The Most Expensive Campaign Promise Ever – Explainer

This article was submitted by Peter McCaffrey, President 0f the Alberta Institute

Over the coming weeks, I’ll be analyzing some of the big policy announcements that the major parties in the Alberta election make.

So, today, we’re going to kick things off with a look at an issue that made headlines yesterday – electricity policy.

I know, I can almost see your eyes glaze over through your webcam, but bear with me – this is important!

Last March, Justin Trudeau announced the release of the federal government’s “2030 Emissions Reduction Plan: Canada’s Next Steps for Clean Air and a Strong Economy”.

Who could be opposed to Clean Air and a Strong Economy, right?

The devil, as always, was in the details and, in this case, the details are called the “Clean Electricity Regulations”.

The federal government has been talking for some time about “transitioning” Canada’s entire electricity sector to being “net-zero” (ie: no net carbon emissions) by 2050.

The “Clean Electricity Regulations”, though, are the federal government’s plan to speed up this transition and require the provinces to have net-zero electricity grids by 2035 instead.

Now, for some provinces, that won’t actually be too challenging, as they already generate the vast majority of their electricity from Hydro.

But for Alberta (and Saskatchewan), it will be practically impossible – and insanely expensive.

That hasn’t stopped Rachel Notley and the NDP from promising to follow the federal government’s lead and do it, though.

So, let’s take a deep dive into exactly why this policy could be so harmful to Alberta.

First, in Alberta, about 85% of electricity on the commercial market comes from non-renewable resources.

That means that, in order to achieve net-zero here, we’d have to rebuild almost literally the entirety of our electricity market in the next 12 years.

If that sounds expensive to you – you’d be right!

In July 2020, when the federal government first started floating this idea, the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) wrote a report that calculated that transitioning Alberta to a net-zero electricity grid by 2035 would cost $52 billion in additional capital investments and generation operating costs.

Yes, you read that right – $52 billion.

And, to be clear, that $52 billion isn’t the entire price of transitioning to net-zero – that would be much more – the $52 billion is just the extra price of doing it faster, by 2035 instead of 2050!

Next, fast forward to yesterday, and a new report was been released that assesses those direct capital and infrastructure costs calculated by AESO, and works out what the additional indirect economic harm to Alberta would be of being forced to make this rapid transition.

This new report was written by a group called Navius, who are traditionally seen as a left-leaning environmental economic research group, and even they say that the indirect impacts to Alberta’s economy will be enormous – $35 billion – and that’s before they even account for inflation.

So, now, thanks to these two reports, we know exactly what the federal government’s 2035 net-zero electricity grid plan will cost Alberta.

$52 billion in direct costs to upgrade and build infrastructure, plus at least $35 billion in indirect economic costs, for a total of at least $87 billion.

And, as I mentioned before, Rachel Notley and the NDP are fully on board.

They aren’t advertising their support, of course.

Just like with the carbon tax in 2015, they aren’t campaigning on this policy, and they haven’t mentioned it on their website or included it in their campaign material.

But, at a private NDP event last year and in a few occasional tweets, Rachel Notley has confirmed that the NDP is committed to this idea.

And, just like in 2015 with the carbon tax, they’re hoping Albertans won’t notice until after the election.

Let’s be clear, though – a policy of implementing a net-zero electricity grid by 2035 makes the carbon tax look like a bargain by comparison.

The carbon tax costs Albertans about $2 billion.

Don’t get me wrong, that’s a huge amount of money.

But $87 billion (or more) over just 12 years is more than $7 billion a year.

I really worry that people don’t understand just how much money we’re talking about here.

It’s an absolutely insane amount.

Let’s try to put it into scale…

$87 billion is more than the entire Alberta government budget ($63 billion).

$87 billion is 48 times the cost of the Red Deer Hospital.

$87 billion is 290 times as much as the province’s “controversial” Calgary arena investment.

$87 billion would pay for the salaries of every single nurse in Alberta for 70 years.

One more… just for fun…

$87 billion would buy a Tesla Model 3 for literally every household in the province.

Yes, seriously – you get a Tesla, you get a Tesla, everyone gets a Tesla!

This is honestly such an insane amount of money that I’m genuinely not even sure that the NDP realizes exactly what they’ve committed to here.

“Never has a politician committed to a policy that would cost this much to implement. This is not only unrealistic, but it is dangerous to the long-term health and viability of our economy,” said UCP Candidate Brian Jean.

It is the single biggest election promise in Alberta history, and it’s not even close.

