Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Alberta

Alberta won the energy lottery

Published

8 minute read

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Brian Zinchuk

Some people blamed a small handful of natural gas plants being out of operation. Which is a greater concern – two of 87 gas fired units being down, or 88 of 88 wind and solar farms being down at the same time?

Alberta won the energy lottery millions of years ago. I’m not talking scratchers, but the Powerball. You know, the big American lottery that every so often is over a billion dollars?

Except Alberta’s winnings are much, much larger than that.

So why is it the weekend of Jan. 12-15, the jurisdiction that has more oil, gas and coal than God, because God gave all his to Alberta, was forced to beg its neighbours if they could spare a megawatt?

Because that’s what happened. It got so desperate the night of Saturday, Jan. 13, that the neighbours did not have another megawatt to spare. The Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) and the government of Alberta sent out an emergency alert to every cellphone and TV screen in the province, calling on people to shut off everything from stoves to bathroom fans, as well as unplug block heaters and electric vehicles.

The only way this could happen is complete and utter incompetence at the top. It started with Rachel Notley, but Jason Kenney didn’t seem to do much to reverse her moves. Only Danielle Smith seems to have finally said, “No more!”

Former Alberta premier Rachel Notley’s push to get rid of coal as soon as possible and build as much wind and solar is a prime example of incompetence. While most coal plants converted to natural gas, not all units did, and hundreds of megawatts of cheap, reliable power were lost. Meanwhile, in the last two years Alberta’s wind and solar basically doubled, projects that mostly got their start under Notley. And yet there were moments during the weekend where both wind and solar hit zero output, sometimes at same time. Wind and solar’s theoretical capacity of 6,131 megawatts was a big fat zero.

And yet when Notley announced her departure as leader of the NDP on Jan. 16, she put out a video proclaiming the elimination of coal-fired power and kickstarting renewables among her greatest accomplishments.

Some people blamed a small handful of natural gas plants being out of operation. Which is a greater concern – two of 87 gas fired units being down, or 88 of 88 wind and solar farms being down at the same time, as happened the morning of Jan. 14? Indeed, the vast majority of the 87 gas units and 2 coal units were indeed providing nearly all of Alberta’s power throughout the weekend.

Those four days saw the AESO issue four “grid alerts” in a row. The second one was a much closer-run thing. As a last resort, they put all the grid-scale batteries into play, and those batteries were running out of juice after just an hour. The contingency reserve went to effectively zero.

If the province had not issued its emergency alert, the AESO since reported they were within a half hour of calling for rotating blackouts.

Thankfully, it did work. But what about next time?

The next step was rotating blackouts, and, if that didn’t work, major load shedding. And if that wasn’t enough, a replay of Texas, February, 2021, when 246 died. Except there would be more bodies, because it’s a hell of a lot colder here.

Lessons

There are some lessons from that weekend, and especially Saturday:

  1. Wind and solar totally and utterly fail when we need power the most.
  2. Do NOT expect your neighbour to be able to help you out. Often they can, and do. But as we saw Jan. 13, when your boat is sinking, your neighbour’s may be sinking faster. This was evident by the small amount of power BC sent Alberta. They routinely send 3x that. Montana was sending effectively nothing. And even though Saskatchewan was maxed out in sending what we had, it was not enough to bail out Alberta. Interties are good in many ways, but they must not be entirely relied upon.
  3. As a result, each jurisdiction must ensure it has ample supply within its own borders and control. And that includes enough dispatchable power to backfill every single megawatt of wind and solar, plus the possible loss of one of its baseload units. That 4 per cent contingency reserve is really not enough.
  4. If Alberta did go into rotating blackouts:
    1. What would have happened if that half hour turned out into half a day, or longer, with the temperature at -35 C as it was in Calgary? How many lives might be on the line? What would the property loss be, from things like frozen pipes?
    2. Whose head would the public be calling for on Monday morning? Oh wait, there was a fourth grid alert that morning.
  5. Alberta has more than five million vehicles registered. What would have happened if five million EVs were all plugged in that weekend?
  6. We cannot, we must not, allow this to happen here in Saskatchewan, or again in Alberta. But yet SaskPower keeps saying we’re going to build an additional 3,000 megawatts of wind and solar. We are on Alberta’s path. Alberta already has 6,131 megawatts of wind and solar. How’s that working out for them? Friday night – 6 megawatts. Saturday night – 90. Sunday morning, zero.

Fossil fuels account for up to 94 per cent of Alberta’s and 89 per cent of Saskatchewan’s power on any given day. We cannot, must not, allow ourselves to think any amount of wind and solar can keep us alive when the temperatures hit -35 C. That weekend in Alberta proved it.

Brian Zinchuk is editor an owner of Pipeline Online and occasional contributor to the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. He can be reached at [email protected].

Alberta

A Christmas wish list for health-care reform

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Nadeem Esmail and Mackenzie Moir

It’s an exciting time in Canadian health-care policy. But even the slew of new reforms in Alberta only go part of the way to using all the policy tools employed by high performing universal health-care systems.

