Energy regulations helping to make Alberta noncompetitive
Alberta is suffering due to an unprecedented prolonged oil price low and soft recovery. Glibly bemoaning how “it ain’t easy being green” just makes light of the true plight of thousands and thousands of Albertans directly or indirectly dependent on Alberta’s natural resources sector. Massive job losses, being put on EI and then social assistance, reliance on the food bank, health issues related to stress and depression, and crimes of desperation are all statistical areas that have soared in Alberta.
Frustration is further compounded by attacks on the sector from our own governments. Provincial socialist ‘class legislation’ is proving to lower competitiveness and drive away investment as predicted (Conoco Phillips, Royal Dutch Shell, etc.). The federal government also increased taxes at upper levels, increased unnecessary regulatory burdens, proposed a national carbon tax, and reduced drilling incentives. Prime Minister Trudeau is clinging to an IPCC/United Nations disproven human emissions premise (re climate change) and nonbinding agreement that most of the world is rejecting. This is being done despite admission that Alberta’s oil and gas industry is a driver of Canada’s economy and is being counted on to solve the excessive debt. No wonder investment uncertainty is plaguing us (re: timely supply to world market; competitive return on investment; and government trust, support and competence).
Actual hardship is aggravated by the magnitude of ‘fake’ and ‘edited’ news propagated to falsely demonize fossil fuels. Recently the Canadian Energy Research Institute announced six emerging technologies that will continue to reduce costs and emissions in the oilsands. Technological advances in nonrenewable energy are usually edited out of many of the major media TV news programs. Perhaps such unawareness is why a recent letter to the News ludicrously made a grim comparison of modern clean coal-powered electric plants (possible with carbon capture and other new technologies) to those in London, England in the 1950s.
There is a far-off future need for a shifting energy mix (non-renewable/renewable), but one sector should not be “moved away from”/hung out to dry for the advancement of the other. China’s mix is 80/20 and of the 20 per cent renewable the majority is by far hydro. Embracing the selling of wind turbines and solar panels does not equate to their use in China. (Google ‘renewable resources’ followed by the country). In Canada both non-renewable and renewable energy should be allowed to collectively grow and contribute to our economy through market demand and continued innovation in efficiency, storage, affordability, disposal, and dependability. Discriminatory legislation is counterproductive and makes us noncompetitive.
Barb Taylor Medicine Hat