Thankfully, here at the Alberta Institute, our team is working hard to assess and analyze campaign promises to make sure that you have the facts at your fingertips, and that you’re fully aware of just how much our politician’s promises are going to cost you.

I’d love to be able to bring you more of this type of analysis, so if you support our work, please help us continue to provide you with the level of in-depth policy research by making a donation to support our work:

The Alberta Institute is an independent, libertarian, public policy think tank that aims to advance personal freedom and choice in Alberta.

Founded in 2018, we work to develop and promote solutions to a wide range of municipal, provincial, and federal public policy issues in a strictly non-partisan way.

Our solutions are informed by our belief in a free and open society built on individual rights, private property, peace, voluntaryism, free markets, free minds, free trade, free movement, self-ownership, and reason.

We promote these beliefs through a wide variety of activities and actions, including research, data analysis, publications, newsletters, advocacy, events, conferences, and more.

Independence:

The Alberta Institute’s work is funded by thousands of small-dollar donors from across Alberta who believe in – and wish to support – our mission.

We don’t accept any government funding – and we never will – because we think Albertans should be free to choose, for themselves, which organizations to support.

The donations we receive from our supporters allow us to hire dedicated research staff and volunteer coordinators, publish and promote our findings, host events to help get the message out and connect with the community, offer internships and other opportunities to young Albertans, and much more.

We also depend on our grassroots volunteers, spread across nearly every community in the Province, to help with our mission of advancing personal freedom and choice across Alberta.

Up Next

Alberta wildfire situation: Update 3

Don't Miss

Alberta Institute – Provincial election roundup Day 5

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Alberta’s grand bargain with Canada includes a new pipeline to Prince Rupert

Business / 2 hours ago

Carney’s European pivot could quietly reshape Canada’s sovereignty

Crime / 12 hours ago

Manhunt on for suspect in shooting deaths of Minnesota House speaker, husband

Alberta

Alberta’s grand bargain with Canada includes a new pipeline to Prince Rupert

Published on June 15, 2025

Todayville

From Resource Now

By Nelson Bennett

Alberta renews call for West Coast oil pipeline amid shifting federal, geopolitical dynamics.

Just six months ago, talk of resurrecting some version of the Northern Gateway pipeline would have been unthinkable. But with the election of Donald Trump in the U.S. and Mark Carney in Canada, it’s now thinkable.

In fact, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith seems to be making Northern Gateway 2.0 a top priority and a condition for Alberta staying within the Canadian confederation and supporting Mark Carney’s vision of making Canada an Energy superpower. Thanks to Donald Trump threatening Canadian sovereignty and its economy, there has been a noticeable zeitgeist shift in Canada. There is growing support for the idea of leveraging Canada’s natural resources and diversifying export markets to make it less vulnerable to an unpredictable southern neighbour.

“I think the world has changed dramatically since Donald Trump got elected in November,” Smith said at a keynote address Wednesday at the Global Energy Show Canada in Calgary. “I think that’s changed the national conversation.” Smith said she has been encouraged by the tack Carney has taken since being elected Prime Minister, and hopes to see real action from Ottawa in the coming months to address what Smith said is serious encumbrances to Alberta’s oil sector, including Bill C-69, an oil and gas emissions cap and a West Coast tanker oil ban. “I’m going to give him some time to work with us and I’m going to be optimistic,” Smith said. Removing the West Coast moratorium on oil tankers would be the first step needed to building a new oil pipeline line from Alberta to Prince Rupert. “We cannot build a pipeline to the west coast if there is a tanker ban,” Smith said. The next step would be getting First Nations on board. “Indigenous peoples have been shut out of the energy economy for generations, and we are now putting them at the heart of it,” Smith said.

Alberta currently produces about 4.3 million barrels of oil per day. Had the Northern Gateway, Keystone XL and Energy East pipelines been built, Alberta could now be producing and exporting an additional 2.5 million barrels of oil per day. The original Northern Gateway Pipeline — killed outright by the Justin Trudeau government — would have terminated in Kitimat. Smith is now talking about a pipeline that would terminate in Prince Rupert. This may obviate some of the concerns that Kitimat posed with oil tankers negotiating Douglas Channel, and their potential impacts on the marine environment.

One of the biggest hurdles to a pipeline to Prince Rupert may be B.C. Premier David Eby. The B.C. NDP government has a history of opposing oil pipelines with tooth and nail. Asked in a fireside chat by Peter Mansbridge how she would get around the B.C. problem, Smith confidently said: “I’ll convince David Eby.”

