Connect with us

Energy

Canadian Gas Association Writes a Letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau Highlighting the Importance of Natural Gas Energy Choice for Canadians

Published

6 minute read

From EnergyNow.ca

On January 29, 2024, the Canadian Gas Association (CGA) sent a letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, emphasizing the significance of the natural gas energy option for Canadians, a need underscored by the recent severe weather conditions in Western Canada.

The letter reads as follows:

Canada’s energy delivery companies had their work cut out for them over the last few weeks, ensuring the country could get through a period of extreme cold temperatures. The polar vortex that locked in across the continent only underscored how important an energy system with many options is to our overall well-being. I thought I would expand on this point in my first letter to you in 2024.

The second week of January saw temperatures in parts of the country drop well into the minus 40s, with windchill in the minus 50s. This triggered alerts from various authorities to reduce electricity use. Around 4 pm in Alberta on January 12th wind and solar generation facilities were operating at only a few percentage points of their capacity. But power was desperately needed. Luckily, a combination of in-province and neighbouring jurisdiction power sources – like natural gas-powered plants – could help meet the power needs of the province.

It is worth drawing attention to the fact that the alerts were all about a single energy system – the electricity grid. While that grid was under strain due in part to low renewable energy generation availability, the natural gas delivery system (a separate system that delivers gas energy, not electrons) was delivering approximately 9 times the energy and operating without any alerts required.

The contribution of the gas system is really worth emphasizing.

Nationally, over an average year, electricity meets just over 20% of our energy needs.  Natural gas directly delivered to customers – residential, commercial and industrial – meets almost twice that amount, or just under 40% and liquid fuels like gasoline and diesel meet the balance.  But at certain times of the year, such as during the recent January freeze, the differential between what natural gas and electricity deliver grows dramatically.  At points earlier this month Alberta had use of roughly 12,000 megawatts of electric power and over 110,000 megawatts of gas energy equivalent.

And yet it was the electric system, not the natural gas system, that was threatened.

Media coverage during and after the freeze referenced how the electric system is threatened by extreme weather and needs to be built out to meet demand. But to suggest that the electric system could ever meet the energy delivered by natural gas over the gas delivery system is simply unrealistic. Do those who advocate for the electrification of all energy, especially peak heating needs, pretend that we have either the means, the resources, or the dollars, to build out an electric system that could meet roughly nine times the load of the gas system?  Do advocates of natural gas bans appreciate that banning natural gas power generation would leave us in situations of actual shortage – a terrifying spectacle in the event of minus 50 degree weather?

Again, the point here is to underscore the value proposition of natural gas and the infrastructure that delivers it: the reliability these provide is extraordinarily important. This value is particularly well demonstrated when severe weather – a Canadian reality – hits us.  We have to stop talking about eliminating the choice of energy options like natural gas, and relying exclusively on one energy delivery system, like electricity. Each delivery system has its own advantages, and natural gas is particularly well suited to meet heating needs. That should never be overlooked, as this month’s weather events reminded us.

Prime Minister, when it comes to energy – in supply options, and in delivery systems – diversity truly is our strength in Canada.  We must maintain natural gas as an option for reliability, for affordability, and for sustainability – all of which are essential for our country’s energy security and the wellbeing of the Canadian consumer.

Respectfully,

Timothy M. Egan
President and CEO, Canadian Gas Association
Chair, NGIF Capital Corporation

About CGA

The Canadian Gas Association (CGA) is the voice of Canada’s gaseous energy delivery industry, including natural gas, renewable natural gas (RNG) and hydrogen. CGA membership includes energy distribution and transmission companies, equipment manufacturers, and suppliers of goods and services to the industry. CGA’s utility members are Canadian-owned and active in eight provinces and one territory. The Canadian natural gas delivery industry meets 38 per cent of Canada’s energy needs through a network of almost 584,000 kilometers of underground infrastructure. The versatility and resiliency of this infrastructure allows it to deliver an ever-changing gas supply mix to 7.6 million customer locations representing approximately two-thirds of Canadians. CGA members ensure Canadians get the affordable, reliable, clean gaseous energy they want and need. CGA is also working to constantly improve that gaseous energy offering, by driving forward innovation through the Natural Gas Innovation Fund (NGIF).

SOURCE Canadian Gas Association

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

Economy

Trump’s Promise Of American Abundance, Fueled By ‘Liquid Gold’

Published on

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By JAMES P. PINKERTON

 

One of the brightest nuggets of policy in Donald Trump’s July 18 acceptance speech to the Republican convention in Milwaukee was his ode to “liquid gold.” That is, oil.

As part of his inflation-fighting plan, Trump offered a gleaming solution: increase energy production, thereby decreasing energy prices. “By slashing energy costs,” Trump declared, “we will in turn reduce the cost of transportation, manufacturing and all household goods.”

He continued: “We have more liquid gold under our feet than any other country by far. We are a nation that has the opportunity to make an absolute fortune with its energy.”

Indeed. According to the Institute for Energy Research (IER) technically recoverable oil resources in the U.S. total 2.136 trillion barrels. At the current price of around $80 a barrel, that’s some $171 trillion. And so, Trump concluded, “we will reduce our debt, $36 trillion.”

As former Alaska governor Sarah Palin would say, “You betcha.” In Palin’s Alaska, oil is so abundant, relative to the population, that everyone gets a check from the state. Last year, it was $1,312. For a family of four, that’s more than $5000. Our goal should be that every American gets such an energy dividend.

Moreover, the abundance of America’s carbon fuels is not limited to oil. According to IER, we have 3.391 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. That’s worth $165 trillion.

