Energy
Did the Environment Minister announce the end of Alberta’s Oil and Gas Industry at COP 27?
Steven Guilbeault (center) arrested after climbing the CN Tower for a Greenpeace protest on July 16, 2001.
PHOTO BY AARON HARRIS/THE CANADIAN PRESS
News Release From the Alberta Institute
Stop The Federal Cap On Oil And Gas
This week, Environment and Climate Change Minister, Steven Guilbeault, effectively announced the end of Alberta’s oil and gas industry.
In Egypt, at COP27, he announced that his government will cap oil and gas sector emissions from the end of next year, and work to reduce them after that.
Remember, even Justin Trudeau said that no country would find 173 billion barrels of oil in the ground and just leave them there.
But that, of course, was before he was Prime Minister.
Radical environmental activist Steven Guilbeault does believe we should leave 173 billion barrels of oil in the ground.
Now, yes, technically, he said he would cap and reduce emissions, not oil and gas production, and some energy companies are confident they can find efficiencies to allow them to continue producing some oil and gas without increasing emissions.
But anyone who’s been in the game long enough has seen the goalposts moved often enough to recognize another goalpost shifting when they see it, and that’s exactly what happened today.
How so?
Well, you would think Minister Guilbeault’s friends in the eco-activist industry – the same people who just a few years ago were calling for this cap on emissions – would be happy about this week’s announcement, wouldn’t you?
But no, these same people who were calling for exactly this policy just a few years ago actually attacked his announcement.
They think that this week’s announcement – the policy they were calling for until recently – is woefully inadequate.
They now want, you guessed it, a cap on production.
They don’t actually care about the level of carbon emissions, they don’t actually care whether emissions go down, they want the amount of oil and gas producedto go down.
This, fellow Albertans, is what Alberta is up against.
The radical eco-activist environmental movement doesn’t want Alberta’s oil and gas industry to be more environmentally friendly, they want Alberta’s oil and gas industry to die.
Meanwhile, having shifted the goalposts a dozen times already – the federal government’s environmental policies are as close to a complete ban on oil and gas as you can get, without actually banning it.
One more goalpost shift, and it will be an outright ban.
The environmental groups are pushing for that last final goalpost shift.
And Albertans are just supposed to trust the federal government that, despite all the previous times they shifted the goalposts, this time they definitely won’t.
The time to stand up for Alberta, and stand up for Albertans is now.
If we don’t do so right now, it might be too late.
In the 1980s, Alberta Premier, Peter Lougheed, fought for – and won – an amendment to the Canadian Constitution – Section 92A – that gave Alberta (and the other Provinces) the exclusive right to explore, develop, conserve, and manage their natural resources.
This amendment made clear that these resources belonged to the Provinces, not the federal government, and Alberta would not have signed on to the Constitution had that clause not been included.
Justin Trudeau and Steven Guilbeault do not believe in that clause in the Canadian Constitution.
They have already ignored it many times, and intend to continue to ignore it.
Justin Trudeau’s view is that Alberta can do whatever we want with our resources… as long as whatever we want to do is exactly what the federal government wants us to do.
And the federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change’s view is that we should leave them in the ground – all of them.
Enough is enough.
Now is the time for every Albertan – and the Alberta government – to stand up to the federal government.
If you agree, please join our campaign to stop the federal cap on oil and gas:
Please also consider forwarding this email to your friends, family, colleagues, and every Canadian.
Regards,
The Alberta Institute Team
Dan McTeague
Will this deal actually build a pipeline in Canada?
By Dan McTeague
Will Carney’s new pipeline deal actually help get a pipeline built in Canada? As we said before, the devil is in the details.
While the establishment and mainstream media cheer on the new pipeline agreement, there are specific details you need to be aware of.
Dan McTeague explains in his latest video.
Energy
Canada following Europe’s stumble by ignoring energy reality
Family in Spain eating by candlelight during a blackout, April 2025
From Resource Works
Canada’s own 2024 grid scare proves we’re on the same path unless we change course.
Europe’s green-energy unraveling is no longer a distant cautionary tale. It’s a mirror — and Canada is already seeing the first cracks.
A new Wall Street Journal investigation lays out the European story in stark detail: a continent that slashed emissions faster than anyone else, only to discover that doing so by tearing down firm power before its replacement existed comes with brutal consequences — collapsing industry, sky-high electricity prices, political fragmentation, and a public increasingly unwilling to subsidize wishful thinking.
The tragedy isn’t that Europe tried to decarbonize quickly.
The tragedy is how they did it: by insisting on an “or” transition — renewables or fossil fuels — instead of what every energy-literate nation outside Europe pursued: renewables and fossil fuels, working together while the system evolves.
And here’s the uncomfortable truth:
Canada has already had its first European-style crisis. It happened in January 2024.
Canada’s early warning: the January 2024 electricity crunch
Most people have already forgotten it, because our political class desperately wanted you to. But in January 2024, Western Canada came within a whisker of a full-blown energy security breakdown. Alberta, Saskatchewan, and B.C. were stretched to their limit. The grid was under cascading stress. Contingency plans were activated. Alberta came terrifyingly close to rolling blackouts.
