Flat copper, EV glut, imploding wind power equal green crash

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

Large fissures are appearing in the ‘Green Transition’ story climate crusaders tell themselves. They are trying to foist it on a reluctant public and skeptical business world. One recent such crack is the carve-out on carbon taxes for heating oil in the politically-fickle Atlantic provinces. Provincial premiers are trying to get the same treatment for other fossil fuel heating fuels.

Yet, politicians who still hew to the Climate Crisis orthodoxy remain unrepentant. Montreal’s city council has announced that all new buildings of three stories or less will not be permitted to use natural gas heating. Taller buildings would face the ban later. Several cities and states in the United States are also trying to restrict natural gas use. Their efforts seem desperate.

A recent U.K. study concluded that heat pumps are much more expensive than employing natural gas (also true in Canada), and resistance heating is even worse. Due to the study and public pushback, the planned U.K. heat pump mandate was cancelled – and ‘Net Zero’ postponed beyond 2035.

Extreme policy adopted by voting-block-pandering politicos notwithstanding, other constituents of the artificially-sustained Green Transition show signs of weakness. For some, notably wind power, outright impending collapse looms.

Wind turbine companies’ share prices have slumped. The main reason is that wind power contracts are being cancelled in many places. A large project off the New Jersey coast is the latest example. Component and material costs are the main culprits. They caused wind developers to raise requested electricity prices to unaffordable levels, and higher interest rates made capital costs rocket skyward. Recent revelations about the high costs of recycling wind turbine blades have soured governments and the public on this dubious ‘alternative energy’.

Electric vehicles, ‘EV’s’, are another darling of the climate lobby. There is now a large accumulation of unsold EV’s on dealer lots, not just in North America but in China. It takes a very large ‘rebate’ to get anyone to consider buying one – an indication of fundamental unpopularity.

It takes many minutes to recharge the battery pack at a ‘supercharge’ station; or, sometimes, hours at a regular charging station. The former is expensive, the latter is an unacceptable time and opportunity cost for owners. The bigger issue is a woeful lack of chargers for highway driving yet over reaching politicians are pushing a fantasy ban on gasoline vehicles by 2035. Forget that, it won’t be happening.

However, the best indication that the Green fever dreams of excitable politicians and disingenuous so-called Climate activists are becoming a nightmare is the price of copper. Slow expansion of copper production and the increasing demand for it in Green Transition technologies such as EV’s, wind turbines, and solar panels and for all the grid connections and upgrades that they entail should force the copper price to soar. Yet, it is just about where it was three years ago.

Mining companies are reluctant to buy or develop new copper deposits, or expand existing operations, with no visibility for a substantially higher copper price. Costs have risen, too, and particularly for fuel and financing, making future positive returns look implausible.

Energy consumers, households and businesses, are rejecting the hysterical climate extremism that attempts to compel the use of uneconomic and unreliable energy forms and technologies, and the rejection of proven, affordable ones. Politicians should listen, and change.

Ian Madsen is the Senior Policy Analyst at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

Related Topics:#Copper #EVGlut #FrontierCentreForPublicPolicy #GreenCrash #IanMadsen #WindPower

Up Next

Ottawa’s cap-and-trade plan long on costs, light on environmental benefits

Don't Miss

‘Anti-human’: Tucker Carlson, Michael Shellenberger blast John Kerry’s COP28 speech

Todayville

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

Manhunt on for suspect in shooting deaths of Minnesota House speaker, husband

Canadian Energy Centre / 4 hours ago

Cross-Canada economic benefits of the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline project

Alberta / 4 hours ago

Albertans need clarity on prime minister’s incoherent energy policy

Canadian Energy Centre

Cross-Canada economic benefits of the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline project

Published on June 15, 2025

Todayville

From the Canadian Energy Centre

Billions in government revenue and thousands of jobs across provinces

Announced in 2006, the Northern Gateway project would have built twin pipelines between Bruderheim, Alta. and a marine terminal at Kitimat, B.C.

One pipeline would export 525,000 barrels per day of heavy oil from Alberta to tidewater markets. The other would import 193,000 barrels per day of condensate to Alberta to dilute heavy oil for pipeline transportation.

The project would have generated significant economic benefits across Canada.

The following projections are drawn from the report Public Interest Benefits of the Northern Gateway Project (Wright Mansell Research Ltd., July 2012), which was submitted as reply evidence during the regulatory process.

Financial figures have been adjusted to 2025 dollars using the Bank of Canada’s Inflation Calculator, with $1.00 in 2012 equivalent to $1.34 in 2025.