To be sure, these staggering dollar totals can’t be counted directly against the national debt—or in support of some future tax cut. Yet every dollar of our energy assets would contribute to the economy, and if even 10  percent of the humongous total could be available to the public, we could, in fact, pay off the national debt.

Moreover, thanks to fracking and other enhanced recovery techniques, we keep finding more energy: Human ingenuity has upended old beliefs about energy shortages, ushering in an almost Moore’s Law-ish surge in production.

Indeed, there’s so much oil and gas (and coal) that an emerging school of thought holds that carbon fuels aren’t “fossil” at all, but rather, the product of earth’s vulcanism. The core of this earth, after all, is the same temperature as the surface of the sun. Perhaps all that heat is cooking something.

In any case, we keep finding more oil, and not just in the U.S.

So how, exactly, do we take advantage of this planetary cornucopia? As Palin said, as Trump said, and as the convention crowd chanted, “drill, baby, drill.”

Okay, but what about climate change? Most Republicans don’t worry too much about that, but if Democrats do, they should be reassured that we can capture the carbon and so take it out of the atmosphere. Trees and other green vegetation have been capturing carbon for eons; the element is, in fact, vital to their very existence. Similarly, the human body is 18 percent carbon. Yes, all of us ourselves are carbon sinks.

So we, being smart, can capture vastly more carbon — capturing it in everything from wood to cement, from plastics to nanotubes. These in turn can be landfill, construction materials — maybe even a space elevator.

We can, in fact, establish a a circular carbon economy: carbon fuels extracted, burned, and then recycled back into feedstocks. By this reckoning, carbon fuels are renewable. Such creative thinking can power all those energy-hungry data centers on which Big Tech and AI depend. So there’s the makings of a bipartisan “Grand Carbon Bargain,” uniting mostly blue-state tech with mostly red-state energy. More energy + more tech = more wealth for all.

In Milwaukee, Trump spoke of American “energy dominance,” and that’s great. But with all the energy we can produce and consume, we can speak of economic abundance — and that’s even greater.

James P. Pinkerton served in the White House domestic policy offices of Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. He is the author, most recently, of “The Secret of Directional Investing: Making Money Amidst the Red-Blue Rumble.”

Continue Reading

Energy

The Flood Of Energy Absurdities Never Slows

Published on

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By DAVID BLACKMON

 

I often write about absurdities in the energy space, the kinds of stories in which nothing seems to make sense and which result in the wasting of massive amounts of money on rank boondoggles.

Indeed, I maintain an entire Substack focused on what is an amazingly target-rich environment.

Despite enjoying such a wealth of absurd potential content, I found myself suffering from a bit of writer’s block Tuesday morning — thanks in large part to all the breaking news about debates and attempted assassinations  permeating our society in recent days. But that was before two gloriously absurd stories popped into my in-box.

The first of these absurdities comes to us from the ritzy Massachusetts island of Nantucket, where debris from one of President Joe Biden’s vaunted offshore wind monstrosities — speaking of rank boondoggles — was found littering the beaches in recent days. The Nantucket Current reports that the debris, apparently hard fiberglass material from a broken blade, originates from the Vineyard Wind 1 offshore project, whose first ten massive turbines were activated less than a month ago.

So much for that advertised 30-year life, huh?

The operators of Vineyard Wind said the debris is the result of an “offshore incident” in which a blade suffered damage. The company also characterized the debris as “non-toxic fiberglass fragments,” adding that they are “not hazardous to people or the environment.”

No word from the company on the nature of this “incident,” or on how frequently Nantucket residents can expect such litter from their 62 government-subsidized, 850-feet-tall turbines (almost the height of the Eiffel Tower) and blades to wash up on their beaches. But the fact that the first “incident” came during the first month of operations was not exactly encouraging.

Then the story got even worse for Vineyard Wind: Boston.com reported Tuesday that Nantucket officials made the decision to close the beaches to public access due to dangers from what they called “floating debris and sharp fiberglass shards” that were part of the debris. Worse still, the Federal Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement announced late Tuesday the development’s operations have been “shut down until further notice” due to the safety hazards to the public.

Despite the inconvenience and potential hazards caused by Biden’s offshore wind boondoggles, we can be sure that Nantucket residents will enjoy paying their future power bills that are being inflated by the power-provision guarantees deftly negotiated by their state leaders. It is, after all, a small price to pay for such a glorious virtue signaling opportunity.

The next story comes to us from a report at LiveScience.com detailing a new study predicting that earthquakes will now be caused by the all-knowing, all-seeing, all-causing, all-powerful boogeyman we refer to as “climate change.” No, really, I swear I’m not making that up. Promise.

It is a real report, headlined, “Will we have more earthquakes because of climate change?”

Naturally, the story suggests this will be the case. What else would a good climate alarmist say? It is a requirement for researchers to blame literally every bad thing in our lives on climate change because, if you don’t, you won’t get that next government grant, now, will you?

That is the game. It has been the game for 30 years now, and many believe the net effect has been the increasing corruption of what we call “science.” The raising of outlandish claims such as this in glaring headlines or by hyperventilating weather people on our local news channels is exactly why a constantly rising percentage of the population holds the field of climate “science” in contempt.

One X user who tweeted this story out said: “I miss the days when we used to blame witches.” That is really funny. I wish I had thought of it first.

I know this frustrates all the alarmists out there, but I am just the messenger here. If you want the winds of public attitudes to ever shift in your direction, you are going to have to stop spreading ridiculous nonsense like this. All your cynical efforts to raise alarm are backfiring, and it could not happen to a more deserving bunch of people.

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.

Continue Reading

Trending

X