For 2026, for the sake of Canadian patients, let’s hope Alberta stays the path on changes to how hospitals are paid and allowing some private purchases of health care, and that other provinces start to catch up.

While Alberta’s new reforms were welcome news this year, it’s clear Canada’s health-care system continued to struggle. Canadians were reminded by our annual comparison of health care systems that they pay for one of the developed world’s most expensive universal health-care systems, yet have some of the fewest physicians and hospital beds, while waiting in some of the longest queues.

And speaking of queues, wait times across Canada for non-emergency care reached the second-highest level ever measured at 28.6 weeks from general practitioner referral to actual treatment. That’s more than triple the wait of the early 1990s despite decades of government promises and spending commitments. Other work found that at least 23,746 patients died while waiting for care, and nearly 1.3 million Canadians left our overcrowded emergency rooms without being treated.

At least one province has shown a genuine willingness to do something about these problems.

The Smith government in Alberta announced early in the year that it would move towards paying hospitals per-patient treated as opposed to a fixed annual budget, a policy approach that Quebec has been working on for years. Albertans will also soon be able purchase, at least in a limited way, some diagnostic and surgical services for themselves, which is again already possible in Quebec. Alberta has also gone a step further by allowing physicians to work in both public and private settings.

While controversial in Canada, these approaches simply mirror what is being done in all of the developed world’s top-performing universal health-care systems. Australia, the Netherlands, Germany and Switzerland all pay their hospitals per patient treated, and allow patients the opportunity to purchase care privately if they wish. They all also have better and faster universally accessible health care than Canada’s provinces provide, while spending a little more (Switzerland) or less (Australia, Germany, the Netherlands) than we do.

While these reforms are clearly a step in the right direction, there’s more to be done.

Even if we include Alberta’s reforms, these countries still do some very important things differently.

Critically, all of these countries expect patients to pay a small amount for their universally accessible services. The reasoning is straightforward: we all spend our own money more carefully than we spend someone else’s, and patients will make more informed decisions about when and where it’s best to access the health-care system when they have to pay a little out of pocket.

The evidence around this policy is clear—with appropriate safeguards to protect the very ill and exemptions for lower-income and other vulnerable populations, the demand for outpatient healthcare services falls, reducing delays and freeing up resources for others.

Charging patients even small amounts for care would of course violate the Canada Health Act, but it would also emulate the approach of 100 per cent of the developed world’s top-performing health-care systems. In this case, violating outdated federal policy means better universal health care for Canadians.

These top-performing countries also see the private sector and innovative entrepreneurs as partners in delivering universal health care. A relationship that is far different from the limited individual contracts some provinces have with private clinics and surgical centres to provide care in Canada. In these other countries, even full-service hospitals are operated by private providers. Importantly, partnering with innovative private providers, even hospitals, to deliver universal health care does not violate the Canada Health Act.

So, while Alberta has made strides this past year moving towards the well-established higher performance policy approach followed elsewhere, the Smith government remains at least a couple steps short of truly adopting a more Australian or European approach for health care. And other provinces have yet to even get to where Alberta will soon be.

Let’s hope in 2026 that Alberta keeps moving towards a truly world class universal health-care experience for patients, and that the other provinces catch up.

Continue Reading

Alberta

Calgary’s new city council votes to ban foreign flags at government buildings

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

It is not yet clear if the flag motion applies to other flags, such as LGBT ones.

Western Canada’s largest city has put in place what amounts to a ban on politically charged flags from flying at city-owned buildings.

“Calgary’s Flag Policy means any country recognized by Canada may have their flag flown at City Hall on their national day,” said Calgary’s new mayor Jeromy Farkas on X last month.

“But national flag-raisings are now creating division. Next week, we’ll move to end national flag-raisings at City Hall to keep this a safe, welcoming space for all.”

The motion to ban foreign flags from flying at government buildings was introduced on December 15 by Calgary councilor Dan McLean and passed by a vote of 8 to 7. He had said the previous policy to allow non-Canadian flags to fly, under former woke mayor Jyoti Gondek, was “source of division within our community.”

“In recent months, this practice has been in use in ways that I’ve seen have inflamed tensions, including instances where flag raisings have been associated with anti-Semitic behavior and messaging,” McLean said during a recent council meeting.

The ban on flag raising came after the Palestinian flag was allowed to be raised at City Hall for the first time.

Farkas, shortly after being elected mayor in the fall of 2025, had promised that he wanted a new flag policy introduced in the city.

It is not yet clear if the flag motion applies to other flags, such as LGBT ones.

Despite Farkas putting forth the motion, as reported by LifeSiteNews he is very much in the pro-LGBT camp. However, he has promised to focus only on non-ideological issues during his term.

“When City Hall becomes a venue for geopolitical expressions, it places the city in the middle of conflicts that are well beyond our municipal mandates,” he said.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, other jurisdictions in Canada are considering banning non-Canadian flags from flying over public buildings.

Recently a political party in British Columbia, OneBC, introduced legislation to ban non-domestic government flags at public buildings in British Columbia.

Across Canada there has also been an ongoing issue with so-called “Pride” flags being raised at schools and city buildings.

Continue Reading

Trending

X