Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Alberta

Response: This Is Why Geothermal Should Be Our First Choice When It Comes To An Energy Transition

Published

4 minute read

I write in response to “CBC News Poll: Why the economic crisis could speed up transition to renewable energy” published recently:

(see: CBC News poll: Why the economic crisis could speed up transition to renewable energy)

Geothermal is the missing link in Earth’s energy mix. It’s the only scalable solution that is both clean and baseload. Without a clean baseload power source, the grid will struggle to replace all the legacy coal, gas and nuclear power, with just intermittent sources like wind and solar (even with better batteries than exist today).

Geothermal, however, can fill this gap. More importantly, we can do this not by importing windmills, solar panels and batteries from China, but by building on the same world-leading assets and expertise that sit idle in the oil service industry today. We can lead the world simply by using this expertise to convert our old abandoned well sites to geothermal use.

Even better, Eavor’s “made in Canada” solution (which is available to any Canadian developer), facilitates rapid scaling. In particular, Eavor’s technology eliminates or vastly reduces the need for exploration uncertainties, delays and costs. It also transforms geothermal from baseload to dispatchable. This allows Eavor to work much more synergistically with wind and solar where needed. Eavor’s technology, known as “Eavor-Loop™”, works by drilling a sealed well-bore loop which gently harvests geothermal heat over a large surface area simply through conduction. Without the need for a geothermal aquifer, this enables implementation almost anywhere in the world. In line with this, Eavor has assembled a multi-year, multi-billion-dollar prospect pipeline. These prospects are, however, all outside of Western Canada.

What will it take to enable Eavor, and other Canadian geothermal developers like Terrapin and DEEP, to bring this geothermal revolution home? The same thing that has nurtured successful and growing geothermal industries elsewhere – a combination of early grants and energy pricing that recognizes the advantages of green baseload power. Ideally these incentives would be modeled after the SDE+ system in the Netherlands, which is more efficient, but has the same net effect as a Feed-in-Tariff.

Our calculations are that, a geothermal “Moon Shot” for Western Canada with the above incentives, could easily attract $4 billion in foreign investment capital, to create 400 MW of clean, dispatchable power, all the while employing 5,500 oil service workers for 4 years. Larger plans could employ 25,000 for a decade or more. Such a plan would create a geothermal ecosystem in Canada that could lead the world and represent an entire new clean export industry. At Eavor, we believe that is a vision worth getting excited about. In short, the current situation doesn’t have to devolve into a fight between oil industry jobs or renewables. It doesn’t have to be a zero-sum game. With geothermal solutions like Eavor the same investment dollar can protect oil service jobs and improve the environment all at the same time.

To learn more about Eavor visit Eavor

For more stories, visit Todayville Calgary

Follow Author

Alberta

Alberta taxpayers should know how much their municipal governments spend

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill and Austin Thompson

Next week, voters across Alberta will go to the polls to elect their local governments. Of course, while the issues vary depending on the city, town or district, all municipal governments spend taxpayer money.

And according to a recent study, Grande Prairie County and Red Deer County were among Alberta’s highest-spending municipalities (on a per-person basis) in 2023 (the latest year of comparable data). Kara Westerlund, president of the Rural Municipalities of Alberta, said that’s no surprise—arguing that it’s expensive to serve a small number of residents spread over large areas.

That challenge is real. In rural areas, fewer people share the cost of roads, parks and emergency services. But high spending isn’t inevitable. Some rural municipalities managed to spend far less, demonstrating that local choices about what services to provide, and how to deliver them, matter.

Consider the contrast in spending levels among rural counties. In 2023, Grande Prairie County and Red Deer County spent $5,413 and $4,619 per person, respectively. Foothills County, by comparison, spent just $2,570 per person. All three counties have relatively low population densities (fewer than seven residents per square kilometre) yet their per-person spending varies widely. (In case you’re wondering, Calgary spent $3,144 and Edmonton spent $3,241.)

Some of that variation reflects differences in the cost of similar services. For example, all three counties provide fire protection but in 2023 this service cost $56.95 per person in Grande Prairie County, $38.51 in Red Deer County and $10.32 in Foothills County. Other spending differences reflect not just how much is spent, but whether a service is offered at all. For instance, in 2023 Grande Prairie County recorded $46,283 in daycare spending, while Red Deer County and Foothills County had none.

Put simply, population density alone simply doesn’t explain why some municipalities spend more than others. Much depends on the choices municipal governments make and how efficiently they deliver services.

Westerlund also dismissed comparisons showing that some counties spend more per person than nearby towns and cities, calling them “apples to oranges.” It’s true that rural municipalities and cities differ—but that doesn’t make comparisons meaningless. After all, whether apples are a good deal depends on the price of other fruit, and a savvy shopper might switch to oranges if they offer better value. In the same way, comparing municipal spending—across all types of communities—helps Albertans judge whether they get good value for their tax dollars.

Every municipality offers a different mix of services and those choices come with different price tags. Consider three nearby municipalities: in 2023, Rockyview County spent $3,419 per person, Calgary spent $3,144 and Airdrie spent $2,187. These differences reflect real trade-offs in the scope, quality and cost of local services. Albertans should decide for themselves which mix of local services best suits their needs—but they can’t do that without clear data on what those services actually cost.

A big municipal tax bill isn’t an inevitable consequence of rural living. How much gets spent in each Alberta municipality depends greatly on the choices made by the mayors, reeves and councillors Albertans will elect next week. And for Albertans to determine whether or not they get good value for their local tax dollars, they must know how much their municipality is spending.

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute

Austin Thompson

Senior Policy Analyst, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Alberta

Premier Smith addresses the most important issue facing Alberta teachers: Classroom Complexity

Published on

Premier Danielle Smith is posting this response to a media question about Classroom Complexity.

While Albertans are hearing a lot about capping class sizes, Premier Smith says it might be a much better idea to talk about capping “complexity”.

Continue Reading

Trending

X