Alberta
Oil Sands are the Costco of world energy – dependable and you know exactly where to find it
From Resource Works
Canada’s secret energy advantage: long life, no decline
Frankly, Canadians should hold the oil sands in higher esteem. The more I see how the world really works, the prouder I am of this resource.
When Fatih Birol, Executive Director of the International Energy Agency, speaks, the world listens. His latest warning is blunt: decline rates are the elephant in the room for global energy.
Oil and gas fields almost everywhere face natural decline. Shale wells lose about 70 per cent of their output in the first year. Many conventional reservoirs also taper off, often in the range of 5 to 7 per cent annually, though actual decline rates vary widely depending on geology and field management. The result is that nearly 90 per cent of global upstream spending now goes simply to replacing lost supply.
Fatih Birol, Executive Director of the International Energy Agency, at right with the author in Winnipeg in 2017.
Birol estimates that it is taking about $500 billion a year just to keep the industry running in place. If that stopped, the world would lose the equivalent of Brazil’s and Norway’s combined production every year. That’s how steep the slope has become.
Which brings us to Canada’s quiet advantage. Our oil sands — especially the mining and upgrading projects in northern Alberta — don’t behave like shale. Once built, they produce steadily for forty years or more. No frantic drilling treadmill. No production cliff.
Oil sands insiders call this the “long life, no decline” advantage.
It may sound like inside baseball. But in energy economics, this distinction is huge. In fact, it’s so critical that one of the nation’s largest energy producers, Calgary’s Canadian Natural Resources, recently devoted an entire investor slide to it, spelling out the contrast between shale and oil sands. When a major company takes the trouble to educate even sophisticated investors, you start to suspect the point isn’t as widely understood as it should be.


Another underappreciated benefit of this advantage is what it makes possible on the decarbonization front. Because oil sands production is steady for decades, these assets provide a stable platform to deploy major emissions-reduction technologies — carbon capture and storage, small modular nuclear reactors, advanced heat recovery. These are not quick fixes; they require billions in upfront capital and long timelines to pay back. That kind of commitment makes little sense if your underlying resource base is collapsing year after year. Canada’s stability means we can make those big bets. When Prime Minister Mark Carney refers to “decarbonized oil”, some might dismiss that as magical thinking, but I’m pretty sure what he means is oil sands deposits that can be subject to long-term, intensive efforts to do all of these things – a luxury not available to those whose eggs are all in the drilling basket.
But there’s a bigger geopolitical conversation here. Surely if the United States wants to secure abundant oil in its own “backyard,” the logical step would be to ensure there is enough pipeline capacity from Canada. We’ve been here before with Keystone XL. The project became a political lightning rod, but the fundamental logic has not changed: the U.S. and their refineries will need reliable long-life oil for decades to come. Canada has it. The question is whether Washington is prepared to act in its own strategic interest.
That means the long life, no decline message is not just an investor presentation footnote. It’s a fact that needs to be recognized in Ottawa, in Washington, and across the Canadian public. In Ottawa, because policymakers must grasp that the oil sands are the crown jewel of Canada’s resource economy.
What Washington needs to keep front of mind is that Canada is not just a friendly neighbour — we are a cornerstone of North American energy security. Canadians, whose views have been shaped by years of opposition campaigns that tried to make us ashamed of the oil sands, seem to be open again to the possibility that energy is more complicated that polarized public debates often make out.
Frankly, Canadians should hold the oil sands in higher esteem. The more I see how the world really works, the prouder I am of this resource.
To understand in more detail what this long life, no decline phrase is all about, think of it this way. For decades, the global oil system has resembled hunting and gathering. Companies poke holes in the ground, chase short-lived wells, and then move on to the next patch. Technology has reduced the uncertainty, but the feel is still primitive — like a parent rushing to the corner store every night for a quart of milk. It works, but it’s expensive, unreliable, and not built for the long haul.
Canada’s oil sands are the opposite. They are the Costco of energy: a big-box supply that doesn’t run out after one trip. Instead of scrambling for the next well, the resource is completely known, concentrated in one place, and designed for decades of steady output. That allows entire communities, supply chains, railroads, and international ports to grow around it. The oil sands are less like hunting and more like a factory — stable, predictable, and always in stock.
If Costco can sell loyalty with a simple membership card, why can’t we brand Canada’s enduring energy advantage just as boldly?
Great observers of energy markets like Daniel Yergin and Anas Alhajji have hinted at this for years: decline is relentless, durable resources are rare, and those who hold them wield strategic power. The IEA’s latest report confirms it. Four out of five barrels of oil today come from fields already past peak. Nine out of ten cubic metres of natural gas come from the same category. The world isn’t just chasing new demand growth — it’s sprinting to replace what geology is taking away.