“I’m sensitive to the issues that were raised before,” she added. One of those concerns was emissions. But the Alberta government and oil industry has struck a grand bargain with Ottawa: pipelines for emissions abatement through carbon capture and storage.

The industry and government propose multi-billion investments in CCUS. The Pathways Alliance project alone represents an investment of $10 to $20 billion. Smith noted that there is no economic value in pumping CO2 underground. It only becomes economically viable if the tradeoff is greater production and export capacity for Alberta oil. “If you couple it with a million-barrel-per-day pipeline, well that allows you $20 billion worth of revenue year after year,” she said. “All of a sudden a $20 billion cost to have to decarbonize, it looks a lot more attractive when you have a new source of revenue.” When asked about the Prince Rupert pipeline proposal, Eby has responded that there is currently no proponent, and that it is therefore a bridge to cross when there is actually a proposal. “I think what I’ve heard Premier Eby say is that there is no project and no proponent,” Smith said. “Well, that’s my job. There will be soon. “We’re working very hard on being able to get industry players to realize this time may be different.” “We’re working on getting a proponent and route.”

At a number of sessions during the conference, Mansbridge has repeatedly asked speakers about the Alberta secession movement, and whether it might scare off investment capital. Alberta has been using the threat of secession as a threat if Ottawa does not address some of the province’s long-standing grievances. Smith said she hopes Carney takes it seriously. “I hope the prime minister doesn’t want to test it,” Smith said during a scrum with reporters. “I take it seriously. I have never seen separatist sentiment be as high as it is now. “I’ve also seen it dissipate when Ottawa addresses the concerns Alberta has.” She added that, if Carney wants a true nation-building project to fast-track, she can’t think of a better one than a new West Coast pipeline. “I can’t imagine that there will be another project on the national list that will generate as much revenue, as much GDP, as many high paying jobs as a bitumen pipeline to the coast.”

Alberta

Albertans need clarity on prime minister’s incoherent energy policy

Published on June 15, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

The new government under Prime Minister Mark Carney recently delivered its throne speech, which set out the government’s priorities for the coming term. Unfortunately, on energy policy, Albertans are still waiting for clarity.

Prime Minister Carney’s position on energy policy has been confusing, to say the least. On the campaign trail, he promised to keep Trudeau’s arbitrary emissions cap for the oil and gas sector, and Bill C-69 (which opponents call the “no more pipelines act”). Then, two weeks ago, he said his government will “change things at the federal level that need to be changed in order for projects to move forward,” adding he may eventually scrap both the emissions cap and Bill C-69.

His recent cabinet appointments further muddied his government’s position. On one hand, he appointed Tim Hodgson as the new minister of Energy and Natural Resources. Hodgson has called energy “Canada’s superpower” and promised to support oil and pipelines, and fix the mistrust that’s been built up over the past decade between Alberta and Ottawa. His appointment gave hope to some that Carney may have a new approach to revitalize Canada’s oil and gas sector.

On the other hand, he appointed Julie Dabrusin as the new minister of Environment and Climate Change. Dabrusin was the parliamentary secretary to the two previous environment ministers (Jonathan Wilkinson and Steven Guilbeault) who opposed several pipeline developments and were instrumental in introducing the oil and gas emissions cap, among other measures designed to restrict traditional energy development.

To confuse matters further, Guilbeault, who remains in Carney’s cabinet albeit in a diminished role, dismissed the need for additional pipeline infrastructure less than 48 hours after Carney expressed conditional support for new pipelines.

The throne speech was an opportunity to finally provide clarity to Canadians—and specifically Albertans—about the future of Canada’s energy industry. During her first meeting with Prime Minister Carney, Premier Danielle Smith outlined Alberta’s demands, which include scrapping the emissions cap, Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, which bans most oil tankers loading or unloading anywhere on British Columbia’s north coast (Smith also wants Ottawa to support an oil pipeline to B.C.’s coast). But again, the throne speech provided no clarity on any of these items. Instead, it contained vague platitudes including promises to “identify and catalyse projects of national significance” and “enable Canada to become the world’s leading energy superpower in both clean and conventional energy.”

Until the Carney government provides a clear plan to address the roadblocks facing Canada’s energy industry, private investment will remain on the sidelines, or worse, flow to other countries. Put simply, time is up. Albertans—and Canadians—need clarity. No more flip flopping and no more platitudes.