Connect with us


How climate activists harm Canadian energy security


8 minute read

From the Daily Caller News Foundation



Canadian Official Reveals Damage Eco-Activists Have Wreaked On Great White North’s Energy Security

Rebecca Schulz — the minister of environment and protected areas of Alberta, Canada — sat down with the Daily Caller News Foundation at the Canadian embassy in Washington, D.C. to discuss how climate activists, along with the country’s left-wing government, have hampered Canada’s energy security.

Alberta is a province in Western Canada that is known for its abundant natural resources, especially oil and natural gas. However, the federal government in Ottawa — led by liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau — has moved to restrict development in the province, harming the many blue-collar Canadians who rely on affected industries to make a living, Schulz explained to the DCNF.

“We have seen, over the last number of years, the activist, radical left starting to shape policy in a way that is, I think, very concerning, not only for just the basic needs of everyday people when it comes to safe, affordable, reliable energy, but I think, when it comes to to energy security,” Schulz told the DCNF.

“Certainly, we have a prime minister that is completely just bending to the activist base and ignoring, I think, the very real concerns of everyday commonsense as Canadians, and that’s a problem,” Schulz told the DCNF, referencing Trudeau. Later in the interview, Schulz predicted that Canadian voters will “vastly reject” Trudeau when they next head to the polls, in large part due to “the woke, ideological policies” that his government has pursued.

In Canada, one such official with deep ties to the climate activist movement shaping policy is Minister of Environment and Climate Change Steven Guilbeault. A former Greenpeace activist who once scaled Toronto’s iconic CN Tower and climbed on the roof of a government official’s private residence to install solar panels in acts of protest, Guilbeault has stated that he does not seek to implement a “secret agenda” of policies aligned with his activist past while in office, according to CBC, a Canadian news outlet.

Notably, the Biden administration counts numerous former activists among its ranks, including Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Director Tracey Stone-Manning, who was connected to radical eco-activists concocting a tree spiking plot in Idaho in the late 1980s. BLM manages federally-controlled lands for uses like energy production and livestock grazing.

“It’s really problematic because it is completely ideologically driven and devoid of common sense and the realities that people are facing every single day. And I think, you know, of course, people do care about the environment. I, of course, as minister of the environment, I care that we’re doing the right thing for the environment that we’re leaving,” Schulz continued. “You know, the places that we live, and where we develop our resources from, we’re maintaining that for future generations. But I also know that we could not survive a day without oil and gas, or products made from oil and gas and petrochemicals. And that fact isn’t changing. That, in fact, is growing so, I think it’s pretty concerning that they are also then trying to essentially stifle any opinions or statistics or facts that don’t support their narrative.”

Canada is one of America’s biggest energy suppliers, providing about 52% of all gross oil imports in 2023 and exporting nearly three trillion cubic feet of natural gas to the U.S. in 2022, according to the Canadian Energy Centre. Most of the fuel comes to America via cross-border pipelines, though some is also delivered by rail or by sea, according to a 2021 report commissioned by the American Petroleum Institute.

The Keystone XL pipeline, a major project that would have helped bring oil from Alberta to refineries along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico in the U.S., was set to be a new expansion to the systems that bring Canadian energy to America.

However, activists waged a major pressure campaign against the project, and its developers ultimately scuttled it in June 2021 after the Biden administration nixed a crucial permit and generally showed minimal enthusiasm for the project upon entering office, according to The Associated Press.

“Projects like that, of that size and scope, obviously take a significant amount of political will,” Schulz said of Keystone XL. “And I think that was a hugely disappointing decision, because we know that market access matters for energy security and meeting the needs of, I would say, Canadians and Americans, and people around the world.”

Notably, Brent Sadler — a 26-year veteran of the U.S. Navy who now works as a senior research fellow for naval warfare and advanced technology at the Heritage Foundation — agrees with Schulz’s assessment that Keystone XL would have been a positive development for North American energy security.

In a recently-published report assessing American energy security in light of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) geopolitical ambitions, Sadler argued that policymakers impose “unnecessary restraints” on cross-border energy interconnection, and that security interests would be better served if they instead “get out of the way” and “permit cross-border energy infrastructure projects such as the Keystone XL pipeline.”

For now, Schulz will turn much of her focus to the Trudeau government’s proposed emissions cap for the oil and gas industry, which could see the government require energy producers to slash their emissions by about 37% relative to 2022 levels by 2030, according to Reuters. Its opponents — many of whom are located in Alberta — are characterizing the policy as a thinly-veiled production cap that will severely hurt the province’s workers and regional economy.

If finalized, the policy “would kill thousands of jobs, I would say tens of thousands of jobs, just directly in conventional oil and gas, not to mention what we’re seeing in oil sands and, of course, other related industries,” Schulz told the DCNF. “We just have a federal government that doesn’t look at any socioeconomic data on the impacts that their policy would have … No competent, responsible government would see those numbers and move ahead with that cap, but that is, in fact, what our federal Liberal government is doing in Canada.”

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


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

Published on

From the Daily Caller News Foundation



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


The Flood Of Energy Absurdities Never Slows

Published on

From the Daily Caller News Foundation



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: 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 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