And indicators are that American oil producers sense the easy years of global oil dominance are fading fast. “The US shale business is broken,” said one executive recently, according to the Financial Times. “What was once the world’s most dynamic energy engine has been gutted by political hostility and economic ignorance.”
That’s why Canada’s message has to be clear and confident. This is not the time to downplay the value of our oil sands. It’s time to explain, unapologetically, that in a world of decline, Canada’s long-life, no-decline resources are indispensable.
Alberta
Federal budget: It’s not easy being green
From Resource Works
Canada’s climate rethink signals shift from green idealism to pragmatic prosperity.
Bill Gates raised some eyebrows last week – and probably the blood pressure of climate activists – when he published a memo calling for a “strategic pivot” on climate change.
In his memo, the Microsoft founder, whose philanthropy and impact investments have focused heavily on fighting climate change, argues that, while global warming is still a long-term threat to humanity, it’s not the only one.
There are other, more urgent challenges, like poverty and disease, that also need attention, he argues, and that the solution to climate change is technology and innovation, not unaffordable and unachievable near-term net zero policies.
“Unfortunately, the doomsday outlook is causing much of the climate community to focus too much on near-term emissions goals, and it’s diverting resources from the most effective things we should be doing to improve life in a warming world,” he writes.
Gates’ memo is timely, given that world leaders are currently gathered in Brazil for the COP30 climate summit. Canada may not be the only country reconsidering things like energy policy and near-term net zero targets, if only because they are unrealistic and unaffordable.
It could give some cover for Canadian COP30 delegates, who will be at Brazil summit at a time when Prime Minister Mark Carney is renegotiating his predecessor’s platinum climate action plan for a silver one – a plan that contains fewer carbon taxes and more fossil fuels.
It is telling that Carney is not at COP30 this week, but rather holding a summit with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith.
The federal budget handed down last week contains kernels of the Carney government’s new Climate Competitiveness Strategy. It places greater emphasis on industrial strategy, investment, energy and resource development, including critical minerals mining and LNG.
Despite his Davos credentials, Carney is clearly alive to the fact it’s a different ballgame now. Canada cannot afford a hyper-focus on net zero and the green economy. It’s going to need some high octane fuel – oil, natural gas and mining – to prime Canada’s stuttering economic engine.
The prosperity promised from the green economy has not quite lived up to its billing, as a recent Fraser Institute study reveals.
Spending and tax incentives totaling $150 billion over a decade by Ottawa, B.C, Ontario, Alberta and Quebec created a meagre 68,000 jobs, the report found.
“It’s simply not big enough to make a huge difference to the overall performance of the economy,” said Jock Finlayson, chief economist for the Independent Contractors and Business Association and co-author of the report.
“If they want to turn around what I would describe as a moribund Canadian economy…they’re not going to be successful if they focus on these clean, green industries because they’re just not big enough.”
There are tentative moves in the federal budget and Climate Competitiveness Strategy to recalibrate Canada’s climate action policies, though the strategy is still very much in draft form.
Carney’s budget acknowledges that the world has changed, thanks to deglobalization and trade strife with the U.S.
“Industrial policy, once seen as secondary to market forces, is returning to the forefront,” the budget states.
Last week’s budget signals a shift from regulations towards more investment-based measures.
These measures aim to “catalyse” $500 billion in investment over five years through “strengthened industrial carbon pricing, a streamlined regulatory environment and aggressive tax incentives.”
There is, as-yet, no commitment to improve the investment landscape for Alberta’s oil industry with the three reforms that Alberta has called for: scrapping Bill C-69, a looming oil and gas emissions cap and a West Coast oil tanker moratorium, which is needed if Alberta is to get a new oil pipeline to the West Coast.
“I do think, if the Carney government is serious about Canada’s role, potentially, as an global energy superpower, and trying to increase our exports of all types of energy to offshore markets, they’re going to have to revisit those three policy files,” Finlayson said.
Heather Exner-Pirot, director of energy, natural resources and environment at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, said she thinks the emissions cap at least will be scrapped.
“The markets don’t lie,” she said, pointing to a post-budget boost to major Canadian energy stocks. “The energy index got a boost. The markets liked it. I don’t think the markets think there is going to be an emissions cap.”
Some key measures in the budget for unlocking investments in energy, mining and decarbonization include:
- incentives to leverage $1 trillion in investment over the next five years in nuclear and wind power, energy storage and grid infrastructure;
- an expansion of critical minerals eligible for a 30% clean technology manufacturing investment tax credit;
- $2 billion over five years to accelerate critical mineral production;
- tax credits for turquoise hydrogen (i.e. hydrogen made from natural gas through methane pyrolysis); and
- an extension of an investment tax credit for carbon capture utilization and storage through to 2035.