It wasn’t caused by climate change. It wasn’t caused by a mysterious cyberattack.
It was caused by the same structural brittleness now crippling Europe:
- Insufficient firm power, after years of political messaging that we could “electrify everything” without adding real generating capacity.
- Overreliance on intermittent sources not backed by storage or gas.
- A planning system that punted risk into the future, betting the grid could be stretched indefinitely.
The January 2024 event was not a blip. It was a preview.
Our European moment in miniature.
But instead of treating it as the national wake-up call it should have been, B.C. did something telling — and deeply damaging.
The B.C. government’s response: attack the messenger
Just a couple of years ago, an economist publicly warned about the economic price of emerging system vulnerabilities due to a groaning stack of “clean economy” policies.
The B.C. government didn’t respond with data, evidence, or even curiosity. Instead, a cabinet minister used the safety of legislative privilege — that gold-plated shield against accountability — to launch nasty personal attacks on the economist who raised the concerns, which themselves had originated in the government’s own analysis.
No engagement.
No counter-analysis.
No willingness to consider the system risks.
Just slurs — the very definition of anti-intellectual governance.
It was a moment that told the whole story:
Too many policymakers in this province believe that energy systems obey politics, not physics.
Physics always gets the last word.
Europe shows us what political denial turns into
The WSJ reporting couldn’t be clearer about the consequences of that denial:
- Germany: highest domestic electricity prices in the developed world.
- U.K.: highest industrial electricity rates among major economies.
- Industrial flight: chemical plants closing, data centres frozen, major players hinting at exiting Europe entirely.
- Grid instability: wind farms paid tens of millions not to generate because the grid can’t handle it.
- Public revolt: rising support for parties rejecting the entire green-transition agenda.
- Policy whiplash: governments rushing to build gas plants they swore they’d never need.
Europe is now an object lesson in how good intentions, executed poorly, can produce the exact opposite of what was promised: higher prices, higher volatility, declining competitiveness, and a public ready to abandon climate policy altogether.
This is precisely what January 2024 warned us about — but on a continental scale.
The system cost we keep pretending doesn’t exist
Every serious energy expert knows the truth Europe is now living: intermittent renewables require massive amounts of redundant capacity, storage, and backup generation. That’s why the U.K. now needs 120 gigawatts of capacity to serve a demand previously met with 60–70 gigawatts, even though electricity use hasn’t meaningfully grown.
This is the math policymakers prefer not to show the public.
And it’s why B.C.’s refusal to have an honest conversation about firm power is so dangerous.
If we electrify everything without ensuring affordable and abundant natural gas generation, we’re not building a green future.
We’re building Europe, 10 years early.
The lesson for Canada — especially for B.C.
Here is what Europe and January 2024 together say, in one clear voice:
1. There is no energy transition without firm power.
Renewables are part of the system, but they don’t run the system. Natural gas does. Hydro does. Nuclear does. Pretending otherwise is how you end up with rolling blackouts.
2. Political denial makes crises worse.
When ministers attack economists instead of answering them, it signals that ideology is running the show. Europe learned the cost of that. We will too, unless we change course.
3. Affordability is the foundation of public consent.
Europe lost the room. Once people see their bills double while factories close, the climate agenda becomes politically radioactive.
4. B.C. has an advantage Europe would kill for.
Europe dreams of having an abundant, local, low-carbon firm-power fuel like northeastern B.C.’s natural gas. We treat it like a political liability. That’s not strategy. It’s negligence.
5. The transition will fail if we don’t treat electricity like the national security asset it is.
Without energy, there is no industry.
Without industry, there is no prosperity.
Without prosperity, there is no climate policy that survives the next election cycle.
What we need now
Canada must embrace an “and” strategy:
Renewables and natural gas. Electrification and realism. Climate ambition and economic competitiveness.
January 2024 showed us the future in a flash. Europe shows us the end state if we keep ignoring the warning.
We can still choose something better. But only if we stop pretending that energy systems bend to political narratives — and start treating them with the seriousness they demand.
Resource Works News
-
MAiD1 day agoFrom Exception to Routine. Why Canada’s State-Assisted Suicide Regime Demands a Human-Rights Review
-
Automotive2 days agoPower Struggle: Governments start quietly backing away from EV mandates
-
Business1 day agoCarney government should privatize airports—then open airline industry to competition
-
Business2 days agoNew Chevy ad celebrates marriage, raising children
-
Business1 day agoWhat’s Going On With Global Affairs Canada and Their $392 Million Spending Trip to Brazil?
-
Energy1 day agoCanada following Europe’s stumble by ignoring energy reality
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days agoFrances Widdowson’s Arrest Should Alarm Every Canadian
-
Focal Points2 days agoPharma Bombshell: President Trump Orders Complete Childhood Vaccine Schedule Review