Total Government Revenue by Region

Between 2019 and 2048, a period encompassing both construction and operations, the Northern Gateway project was projected to generate the following total government revenues by region (direct, indirect and induced):

British Columbia

Provincial government revenue: $11.5 billion
Federal government revenue: $8.9 billion
Total: $20.4 billion

Alberta

Provincial government revenue: $49.4 billion
Federal government revenue: $41.5 billion
Total: $90.9 billion

Ontario

Provincial government revenue: $1.7 billion
Federal government revenue: $2.7 billion
Total: $4.4 billion

Quebec

Provincial government revenue: $746 million
Federal government revenue: $541 million
Total: $1.29 billion

Saskatchewan

Provincial government revenue: $6.9 billion
Federal government revenue: $4.4 billion
Total: $11.3 billion

Other

Provincial government revenue: $1.9 billion
Federal government revenue: $1.4 billion
Total: $3.3 billion

Canada

Provincial government revenue: $72.1 billion
Federal government revenue: $59.4 billion
Total: $131.7 billion

Annual Government Revenue by Region

Over the period 2019 and 2048, the Northern Gateway project was projected to generate the following annual government revenues by region (direct, indirect and induced):

British Columbia

Provincial government revenue: $340 million
Federal government revenue: $261 million
Total: $601 million per year

Alberta

Provincial government revenue: $1.5 billion
Federal government revenue: $1.2 billion
Total: $2.7 billion per year

Ontario

Provincial government revenue: $51 million
Federal government revenue: $79 million
Total: $130 million per year

Quebec

Provincial government revenue: $21 million
Federal government revenue: $16 million
Total: $37 million per year

Saskatchewan

Provincial government revenue: $204 million
Federal government revenue: $129 million
Total: $333 million per year

Other

Provincial government revenue: $58 million
Federal government revenue: $40 million
Total: $98 million per year

Canada

Provincial government revenue: $2.1 billion
Federal government revenue: $1.7 billion
Total: $3.8 billion per year

Employment by Region

Over the period 2019 to 2048, the Northern Gateway Pipeline was projected to generate the following direct, indirect and induced full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs by region:

British Columbia

Annual average: 7,736
Total over the period: 224,344

Alberta

Annual average: 11,798
Total over the period: 342,142

Ontario

Annual average: 3,061
Total over the period: 88,769

Quebec

Annual average: 1,003
Total over the period: 29,087

Saskatchewan

Annual average: 2,127
Total over the period: 61,683

Other

Annual average: 953
Total over the period: 27,637

Canada

Annual average: 26,678
Total over the period: 773,662

Alberta

Albertans need clarity on prime minister’s incoherent energy policy

Published on June 15, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

The new government under Prime Minister Mark Carney recently delivered its throne speech, which set out the government’s priorities for the coming term. Unfortunately, on energy policy, Albertans are still waiting for clarity.

Prime Minister Carney’s position on energy policy has been confusing, to say the least. On the campaign trail, he promised to keep Trudeau’s arbitrary emissions cap for the oil and gas sector, and Bill C-69 (which opponents call the “no more pipelines act”). Then, two weeks ago, he said his government will “change things at the federal level that need to be changed in order for projects to move forward,” adding he may eventually scrap both the emissions cap and Bill C-69.

His recent cabinet appointments further muddied his government’s position. On one hand, he appointed Tim Hodgson as the new minister of Energy and Natural Resources. Hodgson has called energy “Canada’s superpower” and promised to support oil and pipelines, and fix the mistrust that’s been built up over the past decade between Alberta and Ottawa. His appointment gave hope to some that Carney may have a new approach to revitalize Canada’s oil and gas sector.

On the other hand, he appointed Julie Dabrusin as the new minister of Environment and Climate Change. Dabrusin was the parliamentary secretary to the two previous environment ministers (Jonathan Wilkinson and Steven Guilbeault) who opposed several pipeline developments and were instrumental in introducing the oil and gas emissions cap, among other measures designed to restrict traditional energy development.

To confuse matters further, Guilbeault, who remains in Carney’s cabinet albeit in a diminished role, dismissed the need for additional pipeline infrastructure less than 48 hours after Carney expressed conditional support for new pipelines.

The throne speech was an opportunity to finally provide clarity to Canadians—and specifically Albertans—about the future of Canada’s energy industry. During her first meeting with Prime Minister Carney, Premier Danielle Smith outlined Alberta’s demands, which include scrapping the emissions cap, Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, which bans most oil tankers loading or unloading anywhere on British Columbia’s north coast (Smith also wants Ottawa to support an oil pipeline to B.C.’s coast). But again, the throne speech provided no clarity on any of these items. Instead, it contained vague platitudes including promises to “identify and catalyse projects of national significance” and “enable Canada to become the world’s leading energy superpower in both clean and conventional energy.”

Until the Carney government provides a clear plan to address the roadblocks facing Canada’s energy industry, private investment will remain on the sidelines, or worse, flow to other countries. Put simply, time is up. Albertans—and Canadians—need clarity. No more flip flopping and no more platitudes.