As for carbon taxes, the budget promises “strengthened industrial carbon pricing.”
This might suggest the government’s plan is to simply simply shift the burden for carbon pricing from the consumer entirely onto industry. If that’s the case, it could put Canadian resource industries at a disadvantage.
“How do we keep pushing up the carbon price — which means the price of energy — for these industries at a time when the United States has no carbon pricing at all?” Finlayson wonders.
Overall, Carney does seem to be moving in the right direction in terms of realigning Canada’s energy and climate policies.
“I think this version of a Liberal government is going to be more focused on investment and competitiveness and less focused around the virtue-signaling on climate change, even though Carney personally has a reputation as somebody who cares a lot about climate change,” Finlayson said.
“It’s an awkward dance for them. I think they are trying to set out a different direction relative to the Trudeau years, but they’re still trying to hold on to the Trudeau climate narrative.”
Pictured is Mark Carney at COP26 as UN Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance. He is not at COP30 this week. UNRIC/Miranda Alexander-Webber
Resource Works News
Alberta
ChatGPT may explain why gap between report card grades and standardized test scores is getting bigger
From the Fraser Institute
By Paige MacPherson and Max Shang
In Alberta, the gap between report card grades and test/exam scores increased sharply in 2022—the same year ChatGPT came out.
Report card grades and standardized test scores should rise and fall together, since they measure the same group of students on the same subjects. But in Alberta high schools, report card grades are rising while scores on Provincial Achievement Tests (PAT) and diploma exams are not.
Which raises the obvious question—why?
Report card grades partly reflect student performance in take-home assignments. Standardized tests and diploma exams, however, quiz students on their knowledge and skills in a supervised environment. In Alberta, the gap between report card grades and test/exam scores increased sharply in 2022—the same year ChatGPT came out. And polling shows Canadian students now rely heavily on ChatGPT (and other AI platforms).
Here’s what the data show.
In Alberta, between 2016 and 2019 (the latest year of available comparable data), the average standardized test score covering math, science, social study, biology, chemistry, physics, English and French language arts was just 64, while the report card grade 73.3—or 14.5 per cent higher. Data for 2020 and 2021 are unavailable due to COVID-19 school closures, but between 2022 and 2024, the gap widened to 20 per cent. This trend holds regardless of school type, course or whether the student was male or female. Across the board, since 2022, students in Alberta high schools are performing significantly better in report card grades than on standardized tests.
Which takes us back to AI. According to a recent KPMG poll, 73 per cent of students in Canada (high school, vocational school, college and university) said they use generative AI in their schoolwork, an increase from the previous year. And 71 per cent say their grades improved after using generative AI.
If AI is simply used to aid student research, that’s one thing. But more than two-thirds (66 per cent) of those using generative AI said that although their grades increased, they don’t think they’re learning or retaining as much knowledge. Another 48 per cent say their “critical thinking” skills have deteriorated since they started using AI.
Acquiring knowledge is the foundation of higher-order thinking and critical analysis. We’re doing students a deep disservice if we don’t ensure they expand their knowledge while in school. And if teachers award grades, which are essentially inflated by AI usage at home, they set students up for failure. It’s the academic equivalent of a ski coach looking at a beginner and saying, “You’re ready for the black diamond run.” That coach would be fired. Awarding AI-inflated grades is not fair to students who will later struggle in college, the workplace or life beyond school.
Finally, the increasing popularity of AI underscores the importance of standardized testing and diploma exams. And parents knew this even before the AI wave. A 2022 Leger poll found 95 per cent of Canadian parents with kids in K-12 schools believe it’s important to know their child’s academic performance in the core subjects by a fair and objective measure. Further, 84 per cent of parents support standardized testing, specifically, to understand how their children are doing in reading, writing and mathematics. Alberta is one of the only provinces to administer standardized testing and diploma exams every year.
Clearly, parents should oppose any attempt to reduce accountability and objective testing in Alberta schools.
-
International2 days agoUS announces Operation Southern Spear, targeting narco-terrorists
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days agoEU’s “Democracy Shield” Centralizes Control Over Online Speech
-
Addictions1 day agoCanadian gov’t not stopping drug injection sites from being set up near schools, daycares
-
International2 days agoIs America drifting toward civil war? Joe Rogan thinks so
-
Business1 day agoParliamentary Budget Officer begs Carney to cut back on spending
-
International2 days agoBondi and Patel deliver explosive “Clinton Corruption Files” to Congress
-
International2 days agoState Department designates European Antifa groups foreign terror organizations
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days agoDEI Or Die: Out With Remembrance, In With Replacement


