall emissions. But that’s clearly not good enough for the Liberals, which will stop at nothing to attain the Paris Agreement’s misguided target of achieving net zero by 2050….which the Liberal/NDP modified to 2035 because…something or another.
Not content to let the carbon tax incentivize market players to find ways to reduce emissions, the government has also imposed industry-specific emissions caps on oil and gas, introduced clean fuel standards, banned the sale of new gas-powered vehicles by 2035 and made it virtually impossible to build new energy infrastructure, all while giving tens of billions of taxpayer dollars to favoured industries to produce products demanded by governments, rather than consumers.
Ottawa’s ever-changing rules do not provide the type of stability businesses need to make long-term investments — not just in energy and electrical generation, but in other sectors of the economy, as well. This is likely one of the reasons why Canada has seen a sharp decline in gross business investment since the Liberals took office in 2015.
The draft regulations were immediately attacked by the premiers of Alberta and Saskatchewan as being “unconstitutional” and “unachievable.” Although there have been varying estimates of how much the transformation will cost — with Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault disingenuously claiming Canadians will save money by switching away from fossil fuels (which his carbon tax has artificially inflated in price) — there can be little question that it would be an expensive undertaking for the Prairie provinces.
NP View: Liberal net-zero scheme heralds dark era of ever-growing government — National Post
The draft clean electricity regulations, released last week, serve as a warning that neither the provinces nor industry nor common sense will stand in the way of the federal government’s commitment to meeting the radical emissions targets agreed to in Paris in 2015. Whether the Liberals will...
Unlike British Columbia, Manitoba, Quebec and Newfoundland, they are not endowed with the geographical features that permit an abundance of hydroelectricity. Nor do they have a legacy of nuclear power, like Ontario does. Saskatchewan currently relies on fossil fuels for more than three-quarters of its electricity supply.
Alberta also relies heavily on fossil fuels, but is considerably greener than a decade ago. The province had planned to phase out coal generation by 2030, but has managed to make the transition ahead of schedule (something that’s almost unheard of in government), with its last coal plant due to be decommissioned later this year.
Most of the coal has been replaced with gas-fired generators, which produces half as much greenhouse gasses. It’s thus not possible to say that Alberta hasn’t been doing its part to try to reduce the country’s overall emissions. But that’s clearly not good enough for the Liberals, which will stop at nothing to attain the Paris Agreement’s misguided target of achieving net zero by 2050….which the Liberal/NDP modified to 2035 because…something or another.
Not content to let the carbon tax incentivize market players to find ways to reduce emissions, the government has also imposed industry-specific emissions caps on oil and gas, introduced clean fuel standards, banned the sale of new gas-powered vehicles by 2035 and made it virtually impossible to build new energy infrastructure, all while giving tens of billions of taxpayer dollars to favoured industries to produce products demanded by governments, rather than consumers.
Ottawa’s ever-changing rules do not provide the type of stability businesses need to make long-term investments — not just in energy and electrical generation, but in other sectors of the economy, as well. This is likely one of the reasons why Canada has seen a sharp decline in gross business investment since the Liberals took office in 2015.
Perhaps, with enough global warming, if the Arctic ice sheet completely melts along with all the permafrost…& for some reason it all drains south away from the Arctic Circle towards the Gulf of Mexico (?) and across both Saskatchewan and Alberta….
Then SK & AB can dam these currently unexisting rivers (green environmentally, friendly dams) to generate more hydroelectric power (hopefully before 2035) to prevent the melting that would’ve created the rivers needed to build the dams to have the hydroelectric power to replace their current electricity sources…
There is room on the N Sask for another hydro dam and Diefenbaker could add a turbine.
Ok, that’s two. keep in mind that Alberta is going to want to dam the same river before it reaches Saskatchewan I’m going to assume…by 2035, so in 12 years or less.
How many more do we need before 2035 for the net zero thing in order to not be punished by the federal government for our current geography and potential voting habits?
If we need to replace all electrical generation (for SK & AB) that may come from natural gas or coal in the next 12 years or less, and throw in the sunsetting of internal combustion vehicles in the same timeframe…how many more dams are we going to need?
What would be the timeframe for regulatory approval be for small nuclear reactors from conception to implementation…to replace our current electrical generation sources? Is that doable by 2035?
It would probably cheaper to move all of SK to TX for winter than go netzero.
Sounds economically feasible, as long as they install high-speed electric (from fully renewable sources) trains that can empty our million plus people (all about the same time), house them from mid-October to mid-March, and get them all back in a timely period, I’d give it a try.
(If we keep the “Texas-time” at under 180 days consecutive or less, we can keep Canadian healthcare and pay Canadian income taxes, and so on)
Can we get Mexico to pay for it though? Or maybe Quebec? Maybe Berlin or Toronto? What does an Armadillo taste like anyway?
We’re going to definitely need some “Equilization Payments” from taxing hydroelectric power in BC & Quebec and perhaps Ontario to support our Green lifestyle while we are saving the planet.
We start out at almost 900m and pancake flat until hitting the Missouri Coteau. After that it's ea dynamic charge and dump battery train/rollercoaster ride thru MT WY CO NM OK or a slow gentle glide following the Missouri and Mississippi to Houston.
Diesel to get back cuz it's cheaper than electric down there.
Or just Tom Sawyer it on barges from Montana and a straw fired steam paddlewheeler to get back.
Westernesse
But…But we have to single handedly offset Brazil & Russia & India & China & South Africa and so many many others by 2035 by hamstringing our economy and becoming a financial basket case…that we’d HAVE to go full electric for the UN IPCC Selfies and to be able to shake our collective finger while lecturing others!!!
Canada accounts for 1.6% of global emissions but its population is only about 0.5% of the global population so per Capita….is irrelevant (!!) and a mugs game to skew the numbers for political purposes that have nothing to do with the actual environment that we survive in each year.
Why are the emissions not related to the square area of each nation instead of their population…(???) in order to demonize the actual over-populated heavy emissions problem children of the globe? Anyone??
In 10 years global population drops in a big way. The gotta play the game until the boomers and half of X is gone.
“We are investing in non-emitting nuclear technologies to power us forward — a future that leverages Saskatchewan’s world-leading production of uranium to create jobs and help create non-emitting, reliable and affordable power to Saskatchewanians across this province,” Wilkinson said during a press conference at the University of Saskatchewan.
The project was announced by SaskPower in June 2022, when it selected the GE-Hitachi BWRX-300 reactor for the project.
SMRs are scalable and versatile nuclear reactors that typically produce 300 megawatts of electricity or less. They can support large established grids, small grids, remote off-grid communities and resource projects, according to the provincial government.
The province said a 300-megawatt SMR could generate enough clean electricity each year to power 300,000 homes…but by 2035?
While the federal government has set the goal of creating a net-zero power grid by 2035, the Saskatchewan government has set its own goal of 2050.
The location of the proposed reactor has not been chosen, and the Saskatchewan government isn’t scheduled to make a final decision on the project until 2029.
$74 million announced for small nuclear reactor project in Saskatchewan — Global News
SaskPower announced the project in June 2022 when it selected the GE-Hitachi BWRX-300 as the technology. The Saskatchewan government will make a final decision on plan in 2029.
The should dump the nuclear waste on the steps of Parliament Hill or wherever TrueDope has his summer cottage.
So much of Canada is stable Canadian Shield, so storage of used nuclear products isn’t a big hardship whatsoever, put the approval process is.